Annabelle

2.5 Stars (out of four)

As we frolic into one of my favorite seasons (Halloween), along comes the usual crop of horror movies, with this prequel to the (surprisingly) good 2013 film, The Conjuring (see earlier review).

Annabelle takes place approximately 5-7 years before the events in The Conjuring and longer than that for the events in The Amityville Horror, two celebrated cases from the the husband-wife paranormal team Ed and Lorraine Warren.  Annabelle starts even before the events described in The Conjuring where a demon-infused doll ended up in the hands of the nursing students and finally the Warrens.  This time, the unfortunate victims are a lovely young, married couple about to have their first child.  It takes place in the late 60's when there was a lot of occult-inspired crimes going on like the Manson family murders.  Indeed, the couple is attacked in their home by a pair of these devil-worshipping types which brings the problems in the first place.  Soon after, mysterious forces begin to...ahem..."devil" the young mother and her child.  After the couple move to another town, the events follow them and grow even more malefic and intense until they discover the a demon has anchored itself onto the creepy Annabelle doll.  It becomes obvious the demon wants the kid's soul and so the couple must do spiritual battle against the demon with tragic results.

Okay, so I went to Annabelle not expecting much aaaaand...I kind of got what I expected.  The movie is not bad per se, but it is lackluster.  Based on the success of The Conjuring, we are now entering the cycle of crappy (pre)sequels that will continue until the original great idea has been flogged to death into a degenerate downward cycle of ever-increasing irrelevance and gore.  Warner Bros. has already said they are excited about another sequel, so prepare yourselves.  However, shockingly, the movie is not too bad.  It keeps the gore quotient to a minimum while preserving some good old fashioned scares.  Now, don't be fooled.  This is a "boo!" movie, plain and simple.  There is nothing deeper or interesting about it, but it's a pretty good one.  The makers valiantly attempt to make a horror film, not a slasher; that is, keeping a pervasive sense of dread throughout the film.  This is hard to do, but ultimately, more satisfying.  It is the difference between Halloween and Friday the 13th.  The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Toolbox Murders.  Hostel and Saw.  The Blair Witch Project and Apollo 18.  The Exorcist and The Gates of Hell.  John Carpernter's The Thing and Pihranna.  Se7en versus The Bone Collector.  Deep Blue Sea and Sharknado.  Yes, even the schlockfests Nightmare On Elm Street versus The Human Centipede or Scream and Scary Movie.  Hollywood loves to make horror movies because they don't cost a lot and most of its dumb audience (yes, I see you looking at me...) not demanding something better.  At least for this time, it was okay.  It seems a little too preoccupied to reference its better precursors by referring to the Warrens through implication twice and a quote from Lorraine at the end.  There were some fun scares and some creepy imagery, but ultimately Annabelle is a lightweight and an unfortunate harbinger of things to come.

On a personal note, if they are going to continue on a franchise of Ed and Lorraine Warrens' ghostbusters adventures, I would love to see Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga reprise their very sympathetic roles.  They were both great in them and very likeable protagonists.

Suspiria

3 Stars (out of four)

So, I decided to tackle Dario Argento's Suspiria because it's been awhile since I've seen it and ranks as probably one of the best horror films you've never seen.  (And it's Halloween time, so why not?). I love to introduce people to new, good movies, so for my 125th review, I thought I'd give you one from the darker side of the street from the cult movie section.

First, Suspiria's plot is pretty simple.  Jessica Harper plays Suzy Bannion, a dancer who has transferred to a prestigious ballet school in Germany.  She arrives during a horrific thunderstorm, and when she comes to the door, another student rushes out babbling incoherently.  This student is later horrifically killed at a hotel where she takes shelter.  The next day, Suzy comes to the school and is greeted warmly by the school's headmistress Madame Blanc.  Madame Blanc also has a German assistant headmistress named Frau Tanner, a severe Teutonic woman who looks like she belongs as a guard at Dachau, not a ballet school.  Strange events and crimes begin to happen to Suzy and people associated with the school.  Suzy suspects all is not what it seems and eventually finds out the school is being run by a coven of malefic witches who are intent on killing her.

