The dictionary definition of the term “documentary” is the following: “Movies, Television. based on or re-creating an actual event, era, life story, etc., that purports to be factually accurate and contains no fictional elements.” However, too often modern documentaries have an additional element: an agenda. So many of these are ham-fisted attempts by filmmakers to make a political point or criticize something about society they don’t like. Granted, sometimes doing those things is necessary and important, but I digress. However, there are a few documentary films that stay true to the actual definition, among them Korengal.

Korengal Valley is a mountainous area in north-eastern Afghanistan, near the border with Pakistan. Due to its location, it’s an ideal route for the Taliban to smuggle weapons and supplies between Pakistan and the rest of Afghanistan. In order to counter this, the United States Army set up an outpost on a ridge in the valley, which quickly earned its reputation as a hellhole among the soldiers stationed there. Due to the large amounts of enemy soldiers in the area, the army battalion took fire an average of 3 days out of 4, for all 14 months that they were deployed there.

However, unlike director Sebastian Junger’s previous documentary Restrepo, this film is not about combat. In fact, despite the huge amount of time they were fighting, combat footage makes up only a small percentage of the film. Rather, this film is the intensely personal story of the men who were deployed in that valley. The point of the movie is not combat or war, but how combat and war affect people. It is about these soldiers’ thoughts and memories and experiences.

The film is divided between footage shot by Junger and his (now-deceased) partner Tim Hetherington while entrenched with the soldiers, and interviews with them after they returned home. Because the film is not about combat, you get to see many aspects of these soldiers’ lives that we would normally never think about; we get to see them relaxing by playing Guitar Hero, for example. While entrenched with the soldiers, the filmmakers got to know and be trusted by the soldiers, and during the interview sections they are extremely frank about some very sensitive and touching subjects. We get to see one soldier talk about what it’s like to be the only black soldier in the squad, and another speak about how he thinks that God must hate him for the things that he did.

This film does not have an agenda. Don’t be scared away from it by fear that it’s going to try and shove some message down your throat. This film is only the story of these men, their experiences, and how it changed them. And it is a completely honest experience at that, so honest that it can be shocking at times. And that is why I love this film. It is not about politics, or war. It is just the story of these men and what they went through, and that is what we need to take away from war. Not just the war itself, but what it does to people. And it doesn’t hold anything back. This is the conversation we should be having about the war, and about the people whom it changed.

Grade: A

I admit, I didn't know much about Aaron Swartz. Co-founder of Reddit and RSS Feed, he was to me a computer wiz embroiled in a lawsuit I heard about but didn't take the time to fully understand. His death last year sent shockwaves throughout the Internet, but my knowledge remained cursorily linked to the severely truncated news broadcasts about his accomplishments. With The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz, Aaron's story finally reaches any audience unfamiliar with his work. Part in memoriam, part call to action, this film not only delves into Aaron's work, ideals, and government prosecution, but it powerfully poses questions about what society will stand for in the new information age.

Aaron was, by all standards, an incredibly gifted person from a young age. He could read brochures with complicated phrasing at age 3 (a shock to his mother) and became obsessed with programming. By age 12 he'd created a site sourcing information from users in a way quite similar to today's Wikipedia, though he developed it five years before Wikipedia came into existence. He impressed everyone he met with a confidence in his skills as well as an advanced understanding of what innovation in technology would and should look like. 

He believed information on the Internet should be freely available, and he fought for it. For a reason never quite conveyed in the film, he began to download scholarly articles from the database JSTOR without paying for them. The film espouses the idea that the government wanted to send a message to the "hacker" community when they decided to harshly prosecute Aaron under a dated computer law from 1996. According to the interviewees, Aaron's promotion for a free and open internet was threatening to the government. Despite JSTOR dropping all charges against Aaron and MIT attempting to "remain neutral" (though arguably pro-prosecution) in the case, the government maintained their pursuit. 

Aaron's highs were quite high, and his lows followed suit. The seemingly endless prosecution and the potential impacts weighed on him. He faced over 35 years in jail and a fine in excess of $1 million, and while many believe he would not have been found guilty, many were also shocked at his prosecution in the first place. He faced 13 felony counts and knew being a convicted felon would kill any of his political aspirations. He believed in making the world a better place and didn't want to give up easily and accept a guilty plea bargain, because he genuinely didn't believe he deserved that. His friends knew how much the case hurt him, but at the time of his suicide had no idea the extent to which he grieved.

