Horrifying, Thoughtful & Atmospheric - It Follows Review

There has been a spate of horror remakes in recent years, adding more realistic gore and pointless backstories to films like Nightmare on Elm Street and Halloween. And there have been even more low-budget gore flicks pouring into VOD distributors. They leave my poor heart wanting more.

Thankfully, writer-director David Robert Mitchell has come to my rescue with an atmospheric and thoughtful horror film, It Follows. Director David Robert Mitchell pays homage to the horror greats. Maika Monroe, as Jay, tries to outrun and outwit her supernatural foe, alongside her Scoobies, Keir Gilchrist as Paul, Olivia Luccardi as Yara, Lili Sepe as Kelly, Jake Weary as Jeff, and Daniel Zovatto as Greg, the resident greasy hunk. Float away with me to a land of fear and beauty as I review It Follows (2014)!

Subscribe to TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/sxaw6h Subscribe to COMING SOON: http://bit.ly/H2vZUn Subscribe to INDIE TRAILERS: http://goo.gl/iPUuo Like us on FACEBOOK: http://goo.gl/dHs73 Follow us on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/1ghOWmt It Follows Official Trailer #1 (2015) - Maika Monroe Horror Movie HD After a strange sexual encounter, a teenager finds herself haunted by nightmarish visions and the inescapable sense that something is after her.

1. Where does this film take us? It Follows exists in a dreamy, nostalgic time-space. The colours are muted pastel, the score is reminiscent of 70s/80s horror music, there are black and white movies playing on an old TV, but there is also a futuristic e-reader and a lack of slang. It is not past, present, or future. It is timeless.
2. How did this film make us feel? The film has many wide shots with long takes, the audience is constantly monitoring the image, looking for the being that haunts the characters. You are never at ease. There are very few cheap scares. By relying on sustained tension, moments of panic and violence are granted even more emotional force. I alternated between feeling tension, fear, and joy. When I left the theatre I was emotionally rattled, and continued to look around myself, through windows, past lights, as I had done while I watched the film. The cinematography was extremely effective.
3. What issues does this film tackle? One of the more obvious themes that It Follows tackles is that of sexually transmitted disease. The deadly curse that haunts Jay is passed on after penetrative sex is completed for the man. No homosexual or non-penetrative sex is depicted, so this might be a specifically hetero affliction. The curse plagues the most recent person to have sex with the previously cursed person. I have heard it remarked by some that it can also be interpreted as PTSD from rape or sexual abuse. An unnamed, unseen thing haunting you, something incomprehensible to your loved ones, something that isolates you, that penetrates your every thought, and makes every space you inhabit unsafe. Others interpret it as the threat of adulthood, or mortality. The film’s young adults are hanging out at the end of summer, clinging to one another and their childhood pastimes of floating in pools and sleepovers. Parents are obscured or appear as violent apparitions, we are firmly in a world of youth and vulnerability. But, the threat of adulthood is forever looming, forever threatening to tear the kids apart, and all they can do is run and cling to one another. Adulthood slowly creeps up on everyone, no matter how fast you run, how far you drive, or how many people you sleep with.
4. Was it fun? Oh man, this film was so fun. It is beautiful, well-paced, and is reminiscent of some of my favourite horror films including Cat People (1942), Halloween (1978), with a little bit of a Buffy (1997) or Scooby Doo (1969) mixed in for good measure. The nostalgia is not only in the production design and sound design, it’s in every element. I get the warm and fuzzies from the Cat People influenced pool confrontation as much as I get it from thinking about lazy summer days.
5. Was it transformative? The film was not transformative, it did not change my worldview, but it does make me hopeful that a more thoughtful indie horror trend will emerge. Enough hack ‘em, slash ‘ems! Keep me guessing! Keep me fearful!

It Follows is a horror pleasure and I really recommend it. Pair it with The Shining (1980) to maintain that atmosphere and suspense.

- Andrea

Selma in Review before the Oscars

I am really excited to share this blog with everyone. I was fortunate to have guest blogger, Alessia Iani (Ba, and MA graduate), contribute this week right before the oscars. She watched Selma in theatres and has written a very in depth analysis below. It sent chills up my spine. 

