The Adventures of Huck Finn

Ernest Hemingway once said that all American literature began with a novel by Mark Twain named Huckleberry Finn. There are two obvious reasons why that may be: It is the first great novel to be told in American language, and it is the first great novel to deal honestly and rightly with the subject of race relations. Roger Ebert noted in his review, “The novel has regrettably been under fire in recent years from myopic advocates of Political Correctness, who do not have a bone of irony (or humor) in their bodies, and cannot tell the difference between what is said or done in the novel, and what Twain means by it.”

The book is about a minimally educated outsider white boy, the offspring of an alcoholic, who runs off down the Mississippi with an escaping slave named Jim. Huck contributes to many of the racist looks dominant at that time about Africans, but he has never really thought about them, and during the many days and nights on the river Jim reeducates him.

Huck finally decides that if it is a sin to help a slave escape, he must be a sinner.

The story of Huck and Jim has been told in six or seven earlier movies, and now comes “The Adventures of Huck Finn,” a 1993 beautiful and entertaining version by a young director named Stephen Sommers, who doesn’t stay on the film’s gentle message, but doesn’t avoid it, either. Ebert noted, “The transformation of Huck is there on the screen, although much more time is devoted to the story's picaresque adventures, as Huck and Jim meet a series of colorful characters - including some desperate criminals, some feuding neighbors, and the immortal con men the King and the Duke.”

Huck is played by Elijah Wood, who leniently seems free of charm and other exaggerations of child stars, and makes a stubborn, convincing Huck. Ebert noted, “The real Huck (based on a childhood friend of Twain's) was probably much tougher and had rougher edges, but Huck has been sanitized for years in the movies (just as the Widow Douglas tried to "sivilize" the original).” Jim, the important character in the story, is played by Courtney B. Vance, a New York stage actor who is able to represent sensitivity with which Jim guides Huck out of the brushes of prejudice and sets him on the road of tolerance and decency.

The supporting cast is regularly splendid, especially Jason Robards and Robbie Coltrane, as the King and the Duke, who imitate visitors from England in an attempt to con two innocent sisters out of their tradition. Ebert said, “It was a little eerie, halfway through the movie, to realize that Twain wrote the original American road picture, and that in some way not only all of American literature, but also "Easy Rider," "Bonnie and Clyde," "Five Easy Pieces" and "Thelma & Louise" came out of his novel.”

Ebert admitted, “I read the book for the first time when I was 7, understanding every other word, and I have read it a dozen times since. For me, the best passages are those in which Huck and Jim are alone on the river, debating such curiosities as why the French speak a foreign language, and how many stars there are in the sky, and whether it is all right to steal fruits that are in season if you make a solemn vow not to steal fruits that are out of season. Twain punctuates these passages with lyrical descriptions of the mighty river, and of a thunderstorm that reminds him of barrels rolling down a giant staircase.”

Then Huck and Jim drift onto the subjects of race and slaver, and Huck is able to admit, after explains it to him, that black people have the same feelings as everyone else and are deserving of his respect. This process of Huck’s change is one of the important events in American literature. Some cannot like it and think it should not be taught in schools because Huck, like every boy of his time, use the N word. Ebert is right when he said, “They are very short-sighted.”

Obviously, the movie doesn’t use the word, nor does it really go that far into the heart of Huck’s change. It wants to entertain and not offend. However, it is a good film with strong performances. Nothing in it is wrong, however some depths are lacking. Ebert ended his review by saying, “I admired the performances, and Sommers' sense of time and place, and I hope the movie guides more people toward the book - which contains values that sometimes seem as rare today as when Jim was first teaching them to Huck.”

Honestly, I had seen one version of this novel when I was a junior in High School, but I don’t know which version that was. We did read the book that year as well, but not entirely. We read only parts of the book before my teacher asked for the books back and we watched the movie instead. I think I had seen Doug Walker review this film last year, so I decided to check it out earlier this year, and I loved it. If you have read the book and want to see a good adaptation on it, this is one you should see, it’s a good one.

Check in tomorrow to see what I will review next in “Disney Month 2021.”

Sister Act

I don’t think anyone will know how God feels about the richly mocking humor, but the average human movie watcher will enjoy, and dance to, this hilarious Whoopi Goldberg movie.

