The horrors of the Holocaust have been outlined in many films over the years.  Many of them are really well done, while others are not.  The latest version of the film fall smack in the middle.

The Zookeeper’s Wife tells the true story of Antonina Żabińska (Jessica Chastain) and her husband, Dr. Jan Żabiński (Johan Heldenbergh), a family living at a zoo in Poland who helped around 300 Jews escape from the dreaded Warsaw Ghetto.  After Poland is occupied by the Germans, Antonina and Jan have to report to Hitler’s chief zoologist, Lutz Heck (Daniel Brühl), who takes a shine to Antonina.  His presence at the zoo makes it even more challenging for the Żabińskas to help the people that they were to help.

Jessica Chastain is wonderful in the lead role.  Chastain brings the power to her performance not only with her scenes with her male co-stars, but also with the animals that seem to be free throughout the film.  Whether she is cuddling with beautiful lion cubs or helping a new born baby elephant to breath, Chastain is amazingly believable as an animal handler above all others.

The scenes of the bombing of the zoo and then the extermination of the animals later because they “would not survive the winter” were brutal and hard to watch.  They also provided a stark comparison to the manner in which the Nazis treated the Jews.  The film also metaphorically compares the animals in the zoo with the Jewish people being kept in the Żabińska home, a zoo of a different type, but still a way to protect the inhabitants.

The scenes shot at the Warsaw Ghetto was a terrible reminder of how horrible these situations were.  The film does a good job of portraying the overcrowded location, and showing the blatantly disgusting environment that these men, women and children were forced to withstand.  The scene of the children being lifted onto the train by Heldenbergh, with the knowledge of what would come for these people, was heartbreaking.

This is another good film about the horrors of the Holocaust.  This is a period that we must always remember.

3.85 stars

I think most kids, especially the younger ones, will enjoy The Boss Baby, featuring the voice talents of Alec Baldwin.

However, I did not enjoy this much at all.

I suppose I am not the target audience for this film, however, Pixar, Disney and many other successful animated studios have shown that they can make entertaining films that appeal to both young children and adults.  The Boss Baby is simply not in that league.

Tim (Miles Bakshi) has a great life with all of his parents’ attention.  That is, until a new baby brother comes along.  However, there is something odd with the suit-wearing baby.  Tim discovers that the Boss Baby can speak and that he has arrived from his company with the hope to prevent the release of a forever-young puppy that will tilt the scale of love available to the side of the puppies and away from the babies.

Of course, Tim has been feeling jealous of the attention now being showered upon the new sibling so he teams up with Boss Baby so they both can get what they want… Boss Baby out of the house.

This film is needlessly confusing.  There is a lot of fantasy segments included in the film and it really tends to blur the line between fantasy and what is really happening.  In fact, at the beginning of the film, I was sure the whole film was going to turn out to be one big dream by Tim, and, honestly, I’m not convinced that that isn’t exactly what happened.

The voice cast is acceptable, with Alec Baldwin as the standout.  However, Jimmy Kimmel and Lisa Kudrow, two very funny individuals, were regulated to pretty unfunny roles as the parents of Tim.  Tobey Maguire provides the voice over narration, much like you might have had in the Wonder Years, and he is fine.  Steve Buscemi appears as well later in the film.

The film’s animation is pretty well done, and I do like the way the animation switches to a different style during fantasy segments.  Still, it probably caused confusion in the story telling as well.

There is a good message to the film as well, as it tells kids that, just because there is a new baby in the house, your parents are not going to love you any less.  I am sure that is a message that would resonate with many young children so the movie should be commended for that.  But I am a long way from those days and that message is not directed to me.

And that message gets lost among all the poop, puke, hit in balls jokes that are scattered throughout the film.  Again, humor that the 8 year old might find hilarious, but is actually quite tedious for me.

The Boss Baby wasn’t as bad as it could have been, but it is not something that I would want to see again, nor is it something that I expect to remember much about later in the year.

2.4 stars

I had never seen the Anime animated version of Ghost in a Shell, so I went into the new film, starring Scarlett Johannson, completely free of expectations.  I have only seen a minimal amount of trailers even for this film.  I was the proverbial blank slate.

Unfortunately, I was not that impressed with the live action version of the Japanese film.  Honestly, I was pretty bored through most of it.

