Milwaukee Film Fest 2014: Things Never Said

Much like the woman who is the subject of the film about to be discussed, “Things Never Said” had a few tough tasks. One, it had to get people to take spoken-word poetry as seriously as its characters do, when it's an art form that's easy to parody. Two, it had to get us to be sympathetic with a woman who cheats on her husband. This is never easy to accomplish without sinking into overwrought melodrama, but women, especially black women, really get the short end of the stick in this regard. (Tyler Perry, please stay in drag if it'll keep you from making disgusting, regressive crap like “Temptation: Confessions Of A Marriage Counselor.” And the upcoming “Addicted” doesn't look much better.)

But “Things Never Said” not only manages to keep the melodrama at bay, it actually makes the characters in front of the lens feel as real as they come, even if the world they inhabit is foreign to many of us. But thanks to writer-director Charles Murray's beautiful script, the characters are as compelling as the poems they compose and recite.

Then again, perfect casting never hurts, and here we have the intensely charismatic Shanola Hampton, who plays Kalindra Stepney, an aspiring LA poet who is unhappily married to a man even more frustrated than she is, still mourning the athletic dreams that were destroyed by an injury. Her burgeoning talent attracts his ire and jealousy, as well as a new admirer named Curtis (Omari Hardwick), himself an aspiring poet with plenty of past behind him. They strike up a tentative romance, and she must decide to stay where everyone (including her own mother) expects her to be, or take a chance on a new path.

Audiences have seen this happen before and where it leads, but rarely in such style. We generally disagree with the actions of the people that populate “Things Never Said,” but that rarely stops us from empathizing with them, even in the case of Kalindra's abusive husband Ronnie. Of course, in a story like this, we get a new romance so the sensitive lover can provide a welcome contrast to the abuse the woman is subjected to. Said lover usually risks being too good to be true, but the fact that this one is named Curtis Jackson (the birth name of 50 Cent) actually provides some welcome comic relief. And he's another charismatic one with the acting chops (and shirtless scenes) to pull it off.

But it keeps other staples of the genre at bay enough to where we don't know if they're going to be fulfilled or not. (Will there be an epic confrontation between the old and the new lover? Will certain characters ever come around? I honestly didn't know.) Ronnie's abuse feels more frightening for it being depicted so realistically, and even minor characters such as Kalindra's mother serve their purpose, and explain how a woman could see putting up with years of relationship toxicity as strength. What results is stories we may have seen, but people who aren't often portrayed, especially with this much skill. Here's hoping we see more of it.

Grade: B+

Movie Review "Hairy Who and the Chicago Imagists" Milwaukee Film Festival 2014

Day 2 of the Milwaukee Film festival saw me going with my artist friend to see the movie about the Hairy Who.  Not really being into the art scene I had no idea who they were and what they did so I was going into the movie blind.  Which is one of the reasons why I love film festivals to see movies I normally wouldn't see and step out of my comfort zone.

So who are the The Hairy Who and the Chicago Imagists? Well they are a collection of artists with various styles who got together in Chicago in the 60's.  With influenced that range from abstract and surrealism, to comic books and advertisements.  Their artwork was like something people had never seen before and even though there were some graphic pictures they became popular with local collectors.  The incubator for the Imagist was the New Hyde Park Gallery which celebrated local and upcoming artists.  The Hairy Who was just the start and a few other collectives followed.  Their work separated them from other contemporaries in New York and San Francisco and came to represent the Midwest.

The movie is a very informative art history lesson and the artists themselves are very interesting.  But not having an interest in art I felt a little bored.  There were a lot of things that influenced these artists but not having that background  knowledge of who they were talking about it didn't mean much to me. While I can't appreciate the technical aspect of the craft I can appreciate the aesthetics. While some were bizarre there were some that looked really cool. So I do admire them for doing what they wanted to do and not compromising.

