Neil Young Trunk Show

First Hit: Loved watching Neil do what Neil does, play and sing what he wants.

Sitting in the theater ready to watch my most favorite singer songwriter is always a joy.

Sometimes I’ve gone to one of his films and have been the only person in the whole joint, but this weekend there were other fans like me.

There also was a special treat because Pegi, Ben, and Amber Young were sitting in the theater as well. The film is basically a concert film, with a little backstage stuff. As with everything Neil does, you don’t know what you’re going to get until he delivers it.

There are some memorable plaintive acoustical songs (“Oh Lonesome Me”), well known rockers (“Cinnamon Girl” and “Like a Hurricane”) and some long winded “No Hidden Path” from Chrome Dreams II. 

All in all I couldn’t stop tapping my feet, bobbin my head and mouthing the words to most all the songs.

Jonathan Demme used high definition cameras and roving views to capture Neil at his best; reaching for the high notes, moving like a wayward dinosaur, and playing guitar like only he can; delicately, furiously, and ferociously.

Overall: Simply sat back and enjoyed the visual and sound extravaganza.

The Art of the Steal

First Hit: What if your last will and testament was manipulated and defied? This interesting film tells one story and has one wonder; what about the art?

I love modern art. Having a abstract expressionist as a mother definitely created an immediate interest in this film. 

I watched with great interest because this film is about one of the greatest (if not the greatest) collections of modern art ever created. Dr. Albert Barnes made a lot of money by inventing and selling pharmaceuticals. With this money he decided to buy art, the modern art of the time. He bought 181 Renoir, 69 Cezanne, 59 Matisse, 49 Picasso, 21 Soutine, 18 Rousseau, 16 Modiglani, 11 Degas, 7 van Gogh, 6 Seurat, 4 Manet, 4 Monet, and lots of other items including works by Rubens and El Greco along with jewelry and Native American ceramics.

The Philadelphia art scene laughed at his purchases as being insignificant. Barne's, therefore, housed his collection in Marion just outside of Philadelphia. As time went by, his art became the envy of every museum in the world. Nowhere was there a better collection of modern art (worth more than $20 Billion).

Because of the slight by the Philadelphia art scene, Barnes’ Will expressly defined that his foundation, a teaching foundation, and its art would never be sold or loaned in anyway. Well, as time passed, problems erupted and it appears now, Philadelphia will get this art.

This documentary discusses the whole story and it is interesting to note that everyone associated with moving the art to Philadelphia refused to speak on camera for this film. To me there are two primary questions this film brings forth: 1) Does one’s last Will define the ending and what is to be done no matter what? 2) Is it fair to restrict the seeing of this fine art?

My initial answer is “Yes” to both questions because some great art isn’t seen today because it is in the hands of private collectors and I'm none the less of a person because I've not seen the art. And I’d like my last wishes to be honored. However, there is a very strong case for "No" to both questions as well.

Art is simply the medium by which a muse guided an idea, concept and feeling through an artist and how can that be owned except by the originator not the purchaser. And after a person is gone, what can one do about or how can one care about worldly possessions?

Don Argott did a fine job of piecing together this documentary. It is clear and attempts to present a complete story although people wanting to move the art to Philadelphia refused to speak in the film.

Overall: Interesting film which uses this collection to bring up larger questions about possession of art and the viability of Wills.

Prodigal Sons

First Hit: Overdone film which might have been therapeutic to Kim (formally Paul) but left me wondering why this film made it to theaters.

Kimberly Reed (formally Paul McKerrow) revisits her home town of Helena Montana to attend her 20 year high school reunion.

She has been estranged from her hometown community after undergoing a sex change operation. Her older adopted brother Marc will also be attending the reunion because he was held back a grade in pre-school.

Marc describes himself as a reckless young man which led him to an auto accident where he received head injuries. He had numerous brain surgeries which required removing part of his brain. This makes him have occasional violent mood swings and can be irrational. Marc and Kim have been estranged for years.

There is also a younger brother named Todd, who announced being gay some years earlier. Their mother and father, as well as the entire Helena community, embraced all of these changes in their children. During this film we see the disagreements and family fighting.

