Tag Archives: history

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

June 12, 2026

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

Pressure (2026)

What started out as a boutique experience at the movies for us turned into one of the most compelling films of the year. We saw this film while we were in New York City for a wedding, and it was a last-minute choice on our part because it was playing at an AMC theater and we have the A-list pass so it just seemed like a fun idea to go to a movie in the Big Apple. This is a relatively small film about one of the biggest events of the last century: the invasion of Europe by Allied Forces to defeat the Nazis. The plot revolves around one of the smallest details imaginable but one that is crucial to the events that take place.  This is a movie about a weather forecast.

Brendan Fraser returns to the screen as General Dwight Eisenhower, the supreme commander of Allied Forces in World War II. He and the Brain Trust of the allies are planning the invasion of Normandy for time and secrecy. I thought Frasier’s performance was very effective and probably close to the way Eisenhower must have felt at the time. Although I’m reasonably well first in the history of the war I was not particularly aware of the drive run failure that Eisenhower took responsibility for when Friendly Fire killed a number of Allied troops. The uncertainty of War is thus introduced as a key element of the story here. The general is looking to replace his own doubts with confidence in data that he doesn’t really understand. The inability to trust your own decision making and look for other information that’s going to help you to choose is what makes this movie compelling. 

Andrew Scott plays Captain James Stagg, a meteorologist for the British army who is trusted implicitly by Churchill but whose brittle demeanor and prickly personality alienates him from his Allied meteorologist and the chain of command that ends with Eisenhower.  Everybody who has read about World War II will have some understanding about the timing of the invasion. Operation Overlord had to be delayed because of a storm, it turns out however that the storm was not really well predicted and that the English meteorologist who had a better understanding of the North Atlantic weather patterns was the one Authority the military should be relying on. It’s always interesting to me when an historical event that people know the outcome of can be presented with some suspense in spite of the fact that we know how things ended up.

The title pressure refers not only to the weather pattern but to the choices that were faced by General Eisenhower and by Captain stag. Ike is looking for certainty where none is possible, but the meteorologist working for the Americans wants to provide that certainty. The British captain, on the other hand, recognizes that such certainty is not possible when it comes to the weather of the North Atlantic. That does not however mean there is no confidence in his predictions. His perceived arrogance combined with his prickly manner, make it difficult for others to trust him in spite of his wisdom.

This is a modestly budgeted film that features a lot of talking and rooms filled with data sheets and War plans. The setting is the headquarters of the American expeditionary Force, a beautiful estate that seems like the perfect setting for observing the weather. There are a few battle sequences that concern The Invasion much of that however gravel footage. There are a few second unit set pieces to illustrate how the weather affected the invasion, but this remains for the most part a suspense film based on the conflicts between men who are all under a high degree of stress.

I have a weakness for films that move me emotionally. That’s really why I go to the movies, to feel something. Sure there are times when those emotions are manipulated and if it is done in a heavy-handed way it could create a little bit of resistance to the film. That is not what is happening in this movie. The true nature of the cause is enough to inspire us. The drama between the two men at the heart of the story is compelling enough to keep us glued to the screen. The performances seem honest enough to make our emotional reactions feel sincere. More than 80 years after the events depicted in the film I can still feel a sense of pride in the men and women who made such a significant difference in the world. Thank goodness they could sustain themselves through the pressure.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

August 27, 2025

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

Shampoo (1975) Paramount Summer Classic Film Series

I wrote about this film just a couple of years ago on the 1975 Throwback Thursday Project that I did. You can read those comments here. I don’t know that my opinion has changed much on the film, it is still a mildly humorous look at mores of the era (set in 1968 but easily applicable to the 70s). Warren Beatty Produced, Co-Wrote and stars in this film from Director Hal Ashby. The events all take place on election day in 1968, but not a single character is shown to participate in the election process. There are a few news clips in the background, some of which are meant to carry irony, given the passage of time from when the film is set, to the time that the film was released.

George is a hairdresser in Beverly Hills, who styles himself as an artist, and not just a barber. From the very beginning, we know that he is straight, and it is clear from the number of women he beds, that he also wants to be Warren Beatty in real life. Near the end of the picture we learn that the main thing that drew him to the field was the target rich environment that the hairdressing industry would be. Whereas he might have been admired as a “player” fifty years ago, today he would be seen as a predator. He is not malicious but he is selfishly using his partners instead of developing a relationship with them. Julie Christie and Lee Grant are able to defend themselves to some degree, but they are hurt by George in spite of their insights about him. The character we are going to feel the most empathy for is Goldie Hawn’s Jill.

