In the Spotlight

This is sort of a review of the (relatively) new film, Spotlight. Go see it (or wait for it in some other format, it doesn’t need to be seen on the big screen to be appreciated). I expect it to have more than a few nominations when it comes to awards season. That, however, is NOT why I’m writing this review.

The movie is the story of the Boston Globe’s coverage of the sex abuse scandal in the archdiocese of Boston. Although the abuse went back decades, the story itself plays out during 2001-02. The best journalism-based movie since All the President’s Men, with lots of good character actors, many recognizable from popular television shows, Spotlight is a compelling story that does a fine job of showing the nuts and bolts of investigative journalism, as well as clearly demonstrating the importance of those nuts and bolts. Finally, and most important in my view, the movie should sound an alarm.

That is my main point in writing this. The precipitous decline of print journalism, of the daily newspaper (and news magazine, RIP Newsweek) , almost ensures that we may never see this kind of reporting again. With print journalism being either a small “profit center” of a larger media conglomerate or a fragile independent entity that has almost no chance of remaining economically viable, stories like this will be more likely to stay in the shadows.

That worries me. I’m a dinosaur who continues to subscribe to my daily paper, at least in part because I think it’s important. There aren’t enough of us to sustain what Post-Dispatch columnist Bill McClellan calls the “buggy whip factory.” I fear the print journalism industry has long-since reached critical mass, with declining readership requiring more cuts, resulting in skimpier product, resulting in even fewer readers and more cuts.

Add to that the seemingly increasing need of people to live in echo chambers, to only see and hear what they already believe. Disagree with an editorial position? Cancel the subscription. See an article critical of a pet politician or cause? Cancel the subscription. Think the paper has it in for people like you? Use that confirmation bias to cancel your subscription. Why entertain contrary points of view when you can limit yourself to Fox News or MSNBC?

But we all lose. As creepy as the Catholic Church abuse scandal was, it needed to be covered. That story needed resources (think reporters, time, and money) dedicated to unveiling the layers of secrecy. But that story, in and of itself, is not the point. The point is, there are more stories, at least equally important, out there, stories that remain shrouded because there is no more newspaper willing or able to help us see what’s behind the curtain. Instead we’re left with agenda-driven bloggers with questionable ethics and objectivity. As a former journalism teacher, this frightens me in terms of the future of information in this country.

Whenever and however you see it, take the time to view Spotlight so that you at least remember what you’re missing.

Holiday Movie Reviews -- 3 for 3

Yet another snow day or just looking for a good movie?

We probably saw more movies in the last four weeks than we have in the last four months (well, no probably about it; maybe more than in the last 8 months). Three winners in a row is definitely a record (and that doesn’t count Frozen, which we saw with Becca in 3-D -- the three could also have stood for how many people were in the theater, including us, or Hunger Games 2, again, the number standing for how many people were in the theater, including us; both of them were good, as well). 

So, in reverse order, here are three quick reviews of non-blockbuster films which we felt were all worthy of our time and money:

 The Book Thief -- I read the book and enjoyed it (well, enjoyed might be a stretch for a (sort of) Holocaust book narrated by Death) and wanted to see the movie. I didn’t think the book was an easy read, but I think it helps to have read it if you’re going to see the movie. I guess it’s not really a Holocaust book, but it is set in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust plays an important role. Geoffrey Rush is (as always) great and Sophie Nélisse, who plays the heroine, Liesel, is also spectacular. The relationship (from the book) between Liesel and her only friend, Rudy (Nico Liersch), gets short-changed, I think. Actually, I thinkalmost  all the relationships get a little short-changed, but that’s common in book to film transitions. In short, good movie, better book (hardly a unique assessment). Still, a look at the war from the POV of German non-combatants makes it unique.

Saving Mr. Banks -- I struggled briefly in the middle with this movie about Walt Disney’s (Tom Hanks) courtship of P. L. Travers (Emma Thompson) to secure the rights to make Mary Poppins, in part because Thompson was so good that I found her tiresome and unlikable. I get that Travers had lots of baggage (Colin Farrell does a good job as her father, in flashbacks), but who wants to watch people lug around their baggage all the time? I also think (because this is a Disney studio release) that Walt Disney is, if not sanitized, at least portrayed in the best possible light, and Hanks is always good. Still, by the end, I was genuinely touched and glad we went to see it. I think Carolyn liked it even more than I did. Definitely worth your time and worthy of the award nominations coming its way (or already arrived).

Philomena -- The best of these three good movies. We tried to see it New Year’s Eve but it sold out just as we reached the ticket sales register. Judy Dench stuns (well, can Dench really stun you any more with a performance?) as an almost-70 Irish woman on a quest to find the son taken away from her and sold by the nuns a couple or so years after the unmarried teenager gave birth at their convent. Caveat: this is probably not a movie for big fans of the Catholic Church. As a recovering Catholic,* however, I had no problem with it. Steve Cougan (he also directed and co-wrote) plays a disgraced former PR flak for British Prime Minister John Major. Yes, this film is based on actual an actual story, and the “lost” son was a real person who served in both the Bush and Reagan administrations. Philomena still lives, and Dench creates a fascinating character of depth and complexity. It’s an indie film, and so far the only place you can see it is at Frontenac. (I’d love to see indie films get exposure at venues that could show them off better, although we did see The Book Thief at a “real” theater.) Oh, and if you want to eat at The Canyon Café before or after, make a reservation. With or without dinner, Philomena is outstanding.

 * Not my expression, just one I borrowed. Thanks MAM.

Quick Movie Review -- Captain Phillips

Just got home from watching Captain Phillips, starring Tom Hanks. Bottom line – really exciting movie that grabs you early and doesn’t let you go. Tom Hanks does a great job, creating a competent, sympathetic hero. However, the men who play the Somali pirates are also more than just cardboard villains. We get at least some understanding about how these complex, varied men try to survive in a world stacked against them. The action gets rolling quickly with an adequate minimum of exposition and you stay tense, on the edge of your seat, despite knowing (sort of) how it’s going to end, because it’s based on a true story.

That fact has led to reviews critical that the story has been “enhanced” by Hollywood. Yeah, okay. So? It’s a movie, and even movies based on true stories, can’t be expected to be 100% accurate; they are, after all, only based on a true story, a story told from, usually, a single point of view (which means it’s only partially accurate in any case). It’s a movie, not history (which has multiple points of view, too), and movies, with the exception of some documentaries, are, by definition, stories.

Even the most exciting life is mundane most of the time – making a movie of it would require the judicious use of facts that would reduce its level of truth. If Captain Phillips isn’t a completely accurate telling of what happened (and I certainly don’t know, one way or the other), it is an exciting one. So don’t let that keep you from enjoying a terrific movie, a compelling story, and a good actor carrying the load. Best movie I’ve seen in a long time, worth your time and dollars, and probably better on the big screen than your TV.