Selma is an historical drama that recounts the events that occurred in the wake of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in particular those events surrounding Martin Luther King Jr.’s campaign to secure voting rights for Black Americans, and the march from Selma to Montgomery (both cities in the state of Alabama) in March of 1965.

Directed by Ava DuVernay and co-written by DuVernay and Paul Webb, Selma, which was released in theatres in December of 2014, is currently nominated for two 2015 Oscars: best picture and best original song (for "Glory" written by John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn, performed by John Legend and Common).

Subscribe to TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/sxaw6h Subscribe to COMING SOON: http://bit.ly/H2vZUn Like us on FACEBOOK: http://goo.gl/dHs73 Follow us on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/1ghOWmt Selma Official Trailer #1 (2015) - Oprah Winfrey, Cuba Gooding Jr.

1. Where does the film take the viewer? The acting in Selma is absolutely on-point; the all-star cast, featuring David Oyelowo [Lee Daniel's The Butler (2013), and A Most Violent Year (2015)], Carmen Ejogo [The Purge: Anarchy (2014), and Zero Hour (2015)], Tom Wilkinson (The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)], Lorraine Toussaint [Orange is the New Black (TV, 2014)], Giovanni Ribisi, Oprah Winfrey, and Common, to name a few, share great chemistry, effectively transporting us into the tumultuous times their characters inhabited. Because the acting is so very flawless, as a viewer, I felt unable to look away, unable to not connect with this film. We are taken right into the tense atmosphere of the mid 1960s: we glimpse political tensions between President Lyndon B. Johnson (Wilkinson), Martin Luther King Jr. (Oyelowo), and the Governor of Alabama, George Wallace (Roth), the individual obstacles faced by black Americans like Annie Lee Cooper (Winfrey), the involvement in the civil rights movement of organizations like the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and members of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and the work of key individuals like Malcolm X (Nigel Thatch), Diane Nash (Thompson), and James Orange (Dorsey), and the ongoing racial tensions / prejudice / violence between white and black Americans. The set design and costuming are the ribbons that tie together this historical drama, and despite some reviewers' criticism regarding the historical accuracy of certain character depictions, the characters / environments / circumstances shown work together cohesively to weave a story that pulls you deep into its beautiful and perturbing heart.
2. What feelings does the film conjure? When I ventured out on a blustery Saturday evening to watch Selma, I did not expect to go home feeling simultaneously angered and hopeful. I was definitely not ready to find myself involuntarily weeping throughout the film. I did not notice I have been crying until the film ended. I was not alone: two young women seated next to me were trying very hard to contain their sobs, to no avail, and a group of middle aged men sitting at the front fumbled around for tissues only 20 minutes into the film. For all intents and purposes, this film was an emotional rollercoaster. I wavered between being uplifted and angered. I experienced feelings of intense frustration when faced with all the actions of racist white Americans. I felt joy and sorrow. The most powerful and unexpected response to the film was a feeling of familiarity. I felt this sense of familiarity during each of the riot scenes, in particular the first scene wherein police prevent peaceful protesters (sans King) from crossing the Edmund Pettus bridge out of Selma, onward to Montgomery, showering them with tear gas and brutally beating them down. This familiarity I can clearly trace to the countless times in the last six months when I have viewed media images in print / online of Ferguson riots, and peaceful protests across America in solidarity with Mike Brown and the #BlackLivesMatter movement.
3. Issues discussed? From the outset of the film we are shown the complex manifestation of various kinds of violence: systemic, physical, etc. We see prejudice and restrictions imposed on Black Americans. The first violent act we witness comes directly after the opening scene, which takes place in 1964, and shows King receiving his nobel peace prize: four black American girls walking down the stairs of a church are killed in a sudden explosion. Oyelowo's portrayal of Martin Luther King Jr. is as careful and nuanced as the depictions of violence and prejudice: Most importantly, King is human - this is not a caricature. We do not only glimpse the vigour and passion with which King fought for the civil rights of black Americans, but the powerful emotional and psychological struggles he went through to bring his dream to fruition. He was deeply aware of the hurt he sometimes caused to those around him. The issues of race, human rights, and what constitutes political and social progress are approached carefully, though the film does play on our emotions to sway us to believe in the central characters - both the antagonists' and protagonists' values. It is a film that asks us to witness the past, and in doing so, consider what we are witnessing in our present moment. How far have we come from 1960? How much work is left to do?
4. Are there surprises? Having studied the civil rights movement, we know what to expect: violence, reconciliation, and disappointment. However, the film gives us these situations and evokes emotion at unexpected times. This is done through careful cinematic direction: close-ups on faces and hands, on bodies rising and falling. The film captured moments of domestic joy and sorrow, a mix of anguish and terror during the riots, pure hatred in the faces of white folks, King's emotional struggle, Coretta King's difficulties in continuing to support a cause that greatly affected the man she loves, and fiery looks between President and King, activists Hosea Williams and John Lewis. When we revel in feelings a film conjures during its fleeting moments, it forces us to think again about a particular interaction or relationship or setting. That is the best surprise: one that requires attentiveness and careful interpretation.
5. Transformative experience? For me, the centrepiece of the film, by which I mean not only the climax and turning point, but the most powerful moment, is the death of Jimmie Lee Jackson, and King's speech at Jackson's funeral. "Who murdered Jimmie Lee Jackson?" proclaims King in a resolute and heartbroken tone. His answer is grim: we are all responsible. Brutally beaten by police, Jackson's death pushes the activists to complete the march to Montgomery. This transformation for the characters left alive is necessary for the action to continue. But how do we react? With anger and sadness, to be sure, I personally found myself unable to shake feelings of familiarity. And this is the heart of the film: Mike Brown, shot and killed in Ferguson by Officer Darren Wilson on August 9th, 2014 IS Jimmie Jackson. HOW many black women and black men have been our Jimmie Lee Jacksons? Too many. If this film transforms us, it is because it brings us further into awareness of our current moment. A time when the vestiges of racial inequality and prejudiced ideologies and the attendant violence that comes along with these is being exposed and criticized. What we choose to do with this realization is up to us.