Jack Warden plays a powerful businessman, Lester, married to Grant, while carrying on an affair with Christie. George is a former lover of Christie’s Jackie, but Lester does not know that and thinks George is gay. George is sleeping with Felicia, Lee Grant’s character. So George is involved with two of the women that Lester is involved with, and the confusion over how they all play out the dance is the stem of the story. All of the events take place over a 48 hour period, so there are lots of awkward moments surrounding chance meetings, hair appointments, business deals and political events.

Both George and Lester are manipulators, and although he is sometimes harsh in assessing women, Lester may be the more honest and respectable of the two. George is a nicer guy to know, but he is callous in a way that is unexpected and wounds the women more deeply than the shallow hurts that Lester inflicts.

Everyone ends up at two different parties on the same night. The uptight election watching party forces everyone to deny their feelings for each other, while the second party that is hosted at a Playboy style mansion, seems freer but is just as deadly to true love as anything else in the film. Both parties give us glimpses of the cultural divide that was rising in the period. Race and the War are barely mentioned, this is a clash over ethics and how we manage our romantic feelings. The film does not have a clear answer, but it is clear that George ends up with the short end of the stick, and he has no one to blame but himself.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 20, 2025

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

Warfare (2025)

This is an unusual movie designed to put us in the field with the Warriors who defend us in Dark Places. It represents the memories of the men who went through the actual event, and is designed to replicate as closely as possible the firefight that these men participated in. I don’t see an agenda or political perspective in the way this film is being presented, the men who are performing their Duty are average Americans, who are well trained, but respond like human beings in the dangerous circumstances they find themselves in.

Although there are a couple of familiar faces in the cast, this is certainly not a star driven vehicle. At least two dozen characters appear on the screen and have lines, but you could not point to a single one of them and say they were the main focus of the story. It is the event that is the star of the film. A military Advanced team, probing an enemy territory, during the Iraq occupation, discovers that they are the target of an insurgent attack. The events unfold for the most part, in real time, and the threat of death exists in every frame of the last half of the movie. There are moves that are made by the Marines in this story, which in hindsight might seem problematic, but given the outcome, and the survival of some of their comrades, we should certainly be willing to forgive some Divergence from military bureaucracy.

Even though they’re under attack, the Marines Express every confidence in the situation that they are capable of responding appropriately. They have Superior Equipment and Superior training and they also have reinforcements that will system although it will take some time. To me the astonishing thing about the events depicted in the film are the nearly heroic actions taken to save the lives of the injured Marines when an IED explodes as they are preparing to withdraw. Injuries that we saw in Saving  Private Ryan, were horrifying but the story doesn’t linger over them and the agony that those soldiers went through. In this film the consequences of the injuries seems to be the main justification for telling the story. Both the injured Marines, and their teammates never really give up in spite of the pain and the fear that they must be going through. Some may have a moment’s hesitation, some are trying to cope with with shock and concussions and temporary deafness. They all however do their jobs.

I will warn you that the injuries depicted are brutal, and there are moments when the agony of the victims is hard to bear. The stalwart efforts platoon of Marines is admirable in and of itself regardless of the outcome of the battle. This is not a story where retribution is heaved upon the enemy in a dramatic moment of Revenge. The forces that are being used, often appearing to be overwhelming, are done for the purpose of saving the lives of their comrades in arms. We really have no idea what kind of damage was inflicted on the enemy at the end of the day. This is a war film that is not a drama about some narrative, rather it is a narrative about an event that took place and that these Warriors survived.

War is evil, but sometimes necessary. The Men Who engage in war are usually not evil, but simply doing their jobs, fulfilling the plans of someone else to make the world a better place. The struggle to accomplish that requires incredible fortitude. Warfare attempts to depict that fortitude and put the audience at the scene. It succeeds in its visual execution, by allowing us to see the chaos and confusion in this sort of combat operation, but also the professionalism and determination of well-trained men. Because the story is told from the perspective of the men who actually went through this, the dialogue is filled with technical terminology Battlefield jargon and a variety of military language. Nothing is done to make this film dumb enough for an audience to understand. It requires an audience that is smart enough to know that what they are seeing is something they never want to go through themselves.