Though RSS Feed and Reddit were likely his most memorable pursuits, the film conveyed he was probably most validated by the SOPA and PIPA fight. No one thought they could stop these bills from passing in congress because they were backed by an enormous amount of corporate interest and money, but Aaron and a group of others brought the issue to the forefront and the bills were ultimately defeated. Friends noted this might have been Aaron's dream -- to finally see he could made a large political impact utilizing the medium he so loved: the Internet.

While switching between interviews, photos, and press clips became jarring at times, the film felt surprisingly cohesive. Dishearteningly, the film showed that almost any person or organization involved in prosecuting Aaron, or not fighting hard enough against his prosecution, refused to be interviewed for the film. Thus, the story felt quite one-sided at times, though the film wasn't exclusively about his prosecution. Ultimately it questions what it means when the government harshly pursues prosecuting people for vague crimes like Aaron's, but doesn't prosecute heavily bank-rolled individuals or institutions for their roles in larger issues, like the 2008 crisis. More importantly, it asks what we as individuals and as a society are going to do about it.

Aaron is a role model for anyone fighting for a free, open, and accessible internet. Friends say he asked himself everyday if he was doing the best possible thing he could be doing to change the world, and he truly believed he could improve it. My knowledge of Aaron was so cursory in part because he fought so hard to ensure I could pursue whatever knowledge I pleased on the Internet. I implore you to forgo the Internet for an evening at the movie theatre. Getting to know Aaron and learning about a medium so ingrained into our daily lives is well worth the time.

Grade: A

If you are looking at this picture of a giant humanoid transforming machine with a sword, riding a larger metal dinosaur and there aren’t tiny flowers of glee blooming in your stomach… you are in the wrong place mate. Be warned, this is a “fan boy” review and I will try my best to not get pepped up.

Transformers: Age of Extinction, the fourth installment from the Transformers franchise, carries forward the tradition with all the metal, explosions, toys and the “make you go weak in the knees” cars. The last chapter in the series had the Autobots (Good Guys) fight the Decepticons (Bad Guys) ending with the death of Decepticon leader Megatron. It’s been some time now after the game changing fight in Chicago, and the story starts with the Yeager family. Cade (Mark Wahlberg) is a mechanic and garage inventor with a 17 year old daughter Tessa (Nicola Peltz). He builds small machines and repairs stuff to make ends meet, until everything changes when he stumbles upon the dormant Autobot leader Optimus Prime.

The movie starts on a subtle note with a very District 9 feel, with post war imagery and exploitation of alien technology, building the base of the story. Now the government has been hunting Autobots and Decepticons alike, to get rid of all aliens and take control over the security of humans on the planet, and the Yeagers are now involved and branded as terrorist for associating with aliens and get added to the hit list. This leads to the usual run-hide-fight scenario that is a part of all Transformers movies. But hey!- you aren’t here for the narrative (though it is an improvement over its predecessors). The flick moves away from the original pack of Autobots and adds some new machines that fight along side Optimus and everyone’s favorite Bumblebee. Decepticons are now replaced by a new horde of machines that want both the Autobots and Decepticons killed. There are more alien machines, crazy theories, secrets unveiled and explosions as we move towards the latter half of the movie.

Surprisingly, in what seems like an effort to build a more solid Transformers universe, there’s a large number of new human characters introduced. Mark Wahlberg gives a decent performance, stepping into the shoes of Shia LaBeouf, as the new parallel protagonist (yes, we all know Optimus is the real hero). Nicola Peltz (Bates Motel) plays a not so essential role with mostly damsel-in-distress and doe-eyed-teenager acts accompanied by Jack Reynor (Delivery Man) playing the mostly unnecessary character of her boyfriend. But there is another cluster of actors that includes TJ Miller, Kesley Grammer, Titus Welliver, Stanley Tucci and Li Bingbing, who score a few points with their character portrayal. Though how well these characters are developed is a whole different question. Along with this large cast is a 165 minute long runtime, which is a treat for the fans.