We see Marc learning he is the grandson of Orson Wells (he looks a lot like him). We see a family trying to understand each other. However, the question is why would we care? From a human perspective, I could sense their own anguish and could sense the pain of their struggles while feeling compassion for her and her family's struggle.

However, it was also obvious to me, that they each needed to do more accepting of themselves, their choices and subsequently each other. When Marc shows Oja Kodar, Orson’s close companion, pictures of his childhood which included Kim as she once was, Kim lights into him as if Marc did something wrong.

For this she is clearly out of line. If Kim felt bad or hurt about the truth that she was born in a boy's body, then Kim needs to get over it. Marc’s intention was not to embarrass Kim but share his life with someone who wanted to know. I hope Kim watches this segment a few times as Marc, although struggling to be clear, rightfully tells Kim she needs to look at her own stuff.

Kimberly Reed directed this overly long and not very enlightening film. It felt as if this film needed to have a more profound universal point to make instead of being so engrossed in her own victimization of her own clearly made choices. It isn’t to say that her path wasn’t life changing, difficult, and interesting, but to assume it is of interest to others at the level it is to her is a reach.

Overall:  This film felt like a therapeutic avenue for the director to start the process of seeing herself as a fully engaged human being instead of being victim. Marc isn't her issue, she is.

Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers

First Hit: This was an exceptional representation of our government's deceit, the Vietnam War and Daniel’s bold action to change the course of the United States.

Daniel Ellsberg was a bright and motivated young government employee who believed in what he was doing. He assisted senior officials in creating documentation that supported presidential decisions. He then went to the Rand Corporation.

While at Rand he started reviewing a very extensive investigative document which documented how the United States got involved in Vietnam. The document was labeled “Top Secret”, and as Ellsberg read its contents he realized he had to make a monumental decision based on doing the right thing instead of worrying about his career.

Ellsberg had been in Vietnam and had seen the destruction of the land, homes and the mass killing of people. When he read how our Presidents had misled Congress and the American people he knew he had to act on his conscious.

Painstakingly, he smuggled volumes of this report out of a safe in his office at Rand, and nightly he and his children photo-copied them. And each day he returned the papers the he'd removed the previous day. After realizing he wouldn’t be able to change people minds by talking about the report, he decided to leak the documents to Congressional leaders. But they didn't act on the information either, so he gave them to the newspapers to publish.

From there, history was made. A couple of very telling things about this film: The first was Nixon’s taped comments from his office recordings. It is hard to believe that a man in the highest office of our country could sound so arrogant, stupid and act in such a deceitful way. 

The other thing was the honesty of interviewed people, especially the ones who indicated they made decisions based on their career and politics, not on doing the right thing for the people in the United States, I loved their honesty.

The interviews of Daniel, his wife Patricia, John Dean, Bud Krogh, Tony Russo and Max Frankel were honest, open and enlightening. Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith co-directed this documentary in fine fashion.

Overall: This is must see film and a warning, we must watch our government and make them fully accountable for their actions. A secret made and kept by a government corrupts the power of those in office.

La Danse: The Paris Opera Ballet

First Hit: There are some absolutely extraordinary dance scenes and sequences and practice sessions in this film, but at 158 minutes it is long, very long.

I loved that you get to see a lot of different aspects of this ballet company; the building repair men, the costume makers, the beekeeper, the office staff, and of course the dancers.

The head Company Director Brigitte Lefere appears in a number of scenes and comes across as pretty full of herself and talks in circles which results in little being said. To her credit she does promote modern and contemporary choreographers while continuing to support the classics as well.

The scenes of dancers practicing by themselves gave light to both their love of the art and the difficult standards and practice they drive themselves to deliver an outstanding performance. Listening to choreographers count cadence, criticize and correct the dancers was interesting.

I loved the moment when one of them looked at his dancer and said; you’ve got the dance, technique, and moves down, now use your experience and bring it to life. There were dress rehearsal scenes that literally took my breath away with the unbelievable moves and expressions created by these dancers.

However, the head director's ramblings and self-important monologues (although she was suppose to be in conversation), took away from the film. 

The only other downside of this film was its length. It could have been from 30 – 60 minutes shorter and made the same impact.

Frederick Wiseman was the director.

Overall: This was, at times, one of the most beautiful films on dance I’ve ever seen. However, it is long.