Major (Scarlett Johannson) is the first of her kind.  In a world where everyone had some kind of cybernetic enhancement, she was the first person to have her brain inserted into a fully synthetic body.  The “ghost” in the “shell” if you will.  Then we tried to find out stuff about her past while she does missions for the organization she was involved in.

I have to say that I did not know what was going on wit this movie for much of the first two-thirds of the film.  Because of that, I really found it dragging and I may have even been on the verge of dozing off once or twice.

This was not the fault of Scarlett Johannson, who was very good as Major.  There was a lot of controversy over her casting with the claims of whitewashing dogging the film.  Johannson, who really needs to lead a Black Widow movie soon, was good here, but, admittedly, I believe there were several actresses who could have done as much as she did here.  I understand why the studio chose Johannson though as she looked amazing all the time and she would definitely be a bigger name draw than other actresses that might be in the role.

The backdrop of the movie was spectacular.  The vision of the film was outstanding, with the creation of the world being clearly where most of the CGI budget went for Ghost in a Shell.  However, the CGI was not completely breath-taking as there were several scenes, action ones in particular, where the CGI stood out as obvious.  The visuals of the world behind the action was beautifully displayed consistently though.

The story itself was long and dull and dragged along at a snail’s pace.  It felt remarkably long despite it not being that lengthy of a film.  They do touch upon the theme of “what is life”, but there is not enough detail to that theme to really make it worth it.

I must say that one of the moments early on when I perked up was when the villain Kuze (Michael Pitt) showed up.  He piqued my interest at first as I enjoyed the visual presentation of him.  However, he was switched out of the villain role about halfway through the film and is replaced by a much less fascinating figure and what little good will I had built up with this character had been tossed aside.

In the end, I did not enjoy a lot about the, admittedly beautifully designed, Ghost in the Shell.  The story was weak, the tone was inconsistent and the acting was okay.  The action scenes varied between decent and CGI spot fests.  I hope the fans of the Anime and the original animated version of this film find this satisfactory, but as someone who has none of that background knowledge, Ghost in a Shell was not a good film.

2.4 stars

I used to watch the Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers when it was on FOX Kids in the 1990s.  Honestly, I watched it as a time waster until The Tick came on, but I did watch it.  I knew it for the cheesy, repetitive and over-the-top show that it was.  I did not hate it.  I did not love it.  It just was.

I was interested in seeing the new movie version of the show, however.  It had a different vibe on display in the trailers that made me feel that some of the things I did not like about the TV show were going to change.

And, now that I have seen Power Rangers, I must say that I think this was a fun film, with enough of a new tone and enough of the old tone to make everyone happy.

Five teenagers, all with a multitude of personal problems, wind up finding these “coins” of different colors in an underground cavern and they realize that they now had super powers.  Investigating further, the kids discover an underground space ship where Zordon (Bryan Cranston), a giant head in a wall, and a robot Alpha Five (Bill Hader) reside and Zordon informs these teens that they are the new Power Rangers.

Oh, and the villainous Rita Repulsa (Elizabeth Banks) is coming and she is going to kill everyone on earth.

Geez, thanks Zordon.

I kind of expected that the new Power Rangers movie would not hold my attention, but it started out well.  It had an initial Breakfast Club meets Chronicle feel that really grabbed my interest.  The film took its time to introduce us to these new teenagers and to show us their lives, their troubles and their struggles.  I really dug that and I think it made this a considerably stronger film than I believed it would be.

I also enjoyed the performances of the actors cast as the Power Rangers.  Jason (Dacre Montgomery), Kimberly (Naomi Scott) and Billy (RJ Cyler) in particular were the standouts in the cast of the super hero team.  That takes nothing away from the other two Rangers (Becky G and Ludi Lin), but these first three really did most of the heavy lifting of the story.  Billy especially is the breakout character of the film.  It seemed as if the character was implied to have Asperger’s Syndrome ( a form of Autism) and I found that to be an intriguing choice for the Blue Ranger.

We did not get any costumed action until very late in the movie.  That was a risky move for the film, but I think it really paid off.  We got to see this group of kids form a connection with each other that was stronger than “we are a group of heroes and we have to save the world.”  This time put into the connection between the Rangers really added to the moment at the end when they finally do morph into their battle armor.