The special effects are something all Transformers movies ride on, and this one certainly tops the crowd. The alien robots have all been redesigned with more slick look and there are also a few new ones (look out for the samurai!). As for the cars, if yellow Camaros or red hot trucks aren’t your thing … they’ve got Lamborghinis and Bugattis on board. Overall, the movie offers a lot of fresh content as far as the technology, machines, weapons or for that matter pet dinosaurs go! But what is interesting is that there is also a more sensible reasoning offered for the occurrence of events and that opens doors to a plethora of characters and stories from the Transformers universe. In a way, this movie is more like a reboot than a sequel, setting up a base for second Transformers trilogy (probably!).

At the end of the day, Transformers may not be at the pinnacle of storytelling, but it’s a neatly packed 3 hours of “all you asked for and more”! So if you are a Transformers fan or just looking for a 3 hour escapade, Transformers: Age of Extinction is definitely a good way to spend your summer afternoon.

Grade:  A- / B- (depending on the category of audience that you belong to)

After critical successes like Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, I would’ve thought that Quentin Tarantino’s 1997 heist film, Jackie Brown, would be much better known. The story follows a middle aged flight attendant, the titular Jackie Brown (Pam Grier), who, upon getting caught smuggling money from Cabo for arms dealer Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson), decides to con Ordell and the feds out of the remaining half a million dollars located in Mexico.

While often remaining in familiar territory for Tarantino—a crime drama filled with sexism, racism and plenty of violence—it’s interesting to see him work primarily with a female lead character. Jackie is smart and confident, often taking matters into her own hands to solve her troubles. While having strong female characters isn’t out of Tarantino’s realm, it’s refreshing seeing not just a woman, but a black woman, be completely in control. Pam Grier puts so much life into this character: she’s got an incredible toughness to her, while still coming off as charming. In one of my favorite scenes of the whole film, she yells at Ordell after he deviated from the plan they set to get the money. Watching her berate a violent man with a temper—who also tried to kill her earlier in the film—is awesome. She completely takes control and reasserts her position as the leader of the plan.

The only other thing to really stand out in the film is the supporting characters. Max Cherry (Robert Forster) is a bail bondsman with a crush on Jackie who decides to try and help her to pull off the scam. He’s a great contrast to Jackie: he’s quiet, willing to help and more than capable. It’s no surprise that he was nominated for an academy award for his role. Over on Ordell’s side is Louis (Robert De Niro), his former friend who just got out of jail and works for Ordell again. He’s also quiet, but it’s more that he seems to have no ambition and just drift through life. Lastly, Federal Agent Ray Nicolette (Michael Keaton) is highly motivated to catch Ordell and prove himself a capable agent. He’s intense, but despite his best efforts, he can’t seem to manipulate or scare Jackie into cooperating.

The acting, writing and filming of Jackie Brown are all exactly up to Tarantino’s high standards. I think the reason that it goes unnoticed is that there’s nothing particularly memorable about the film. While well executed, it feels like it’s just a combination of Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. I don’t think it should be overlooked for that reason, but I understand why the film doesn’t stand out among the rest of his work.

Grade: A-

Length: 154 minutes

"Go Beyond the Impossible, and kick reason to the curb! That's how Team Gurren rolls!"
-Kamina, summing up the entire series

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Mecha, Action, Comedy
Creators: Hiroyuki Imaishi & Kazuki Nakashima
Studio: Gainax
Length: 27 episodes
Year: 2007
Highlights: Giant mechas. Drills and sunglasses. Utter insanity.

As we’ve already established, the way an anime series is produced is a bit different from how an American TV show is made. While broadcasting networks and individual creators are certainly important, a huge influence on all anime films and series is the studio that produces it. Many anime studios have become known for unique styles that can be seen in many of their works. Any newcomer to the field of anime should become familiar with the more notable of these studios, and one of the biggest names to know is Studio Gainax.

Originally established in the early 80s, Gainax has become known for several different things over the years. Initially, they were known for… let’s say well-endowed female characters. Then they switched over to existential angst. Then they changed to… I suppose it’s what slapstick would be like if made by people on a whole bunch of hallucinogenic drugs (which is quite possible). And then this show, well it’s all of the above. The only constant with Studio Gainax is that there is no constant.

Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann (known simply as Gurren Lagann in America), or TTGL for short, is the story of Simon (pronounced SEE-moan, for some reason). He lives in a small underground village with his self-appointed older brother Kamina, a confident and hot-headed idiot. One day, while digging tunnels to expand the village, Simon finds a strange glowing drill and an unusual red robot with a rare human face. Soon after, Simon and Kamina’s ordinary lives are shattered by the arrival of two things from the mythical “surface”: an enourmous mecha (piloted anthropomorphic robot) called a Gunmen, and a woman named Yoko with a very large gun and very little clothing, who is fighting the Gunmen. In order to defeat the monstrous mecha, Simon must learn to pilot the mecha he dug-up (which Kamina names “Lagann”), and so begins his epic journey.

And I do mean EPIC. Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann was made as an affectionate parody of what are termed “super-robot” shows. These are shows where giant robots feature heavily into the plot and act as basically a superhero, and where these robots tend to be heavily influenced by the emotional state of their pilots. In TTGL, this is taken to the logical extreme: basically of all the characters are defined by their willpower and determination above all else, to the point where the mechas are powered by fighting spirit and the heroes can win fights literally solely because of their own willpower, no matter the odds. The writers of the show even said that if something is awesome enough, it will break the laws of physics in the show.

As such, this show does not take itself seriously at all. It features ridiculous and completely over-the-top fights between the various mecha, that eventually escalate to absolutely absurd levels and scales. Some highlights include the robots using their giant sunglasses as boomerangs (yes, the robots wear sunglasses), weaponized drills the size of large buildings, the mechas spontaneously repairing grievous damage solely because of the pilot’s willpower, and attacks with names such as “WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK I AM KICK!!!!” and “HANDS OFF MY BELOVED LITTLE BROTHER PUNCH!!!!” I would tell you just how absurd the show gets by its end, but you wouldn’t believe me. Let’s just say that it has so many fights, explosions, and pure epicness that it leaves Michael Bay movies far in the dust. The characters are as absurd as the fights are, with extremely exaggerated characterization and ridiculous hot-headedness that only make them all the more hilarious.

However, this doesn’t make the characters two-dimensional caricatures, even if they sometimes seem that way in order to get laughs. Even though the show itself is absurd, all of the characters are written so that they stay completely earnest even during its most absurd moments. For a show that is so insane, the characters are amazingly well-fleshed out, with strong characterization and motivations for their actions. In addition, a strong element of character development means that many of them drastically change and evolve over the course of the show.

Even though the only proper way to describe the show is through words such as “epic,” “absurd” and “insane,” this is not a simple comedy series. There is a serious plot that runs through the whole series; rather than feeling at odds with the insanity of the series, it only enhances it, giving the heroes a compelling reason for even their most ridiculous moments. In addition, there are a couple of huge and completely unexpected plot twists over the course of the show, which brings me to my next point: if you have interest in watching this series, then don’t do a Google search on it after you read this review. Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann got massively popular on the internet during its initial run on Japanese television, and as such it is extremely easy to find images, videos, or articles that will spoil major plot points.

Out of all the media I’ve seen, not just anime, I’ve never seen anything that can compete with Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann in terms of sheer insanity, absurdity, and just plain fun. This show makes even the most ridiculous Hollywood movies seen tame by comparison, and it is absolutely glorious. This show truly goes Beyond the Impossible and kicks logic to the curb. It goes beyond what anyone’s expectations of even the most insane piece of fiction could be, and it kicks any kind of reason or logic out of the way. Or really anything that tries to impose any sense on it or tries to reign in its fun. Studio Gainax has produced a series that has to be seen to be believed, and even then you may not believe it.

So what are you waiting for? Go watch Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann right now! Your mind and expectations will never be the same.

The Past is a Grotesque Animal, originally titled Song Dynasties, is the long-awaited documentary about beloved indie band Of Montreal. Director Jason Miller uses old footage from the artists’ pasts combined with new filming that began during the Skeletal Lamping tour. In order to continue and finish this documentary, the band raised almost $100,000 on Kickstarter in late 2012. Some readers will think “of course, it’s Of Montreal” while others will think, “who is that and how did they raise that much money?” As one band member put it, “either you’ve never heard of us or we’re your absolute favorite band.”

