5Q Movie Review: The Post

This semi-regular feature returns with a look at a movie I actually saw in a theater! Hey, it's a big deal for me since the last time I saw a film on the big screen, D.W. Griffith wasn't even problematic.

With the 5Q Movie Review, I try to get the essence of what a movie is about by asking and answering the truly important questions about a film.

Q: Does Meryl Streep turn directly to the camera and say, "Get it, current administration?" and then pause for audience applause?
A: I'm not saying that Streep, who plays former Post publisher Katharine Graham, does do this, but I'm not saying she doesn't. Stick through the ending credits!

Q: Does Tom Hanks play former Post editorial head honcho guy with a rascally twinkle in his eye?
A: He sure does. Unfortunately, I don't think there is one scene of Hanks pecking at a typewriter while holding a pen or a cigar with his teeth. Not one! What a ripoff.

Hanks and Streep are entertaining, and while Streep gets the kudos, we need to salute Hanks, too, because Ben Bradlee was some kind of demigod according to the way people  talk about him.

Q: Is that--is that David Cross along with Bob Odenkirk? Does Ronnie Dobbs make an appearance?
A: I'm aware that this is an unfair question, but I must be honest. As soon as I heard Cross' voice, I chuckled that he was in the film. Odenkirk has "crossed over" in my mind; Cross hasn't. The casting of the movie in general was a little distracting, actually.

No, Ronnie Dobbs isn't in The Post.

Q: What is the history like? Is it accurate?
A: I'm no expert, but many have criticized the movie for lionizing The Washington Post and downplaying the major role played in the release of the Pentagon Papers--perhaps by far the most important role--by The New York Times.  Of course, many of those critics are people who worked for The New York Times.

Q: Are newspapers still the best?
A: Most of the actual newspapers still around are not the best, but newspapers as a thing are still the best, and it's tempting to say that I would trade the Internet to have newspapers around, thriving, and affordable. That would mean the end of this blog, though--an existential dilemma I choose not to ponder.

I am all in favor of Hollywood making a big prestige movie about newspapers every single year.

Overall, I thought the movie was a nice crowd pleaser, but I was disappointed. I am a fan of media history but thought that Steven Spielberg sacrificed some narrative power in order to serve an agenda. I don't say that from a liberal vs. conservative angle, either. I enjoyed The Post, and it made me want to read more about the time period and the events depicted, but I can't picture myself seeing it again.

Did The Brady Bunch inspire Watergate? (No, but it's a strong post title)

I just didn't have the heart to keep the click bait title as it was without adding a disclaimer of sorts.

I am fascinated, though, by the first season episode of The Brady Bunch titled "Vote for Brady." In particular, I like the sequence in which Mike, looking to help out his ever-lovin' first born in the Fillmore Junior High class president campaign he is waging against Marcia, gives him a tape recorder.

I have kids of my own. I had sisters growing up. I WAS a kid. I have access to YouTube. I have never seen a kid appreciate a gift the way Greg appreciated this tape recorder.

The best thing is the way Greg tests it out. "Testing, 1, 2, 3...Testing, 1, 2, 3...Testing, 1, 2, 3..." I think Mike rolls his eyes a bit as he leaves Greg to his testing.

Now, I think we all thought the same thing the first time we saw this episode: Greg SAYS he's going to use this to broadcast his campaign promises all over the school, but what he is REALLY gonna do is make clandestine recordings of Marcia's campaign and use them to crush her.

Instead, Greg actually dumps his team when they propose the "dirty trick" of smearing Marcia's good name by spreading a rumor about her. Greg threatens physical violence against them.



Every self-respecting campaign manager wears a ribbon that says "Campaign Manager"

What a dope! He could have won the election, then used his power to crush anyone who gossiped about his sister.

Greg doesn't have it in him, neither does Marcia, and we get a sweet if sappy conclusion.

But what if?

What IF the Nixon administration was watching this episode and it inspired not only the secret taping system in the White House, but the entire dirty tricks campaign that ultimately helped bring down a presidency?

What IF?

Just asking. Just asking...

A shot from the deleted scene of Nixon's cameo in Season 4's "The Tiki Caves."