When the Power Rangers do fight, the film gives long time viewers a distinct flavor of the old show.  I am certain that this was intentional.  That first fight between the Rangers and the Putties could have come straight out of the first season.  There were actually several bits of nostalgia tossed into the film like this that really helped pepper the flavor of the Power Rangers into the new film.

I liked Rita Repulsa early in the film.  She had a horror movie feel to her, but in the third act, she felt way too over-the-top and cheesy.  It was as she was exactly like the Rita from the TV show, and, since the movie had changed much of the tone, Rita worked against the movie.  Not that she ruined the film for me, but it was definitely noticeable.

I was also not the hugest fan of the third act slugfest involving the Zords.  I am sure that the real fans of the original series will love the ending though and that is a good thing.  I liked it more when the Zords combined into the Mega-Zord.

While this was not a great movie, it was fun and that will help out any flaws that might be there.  The characters of the Power Rangers were much more developed than any time before and the connection between the Rangers was not ignored.  The beginning section of the film where we see Zordon and Rita in their last battle over earth was a cool way to start the film and the acting was surprisingly good, from the teenagers to Bryan Cranston.  The film effectively balanced the tone of the old series and the new film, making sure that there was something in the film for everybody.  I think that this is an effective way to kick off the new franchise, and… with the mid credits scene…we may have our hint for the next film’s storyline.  And it is one that will turn all the former fans of the Power Rangers GREEN with envy (see what I did there?)

3.3 stars

There is nothing specifically original about the film Life, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson and Ryan Reynolds.  Honestly, it is very much similar to a little film called Alien that came out a few years ago.  However, just because the films are similar, it does not mean that this film is not worth the time to see it.

In Life, several scientists have collected soil samples from Mars and they discovered a microscopic life form that proved the existence of life beyond the earth.  These scientists continued to research the life form, watching it grow.  Things turn on them when the life form attacks one of the scientists, escapes from its isolation and goes on attack.

Of course, if you have ever seen one of these movies before, you know what is going to happen.  The creature, which has been dubbed “Calvin,” goes about killing the members of the crew.

Strengths of Life:  Well, the film looks tremendous.  It is a gorgeous setting that really helps create the tension of the scenes.  And there is a ton of tension involved here.  This is certainly a horror/thriller and it ramps up the anxiety from the moment Calvin escapes from its Petri dish.  The film does an admirable job of creating the claustrophobic feel of beings in tight spaces and in imminent danger.  The tone of the film is extremely well done and should keep you on the edge of your seat.

However, there are some distinctly dull moments as well (most of the time prior to the escape of Calvin) that create a stark contrast with other parts of the film.  Once the organism frees itself, the pace definitely picked up.

Another issue is that none of these characters were developed very deeply.  We have a few character details provided, but mostly, these characters are disposable.  Even with the talented cast that this film can brag about, these actors can only do so much.

Jake Gyllenhaal is fine in his role.  His character of David Jordan is on the way to becoming the longest living person in space.  That’s about all we know of him.  Ryan Reynolds’ Rory is the smart alack.  Hiroyuki Sanada (from LOST, Revenge and The Wolverine) played Sho, whose wife gave birth to a child.  Rebecca Ferguson was the woman on the ship.  As you can tell, these characters are not deeply distinguishable.

Calvin looked pretty good, though it did really remind me of the facehuggers from Alien.  I would have preferred for it not to look so alike, especially before it grew into the larger creature that it did.  The appearance of Calvin only reinforced the notion that this was too similar to the Alien series of movies.

Despite this, I was engaged by the film and found myself nervous as Calvin was bouncing freely around the space station.  Not to spoil anything, but I saw the ending coming a mile away, but that does not take away from a pretty solid little thriller that successfully plays on the fear of the unknown.

3.7 stars

Chip Happens?

Well, sticking with that joke… this movie is a piece of Chip.

Boy, I thought this one was going to be bad, and, man, was I right.

CHiPs is the latest nostalgic television show to become a feature length film by changing the tone into a comedy in the same vein as 21 Jump Street.  The original television show starred Erik Estrada and Larry Wilcox, but I was never a fan of it.  Then, the trailers for this film were terrible.  However, there is always a chance….

Nope.  CHiPs was atrocious.

FBI Agent Castillo (Michael Pena) was asked to go undercover in the California Highway Patrol unit under the pseudonym Francis “Ponch” Poncherello.  He was paired up with rookie cop and former stunt biker Jon Baker (Dax Shepard) to investigate the suspected robbery of armored bank cars by police officers.  These two immediately hate each other as every thing about the other one rubs them the wrong way.  As they learn to get along with each other, a bond forms between them and they become friends.