Of Montreal is a strange and enthralling band. They make fun dance-able pop-indie tunes that plunge into the dark depths of the human psyche. Some fans love them for the joy, others for being “nihilists with good imaginations” as front man Kevin Barnes describes in the song “Gronlandic Edit”. The strangeness of the band has created a fascinating mystique. This is furthered by their glamorous, high-energy live shows. Elaborate costumes, explosive colors, animal masks, and general absurdity are brought to the stage. During one tour, Barnes would enter the stage riding and stroking a beautiful white horse. Fans of the band who are reading this likely are grinning. Whether you’re familiar or not, everyone wonders the same thing: who are Of Montreal and Kevin Barnes, really?

The Past is a Grotesque Animal is 18 years in the making, promising a behind-the-scenes uncovering of the mystical beast that is Of Montreal. Fans’ extreme desire for this film is unsurprising. What’s odd is that while depicting such an unusual band, this documentary is very ordinary. The film walks through Kevin and the band’s history. It’s done chronologically with talking head interviews. They speak to Kevin’s parents and explore his childhood. The band grows, they open for great bands, and conflicts are had amongst band members. If this is sounding surprisingly traditional, it’s because it is. In fact, it’s even dull.

I have to wonder how it would’ve turned out if someone more prodding, like Errol Morris, interviewed the band. A greater, transcendent truth may have emerged. Or maybe this was just meant to be a plain, deluxe CD or iTunes extra features type of documentary. Regardless of intention, that’s how it plays. The plainness is almost shocking. Still though, there are some revealing and entertaining moments. Near the end, Kevin admits to a particularly unpopular view on the importance of art versus human relationships (no spoilers!). Watching the band perform, especially in their most absurd moments, is a joy.

Of Montreal thrives on their mystique, that elusive unusual quality that reaches into the human part of people that they’re usually not willing to admit to. The plain view of Kevin Barnes and the band presented in this film doesn’t exactly tarnish the mystique, but it doesn’t reveal much or even explore it.  As an obsessive fan of the band, it’s hard not to be drawn into interviews with or about Kevin Barnes. If you’re not a fan, The Past is a Grotesque Animal isn’t worth the time. That time would be better spent listening to Of Montreal, the band whose intoxicatingly unique songs are indisputably worth the time investment.


Grade: B-/C+

This film plays at the Brattle Theatre staring 6/20 and will be online 6/24.

For those of us born in the 90’s, we do know a little about the phenomena called The Beatles. But before The Beatles, there was a band that swept people off their feet that went by the name The Four Seasons, and well … a few other names. First created as a Broadway musical (currently running successfully) and then turned into a movie, Jersey Boys covers the story of The Four Seasons, its members, their music and their lives. So does this big screen adaption of highly acclaimed Broadway musical live up to its expectations… let’s have a look!

The movie starts with narration by Tommy DeVito (Vincent Piazza) who voices the story of Frankie Valli (John Lloyd Young), the lead singer of the band.  Frankie, as he describes himself in the movie, is a hairdresser by day and fights crime by night (read: commits crime). Frankie (a Sinatra devotee) is an aspiring singer who gets his big break because of mob boss Gyp (Christopher Walken) but is advised by Gyp that he isn't ready and needs to train before he can go big. Meanwhile, Frankie spends more time with Tommy. Tommy has a band with his brother Nick Devito and Nick Massi and he gives Frankie an offer to join them. The newly formed band plays at local spots while occasionally partaking in petty crimes. Tommy, who is always on the hunt for members (due to jail visits and band reconfigurations), meets Bob Gaudio, who not only sings but plays and writes his own songs. This is when “The Four Lovers” is born, with Frankie, Tommy, Bob and Massi.

The story continues with how the band makes their way to huge record sales as they go through music labels, singing chorus to other singers and even funding the recording for their very first album. Helping them on their journey is Bob Crewe (Mike Doyle), who brings a fair amount of humor onscreen. What follows is a look into the lives of band members, their secrets, differences, vices and finally how they fall apart. To sum it up, Jersey Boys is the story of rise and fall of “Frankie Valli and The Four Seasons” and everything in between.