One dream can change the world. SELMA stars David Oyelowo as Martin Luther King, Jr. Special engagements in select theaters Christmas Day, everywhere January 9th. http://www.selmamovie.com/

- Alessia

Widescreen Thriller: A Most Violent Year

Let us continue the tradition of using Ted Hope's five criteria when it comes to cinema: what five things do we want from cinema? This past week, I had the privilege to watch A Most Violent Year (2015), starring Oscar Isaac, Jessica Chastain, David Oyelowo, and many others. Written and Directed by J. C. Chandor.

Subscribe to TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/sxaw6h Subscribe to COMING SOON: http://bit.ly/H2vZUn Like us on FACEBOOK: http://goo.gl/dHs73 Follow us on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/1ghOWmt A Most Violent Year Teaser Trailer #1 (2014) - Jessica Chastain Movie HD A thriller set in New York City during the winter of 1981, statistically one of the most violent years in the city's history, and centered on a the lives of an immigrant and his family trying to expand their business and capitalize on opportunities as the rampant violence, decay, and corruption of the day drag them in and threaten to destroy all they have built.

1. Where did this film take me? To 1980s New York New York. This year is actually recorded to be the most violent year the state has yet to see. From the rich suburbs of the wealthy, to the dockside industrial slums of those battling the American dream. We are delivered the film through the CEO's vision. He is an immigrant chasing after the prolific American dream. His wife, from a rough NY neighbourhood with a notorious father, equally an outcast. Together, though, they are a powerful couple. Perhaps I can expand on this point and explain HOW J.C. Chandor took me back to this historical moment. Let us first talk about the first five minutes of the film as the credits are rolling. Perhaps one of the most interesting film introductions I have seen in a while. Delivered in a widescreen format, the footage feels stretched and condensed at the same time. However, you never miss a moment. The film begins with what we can assume is the protagonist. We see him running through a quiet suburban neighbourhood. The music is not inviting but it is also not unpleasant. It says, "WAIT, don't get caught up by the beautiful imagery. All is NOT well." The steadycam replicates the point-of-view of the runner, immediately pointing us to see what he sees, therefore indicating that the main perspective will be filtered through Abel. It is Abel Morales' (Oscar Isaac) story. The next character is introduced in a two shot sequence, first a medium wide shot and then a medium close up. This camera work tells us, "OKAY, don't forget this secondary character. He is indeed important." Back to the runner, he is now in an industrial landscape, headed towards a dockside. An oil barge offloads its product into a truck. Cut back to the runner. We understand he is somehow related to this action. His attire - sweatpants and a hoodie - do not disclose his position in the oil company just yet. He is still running. We as the audience ask if he is training for a marathon? Why run so long? Only after do we realize he is training himself to keep up with whatever is thrown across his path. All these actions takes place within the first five to ten minutes. We learn so much about the film because of the camera work and how it compliments the action. We get a sense of who is important and what the story is going to be about. It is brilliant.
2. How did I feel during the film and after the film? There is an immediate quietness about the film that I am unable to explain. It was an uncomfortable quiet. The kind that has you waiting tensely for something to happen. The film never felt slow though, mostly because we understand the time frame of the story: thirty days. Thirty days to close the agreement on the land he purchased. Forty percent upfront and the remainder at the end of the thirty days. Each day is thus accounted for and keeps us and the characters on the same level. Therefore the stillness and unsureness are a combination of things. This film, in many ways, replicates that feeling in Steven Spielberg's Duel (TV special). Throughout the entire car and truck chase, viewers have the need and desire to see who the truck driver is. Not because we particularly care for him, but because we are purposely prevented from seeing him by the camera / director - thus creating desire. The death of the truck driver heightens the disavowal and leaves a burning disappointment - desire unfulfilled. Similarly, Abel spends thirty intense days trying to find out who is robbing his trucks and who tried to enter his house with a gun. He eventually chases one thief down. Abel asks him twice, "WHO ARE YOU WORKING FOR?" This is a major thrilling moment and we the audience are sitting at the edge of our seats waiting to hear a name spoken. Then the disavowal takes place. The man replies, "I don't work for anyone." Abel is no closer to the truth and we feel his disappointment most profoundly. The evil lurking in the background is undetectable. It only exists through the radio broadcast system as an effect. The cause - le raison d'etre - lies out in the filmic world in a secret untouchable form. We are unsure what the purposes are, although we can surmise that it is most likely financially driven. The ending received a lot of negative attention apparently after the first few screenings. The composer was worried that people would disapprove of Abel's actions and write him off as a cold money hungry CEO. Yet, I felt the complete opposite. I felt proud to have been on his side. I will expand further down. 