Ugh.

I really like Michael Pena, but he was given such a load of crap here that I can’t imagine why he would agree to do this.  Ponch is such a horrible person, downright unlikable and mean, that I had no reason to cheer this guy.  And he and Jon had no chemistry at all.  They spent most of the film putting down each other that I didn’t care if they ever became friends.  Jon was such a naive individual, until he wasn’t.  If the script called for Jon to be pathetic, he was pathetic.  If it called for him to be an amazing observational person, then he was.

Nothing here was funny.  I am always amazed at the laughter that comes from the theater when a film uses so much of this kind of lowbrow and stupid (borderline mean-spirited, misogynistic, homophobic) humor.  It makes me want to turn to the others in the crowd and ask them why they find this garbage funny.  There may have been one or two giggle-worthy moments in the film, but they were very few and far between while the rest of the humor focused on the lowest level of jokes.  Crude humor can be funny if done smartly, but there is nothing smart about the humor in CHiPs.

The story was stupid.  There were massive plot holes throughout the entire run.  Ponch had, apparently, some kind of sex addiction and Jon was addicted to painkillers and, I guess, had a bad knee and a body that was failing him.  So of course the movie made him a cop.  The scene where Jon hurtled a shrub made me wonder why his bad knee (that caused him to be unable to get out of bed earlier) didn’t prevent that from happening.  I guess it was because the script needed him to jump that bush.

Jane Kaczmarek (formerly an Emmy winner for Malcolm in the Middle) and Kristen Bell (from Veronica Mars and Heroes) as well as Vincent D’Onofrio (The freakin’ Kingpin) had roles in here, and they were all wasted.  Kaczmarek in particular had a character that was a complete insult to her talent as an actress.  D’Onofrio had one or two scenes that made me think he was more than just a cardboard cutout of a character.

All of the characters were basically one note characters.  They had a character trait, and that is what they were all about.  They were not well developed people with certain troubles or flaws.  Those flaws completely defined who these people were.

I was so happy when this movie ended.  It was a trash heap and it absolutely lived down to the expectations that I had going in.  It is right up there with the worst films of the year.

0.6 stars

The Belko Experiment was written by James Gunn and directed by Greg McLean.  It is a horror-thriller set int an office building. Many people have made the comparison of this being Office Space meets the Purge, and that is a fair assumption.

Belko is a corporation that worked to export American jobs with American workers into other countries…or at least, that is what they were told.  In reality, Belko was setting the stage for a social study on the nature of humans placed in a violent, no-win scenario.

There are 80 employees of Belko and they find themselves trapped in their office building after blast doors seal the building tightly.  Then, a voice over the intercom states that if they do not kill 20 of the people, they would kill double that number, and then they proceed to show their strength by blowing up the chip that was placed (as a way to protect the employees from kidnapping) in each employee’s head.

Of course, this was causing quite the panic among the employees and it did not help when the CEO of the corporation, Barry Norris (Tony Goldwyn) decides that the only way to go was to follow instructions.

The Belko Experiment is a mixed bag.  While it is a fascinating concept for a horror-thriller, the actual execution in many senses are lacking.  The idea of normal people having to choose what to do in an unwinnable situation is an interesting set-up, but it was not really followed through with in any specific manner.  The social study aspect of the story was touched on, but not developed enough to make this a psychological thriller.  The other major issue hurting this film was the lack of any sort of character development for most of the characters on screen.  These characters were basically disposable characters you might find in a slasher movie, with perfunctory introductions and, maybe, a few seconds to let the audience know who this person is.  It was not enough to really build the kind of connection to the characters so, with most of these characters, you don’t care much when they are killed.  Sure, you feel bad generally because it is sad to see people killed, but the emotional beat is severely lacking for most of these characters.

There are a couple of exceptions.  Michael (John Gallagher, Jr) is our main protagonist and is the character we spend the most time with.  He is also the one who wants to find a better way of escaping this trap than following instructions.  He is the voice of reason within the chaos of the story so he is easier to relate to than the rest.  The other character that I felt a connection to was Evan (James Earl), the security guard who was given quite a bit to do early in the film, and who showed his strong moral fiber in the face of the horrible situation.