Suspiria, Latin for sighs, is co-written and directed by the great Italian horror film director Dario Argento and is generally considered his masterpiece.  It's easy to see why.  This film was one of the last ever to be shot in Technicolor, and uses a color saturation process (also used in The Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind) that causes a very stylized, hyper-colorized palette that does not look quite real.  This film is filled with bold, primary colors (especially red), slashes of light and creeping shadows that form a very creepy atmosphere.  In fact, this film is all about atmosphere and would not be very effective or memorable without it.  Argento's masterful use of anamorphic lenses (which distort pictures slightly), light, color and shadow, combined with a 70's-creepy score by the band Goblin, gives the film an otherworldly, some say, not unfairly, hallucinogenic aura which suits the subject matter quite well.  The overall feeling we get is that we are standing inside the Gates of Hell when we are in the school and it succeeds quite well because of the bold color schemes.  In fact, this movie has the best use of color, shadow and lighting I have ever seen next to Gone With The Wind.  Everything is so deliberately placed that it forms a sumptuous visual feast.  It takes away from what would have normally been kind of a Grindhouse schlockfest and makes it a movie that demands to be seen alongside any great director's work.  It's that good.

The multi-cultured cast recited their lines in their native languages (English, German and Italian).  Because of a bad sound recording, much of the dialog was relooped (recorded again in post-production over the original soundtrack, usually meant to spice up bad performance tics or remove extraneous noise-just in case you didn't know...) or dubbed in post-production.  Obviously, the cast knew what was happenening in the story and they react to each other accordingly, but the relooping process makes the voices sound like they don't belong in the world they were shot.  They sound like they're in a studio, which takes us out of the reality of the film somewhat.  The in-studio performances are a little wooden as well.  In fact, most of the acting is a little melodramati, like most Italian productions of the time.  This detracts from a realistic portrayal of events in the film, but oddly adds to the off-kilter atmosphere that pervades the entire film.  It works and doesn't work at the same time.

The film is a bit of a product of its timeframe, 1977.  Around this time, there were a lot of popular films focusing on occult themes (The Exorcist and The Omen being the most popular and notable), especially in the Grindhouse movie circuits.  Suspiria has one foot firmly planted in the Grindhouse film genre, but also stands with the other foot squarely in films that are really good.  Argento's efforts in this film are too good to be dismissed as Grindhouse banality.  While the film is not particularly complicated, and in fact is kind of abrupt and even a little incomprehensible in parts, it is just too well-made to be dismissed.  While it is ponderous by today's hyper-kinetic standards, it is not a "boo" movie, unlike so many horror movies of today. Argento tries for real horror here, with mixed results.  The climax is just incredibly creepy and is pretty good, but the story up to that point can drag in places, but also genuinely scares in others.  This is a film, if you haven't seen it, that should be experienced if you like good, scary creepy stuff.  While there is some gore, especially at the beginning which starts the movie with a bang, that is not the focus of the film like today's slashers.  As I said, Argento tries for the more difficult task of being horrifying rather than shocking.  It is really good and I think if you are a fan of horror, this may be one of those hidden gems you missed.

Gone Girl

3.5 Stárs (out of four)

So, we have now passed through one of the most underwhelming summer blockbuster seasons in recent memory and are now coming into Oscar season, which is looking promising if Gone Girl is any indication.

Without giving anything important away, Gone Girl is about two writers who are in what may not be the most healthy of marriages; but from the outside, look like a picture-perfect couple.  Nick Dunne, played by Ben Affleck is married to Amy Dunne, played by Rosamund Pike.  Amy is the inspiration for her parents' massively popular children's book series Amazing Amy, so she is a bit of a beloved celebrity.  After the recession causes Nick and Amy to lose their jobs, they move from New York to Nick's native St. Louis, when they find out Nick's mom had cancer.  After his mother died, they put down roots and Nick bought a bar.  The move and the bar cause friction in his marriage with Amy until one day, he comes home to find the house overturned and Amy is missing.  The police start an investigation, and as clues start to mount up, it seems Nick may or may not have killed his wife.  Because of Amy's celebrity status, the case quickly becomes tabloid fodder and is being tried in the media.  The rest of the movie hinges on did he or didn't he?