Despite the 1992’s “Sister Act’s” story is about a woman who witnesses a murder, this PG comedy is targeted at both kids and adults, and has enough laughs for each group to keep everybody happy.

Jeff Menell said in his review, “It’s a high-concept idea plugged into a formulaic execution, but this formula has often proved to be tried and true and it doesn’t fail here. The Whoopi crowd will just eat it up and Sister Act may make converts out of the rest of the public. The film’s heavenly expectations at the box office should be fulfilled. Hallelujah!”

Whoopi plays Deloris, the lead singer of a Supremes-like lounge group currently praising them in Reno. Her boyfriend, Vince, played by Harvey Keitel, is a murdering mobster who is afraid he will commit a great sin if he leaves his wife.

At her breaking point with wasting her life, Deloris quits the group and is about to do the same to Vince when she accidentally witnesses one of Vince’s men kill a man.

Deloris escapes and goes to the police, where Lt. Eddie Souther, played by Bill Nunn, decides to secretly keep her hidden in a convent until the trail. They find possibly the last place Vince would think to look for his Catholic school dropout ex-girlfriend.

This is also the last place Deloris wants to be. Also, the strict Reverend Mother, played effortlessly, as always, by Maggie Smith, doesn’t make it any easier for Deloris.

However, much to everyone’s surprise, Deloris starts to fit in, changes the once dilapidated church choir into a high energy group, cleans up the neighborhood, and saves the church.

Everything is very predictable, and if there was time you might get livid at the silliness of everything. However, things move at such a fast pace, and the comedic timing of everything is impressive enough to dominate the basic mistakes.

Menell credited, “Goldberg offers much comic relief as the acerbic nun, a part that seems to have been written expressly for her.” Since the credits say nothing different, we have to guess that’s really her singing, and she’s really good. She’s obviously having fun playing a singing nun and it’s enjoyable.

As you could think, there is no role that Maggie Smith can’t play flawlessly. She does so much with so little effort, that we can’t help but be happy in admiration every great time she’s on screen.

“Sister Act” isn’t hard to follow, and it’s easy to enjoy. The funny songs may make some very religious people cringe while they laugh, but they will laugh.

I saw this movie on TV, but it was the censored version, which wasn’t as enjoyable. However, I did end up seeing the actual version later on, and I really had a fun time watching this film. If you haven’t seen it, you should check it out, especially since the 30^th anniversary of when this film was released will be next year. Check it out if you’re a Whoopi Goldberg fan and have an enjoyable time laughing.

Look out tomorrow when I look at a good novel adaptation in “Disney Month 2021.”

The Rocketeer

The protagonist of “The Rocketeer,” released in 1991, was called as a new action hero in the same vein as Indian Jones, but the difference between this movie and the Indian Jones franchise is essential: “Raiders of the Lost Ark” took the Saturday afternoon serials of the late 1930s and 1940s as an inspiration, while “The Rocketeer” takes them as blueprint. Indian Jones spoofed them, “The Rocketeer” copies them. Roger Ebert said in his review, “The movie lacks the wit and self-mocking irony of the Indiana Jones movies, and instead seems like a throwback to the simple-minded, clean-cut sensibility of a less complicated time.”

That doesn’t mean “The Rocketeer” is not entertaining. Ebert advised, “But adjustments are necessary to enjoy it; you have to dial down, to return to an age of innocence when an eccentric inventor and a clear-eyed hero could take on the bad guys with a new gizmo they’d dreamed up overnight.”

The movie stars Bill Campbell as Cliff Secord, the young test pilot who dreams of winning a huge air race but instead finds himself with the chance of a lifetime when he puts on a jetpack invented by an old man named Peevy, played by Alan Arkin.

Ebert said, “It’s a one-man portable rocket backpack that allows Cliff to fly around the countryside with flames shooting out behind him, while wearing a helmet that, as the screenplay accurately observes, makes him look like a hood ornament.”

