Dreamkeeper

Dreamkeeper
a docudrama movie
IMDb | Netflix | Amazon
Overall Rating: 5/10
Meets Expectations:+1
Apparent Rating: 6/10

There are some movies that meander and seem rather opaque that still end up entertaining, Dreamkeeper was one of them. It was a close call though. I thought a lot of the forced parallels between the legends and the journey were blindingly obvious most of the time and astonishingly inapplicable the rest. I kept getting lost as to what was a flashback, what was story, and what was now.

The “now” part of the story was uninteresting and just next to worthless. I think it existed solely to be a framework for telling these other parables, but generally if I can see why something was done that way it seems like a staging failure. In my own writing, I call that, “Excuse me, your plot is showing.”

Some of the stories were really good. They were well told and interesting. Some of the stories relied upon outside knowledge I didn’t have and those were less successful. The stories were from a variety of tribes, even though the main characters were at one point “Sioux” and at another point “Lakota”– perhaps that’s a variant of Sioux, like when the Pawnee woman added, “Wolf Clan”. None of the Indian parables told failed as badly as the main storyline. The flashbacks, which were supposed to help the viewer sort out the rationale for the main storyline, did not start until late in the movie and by then I’d already written the characters off.

In summary, “Too bad they had all that wasted time with Grandpa and Shane.” It’s a 3 hour movie and at least half of it was very boring. I did not like the resolution in the end either. We’re supposed to see this as a happy ending, but really, the movie would have been a lot better if it had been a dozen little movielets that were just telling the stories.

Overall if you like “Native American” mythology, then you will probably enjoy this movie at least moderately. It was not terrible, but certainly a movie to have your knitting nearby to keep your hands busy.

Miss Potter

Miss Potter
a docudrama movie
IMDb | Netflix | Amazon
Overall Rating: 7/10
Meets Expectations: +1
Apparent Rating: 8/10

Overall, I enjoyed Miss Potter. It is one of those docudrama movies where it is supposed to be historical and based on a real person’s life, but I don’t have any clue how much of it was true. I enjoyed all the costumes but I think what I liked about this was how Beatrix Potter toed the line of convention and her parents’ desires while carving out a life and freedoms for herself.

The movie says it has animation in it. The animation is light-handed and well integrated.

One of the most impressive things about this as a story is that it was easy to see how Miss Potter ended up where she did. Each step of her life’s journey makes sense. She draws because it pleases her to take after her father. She meets with publishers and expects the rounds of rejection. When one finally takes on her book, she is surprised and shrewd about it, but agrees. When she begins seeing her publisher, it is clear why because we have seen their courting in the guise of official business. In the end when she buys the farm, it feels like coming home, even to the viewer. Each and every step is clear and is the kind of decision the viewer would make in that situation.

I felt there could have been more detail in a number of areas of the story, but the plot pulls it along.

This was a rare case where a real person’s story was as interesting as one purely imagined by the author.

Charlie Wilson’s War

Charlie Wilson’s War
Netflix | Amazon
Overall Rating: 7/10
Meets Expectations: +2
Apparent Rating: 9/10

Again this was a movie where I queued it but did not think it was going to be worth watching. I rarely like movies that are based on real events. The usual way a “real story” is put into a movie is designed to make people cry and cry and cry, because nothing that isn’t miserable and painful is “real” to filmmakers out for an Oscar. Charlie Wilson’s War was surprisingly funny for a movie about a covert war.

There were scenes where the spy guy, Gus, was telling Charlie Wilson that a sex scandal is a good thing because the press sees sex in the left hand and you can hide a tank in the right hand. (Paraphrased, but you get the idea.) That was funny.

Tom Hanks was very good. He’s played so many “I’m the good guy!” roles that I wondered if he could pull off being a skeevy dude. He did. You totally believe that he loves being a politician but has no moral qualms about the freely offered sex of the 70s.

I really enjoyed the tension between the spy guy and Julia Roberts’ character who is the prissy churchy Texas lady with the money who was the impetus behind the original idea. I like it when the god-ridden are told to simmer down. I love it when a movie manages to portray the god-ridden as effracking insane and only nominally tolerated by thinking people, the same way any other kind of clinical madness would be if it wasn’t dangerous and the person had obscene amounts of money.

I did not like, however, the way the whole movie was done as an enormous flashback. I would have preferred them omitting the opening scene with the award.

I really enjoyed the discussion of the endgame after the covert war and how that has sabotaged our entire middle-east diplomatic mission ever since.

Overall, I considered it a mildly educational movie, with good acting, excellent writing, that told a story, which happened to be true (but would have made a good story regardless.) If you were a fan of The West Wing, the movie is written by Aaron Sorrenson who was the big guy behind that. If you like that kind of political drama writing, this movie should get kicked up to the top of your list.