Another deliciously twisted movie by David Fincher, a director who has made a career of filming very unpleasant people and subjects (Alien 3, Se7en, Zodiac, Fight Club, The Social Network) with often very entertaining results.  Parents of young people and prudes be warned, this is a very adult movie.  While not gratuitous, it does have some pretty twisted imagery that isn't meant for the faint at heart.  That said, it is a truly adult film that is a joy to watch.  I actually found myself giddy in anticipation, smiling like an idiot as one plot twist after another drew me further and further into this excellent slow-burning potboiler of a story.  I've been to enough of these films to usually see what's coming, but in this case, I was surprised time and again.  This movie was so much fun, it reminds me of why I love them so much, to be so drawn into a story you are almost breathless in anticipation over what will happen next.  The only reason I didn't give this film four stars was the final denouement, which contained a total flip flop on some characters' basic personalities.  However, it could also be the movie does not take an easy way out.  It sat wrong with me somehow, but as I think on it, seems totally in line with the movie's twisted pathways.  Many of these types of movies paint themselves into corners they can't escape with twist after twist needing greater and greater leaps of faith.  Gone Girl is not like that at all until the end as it seemed to me.  While it lessened the impact of an otherwise excellent film, I don't believe it ruined it.

And if that wasn't enough, the film actually has something important to say.  In our post-MTv, insta-celeb, JWow/Snookie, Honey Boo Boo, Kim/Kanye-obsessed culture, the power of the media has become paramount.  Gone are the days when news programs actually had to report things of substance, or at the very least fact-check.  All one has to do is flash a boob of scandal and the press becomes a pack of salivating, rumor-insinuating dogs with no accountability to the truth.  The movie is not-so-subtly pointing the finger at Fox News and its news entertainment pundit shows in particular, but applies equally to all news programs.  The 24-news cycle has created a style beast that ripped apart and swallowed the substance animal whole.  Does it get in the way of Justice?  Does it affect the normal course of a police investigation?  And what kind of a voyeuristic, busybody society are we becoming that delight in the pain and troubles of others?  In either case, evil has never been quite so fun as in this movie.  If you love a story that will pull you in and not let go, this is the film for you.  I loved every minute of it.

A Midnight Clear

3 Stars (out of four)

I read something in an article once describing Saving Private Ryan when it came out that I really agree with.  The best war movies also tend to be anti-war movies.  From All Quiet on the Western Front, Blackhawk Down, Saving Private Ryan, Dr. Strangelove, Full Metal Jacket, Patton, Cross of Iron, Das Boot, Paths of Glory, Patton, Born on the Fourth of July, Apocalypse Now, to yes, even Rambo, the best war films have been those that stress that although war may be necessary at times, it is evil, destroys everything it touches and there is nothing glorious or redeeming about it, particularly when you are at the pointy end of the stick.  I have been meaning to watch A Midnight Clear since it came out in 1993, but it was one I never really got around to until now.  I'm glad I watched it now for the first time, with a little bit of perspective behind me.  Otherwise, I may have dismissed it earlier.  What started off as a bit of a pretentious art film actually turned out to have say that resonates deeply.

The movie takes place in the Ardennes Forest in late December 1944, as the war is winding down, but the Battle of the Bulge is just about to happen.  A depleted six-man intelligence squad has been sent out to determine whether a large German offensive is about to happen and when.  At first they are scared because they know the Germans are out there and they are quickly discovered.  They soon realize the Germans could have killed them multiple times, but didn't.  Then, one night, the Germans set up a Christmas tree and begin singing carols.  One of the squad approaches them and they exchange gifts.  The 7-man German squad also make it clear they want to surrender.  They came from the Eastern Front, are old men and boys as young as 15 and they are convinced their side is losing.  They have one request.  In order to protect their families back home, they have to fake a skirmish.  Unfortunately, one of the Americans is not in on the deal and starts shooting for real and all the Germans end up dead. The rest of the movie deals with the aftermath.