Brooks on Books: Prime Reading Roundup

During my brief stint with Amazon Prime, I tried to take advantage of the Prime Reading program. As with many other aspects of the ever-expanding Prime, it's kind of annoying to navigate and figure out, so I won't try to explain, but many of the cheaper books and Kindle Singles in the Kindle library are available for free reading to Prime members (not to be confused with the Kindle Lending Library and Kindle Unlimited, which...ah, I'm not getting into all that).

Here are some quick thoughts on what I read:

A Spy's Guide to Thinking by John Braddock:  A short read from an intelligence agent who uses a personal incident--being accosted by someone trying to steal his phone while he's out in the field--as a foundation to discuss ways of thinking, touching on game theory and methods of analysis. It's a compelling piece of writing that leaves you wanting more. I might have been disappointed had I paid a full Kindle price, but I really enjoyed it.

Churchill in the Trenches by Peter Apps: In this Kindle Single, a former defense correspondent for Reuters traces the World War I experience of Winston Churchill, who returned to the Army and went to the literal trenches in Belgium after experiencing political defeat. It's an illuminating, focused look at a low point in the man's life, supplemented with accounts from contemporaries and correspondence between Churchill and wife Clementine.

The Spirit of '76: From Politics to Technology, the Year America Went Rock & Roll by David Browne: I was disappointed with this Kindle Single and was glad I hadn't paid for it. Browne is a veteran entertainment journalist who knows his stuff (despite making the gaffe of identifying decathlete Bruce Jenner as a swimmer, an error pointed out by several Amazon reviewers but now corrected), but this is a basic account of the pop culture of 1976 without much insight. It's a quick read of an interesting year, but I don't think Browne really gets across his premise.

Ken Burns: The Kindle Single Interview by Tom Roston: This is a worthwhile and revealing longish interview from 2014, and Burns comes off well here. He covers his storytelling/filmmaking philosophies and also shares revealing details of his personal history that shaped him. Highly recommended for Burns fans. NOTE: The Errol Morris Kindle Single Interview is good, too.

The Rolling Stones Discover America by Michael Lydon: There are parts early on in this "Singles Classic" that make you think, uh-oh, this is gonna be an overwritten slog. Lydon seems to be straining at times to be literary, but this is overall an excellent account of the Stones' ill-fated 1969 tour that culminated in disaster at Altamont.  Embedded with the Stones organization (even then it was a machine, as Lydon illuminates), he takes advantage of the access to provide fascinating details of an explosive act at the heights. He even writes about the access itself and how its extent on a given day affects him. It's a self-aware but piercing look at not just the Rolling Stones, but at the nature of fame and the culture of the era. It's short by book standards but a must read if you're into this sort of thing, and it is well worth the $1.99 price for non-Prime members.

Fall Book Preview (that is, a list of upcoming books that I want to read)

Nothing against literary fiction, mind you, but I'm focusing on the books I really want to buy this fall.
Here, in no particular order, are books I might actually read and would love to get this season:

1) American Heiress by Jeffrey Toobin: An account of the Patty Hearst case, loaded with social context, no doubt.

2) Powerhouse by James Andrew Miller: The guy behind the oral histories of ESPN and "SNL" (what exactly did credited co-author Tom Shales do on those books, anyway? Nobody ever seems to talk with HIM about them) returns to tell the story of Creative Artists Agency.

3) Monsters in the Movies by John Landis: OK, the guy may be liable for a few movie set deaths here and there, but he knows his monsters! This is actually a paperback reissue of a book that came out 5 years ago. I confess I totally missed the original.

4) Altamont: The Rolling Stones, the Hell's Angels, and the Inside Story of Rock's Darkest Day by Joel Selvin: Title says it all.