What is the use of this jetpack? Ebert said, “Need I reveal that the man who possesses it may hold the possibility of world domination in his hands?” The Nazis want it, and according to an animated German propaganda movie that has fallen into American custody (“a man died for this film”), soldiers wearing rocket jetpacks could fly down on the U.S. and take over overnight. (Ebert asked, “Slight problems are ignored, such as: What condition would the hordes of Nazis arrive in after their trans-Atlantic one-man flights? Would they run out of fuel? Be badly sunburned? Get their heels toasted by the flames? Carry sandwiches?) A Nazi spy ring has been deployed to capture the prototype Rocketeer outfit, but the dummkopfs mistakenly steal an Electro-Lux vacuum cleaner instead, and meanwhile Cliff straps on the contraption and goes forth to battle for truth, justice and the American way.” In the film he has the dashing Neville Sinclair (Timothy Dalton), a Hollywood star who is a Nazi supporter, Eddie Valentine (Paul Sorvino), a Mafia leader whose men have been hired to steal the rocket suit, and Howard Hughes (Terry O’Quinn), who is the money behind the invention. Ebert said, “And there is also, of course, his girlfriend Jenny, played by the doe-eyed and pneumatic Jennifer Connelly.”

Ebert continued, “The movie’s innocence extends even to its special effects, which may be state-of-the-art but sometimes seem as charmingly direct as those rockets in the “Flash Gordon” serials - the ones with sparklers hidden inside of them, which were pulled on wires in front of papier-mache mountains. When “The Rocketeer” straps on his gizmo and goes whizzing around the screen, he looks for all the world like some harebrained kid trying to break his neck on some new contraption.”

Even when the special effects are decorative, they seem old-fashioned. Ebert mentioned, “There’s a sequence, for example, that involves a fight on top of a flaming Nazi zeppelin, and as the explosions rocked the frame I was having flashbacks to the Hindenburg and the James Bond movie that also had a fight on top of a blimp.”

Ebert continued, “The virtues of the movie are in its wide-eyed credulity, its sense of wonder. Bill Campbell, an actor who in this film is largely lacking in charisma, may even be the right choice for the role; he’s a white-bread, Identikit leading man who seems as bland as the B actors who wore the superhero costumes in those old serials.” Jennifer Connelly is sweet and beautiful as his girlfriend, and gives the same innocent sensuality of the classic B-movie beauties – an ability to look completely unaware, for example, that she is wearing a low-cut dress.

Ebert ended his review by saying, “Arkin has some fun as the eccentric codger, and Dalton makes a sly villain, and when the movie is over it’s an insubstantial as cotton candy. I suppose that’s a virtue.”

This is an underrated movie that people don’t seem to really remember. I did see a part of this movie as a kid, and I never thought about it until Nostalgia Critic mentioned it in his “Top 11 Underrated Classics” list. Since I’m sharing my cousin’s Disney+, I saw this movie earlier this year and I’m happy I finally saw it. You should to if you have a Disney+ because there is definitely a lot of enjoyment in this movie. This is like a spy espionage film that is action-packed. Then again, we do have Timothy Dalton, who played James Bond for like two films.

Check in tomorrow when I look at a classic film in “Disney Month 2021.”

Pete's Dragon (1977)

The story of “Pete’s Dragon,” released in 1977, is very simple. It’s about a boy named Pete (Sean Marshall) who has a dragon named Elliott (Charlie Callas). Elliott is an animated dragon, and the rest of the movie is in live action. Pete loves Elliott because he is an orphan owned by a crooked family called the Gogans (Shelley Winters, Charles Tyner, Gary Morgan, and Jeff Conaway) and Elliott is his only friend.

While the Gogans are trying to find Pete, they go to a village named Passamaquoddy and meet a man named Lampie (the late Mickey Rooney) who has a daughter named Nora (Helen Reddy). Nora’s fiancé Paul, played by Cal Bartlett, has been reported lost at sea, and she is understandably devasted.

Then we get our villains Dr. Terminus (Jim Dale) and his assistant Hoagy (comedian Red Buttons, famous for his “why does this person gets a dinner when this famous person never got a dinner” on The Dean Martin Roasts) who want to use Elliott to make potions and elixirs to make money. Rachel Review’s said in her blog, “They are your typical sniveling over the top silly villains.”

Rachel mentioned, “The rest of the movie is basically a cat and mouse chase between the villains (Gogans and Terminus/Hoagy) and the good guys (Pete, Elliot, Nora, Lampie and Paul).”

“Pete’s Dragon” is completely harmless entertainment. The songs are fine but aside from Candle on the Water, they’re forgettable. The performances are all nice. The animation of Elliott is great for its time. It has its heart in the right place. It’s a very sweet and enjoyable film. Rachel said, “There is a lack of cynicism to the entire enterprise that is very charming.”