3. What issues were discussed and how? Issues of immigration, generation, family, and business blended together and rose up in contrast to the american dream. In this dystopia the action unfolds and the characters have to carve their name in stone with their fingernails. There are four stories playing simultaneously: Abel's quest for dominance in the oil industry, Anna's fierce and loyal passion to see her husband succeed by any means necessary, Julian's hungry desire to one day be Abel, and Lawrence's tired and never ending bureaucratic desk job. Abel has to secure his deal with a Jewish family that owns a prime piece of property on the waterfront. Old money sells their family owned site to new money - to a self made man. Two generations of immigrants are immediately introduced.  The third generation comes in the form of Abel's antagonist: Julian. While Abel adopts American culture, Julian fights in limbo - Abel asks him several times to speak in English. Julian is in many ways a younger version of Abel. The difference lies in the paths each choose. Abel's philosophy about taking the path that is MOST right stands in stark contrast to that of Julian's fearful, cowardly approach. Guns are seen as cowards' weapons. Abel refuses to let his workers arm themselves for fear it will intensify the problem even further. Julian's fear backfires when he is unable to own up to his actions. His American dream is unsustainable. We can even draw quick similarities with the characters in Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing (1989). Abel is like Mookie. Julian is like Pino. Sometimes the path that is most right seems at first morally tainted. Yet Mookie saved Sal's life by distracting the angry crowd with destroying his pizza joint instead. Abel is unable to save Julian, but promises to care for his family. His success, and we are never given any reason to doubt the sincerity of Abel's character, is attributed to his choice of taking "the path that is most right."
4. Surprises? DUH. Jessica Chastain's character, Anna. She is a very complicated character. How many complicated female characters have we seen recently at the box office? She is the gangster her husband refuses to be. She is the hard shell that is able to kill the deer her husband cannot. She steals from him and then returns the money in order to save the family. She is the book keeper. Yet, she is never given credit for her work. It is clear Abel loves his wife and family. It is clear he has strict moral beliefs and follows them as much as possible. Yet, when does he ever truly acknowledge his wife's help? He forgives her time and time again for her erratic behaviour. He coaches her to take the right course and to dispel her gangster tendencies. She works for him and takes care of the family. We see a nanny only once acting as a babysitter, indicating her true devotion to her children. She attends all the social functions with her husband as a strong supporter. She risks threatening a cop who has interrupted her 10-year old birthday party, "my husband is not who you think he is. He is an honest man. If you disrespect him, he will make it his mission to ruin your life. And this was very disrespectful." She is the chilling - fiery ego Abel refuses to be. They compliment each other perfectly. She says what he is thinking and she does what he wishes he could do. Together they are an unstoppable force.
5. The transformative experience: who is transformed in the end? As an audience member, I believe I felt the most affected by the experiences on screen. I felt the elation of Abel's victory, the fiery passion behind Anna's success in managing her husband's affairs, and the silence of Julian's death and world. During the post production phase, the composer was worried that people would walk away thinking that Abel is a cold hearted money hungry CEO. He cared little for Julian's death, saving the hole in his oil barrel first. The song at the end is supposed to guide the audience emotionally to steer clear from these complicated feelings. I did not think of Abel as anything other than an honest and hard working man. Abel's ability to pay off the remainder of the property value is in large due to how his company behaves for thirty days and how they conduct themselves during all the robberies and violence. The stress of losing everything he had worked hard for was apparent every day. How can you argue with that level of simplicity? Yet, as a CEO with many employees, he makes time to visit Julian in hospital and pay for his expenses. He makes time to visit the new trainees. He takes time to make sure anyone who got hurt on his clock was taken care of. The most shocking scene is when his youngest daughter discovers the gun and cocks it playfully. Anna has to slowly approach and take it out of her hand. Abel takes in the seriousness of the situation: it is one thing to hurt his employees and another to threaten his family. He faces his competitors fiercely but fairly, he asks for what is his and no more, "you owe me $213,000." Abel presupposes Mookie's charisma and courage, and always does the right thing.