I hated Tony Goldwyn’s character, who became so unhinged that he became downright stupid.  There was a situation at the end of the the story that I will not spoil, but had the character done what I would have done, things would have turned out differently.  Even worse was John C. McGinley’s character of Wendell, who we were introduced to as a creep and who never had any redeeming qualities at all.  He just became someone who I wanted to see die, and movie characters like that are not really characters as much as they are plot conveniences.  I also hated Michael’s girlfriend Leandra (Adria Arjona) who seemed to be desperately inconsistent as a character.

Having said all of this, I did find myself reasonably engaged with the film and I was anxious as the story continued.  It turned more into a gore fest with some brutal scenes of blood and death than any sort of social experiment.  That is fine, and if you approach the movie with that understanding, I believe you could really like The Belko Experiment.  It really felt like the film wanted to be more but it settled for the lowest possibility instead of reaching for something better.

The ending of the movie was pretty anticlimactic as it really just sets up the sequel rather than serving as a message or a theme.

The Belko Experiment was one of those films where I walked out of the theater entertained, but the more I thought about the movie, the more of its flaws started to surface.  If you are looking for an intelligent, psychological thriller that has a message to share with the world or a satire of the cutthroat world of business, well this film is not for you.  If you want a potential guilty pleasure horror-thriller where disposable characters are disposed of in gruesome manner, then The Belko Experiment might just be what you are looking for.

3.3 stars

A Tale as old as time…told once again for a new generation.  Is it worth it?

Disney has been remaking their animated classics over the last few years.  Cinderella, Maleficent, Pete’s Dragon and Jungle Book were already in the books and now we get the live-action remake of the Oscar nominated animated movie, Beauty and the Beast.

In the new film, Emma Watson plays Belle, a beautiful young girl who is more interested in reading a book than marrying the local hero, Gaston (Luke Evans).  When he father (Kevin Kline)gets lost in a dark and mysterious castle, Belle heads out to help him.  She finds herself in held prisoner by the Beast (Dan Stevens) and a castle full of animated furniture.

The new live action Beauty and the Beast is basically the same movie as the animated version, with a few small differences.  That was an important thing, I believe, because if they had made a ton of changes to this classic story, the fans would be totally up in arms.  However, there were a few items added to the new film.  There was a story line involving the back story of Belle, particularly with the fate of her mother.  There was a bit more of a role for the Enchantress (Hattie Morahan) who had originally cursed the castle and its inhabitants.

And most controversially, the character of Lefou (Josh Gad) was portrayed as a sexually confused man, showing homosexual tendencies.  This was a major problem for some, but not an issue for me.  In fact, Josh Gad is one of the standouts of the entire film.  Those people boycotting the film because of his fact should really examine their own lives a little closer.  And those people leaning on this for a way to bash the film, well, that is an unfair circumstance.

I did enjoy this film.  I thought that they did a lot of really great things.  First, I believe that they really needed to hit a home run when it came to a couple of the song scenes.  The three major scenes I think included the big dance scene with Belle and the Beast, the Gaston bar song, and the “Be Out Guest” scene.  In my opinion, they nailed two of those three.  The Gaston song was one of my favorite moments of the film.  The dance scene with Emma Watson and Dan Stevens was just beautiful and very moving.  I thought the “Be Our Guest” song , which was extremely iconic from the animated version, was at best average.

Secondly, I thought that Emma Watson brought a sweetness and a real youthful beauty to Belle.  Her emotional moments at the end of the film were very powerful.  She was a charming lead for Beauty and the Beast.

Thirdly, I would say that Luke Evans completely embodied one of Disney’s greatest villains in Gaston.  He was a perfect casting of him, and really pulls off the arrogant hunter/lady killer.  Josh Gad, as I mentioned before. was wonderful as Lafou, and the minor inclusion of a sexual orientation for the character only provided more depth for the sidekick.  Evans and Gad were great with their singing as well, just belting out their tunes when the opportunity presented itself.  Kevin Kline was wonderful as Belle’s father Maurice.  They added a small little song for Kline near the beginning of the film that was just beautiful and perfectly delivered by the amazing Kline.   Emma Thompson sang the title song beautifully, but she felt like she was just doing an Angela Lansbury imitation for most of the film.

Finally, most of the backdrops for the action was tremendously beautiful and flawlessly executed by the professionals at Disney.  This was an epically beautiful movie to watch.

