SHAME

I MUST ADMIT - THE MAIN REASON I WANTED TO SEE THIS MOVIE WAS BECAUSE IT IS RATED NC-17. THE SUBJECT MATTER DIDN'T REALLY APPEAL TO ME.  THE APPEAL WAS TWOFOLD:  (1)TO SEE WHAT AN NC-17-RATED MOVIE LOOKS LIKE THESE DAYS; AND (2) TO FINALLY SIT IN A THEATER WITH NO CHILDREN.  I THINK THE LAST NC-17 FILM I SAW WAS "THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE, AND HER LOVER" IN 1989.
I WOULD SAY THAT THIS FILM IS FILLED WITH GRATUITOUS SEX, BUT THAT WOULD BE WRONG.  THE FILM DOES HAVE A LOT OF SEX IN IT, BUT THAT'S WHAT THE FILM IS ABOUT, SO THAT MAKES IT NON-GRATUITOUS (I GUESS).  ACTUALLY, THERE WEREN'T REALLY THAT MANY SEX SCENES, BUT THE ONES THAT WERE THERE WERE PRETTY GRAPHIC.  AND THERE'S LOTS OF FULL NUDITY, BOTH MALE AND FEMALE.
OTHER THAN THE NUDITY, THERE'S PRETTY MUCH NOTHING MUCH MORE TO AN NC-17 MOVIE THAN YOU CAN SEE EVERY NIGHT ON CABLE TV (ANYONE SEEN "AMERICAN HORROR STORY?").
THAT BEING SAID, "SHAME" IS ABOUT A YOUNG, PROFESSIONAL GUY (BRANDON) WHO SEEMS TO HAVE A LOT GOING FOR HIM.  HE HAS A GOOD JOB IN NEW YORK, LIVES IN A SMALL, BUT ADEQUATE APARTMENT, DRINKS THE BEST TEQUILA, EATS IN THE BEST RESTAURANTS. . . . 
HE SPENDS HIS DAYS AT WORK, AND HIS NIGHTS AT BARS WITH HIS BUDDIES, INCLUDING HIS BOSS, LOOKING FOR THE NEXT ANONYMOUS HOOK UP, SOMETIMES MULTIPLE HOOK-UPS IN THE SAME NIGHT.  HE BRINGS THEM HOME TO HIS APARTMENT (SOMETIMES HOOKERS, SOMETIMES NOT), THEN BOOTS THEM OUT WHEN HE'S DONE.  IT'S A ROUTINE HE'S GOTTEN INTO, WHICH SUITS HIM JUST FINE.  
EVERY RELATIONSHIP IN THIS MOVIE IS DYSFUNCTIONAL.  FROM THE MANY WOMEN BRANDON IS WITH, TO HIS RELATIONSHIPS WITH HIS CO-WORKER, AND EVEN HIS BOSS.  BRANDON'S BOSS THINKS BRANDON IS THE GREATEST.  (WHY?  BRANDON ISN'T A VERY LIKEABLE GUY). 
THEN, BRANDON'S SISTER (SISSY) ENTERS THE PICTURE.  YOU GET THE IMPRESSION FROM THE START THAT SISSY IS A LOSER OF A CHICK.  SHE HAS BEEN CALLING AND CALLING BRENDON, BUT HE NEVER TAKES HER CALLS.  WELL, SHE JUST SHOWS UP ONE DAY AT HIS PLACE AND WANTS TO MOVE IN. THEIR FIRST MEETING, WHEN HE SURPRISES HER IN THE SHOWER, IS ON OF THE MORE UNCOMFORTABLE SCENES IN THE FILM.  YOU JUST DON'T STAND THERE TALKING TO YOUR SISTER, HAVE A FULL ON CONVERSATION WHILE SHE'S STANDING THERE COMPLETELY NUDE.  THERE IS A KIND OF PSEUDO-INCESTUOUS THING ON THE VERGE OF HAPPENING, AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN THE MOVIE THAT MADE ME UNCOMFORTABLE, THIS IS IT.  
WELL,SISSY THROWS BRANDON'S WORLD OUT OF KILTER  AND CRAMPS HIS STYLE.  SHE'S A SLOB, HE'S IMPECCABLY NEAT, AND SHE'S ALWAYS AROUND, SO HE CAN'T BRING CHICKS BACK TO HIS COMFORT ZONE.  NOT TO SHE MENTION, SLEPT WITH BRANDON'S BOSS AFTER A NIGHT OUT, AND IS OBSESSING ON HIM (A MARRIED MAN).
HIS FRAGILE PSYCHE CAN'T HANDLE ALL THIS BREAK FROM FAMILIARITY, AND BRANDON'S WORLD STARTS UNRAVELLING.  UNABLE TO SUSTAIN A REAL RELATIONSHIP WITH ANYONE, OBSESSED WITH ANONYMOUS SEX, HE BEGINS SPIRILING DOWN INTO A PSYCHOLOGICAL HELL, DIVING EVEN DEEPER INTO HIS SEX-OBSESSED UNIVERSE.  
OBVIOUSLY HE AND SISSY ARE FROM A SEVERELY DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY.  SOMETHING HAPPENED IN THEIR PAST TO SCREW THEM UP SO BADLY THAT NEITHER ONE IS CAPABLE SHARING ANYTHING ABOUT THEMSELVES.  BUT WE NEVER FIND OUT WHAT THAT WAS.  THERE IS NO BACK STORY TO THEIR SORDID LIVES.
ONE THING I FOUND INTERESTING WAS THE EXTREMELY LONG TAKES IN THE MOVIE.  THE DIRECTOR, STEVE MCQUEEN, DID TAKE AFTER TAKE WITH ONLY ONE CAMERA, OFTEN LASTING THE ENTIRE SCENE.  WITH THE RAPID FIRE STYLE OF A.D.H.D.-INDUCING DIRECTION AND EDITING IN USE TODAY, THIS WAS A STARK CONTRAST.  IT WAS DIFFERENT, BUT I LIKED IT.  
I CAN'T REALLY RECOMMEND THIS FILM, THOUGH.   OTHER THAN SEEING WHAT AN NC-17 MOVIE LOOKS LIKE TODAY, THERE'S NOTHING THAT GOOD ABOUT  "SHAME."  I WAS CURIOUS.  NOW I KNOW. 