Jersey Boys is a film that shows a lot of potential but doesn’t live up to that potential. To start with my first complaint would be with the run time. At a little over 2 hours, there’s not much the movie has to offer to keep you glued to your seats for that long. It packs a punch with the formation and early days of the band, but after that, there’s really nothing to look forward to. Unlike the first half, the second half seems to be a compilation of “subtle” attempt at covering the lives of the band members. The impact and importance of the character’s actions seem missing from the latter half. It feels like a toned down version of a more dark, more impactful edition. So much so, that at times it’s tough to see the true nature of events; you can only guess what could have transpired. In one such case, the band is shown to be reaching heights of popularity but this has to be grasped from one short party scene! The ups and downs are all blended into a smooth curve where the highs and lows of the story never reach you, and you fail to connect with characters and their experiences.

So is Jersey Boys a sunken ship? Not really. The first and foremost thing to look forward to is the experience of reliving a tale from the era. The sets are beautifully done; the music is perfect and the characters effortlessly portrayed by a fresh cast (some retained from the original Broadway production). The execution of the movie fits the description of a musical but its not simply a chain of songs. There is a good balance between the story and music. Clint Eastwood, the director, makes use of technique called “Breaking the Fourth Wall”, where the actors can be seen narrating the story directly to the audience amidst their performance. Talking about the performances, John and Vincent are the front pair of horses pulling the wagon. John portrays the pivotal character of Frankie with finesse. But Vincent grabs your attention as the dark horse. He is totally charming on screen with a screen presence that cannot go unnoticed.

And you cannot talk about Jersey Boys without talking about its music. The movie retains most of the songs from the original score by the band. “Sherry”, “Big Girls Don’t Cry” and “Walk Like a Man” are hits that people have enjoyed over time and they definitely don’t grow old! For everyone who just got onboard, the songs are fresh and voices unique. The tunes will make you hum along and they add the much required zest to the experience.

On the whole, the movie offers a journey through the life of the band along with good music, but lacks the intensity of a gripping roller coaster ride that it should have been. So if you have been missing out on the conversation your friends have been having about the Broadway musical they just saw, it’s your time to prep up with a 2 hour movie (at least you’ll know what they are talking about).

Grade: B+

Andrew Rossi’s (Page One: Inside the New York Times) new film Ivory Tower explores the dreaded question, is undergraduate college worth the cost? This doesn’t only apply to the financial cost incurred to students but also the societal cost of funneling 19-23 year olds through this system. Rossi’s fast-moving, information-heavy style creates a riveting and valuable experience. Ivory Tower is not without flaws but it’s definitely a documentary to put on your watch list.

Ivory Tower traverses a lot of territory in its 90-minute runtime. We explore the efficacy of free online classes, compare the rise in tuition across years, decipher potential reasons for tuition costs, view the way student body compositions shifted in public institutions, and even attend a student protest at Cooper Union. If you were wondering how the film can look at so many topics in such a short time effectively, you’d be surprised by Rossi’s efficiency. Still, they don’t address much of the territory that could be covered by each question.

As a Northeastern University student, some of Rossi’s frustration will be shared. One sequence near the beginning of the film covers the perks war amongst colleges trying to compete for top students. Why do universities have massive fitness centers, rock climbing walls, unnecessarily extravagant buildings and so on? At Northeastern many of us wonder, how necessary was the recent renovation of the Curry Student Center or how important is the prevalence of random plasma screens everywhere? Are we paying unbelievably high sums to pay for all these overabundant perks? As a result of these behaviors and others, student tuition has risen more than any other good or service in the US economy since 1978 (by a large margin). The documentary lays out this information and asks, are you buying a higher quality education or perks?

Beyond the extravagance of facilities is the issue of diluting the quality of students. As the cost of public universities, supposedly aimed at affordability, shifted from the state to the student, out-of-state enrollment at public universities doubled. Out-of-state students pay more for tuition to public universities than in-state students; thus, many public universities ease the admittance standards for these students to increase the school’s income. Some administrators in the film cite these students as those who skate by partying and meeting the minimum academic requirements. It’s easy to dismiss this as a generalization, but the reality is that students aren’t graduating. 68% of students at public universities fail to graduate in four years.