In conclusion, A Most Violent Year was an awe inspiring experience. Coupled with an amazing cast, a superb sound score, and the widescreen aspect ratio, I highly recommend viewing this artwork in cinema before it passes away.

- Jenn

What do WE want from cinema: Inherent Vice

I had a really unique movie going experience last week. At 9:20pm on a Tuesday night, I trekked alone to Cineplex Odeon Varsity Theatres at 55 Bloor Street, Toronto, for a VIP screening of Inherent Vice (2015). Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, adapted by Thomas Pynchon's novel, this is by far one of the most interesting films I have got to see this year.

Before I go into my analysis, though, I came across this intriguing and perfectly applicable article from the website Hope in Film: The Five Crucial Things We Want From Movies. Written by Ted Hope, this article suggests the following list.

1. Take me somewhere I have never been
2. Make me feel
3. Help me understand this issue / world a little better
4. Deliver fun and surprises
5. A transformative experience

With this as our backbone, let us now take a look at Inherent Vice through these five filters / criteria.

1. Inherent Vice takes place in south California during the transition between the 60s and 70s. On the outset, this town seems to have three kinds of people: hippies, gangsters, and law-enforcers. However, by mid movie, the types have become so muddled that by the end each character is neither him nor herself and are a mish-mash of everyone. A bit like The Beatles song I am the Walrus "I am he as you are he and you are me and we are all together." Yet no one in the film is together. Relationships are never whole, and people are as much present off screen as they are on screen, making the loose episodic plot structure more hippie-ish, if you will. 
2. WOW. How did I feel? Where do I begin? First, let's talk about the voiceover narration. Can we even call it ironic? It is a bit Godardian in the best way, calling attention to the story's realities as unrealities. The pumping action of private investigator Doc Sportello is highly undercut by the mellow female voice, taking your heartbeat down four notches into a normal rhythmic speed. She calls attention to the fading past, the psychedelic 60s slowly evaporating. All that California was is embodied in Doc. And he is hated every moment for it. He is the dinosaur of the south. A T-rex hunting for the truth of the golden fang. What feelings can we say the film conveys? There is this uncomfortable sense of unknowingness - a paranoia that slowly seeps into your bones and makes you fidget in your seat. There is repetition, creating a cyclical feeling that adds to the claustrophobic environment. If you were asked to loosely sketch Doc's world, could you do it? Do we know where all the puzzle pieces fit? I felt hazie leaving the theatre, as if a smokey cloud had settled around me head. A sudden second-high. There was also humour - in an unchecked and unbalanced way. We laughed without restraint but not because we were set up to laugh or forced to. It felt more real somehow.
3. I had not read Thomas Pynchon's novel before watching the film in theatre, and believe this might have filled in any loose gaps my brain is still trying to solve. I do not know much about the early 70s to justify the films explanation. Yet, taking it for what it is and disregarding (momentarily) its time in history, what did I take away? What statement is the film making - and even if it is NOT making a statement, that is in itself a statement - and how is it resolved? I think Doc justifies his good character at the end. He is able to reunite a family together and saves a father (Owen Wilson) from being further involved in a network of cocaine dealers. Sure the family is unromantic in the best way - and the parents are the least prototypic of their kind - but there is a sense of charm seeing the two hug at the end. The set, setting, costumes, and soundtrack created a quintessential aura, what I would think would be an accurate 70s mise-en-scene for this film. 