Overall: 3/5. An art history buff would love this movie but just wasn't for me. My artist friend who saw it with me loved it. So if art is your thing then this is worth checking out. But if art isn't your thing you might want to skip it.   

Jim Wirsum-Screamin' Jay Hawkins-1968

Ed Paschke-Minnie-1974

Add caption

Movie Review "1971" Milwaukee Film Fest 2014

"1971" is a powerful story about a pivotal event that I was unaware of.  In 1971 a group of citizens calling themselves "The Citizens Commision to Investigate the FBI" broke into an FBI office and stole documents. These documents proved that the FBI was spying on their own citizens.  Sound familiar?  Well the movie couldn't be more topical in the age of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden.  It raises the questions were they heroes or just criminals.  Their actions predated Watergate and in some ways probably helped pave the way for the Watergate scandal.

The event in question was the break in at an FBI Field office in Media Pennsylvania.  A group of citizens that were never caught stole the files and anonymously mailed them to various newspapers.   What was the FBI doing? Well they were spying on citizens.  They had undercover agents in different groups that they felt might be "anti-America".  Groups like the Black Panthers, Anti War groups, Women groups, and hippies.  Not only were they spying on them but they were attempting to disrupt the groups by spreading rumors and making people feel paranoid. This was at a time when the FBI had very little or no oversight and a lot of public support.

How did "The Ctizens Commision to Investigate the FBI" get their start? Well before the became the commission they were a group of anti war demonstrators in Philadelphia.  They heard about an attempted break in at an FBI office in Rochester NY.  That break in was stopped and that group was arrested.  What the group in Philadelphia decided to do was break into a field office that had very little security.  They also decided to do it on the night of the Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier fight of the century so most people were distracted.  Their success was largely due to their thorough preparations and good timing.  What they did not know till much later was how big of an impact they would have on the country. 

The Washington Post was the only paper that had the courage to publish the files.  Nothing like this had happened before and since the files where stolen all the other papers decided to give them back to the FBI.  But the Washington Post decided that the info in the stolen papers were too important not to publish.  After they were published Anericans and politicians were shocked by what they found out. And the FBI went on a giant manhunt to capture the people responsible. But they were never caught.  The members remained a mystery till now when they decided to tell their story.  And what a story it is  

The documentary has interviews with the members along with home footage they took and reinactments.  It is expertly put together to tell their story.  The recreations are seemless and really helps you feel the tension.  The story of Bonnie and John Raines is one of the more powerful stories in the documentary.  While most of the other members were younger Bonnie and John were married and had children.  They knew if they got caught they would go to jail for a long time and leave their kids parentless.  The fact that they still chose to do it is amazing and kind of unimaginable if you are a parent. Their decision adds another level of intensity to the story and keeps us on the edge of the seat. The movie also has tons of humor that breaks up the intensity and makes the whole experiance a fun ride similar to a Hollywood thriller. 

In the end their actions opened the eyes of the country and the government.  Congressional hearings were formed and J. Edgar Hoover's unquestioned authority came to an end.  The FBI now had to follow stricter rules and Congress formed an oversight committee.  These rules stayed in place till the Patriot Act repealed some of them.  We now live in a time when we never know who is watching us.  It makes you pause and reflect on how far are we willing to let the government go to make us feel safe.  It was pointed out that them not ever being found probably helped the story stay focused on the FBI and it makes you wonder if Edward Snowden would have had better success if he had remained anonymous. Instead of hearing where he is hiding maybe we would still be talking about what he revealed. 

Bonnie and John Raines were in attendance at the screening and did a Q&A at the end. It was interesting to hear them talk about what they did and how difficult their decision was. But their views on current events was the most interesting. They see Snowden as a modern day hero. One of the quotes from John was"A nation governed by fear is a poorly governed nation".  Basically citizens should not feel like they are constantly being spied on.  

Overall 5/5-a great documentary that plays out like a thriller.  Keeps you on the edge of your seat and laughing.  Not only that it teaches you a history lesson and the power a few people can have.