At first, this movie comes off like an adapted play with only one set, a poor man's Full Metal Jacket which had come out 6 years before. As I said, it comes off a bit pretentious at first, but as the first act settles in, we get a growing sense of dread of the unseen enemy.  The movie is also filled with stark, haunting, even gruesome imagery, adding to the sense of dread.  But once the Germans are revealed as what they are trying to do, that is where the humanity of the film kicks in.  It's easy to hate "them," the impersonal enemy.  It becomes a very different story when you see the humanity behind "them."  This is why soldiers and populations are conditioned in times of war to not think of "them" except as the enemy.  Jerries, Krauts, Japs, Gooks, Hajees; all hurtful titles designed to not make them people, but the enemy.  When we are attacked, like in 9/11, it is natural to hate "them," but like this movie and others have tried to make clear, we must be careful not to paint with too broad a brush.  There are evil people out there, and yes, they must be removed from the Earth.  But we must be careful we don't get so preoccupied with hating "them" that we forget our (and their) humanity in the process.  Otherwise, we just kill everybody and that is the end of the world.  

Because this is the real world, war is sometimes a necessary evil, but it should be the tool of last resort and not used for political expediency or at a moment of profound anger.  Now, lest someone think I am commenting on recent political events, I most definitely am not.  But I pray we don't get too comfortable with the idea that war is one of the only ways to handle problems.  Now, as much as I love movies like The Dirty Dozen, The Green Berets, The Audie Murphy Story, The Sands of Iwo Jima, Kelly's Heroes and the like, their sanitized views of combat are not healthy.  They promote the idea of war as glorious, even fun at times.  Certainly they depict war with few real consequences.  As much as people don't like to see it, they should be reminded that war is horror and destruction.  I hope one day John Lennon may be right, but until that day, we must be prepared for the worst.

The Lego Movie

0.5 Stars (out of four)

What is wrong with everybody?  Did everybody just take leave of their senses and decide to play the biggest practical joke on me by saying this was a good movie?  First of all, all of you with children 2-13, you are never again allowed to recommend another movie to another adult until you have seen three (3) consecutive rated R or unrated films (foreign ones count) so you get some much-needed perspective on what a good film is (or used to be).  I have received non-stop recommendations of this film, some from people whose opinions I (used to) respect.  But after watching this steaming pile, my faith in humanity was shaken a bit.

The Lego Movie is a kid's film that is supposed to be fun for adults too, but it is neither.  It starts off with Emmit Brickowski (Get it?  BRICKowski?  Because they're Legos.  Building bricks!  Haaaar!  The reason you're not laughing is because it isn't funny, like this whole movie), an ordinary construction Lego man who is prophesied to defeat Lord Business/President Business/The Man Upstairs, an evil tyrant who wants to glue the Lego world into permanent stasis.  Emmit and his cast of master builders must stop Lord Business by not following the directions and overthrow his dastardly plan.  If that doesn't make much sense, then welcome to the club.

From the references the kids won't understand to the moronic, muddling and self-contradictory plotline, the stupidly vapid main song, to the non-stop commercials of what Lego playsets are out there to a degree that borders on whoring, this is such a stupid, STUPID, STUPID (did I say stupid enough to get it across how incredibly, mind-numbingly stupid this film is?) movie that should not be unleashed on anyone.  And I see there is a sequel in the mix.  So what is so bad about this film, you ask?  First of all, the plot totally contradicts itself.  At first, it seems to say that conformity leads to a dull and dead existence and that creativity is what makes life and vibrant.  Those who think outside the box, don't follow the instructions are the heroes.  We are introduced to this idea in what they call the master builders who build mishmash Lego creations that overcome the tyranny of sameness and uniformity.  But wait!  They are overcome by Lord Business and the only way they can defeat him is to team up, work as a uniformed unit, follow the directions and eventually convince Lord Business that he is also a master builder.  This magically transforms him into a good guy, don't ask me how, but makes no sense.  Next, the insipid song Everything Is Awesome.  There used to be songs like When You Wish Upon A Star, The Bare Necessities, Once Upon A Dream, Let's Go Fly A Kite, The Beautiful Briny, even Friend Like Me and The Circle of Life.  Now, I don't want to sound like the "Get off my yard" guy, but there was a time, not so long ago, that some thought went into the songs of these films.  Basically, Everything Is Awesome is strikingly similar to the stupid, reductionist crap that passes for pop music today.  A semi-catchy, bouncy beat with autotune brainlessness behind it.  Finally, this is a feature-length commercial for another toy.  There have been one or two good ones done (Clue, Real Steel (although technically not based on Rock Em Sock Em Robots, but really what else were you thinking?) Toy Story, the first Transformers) and a LOT of really bad ones (Masters of the Universe, The Chipmunks Movie, The Smurfs Movie, Battleship, the other two Transformers). This MUST stop!!!  Honestly, I have not figured out why all these Lego-based things keep coming out.  Lego Star Wars was a stupid game, and so was every other Lego franchise.