I could go on with many other well-substantiated dissections of the current problems we face regarding academic institutions. The film does these very well. Where it falters however, is in its conclusions. One major event in the film is the recent protests at Cooper Union, an elite school in NYC with less than 1,000 students. What’s most remarkable about Cooper Union is that due to a large endowment from its founder, 100% of students attend the school on full scholarship. Protests emerge when the school proposes charging tuition for the first time in its history. The reality is that the school is in debt that it needs to break out of. Rossi astutely points out that while the school does run at a deficit, a big part of its massive debt is due to a loan for an overly luxurious new building. Where he loses me is by also pointing a finger at the college’s president for taking a large salary and making poor investments. While the president’s salary does seem outrageous for a free college, it accounts for mere pennies of the overall debt. On the topic of investments, I find it absurd to angrily point a finger at someone for investing the school’s endowment and losing much of that money because of the financial crisis. Investing the money in the first place was a smart attempt to feed the cost of the institution and very few had an inkling of the forthcoming market crash. The film then goes on to glorify and overdramatize a protest held by students in which they occupied the Cooper Union president’s office for 65 days. It seems that Rossi wants us to do the same. Personally, I imagine a very different solution. Why not an emergence of new institutions, or remodeled current institutions, which strip away the perks and offer significantly more affordable tuition rates? What about continuing to foster the emergence of effective online education?

I’m not saying that filmmakers must draw the same conclusions as I do, but that in this case, Rossi’s solutions strike me as old-fashioned and as unsuccessfully backwards as the institutions he’s criticizing. Ivory Tower is riveting and informative. I definitely recommend seeing this film as its issue impact everyone in the United States; just don’t check your skepticism at the door.

Grade: B+

Girl Most Likely suffers from a painful dilemma: the acting is fantastic, but the story falls flat. Imogene (Kristen Wiig) is a playwright who, hoping to get her ex-boyfriend’s attention, pretends to commit suicide. When she wakes up at the hospital after almost actually killing herself, she finds her mother, Zelda (Annette Bening), who she hasn’t spoken with in years. Arriving at her childhood house to recover from her suicide attempt, she sees her brother, Ralph (Christopher Fitzgerald), for the first time in years and meets the attractive renter, Lee (Darren Criss), occupying her former room. When she finds out that her mother lied to her about her father’s death, she decides to focus her energy on trying to reunite with him and get her life back together.

Kristen Wiig continues to prove how great of a comedic actress she is, but unfortunately in this role her character fails to come to life. The whole film feels like Girls or Frances Ha, but unlike those works, fails to live up to its potential. The story feels scattered and never develops a point strong enough for me to connect emotionally with the characters.

When she finds out her father isn’t dead and that her mother lied to spare her young children the trouble of a divorce, she comes to believe that finding her father will fix her life. He’s a successful author and historian living in New York City, so she convinces Lee to take her to the city to look for him. When she finds out she’s been evicted from her apartment and that her best friend won’t let her stay with her for a few days, she ends up having to return to her mother’s house. Each time she sets out to find her father, she gets sidetracked and ends up back at home. The search for her father can never develop into something deeper because she never really focuses on looking, but rather seems to prefer the idea of finding him more.

Imogene seems happy trying to reconnect with her brother, despite being miserable about her return to Atlantic City. While she obviously cares for her brother, she’s too concerned with trying to fix herself to truly bond with him. Instead of legitimately helping and supporting him, she seems to merely pity him. She cannot understand how someone could be happy sticking around his or her hometown when New York is so close. She too busy trying to get her brother, who is obsessed with hermit crabs, to come out of his own shell and never even tries to understand him.

As you could probably surmise, this story is too scattered and irrelevant to make any strong emotional connections or to even maintain a certain level of funny, but the biggest pity is the waste of acting talent. Besides Kristen Wiig, Annette Bening is brilliant as the mother. She’s the perfect mix of crazy and overbearing while still loving and caring about her daughter deep down. Matt Dillon is surprisingly good as a paranoid man who is worried about unseen assassins and telling ridiculous stories about being a samurai and struck by lightning. Bob Balaban also makes an appearance as the estranged father and is great as always.

While the acting was up to the task of the film, the story ends up being irrelevant. A crazy ending wraps up the story quickly and fails to connect with me on anything deeper than face value, despite being set up to potentially say something about family and relationships.