Rachel criticized, “However, I don’t know if I would say it’s a particularly good movie. The villains, particularly the Gogans, get old very fast. They cross over the hokey line and become out right annoying. Plus, it is strange to have a Disney movie where a character is continually claiming she has the ‘bill of sale’ to a human being.” Does anyone find that strange?

Rachel also said, “Dr Terminus and Hoagy are sniveling snarling mustache twirling villains that are fine but don’t do much to inspire me or excite me. Pretty standard rote bad guys.”

Rachel continued, “Like I said, the songs aside from Candle on the Water are nothing special. Let’s put it this way Passamaquoddy isn’t likely to be the next Supercalifragilsticexpialidocious.  This music sorely misses the Sherman Brothers. They could do so much with a song like Brazzle Dazzle Day. As it is it’s meh.”

The animation is pretty good on Elliott and he and Pete have a great friendship. Rachel said, “I also appreciate we don’t get any real backstory on Elliot.” He is just there and that’s all we know.

Rachel admitted, “I certainly would put other live action Disney films like Mary Poppins, Pollyanna, Bednobs and Broomsticks, Parent Trap, 10,000 Leagues Under the Sea, etc far above this.  I even think Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (not Disney I know) is much better. They are for the most part more engaging and less syrupy than Pete’s Dragon.”

Rachel continued, “But there is stuff to like here and aside from the Gogans nothing to really offend or annoy me, so it’s not a bad watch.” This film is simply fine.

I must admit, I heard a lot about this film a few years back. That was probably because of the remake that came out which is the reason why I heard a lot about this film. For those who are curious to check this out, do so. I think there is enjoyment in this film, and I think everyone will like it. Even though Elliott is the only animated character in the film, I think it was great as one of the earliest Disney films that combined live action with animation. Check it out and see for yourself.

Look tomorrow to see what other exciting stuff I will review in “Disney Month 2021.”

Freaky Friday (1976)

Thirteen-year-old Anabel Andrews (Jodie Foster) hasn’t been getting along with her mother (Barbara Harris) very well lately. Mrs. Andrews finds her daughter’s messy room, haircut, and lazy attitude in school problematic. Anabel wishes that she could just have some space and freedom.

On the morning of Friday, the 13^th, both Anabel and her mother say that they would like to switch places. Suddenly, this happens. Anabel now sees she is her mother, and Ellen sees she is now Anabel.

Anabel expects that as her mother, she’ll be able to stay at home, watch television, and do whatever she wants. However, motherly duties soon are shown, and an easy load of laundry ends up being quite a challenge. On top of that, she must deal with every one of the needs of self-centered Mr. Andrews, played by John Astin, who as a husband isn’t quite as cool as a father.

When Anabel is having difficulty with the maid, played by Pasty Kelly, carpet cleaners and cooking, Ellen is finding a day in school to be more than she thought. Her friends find her reviews to be ridiculous, and whether she knows too little or too much, it’s difficult for her not to be outcast.

As her mother, Anabel wants to flirt with Boris Harris, played by Marc McClure, an allergic neighborhood boy she likes. Meanwhile, she’s got to pick up her annoying brother she calls “Apeface,” played by Sparky Marcus, from school and help with plans for the aquacade Mr. Andrews has made for a potential business client. She’d rather just have fun playing baseball in the park.

Once she gets her braces off, Ellen experiments with a new look for her daughter. However, this event Friday ends up having more serious challenges for Ellen, as she finds herself the team captain in an overwhelming field hockey game and the main attraction of Mr. Andrews’ water-skiing show.

Based on Mary Rodgers’ novel, which she adapted for the 1976 film, this laugh-filled comedy takes its naturally hilarious body-switching story and creates a lively and meaningful story, with a strong amount of live action Disney magic. Mother and daughter come to appreciate what the other does, having literally walked in the other’s life.

Part of what makes “Freaky Friday” work so well is the excellent performances from the two leads. Barbara Harris and Jodie Foster have a lot of fun with their roles, a characteristic where the actresses in the 2003 remake stayed true. They take material that might be simply funny on script and make it very funny. DVD Dizzy said in their review, “The film has a comic energy through both the mother and daughter segments, that matches the often-present and always upbeat '70s score.”