Now, you will notice I didn't make this a BOMB rating.  That is because there are some MILDLY amusing jokes in it.  The SPOILER ALERT! Star Wars cameo and that Batman is kind of a prick.  They made me smile, but two kind of funny jokes do not make up for such a stinkbomb like this as a whole.

Are parents so hard up for quality entertainment for their children that they have to go to this?  With so much other great stuff out there, why show them this?  Parents, please be discerning for your kids.  Just off the top of my head, in the recent past, there has been great kid's movies out there like: Up, Toy Story (all of them), How To Train Your Dragon, Madagascar, Ice Age, Frozen. When you can't stand those anymore, start mining the classics like: The Iron Giant, Howl's Moving Castle, Spirited Away, any Disney movie, The Wizard of Oz, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Star Wars, The Dark Crystal, The Land Before Time, any Godzilla film, any Ray Harryhausen film ie Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, Jason and the Argonauts, ANY of them will do.  The point is, if we keep supporting these big commercials masquerading as movies, Hollywood will keep making them. Excellence in children's fare should not be the sole purview of Disney and Pixar.  Demand and support better stuff and you will get it.  Keep buying this crap and that's what you will continue to get.

Sin City: A Dame To Kill For

4 Stars (out of four)

So, full disclosure first.  I have been a fan of Frank Miller's Sin City comics since 1990.  It's groundbreaking art, raw subject matter and retroactive storytelling conventions always made for an entertaining yarn.  This particular story, A Dame To Kill For was the second in this series, and in my opinion, the best of all of them.  The Hard Goodbye, the first in the series that introduced us to Marv formed the basis for the first movie, always left me a bit off.  But this story was hardboiled noir in the vein of Dasheill Hammett and Raymond Chandler.  The femme fatale in the truest sense, the sap, and the revenge, all elements of great American storytelling.  So I went into this film with very high expectations, and it was not disappointed.

This is similar to the first Sin City, with multiple stories and many of the same characters returning to us.  Two were previously written for the comics and one is new for the movies.  I cannot stress enough that however much I loved the movie, it is definitely not for all tastes.  The movie is much more graphic in both the violence and sex, and can be very off-putting for those of more puritanical tastes.  So fair warning, if you can't abide fairly graphic nude and sex scenes, this movie is definitely not for you and you should quit reading right now.  After all, this movie's controversy started over the MOAA banning the original poster of the movie until it was edited to a more chaste version.  See below:

Apparently, the MPAA has no problem with the ultraviolent aspects of the film (beheadins, mutilations, torture), but show a female boob and there are protests everywhere.  I have seen no less than three articles in the last week from star Eva Green regarding her nudity in the film, and several more in the last few months regarding the poster above.  I guess people must have missed the big, fat "R" rating it got and are afraid children will be corrupted by it.  But my argument is this, if you don't want children watching it, don't let them.  This is an adult film made for adult audiences, and while many may disagree with me, the nudity is not gratuitous.  This is one example of a defining aspect of a character, a femme fatale who preys on men to do her dirty work for her.  This is not a new story.  The great noir films Double Indemnity, The Last Seduction, Basic Instinct, Body Heat and Wild Things all feature female predators who prey on saps to further their nefarious aims.

There is not a bad performance in this bunch.  They all project the mood of the filth of BaSIN City, the fictional town that looks like an amalgam of the worst aspects of New York, Las Vegas and LA.  Two major changes are Dennis Haysbert playing Manute, the role the late, great Michael Clarke Duncan played in the original.  His height, large build and deep voice help him seamlessly slip into the role.  The more obvious change was the replacement for Dwight played by Clive Owen in the original.  Now he is played by Josh Brolin, who is a thousand times better.  I always thought Owen was an almost fatal bit of flawed casting in the original.  Thankfully, that mistake was rectified here.  Much has been made of the stilted dialog and actors, particularly Jessica Alba, who are chewing the scenery with everything they got.  My response to that is that it is noir, people don't really talk like that anymore, but it sets an undeniable atmosphere.  As for the acting, this film and stories are supposed to be hyper-stylized,thus the slight unreality of the non-naturalistic acting fits in perfectly.