4. The greatest surprise was the dialogue. The dialogue between characters differs greatly: legal and proper jargon from his girlfriend downtown (Reese Witherspoon), the slow drawl of his drug friend pretending to be dead (Owen Wilson), and the strange and often perverted comments from Lieutenant Bigfoot (Josh Brolin). Actions often contradict the characters verbal intent. Bigfoot angrily refers to Doc as the hippie, yet storms his house at the end of the film and eats a lot of weed sitting out on the table. Deputy Penny Kimball, a serious woman of the law, is caught smoking weed with Doc and having a jolly good time. The humour is dry and the banter delivered in a hyper serious manner to the point of being at the cusp of hilarious: "woohoo, look at the greedy little hippie." "Bring a  bar of soap and you can clean my feet tonight." "Ew. I can bring you pizza though." "There is a swastika symbol on that man's face." "No there isn't. That is an ancient Hindu symbol meaning ALL IS WELL." Do these characters know they are funny or do they take themselves seriously? 
5. Transformative: Ted suggests that this can be for either the viewers or the characters on screen. Still unsure as to how Doc is feeling - probably rather groovy for saving the day (?) - I definitely felt transformed. My opinion about romance, life, beach-house living, the 70s, and the radical 60s has definitely been intensified and caught my interest. This film told the story in a whole new way. The experience was unique and something I am sure to never feel again. Even when I go see the film for a second time, I am sure to feel slightly different. I think in an era when originality is rare and films have become almost colloquial communication tools, it is definitely hard to find that new angle. As my favourite dead poet, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, commented on in his poem "Kubla Khan," the public will scorn this type of artistic creation. They will stomp and spit and refuse entry into their narrow perspective. Bret Easton Ellis shares this perspective in his article Novelist and Screenwriter Bret Easton Ellis Talks Paul Anderson's Inherent Vice.

"Anderson’s epic vision of Southern California in movie after movie is one of modern cinema’s key accomplishments — the scope is a marvel. But the audience for Inherent Vice is not going to be rapturously discussing it this Christmas — the harsh words I heard behind me as I left the screening last week have been echoed all over the place when I ask people who have seen it what they thought, and the pre-release take-down of it around L.A. is surprising to me [...]" - Bret Easton Ellis

Subscribe to TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/sxaw6h Subscribe to COMING SOON: http://bit.ly/H2vZUn Like us on FACEBOOK: http://goo.gl/dHs73 Follow us on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/1ghOWmt Inherent Vice Official 'Paranoia' Trailer (2014) - Paul Thomas Anderson Movie HD When private eye Doc Sportello's ex-old lady suddenly out of nowhere shows up with a story about her current billionaire land developer boyfriend whom she just happens to be in love with, and a plot by his wife and her boyfriend to kidnap that billionaire and throw him in a loony bin...well, easy for her to say.

I understand where this assumption is coming from and find it so sad. I suppose everyone is entitled to their opinions - and there are always going to be those films that are landmarks and only become so in a new generation of understanding - and hopefully open-mindedness. I say HOORAH for Anderson and all the performances in the film. A job well done. A film highly original and intriguing. Thank you for making my Tuesday night so groovy!

- Jenn