DVD Dizzy continued, “The original Freaky Friday lacks the heavy-handed message of the popular 2003 remake and delivers far more in the way of wit and charm. Like the original Parent Trap, it's a contemporary family comedy that transcends any intended audience and simply delights all. What's hip and current in the '70s may seem awfully dated now, but the heart of the film's story remains as true and wonderful as ever.”

“Freaky Friday” is a nice fun family comedy. DVD Dizzy noted, “The contemporary nature of the story makes it a true product of the 1970s, but the film remains every bit as entertaining nearly three decades later. While it doesn't approach the superb quality of the studio's double-disc treatments, Disney's DVD exhibits flawless picture and sound, plus the added bit of effort seen in a great interview with Jodie Foster, a fun little game, and some spirited menus.” The quality of the movie and the DVD presentation make “Freaky Friday” one of the easiest recommendations to make among Disney’s live action films.

I think this film is a nice comedy, and a good one. If you have seen the 2003 remake, since that I remember being advertised a lot when it was theatrically released, see the original. Even though it may not be as good as the original, it’s still a nice, enjoyable comedy that I think everyone will enjoy. I think this film had a sequel that I need to check out.

Look out tomorrow when I review a classic “hybrid” film in “Disney Month 2021.”

The Darn Cat! (1965)

Alright online readers, December is here again. You know what that means? It’s time for “Disney Month 2021.” Like last year, I will be doing a grab bag of different Disney films that I have not seen and reviewed, and it will be no connecting themes. Let’s get started with the first film I will look at, “That Darn Cat!,” released in 1965. I saw a good portion of this film in eighth grade reading class, but never finished it until earlier this year.

Who remembers Felix, the crazy cartoon cat that used to make every viewer happy with his doubtful journeys in the fantasy areas of silent films? Bosley Crowther said in his review, “Well, a live-action counterpart of Felix has been shamelessly conceived by the brownies who work for Walt Disney and is now making saps of human beings in "That Darn Cat," which opened at the Music Hall yesterday. What with his having an adventure that approaches fantasy, despite the fact that it includes talking people and has a firm look of reality, and what with this being the movie that goes with the Music Hall's big Christmas show, he will no doubt do just as well as Felix in delighting a multitude of young and old. This is said with a rational suspension of the usual severity that is exercised by this department in criticizing films about the miraculous capabilities of animals.”

It is said with full awareness that the people that were in this adventure are way over serious consideration as logical humans. They are a group of comedy characters, let by an intelligent teenager, played by Hayley Mills, who becomes involved in a case where her Siamese cat is sued to lead agents of the FBI to the hideout of bank robbers. It looks like the cat followed the robbers (impressionist Frank Gorshin and Neville Brand) to their apartment and came back wearing a wristwatch as a collar, put on by the kidnapped bank-teller (Grayson Hall) desperately calling for help.

Crowther said, “Needless to say, it is the wide-eyed and breathlessly imaginative Miss Mills who first figures out the significance of the mysterious watch and succeeds in recruiting the interest and then the activity of the F.B.I. And it is she who does most of the pushing and coaxing of her pet to return to the hideaway of the robbers, while the F.B.I. lads rally round with their paw-printing gear and walkie-talkies to tail the cat scientifically. It is a setup for criminal apprehension that becomes pretty wild before D.C.—that's short for Darn Cat—obliges and erratically leads the way. In these frenziedly farcical activities, it is not surprising to find the cat the coolest, most controlled, intelligent and, indeed, believable participant.”

The cat that plays the informant, as the FBI says, is great. Clark Gable at the prime of his career never played a tom cat more convincingly. Crowther noted, “This elegant, blue-eyed creature is a paragon of suavity and grace. And what is most commendable about him is that he doesn't deign to converse.” That must be the most offensive character of animals in films.

Along with D.C., the people are in a Disney film, whish is something between enjoyable fictions and intolerable crazy people. Crowther noted, “Miss Mills is one of the former—a well-scrubbed, energy-radiant miss who manages to be attractive even when she has to do the most fatuous things.” Dean Jones as the FBI agent is stuck with the funniest role, and he plays through it nicely. Dorothy Provine and Roddy McDowal play an elderly couple in a juvenile way, and Neville Brand and Frank Gorshin are funny as caricatures of thieves. As funny next-door neighbors Elsa Lanchester and William Demarest show that there’s no point in trying to teach an old dog new tricks.