The film is also another triumph of design, bringing the printed page to life.  They even used it in the advertising:

In fact, the advertising is just as interesting as the movies in setting tone and expectations.  A few examples below:

I have loved both versions' very effective use of the blending of the hyper-stylization with the real, to give an otherworldly effect to the movie.  Aside from artistic choices, it throws you off by introducing an unreal world that doesn't feel right and thus makes you uncomfortable unconsciously.  This is unlike any world we are grounded in, so the events seem more bizarre, more off-kilter and more off-putting if the co-directors of Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller would have played it straight.  In fact, this whole movie is an exercise in the excess of these two men, so much so they even have their own individual posters:

While it seems a bit indulgent (even Steven Speilberg stays behind the scenes), for some reason, it just feels right.  Again, I cannot stress enough how this is not a film for kids or those of conservative tastes.  I guarantee you there is something in here that will offend most anyone.  But it is undeniably sexy, smooth, exciting, and yes, entertaining if you go in with the correct mindset.  I loved every minute of it and wished it could be an hour longer.  Unfortunately, it looks like it was a bit of a flop and we may never see another.  But that is what we thought after the first one, which was a minor hit.  Please, Mr. Rodriguez, please make another.  They are so good and I am always willing to take a trip down the dark alleys of Basin City.

The Giver

3 Stars (out of four)

I was not prepared for The Giver.  I had no idea what it was about other than it was being hyped pretty hard.  I had not read the book it was based on, so I had no preconceptions about it going in.  Boy, was I presently surprised.

The Giver is a sci-fi story about a post-apocalyptic world, apparently.  The movie isn't specific about this.  Mankind has been able to abolish all emotions and feelings from life, creating a society free of strife and crime, but also devoid of vitality and life.  Conformity is strictly practiced, and personal relationships as we know them are outlawed.  The emotions are purged through daily injections of some kind of drug, leaving everyone in some kind of waking stupor.  Everyone has a job and contibutes to society each according to his talents and receives each according to his needs.  There is total equality.  However, occasionally a child is born who doesn't fit into normal criteria, and they are given the unique job of Recever of Memories from the Giver of Memories.  This job is in high regard and the Receiver will act as an advisor to the Elders, the rulers of the society.  As the main character Jonas becomes the Receiver, he begins to get the totality of the human experience from The Giver.  He quickly realizes that the society is soulless and wants to share his experiences, which is cores sly forgiven.  He eventually runs from the society and takes down a tower that apparently runs the illusion society is in, freeing their minds.

So, this movie asks one of the fundamental questions of humanity, that is What are we?  What is our makeup?  The movie argues that a world of Serenity and tranquility robbed of the chaos of human experiences is really a hollow shell, robbing us of a vital piece that which makes us human.  The movie illustrates this through its use of color.  The sterile is black and white, but Jonas sees washed-out flashes of color.  When he meets The Giver, he experiences an explosion of color and sound that overwhelms him.  He learns of love, happiness, music, hate, violence and fear at different times which fundamentally changes his perspective, similar to Plato's Shadows in the Cave to daylight.  The movie is actually a thinly-veiled allegory of The Garden of Eden.  The sterile society is in a state of grace until the Devil introduces to Man the actual knowledge of Good and Evil, thus provoking the Fall of Man.  In this case, the Devil is our humanity and seems to be arguing that our Fallen selves are much preferable to living in ignorance of what is out there.  Indeed, this serene existence kills us inside.  With no context for morality, we be one totally amoral, with only pragmatism as our guide.  This, we can do monstrous things in the name of the pragmatism.  In the movie, this is illustrated by the babies.  If they are not perfect, they are unemotionally killed and disposed of like garbage.  Same with the elderly.  As soon as you are are a burden, you are expelled.  Many movies and books have touched on this:  Logan's Run, 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World, Ministry of Fear, Soylent Green, Schindler's List, but the most obvious comparison is the similarly great Pleasantville.  They all warn us that though we are flawed beings, it is central to what we are, what life is.  They go on to admonish us to never forget this aspect of ourselves.  They implore us to hold onto what is good, but understand what is bad so as to keep perspective.  The movie is wonderful, and I recommend it wholeheartedly.