(Note: Books 1-4 are all out now)

5) Four of the Three Musketeers: The Marx Brothers on Stage by Robert Bader: I think we can count on this Marx expert to deliver a fantastic read. (October)

6) That's Me, Groucho: the Solo Career of Groucho Marx by Matthew Coniam: Sounds great, but it's from McFarland, so unfortunately, it's 40 bucks MSRP for 188 pages. (September)

7) The General vs. the President: MacArthur and Truman at the Brink of Nuclear War by H.W. Brands: I enjoy Brands' works of popular history, and this should be a good read. (October)

8) Born to Run by Bruce Springsteen: I'm not a hardcore fan of the Boss, but I'm curious to see how this book turns out. (September)

9) Good Vibrations: My Life as a Beach Boy by Mike Love and James S. Hirsch: Yes, Brian Wilson has a memoir coming out, too, but I have to admit I'd much rather this one even if I won't believe all of it. (September)

10) Disco Demolition: The Night Disco Died by Steve Dahl and Dave Hoekstra: Tells the story of the infamous disaster known as Disco Demolition Night at Comiskey Park in 1979, an event that got out of control and actually led to the cancellation of the second game of a doubleheader. What a great idea for a book! (August 30)

11) Based on a True Story: A Memoir by Norm McDonald: How could this not at least merit a look?
(September 20)

12) The Best of Shoe by Jeff MacNelly: On one level, a hardcover collection almost seems inappropriate for this strip, but since nobody's making pocket-size paperback reprints anymore, it'll have to do. (October)

13) Super Weird Heroes (Various) Giant Yoe Books anthology of oddball Golden Age comic book stories.

14) TV: The Book: Two Experts Pick the Greatest American Shows of All Time by Alan Sepinwall and Matt Zoller Seitz: That title is a lot more pretentious than these guys' actual writing. Two perceptive and entertaining critics use this gimmick to survey all of TV history. I expect an addictive read.(September)

15) A Thousand Cuts: The Bizarre Underground World of Collectors and Dealers Who Saved the Movies by Dennis Bartok and Jeff Joseph: This sounds fabulous: An exploration of film collecting and a history of the FBI's efforts to harass the collecting community in the 1970s. (August 25)

Iconned myself again

I made another trip to the dollar store (have I mentioned I do this for fre--oh, yeah, I did, several times. Forget I wrote anything about it) and, impulsive dreamer I am, I gambled another buck on another pack of Panini Americana Heroes & Icons cards. If you need a refresher, click HERE for what I found in the first pack several weeks ago.

After opening another quintet of these cards, I hereby suggest another moniker for this series: Panini Presidents, Swimmers, and Astronauts. There just ain't a lot of variety in this assortment of "heroes and icons," and I suggest the good folks at Panini expand their definition of those terms next time out. I would love to see a fireman, Matter-Eater Lad, even a hero sandwich--anything except another Olympic swimmer (though my Summer Sanders exception still applies).

Now, I can't complain about the best card I got this time: Abraham Lincoln. You could argue a George Washington card would too it, but that would be like arguing about a Reggie Jackson or a Shooty Babitt. I mean, they're both awesome, right? And this Abe card is pretty cool, though the text on the back doesn't even give George Washington a place at the table:

To the overwhelming majority of historians there is no debating that Lincoln was our greatest president."

Whoa! That's pretty definitive, Panini. I hope you'd keep a more open mind when choosing between Reggie and Shooty.

After ol' Honest Abe, anything might seem a letdown. President William McKinley suffers a little bit from being in the same pack with one of the all-time greats. Hey, I just noticed two assassinated chief execs in one group of cards--that's a little odd.

Next up, it's swimmer time, and today's athlete is Rowdy Gaines. He seems a decent enough guy, and I always have love for those '84 Olympians in particular, but...eh, yeah.

Then we get to the requisite astronaut portion of our pack, and this time out it's Charles Duke and Dick Gordon. Again, much respect to our moonwalkers, but two of them? I would rather have had a little more variety WITHIN the pack, let alone among the two I've bought.

So I think I'm done with the Heroes & Icons cards. I'm only gonna be disappointed by the presidents, swimmers, and astronauts from here on out. At 20 cents a card, these are kind of cool, but I still think my money would be better spent looking for 1982 Shooty Babbits.

My pack of Americana Heroes & Legends cards

After the fun I had opening some 2013 baseball cards a few weeks back, I may have stretched my luck by trying it with the "Panini Americana Heroes & Legends" pack I got at the dollar store (Have I mentioned that I do this blog for free?). Sure, it was only a buck, but there were only 5 cards, and I didn't really get the equivalent of a Buster Posey. Here's what I DID get:

George H.W. Bush: OK, so the former Prez is a Big Deal, and he is clearly the most prestigious card I got. You can argue about whether he's more a hero or a legend (got to at least give him props for all those combat missions in WWII, I say), you can argue his politics and globoecomomic connections, you can argue what the hell he was up to on November 22, 1963 (that's a topic for another blog, and even mentioning it probably just marked me as both a conspiracy nut and a CIA front), but he IS an ex-president.