Crowther credited, “Robert Stevenson did the directing from a screenplay by Bill Walsh and the Gordons, probably great ailurophiles. The color is good and Bobby Darin warbles a song at the start that may be amusing to humans but would probably fill Felix with disgust.” However, it’s an entertaining movie. I think people could take a look at the film and enjoy it.

If you can get over the fact that this film is from the 60s, then I would say check it out. It is a product of its time, but it is a very enjoyable film. Check it out and have a good laugh while watching it.

Look out tomorrow when I review a classic in “Disney Month 2021.”

The 33

One of the most difficult tasks for a filmmaker is to take a story where everyone knows the ending (or at least should know the ending) and retell it in a way that puts the resolution in doubt again. Steven Spielberg did exactly that in the fact-based Cold War film “Bridge of Spies,” and now Mexican director Patricia Riggen does something similar with a fact-based story from rather recently.

Glenn Kenny said in his review, ““The 33” is a technically impressive simulation of the mine collapse and rescue in Chile in 2010, a cataclysmic event that saw 33 miners trapped underground for a stupefying-seeming 69 days. Their plight became an international cause during that period, and their incredibly improbable rescue was a “whole world is watching” moment on a par with the first moon landing. The movie throws together an international cast that may on first glance strike the movie-savvy viewer as improbable as well: while the English-language production features Antonio Banderas and Lou Diamond Phillips, two actors with obvious Latino bonafides in several departments, in key leading roles, it also has French actor Juliette Binoche and Irish actor Gabriel Byrne in prominent parts, both playing Chileans. It’s a testament to director Riggen’s skill with actors that she makes the ensemble a seamless one. Unless your objections to casting against conventional type are violent ones, there shouldn’t be a problem.”

A little problem comes at the start of the film, as the main characters are introduced in a party scene. One is an elderly miner who’s retiring. Another is an experienced fellow who’s asking his friend and boss for an extra shift on a day he’s supposed to have off. Another is a younger miner who’s about to become a father and who’s looking into getting out of the mining job because of that. Kenny noted, “All three of these cases, of course, add to the “what incredible irony” quotient when a chunk of rock two times the mass of the Empire State Building trap them almost 2,000 feet underground, with only three days’ worth of food and water rations in the refuge area where the miners roost.”

It's in the end result of the disaster that the movie builds up the suspense and claustrophobia. The story pulls between the mine and surface land. Below, the miners judge their situation and determine how desperate they are to get out. Kenny said, “Above, miners’ families—including Binoche’s Maria, the guilt-ridden sister of a drunkard miner, one pregnant wife, and the competing wife and mistress of one sheepishly rakish worker—demand answers and action.” The Chilean government, in the person of a green and serious minister played by Rodrigo Santoro steps in. Gabriel Byrne’s tough mining engineer thinks the miners are all but dead, and his interactions with Santoro’s character do a good job with explaining just why the chances for a rescue were at first around one percent.

The resulting action shows how the odds increased. Kenny said, “There are a lot of characterizations, and a few character arcs, that the movie takes on, and Riggen doesn’t mind having to do sketches—a more thorough movie would have been, well a mini-series.” However, it’s a real success that she keeps the action clear throughout, and show shows likable daring at times. The awaiting starvation of the miners results in a hallucination dinner scene that’s very daring, and actually funny. Leading the underground moments are the performances of Banderas and Phillips. Banderas is reliably fascinating, while Phillips gives so many reminders of what a delicate and effective actor he can be. Kenny said, “This unabashedly crowd-pleasing movie gets to its uplifting but also somewhat disquieting conclusion and coda (which, as is the custom these days, introduces the audience to the real-life miners) with its integrity intact.” As such, “The 33,” released in 2015, is a really nice surprise, and in more than one way.

In all honesty, I had no idea about this news of the miners trapped in Chile until this movie came out. I don’t really watch or read news, unless I’m watching comedy news, but this was a really nice movie about something I never knew before. Thank you to this film for bringing it to my attention because I think this was really nice. Check it out and see for yourself how nice of a film was made.

Thank you everyone for joining in on “Lou Diamond Phillips Month.” I hope all of you enjoyed it, as I mostly did films that were about real events. Maybe he does that a lot, but I don’t know, since I have not seen a lot of his films. Hopefully people have seen his films that I have recommended.

Look out next month to see what I will end this year off with.