Now, there were also several things that I did not love about this new remake.  Unfortunately, though I loved Emma Watson’s performance as Belle, I believe that her singing left something to be desired.  I mean, it was not as if she was a bad singer, but she just did not have the range or the chops to carry off some of the big time songs that Belle has to sing.  Watson was okay singing-wise, but that is tough when you are so front and center.

And then there was the CGI.  I just had some issues with the CGI on some of the characters.  The look of the Beast bothered me several times.  I am not sure what exactly it was, but the Beast just did not meet up with my expectations.  I kind of wish they had gone with full on motion capture rather than the process that they wound up using.  I also did not like the look of the clock Cogsworth (played by Ian McKellen) or the golden candelabra Lumière (voiced by the awesome Ewan McGregor).

Finally, I really did not like the castle onslaught scene where the furniture fights off the angry mob.  This scene was so cartoon-like that it betrayed a lot of what they wanted to do.  While it worked big time int he original animated movie, this felt out of place here.  However, the final battle between the Beast and Gaston was very well done, though I would have rather Gaston still used his bow and arrow than the gun that he was using here.  That is a minor quibble, but the bow and arrow made Gaston more of a hunter than the gun here, bringing more to the character of the braggadocio hunter.

One of the biggest troubles this movie will face is the challenge of updating an animated movie that is considered one of the best of all time.  Beauty and the Beast (1991) was the first animated movie ever nominated for the Best Picture Oscar.  That is some mighty huge shoes to try to fill which is why this film does not try to stray too far from the original.  However, it is not exactly a scene for scene remake wither.  It does take some interesting side trips that were meant to redefine or inform on the development of these beloved characters.  Any time a character gets more layers, I believe that is a good thing.  Disney’s newest live action film does a very solid job of doing just that.

While it may not have all of the magic of the original, the new Beauty and the Beast does find enough of that Disney magic to make this a rewarding experience.

3.95 stars

What a great documentary this was.

Louis Theroux created the documentary investigating the Church of Scientology and the infamous head of the organization David Miscavige.  Theroux and his deadpan reactions perfectly displays the craziness of the situations that he found himself in.

Is the Church of Scientology a real religion or a cult?  The jury is still out on that one, but this documentary certainly brings the idea to the front.

My Scientology Movie is extremely funny and shows members of the Church doing amazingly unbelievable things.  The denials for any sort of interview, the compound protected by flashing lights and wire fences and the use of Scientologists to “squirrel bust” the opposition.

Theroux brings several former Scientologists who have left the religion into the film to help explain the interior workings of the Church of Scientology.  Marty Rathbun was a high ranking member when he left the church and he was an amazing character in this film.  His reactions were compelling as you could see him struggle with the thoughts of what he went through as well as things that he may have done.

The documentary also cast two actors for “re-creations” of events that, according to Rathburn, happened.  The film cast an actor to play the role of David Miscavige as well as an actor to play Tom Cruise, the most famous of the Church of Scientology members.  The actor who played Miscavige was Andrew Perez and he had a couple of scenes set up by the documentary that were just transcendent.  Cruise was played by Rob Alter, but Cruise had less to do in the documentary than Miscavige.

The casting of these two actors was one of the most interesting parts of the film, as we see Marty explain to the actors exactly how these people would act by using old archival footage of Nightline with Ted Koppel as well as an interview with Tom Cruise.

The sessions of Scientology were extremely fascinating as well, seemingly as much as an acting course as anything else.  Or was it brainwashing?  Hard to say, but Marty certainly reacted in a dramatic way.

The relationship between Theroux and Marty was very telling as well.  Every time Theroux tried to go deeper and get Marty to look at things he may have done, Marty rejected it and fought back.

There is a great scene outside of the Church’s compound between Theroux and one of the Scientologists arguing about a road that had been closed and whether or not anyone had the right to be there.  It was funny and jaw dropping at the same time.  The fact that the Scientologist was also filming a documentary and had a camera pointing at Theroux every time they were confronting him was a little crazy.

Th documentary was very entertaining and made me wonder about a religion that I really knew little about.  I knew that science fiction author L. Ron Hubbard founded the religion and that Tom Cruise (and John Travolta, I believe) are among the members, but a lot of the rest of this was new information and very intriguing.

4.5 stars