Unfortunately, he's Ex-President George H.W. Bush. I now know what it must have felt like to be a kid tearing open a pack of Topps in the sixties and seeing a Yankee card, only to discover it was Tom Tresh.

Sally Ride: Is it wrong that I can't look at this woman's name without singing "Mustang Sally"? Yes, it is, if for no other reason than I am a terrible singer of "Mustang Sally." (But you should hear me tear it up on "In the Midnight Hour!") She was the first woman in space, and that's pretty cool, but...I don't know, she's not even wearing a spacesuit on the card's photo. It looks like NASA went to the mall and got everybody's picture taken.

Gary Hall Jr.:This great American swimmer won 10 Olympic medals, according to the text on the card back, including 4 in Sydney in 2000.Ultimately, though, this is a dude in a swimsuit. No disrespect to this world-class athlete, but I would sure rather have had Summer Sanders.

Edgar Mitchell: Now, HERE's an astronaut with an actual spacesuit on! it's a grainy photo, but that somehow makes it cooler. It looks as if it was taken right after he was on the moon--or maybe WHILE he was on the moon (There's actual no portrait gallery on the moon, but there's probably a Sbarro's)! This shows you how nonchalant we are in this country about the space program these days, though: Instead of marveling at getting a trading card of an Apollo 14 astronaut, I actually kind of winced, thinking, "Aw, TWO astronauts in the same pack? Come on!"

Alex Morgan: I must admit I yawned when I saw the card of this women's soccer player. I assure you folks that I would have been just as bored if it were a men's soccer player.

Those are the 5 Heroes & Legends I received for my buck. Personally I think the George Washington I exchanged for the pack was the biggest icon in the bunch, and I wish there were more variety with less contemporary selections. I can't say I won't be tempted to try again, though, next time I'm at the dollar store.(Have I mentioned that I do this blog for free?)

"Lincoln" shows the path to Oscar success

So the Academy Awards are this weekend, and I think we all know "Lincoln" is going to sweep the major categories. Even if we don't all know that, I'm saying it anyway because it's the only one I saw, and in my world, that's the key factor, right?

I believe "Lincoln" has been so successful and will win so many awards for a simple reason.. I refer not to the direction of Oscar winner Steven Spielberg; nor the screenplay by the acclaimed Tony Kushner; nor even the stellar performances by the brilliant Daniel Day-Lewis, the scene-stealing Tommy Lee Jones, and the myriad other pros in the cast.

Well, not the performances per se.

I think the reason this movie will rule the day boils down to the essence of the movie itself, that which it is about: Old (or at least middle-aged) dudes with cool old-timey facial hair yelling at each other.

I think Spielberg hit on a formula here and rode it to eventual Oscar success. "Lincoln" is a winner because of it. Old dudes with cool old-timey facial hair yelling at each other.

Even in real life, I could sit and watch guys talk about the most arcane subjects for hours on end if the dynamic were anything like the depiction of Congress in the film. Granted, the 13th Amendment is most certainly not comparable to haggling over...I don't know, soybean quotas, but the fact is that watching people just discussing an amendment is a captivating spectacle in this circumstance.

How cool C-SPAN would be if our representatives took to the floor sporting big ol' mutton chops and exclaimed "By Jove!" And certainly any elected official who preceded a crucial voice vote on a historically significant proposition by muttering, "Aw, hell with it," would deserve to be appointed for life. Term limits be damned for the gent (or woman; I really don't mean to exclude the ladies) who combined that era's brand of mustache/beard with its florid oratory (unless the oratory were ABOUT term limits, in which case, by Jove,I'd be spellbound but confused). The nation would be a better place and the populace more engaged.