Grade: C-

Length: 103 minutes

He [Hayao Miyazaki] suggests not just the appearances of his characters, but their natures. Apart from the stories and dialogue, "Spirited Away" is a pleasure to regard just for itself. This is one of the year's best films.

-Roger Ebert

Film at-a-glance:
Genre: Fantasy
Creator: Hayao Miyazaki
Studio: Ghibli
Length: 124 minutes
Year: 2001
Highlights: Considered one of the greatest anime films ever.

When I planned this Guide, it took me a long time to figure out which anime series to cover first. However, I knew right from the start which anime film to do first: Spirited Away. There are a number of reasons for this. I could write about it because it is the single most successful Japanese film of all time in terms of box office revenues; because it is the only anime film to ever win the Academy Award for Best Animated Picture; because it’s made by Studio Ghibli, widely considered one of (if not the) greatest anime studios, with a level of quality comparable to Disney; because it was created by Hayao Miyazaki, a director so prestigious that Disney paid an absurd amount of money to distribute his films on his terms (he allegedly sent the producers of the American version of his film Princess Mononoke a katana [Japanese sword] with a note labeled “No cuts”); because of all these reasons, Spirited Away is often regarded as one of the greatest anime films of all time.

I’m writing about it for all of those reasons, but also because it is not only one of my favorite anime films, but also one of my favorite films. Period.

Spirited Away is the story of a young girl named Chihiro. While on the way to move into a new house, her parents take a wrong turn and, in a moment of curiosity, wander into what they think is an abandoned theme park. Little do they know that they have actually entered the spirit world, and after foolishly chowing down on some spirit food, both of Chihiro’s parents are turned into pigs. A horrified Chihiro soon meets a dragon named Haku, who tells her that in order to stay in their world she must get a job at a bathhouse for the spirits run by a greedy witch named Yubaba. With the help of her coworker Lin, the elderly boiler-operator Kamaji, and the voiceless spirit called No-Face, Chihiro must find a way to rescue her parents and, in the process, grow up.

Spirited Away is a quintessential Miyazaki film with all of his trademarks. It is anchored by a strong female protagonist, specifically a child (Miyazaki considers himself a feminist, and it shows in that nearly all of his films have female leads). It has a sort of unique, dreamlike quality that I’ve never seen in the work of any other director.  And it has absolutely gorgeous animation, which has become one of the primary marks of Miyazaki’s Studio Ghibli. In fact, he dislikes computers, and personally draws thousands of frames of each of his films by hand. The primary purpose of this Guide is to educate those in the ways of anime, and in the world of anime Hayao Miyazaki is a living legend.

Spirited Away is also an interesting study in contrasts. On the one hand, it’s a surreal fantasy film, with eerie spirits, bewitching spells, and more magic than any of Disney’s fairy tales; the film’s beautiful animation gives the spirit world a colorful, vibrant atmosphere that seems fantastic and otherworldly. It’s often called the Japanese equivalent of Alice in Wonderland, and for good reason. It’s a world that wouldn’t seem out of place with a Disney logo on the front of it (which is indeed the reason why Disney is the American distributor). In addition, the film has a fair amount of subtle commentary on the state of modern Japanese society, for those interested in such things.

But, on the other hand, Spirited Away is a profoundly real film. Despite all the magic and spirits, this film is fundamentally the story of Chihiro, and how she has to grow up. At the start of the film, she is whiny, bratty, and cowardly. But in order to rescue her parents and live in the spirit world, she has to mature. She has to learn to work hard, make friends, and above all, be brave. Along the way she has to face her fears, and she falls in love. She goes through the things that every person has to go through, and so, despite her fantastic circumstances, her story becomes a timeless, universal story of growing up. Perhaps this is why it has resonated so strongly with so many people all across the globe: it tells a universal story. I think the best films are ones that tell universal stories, and they are just as valid if they are made with flesh-and-blood actors or ones that are drawn.

In the end, I simply love Spirited Away. I love its enchanting animation, ranking up there with the best of any anime I’ve seen. I love Studio Ghibli, and specifically Hayao Miyazaki, one of my all-time favorite directors, for creating beautiful, magical worlds to lose myself in. But most of all, I love it because it is a film that crosses lines of culture and language in order to tell a story that means something to everyone. If you only ever watch one anime film in your life, do yourself a favor and let that one film be Spirited Away.