J EDGAR

 This Clint Eastwood-directed movie is a pretty simple biopic that explores the personal and professional life of the man who started and led the US Federal Bureau of Investigation from the Hoover administration (no relation), all the way into the Nixon years. 
Hoover built the Bureau based on a hard line approach to communists and radicals he felt were bent on overthrowing the government, as well his my-way-or-the-highway regulations he set for his "G Men." they all had to be physically fit, no facial hair, immaculately dressed, etc. 
He ruled the Bureau with an iron fist, was a pioneer in developing the use of forensic science, and accumulated files on just about every political figure in America, making sure they all stayed under his thumb. 
Then there's Hoover's personal side. Everyone has heard the rumors of him being gay. In an interview, Leonardo DiCaprio (who plays Hoover) said the movie doesn't get into that aspect of his life, but it does. It also paints Hoover as a liar who takes credit for banner accomplishments that his agents should have gotten. And even goes into his mommas boy relationship with his domineering homophobic mother. 
A good, well done movie with nice production value. A pleasant period piece that is engaging to watch. 
If I had a problem with it, it is this: The old man make-up was inconsistent. Sometimes it looked great, but other times, it made the actors look like mummies. Also, DiCaprio's weird accent was distracting. I couldn't tell what it was supposed to be. Sometimes it was there, and sometimes not. 
Eastwood spent a lot of time on one particular incident, while just glazing over others, such as the assassinations of both Kennedys, and the Martin Luther King era. 
I realize, though, that there is an awful lot of subject matter that took place in Hoover's life to give it all equal time, and at at two hours and fifteen minutes, Eastwood crammed in as much as he could without making it a 10 hour mini series, which it could have easily been. 
Overall: Good flick.