Of course, the politicians we have today, all modern and stuff with their fancy razors and their non-smallpox-scarred faces, don't feel the need to turn a Congressional session into a political version of "Whisker Wars." So the best we can hope for is that more ambitious filmmakers follow up and produce more historical epics with more follicles and more yelling. I'd wager that even a Millard Fillmore biopic could do good business and scoop up plenty of awards if it were done like this. Of course, the minute I pitched it, some Hollywood suit with a memory would try to intervene and say, "We already did a duck picture. Howard the Duck bombed. Next!"

After writing this all down, my formula for success looks a little...shallow. Yelling? Facial hair? OK, I'll admit it's rather insubstantial. But I just thought of another thing that makes this kind of movie special, something more profound, a cinematic element that cuts right through to the soul and is also easily transferable to the contemporary political scene: Cool hats. Who's with me on that one, huh?

Brooks on Books: Old-School true crime in New York and Los Angeles

Let me tell you how a certain true crime book begins, and you tell me if you want to read it or not:

Nearly 5 million men and women have served the United States as police officers. Only one has been executed for murder.

That's the start of the preface to "Satan's Circus" by Mike Dash, and while the book isn't quite as awesome as that intro leads you to believe it will be, it's still a fun ride. I am pairing it here with another recent read, Richard Rayner's "A Bright and Guilty Place," another fulfilling read. It sems silly to compare two books just because they're in the same broad genre and because I happened to read them recently, but, eh, here goes.

Each book focuses on a murder that occurred a long time ago, one involving someone on the "good side" of the law as a suspect--Dash's Charles Becker killing a gangster in early-1900s New York, Rayner's an ex-Assistant D.A., Dave Clark--a man running for judge, no less--shooting Los Angeles' chief crime boss and "fixer" plus another man in 1932.

Each book, however, goes well beyond its central subject to explore the endemic corruption and wrongdoing in its given sphere. Each offers a tremendously entertaining experience with numerous details about the shady characters and stories that add up to rather disheartening portraits of the histories of these major cities.

I believe Dash's book is better written. "Circus" is tighter and more focused. Even with its many amusing diversions to explore characters like Big Tim Sullivan, Clubber Williams, and Short Change Charley, it never strays too far from the central narrative. Rayner is perhaps a bit more ambitious in trying to use his chosen murder case as a springboard to depict the dark foundation of an entire city, yet his digressions tend to be a bit more distracting and somewhat overwhelming. It's telling (and probably a good idea) that he presents a list of names with brief descriptions at the beginning of the book, and it's easy to get lost in some of the details once the book gets going. Dash also offers a bunch of sidebars and such, but he uses footnotes during the text to avoid clogging the narrative, plus he sticks closer to the main action once the trial of the fallen cop gets underway.

However, Dash's book becomes somewhat less compelling as he sticks closer to the details of what happens after Becker is arrested. I respect Dash's discipline, but I have to say the book is more purely entertaining when it is taking a broader look at the colorful crime bosses, petty thugs, and crooked cops who set up the story. Becker's story intrigues in its own right, but the guy is just not as colorful as many of the other figures in "Circus."

"Place" is perhaps less skillfully written, but on some level more compelling, especially to someone who loves Raymond Chandler novels and other fictional explorations of the seedy side of early Los Angeles...like yours truly. There is a lot of juicy stuff in here about Teapot Dome, magnates like E.L. Doheny, and other key aspects of L.A. history, and much of it is new to me. Learning it enhances my appreciation for what Chandler did in fictionalizing much of it. In fact, Chandler himself is a prominent character here, as is Leslie White, a photographer/detective who is sort of the co-subject of the book.

So which one I'd recommend more depends on your interest in the subject matter and what you're looking for. Both "Circus" and "Place" in their way paint vivid portraits of corruption and vice in a given setting, and both have their own strengths and weaknesses. But don't feel the need to pick one over the other just because I contrived to bring them together here. True crime and history lovers have a lot to enjoy in each volume.

Brooks on Books: What the Heck Are You Up To, Mr. President?" by Kevin Mattson

If you're one of the millions of people that knows/thinks/believes/assumes Jimmy Carter was a terrible President, I'm not gonna try to change your opinion. But this book might surprise you a bit. Carter may still have been a terrible prez, but maybe for different reasons.

Mattson is apparently (judging from his resume) a left-leaning writer, and his book is sympathetic to Carter but not biased or partisan. Included in his subtitle is the phrase "The Speech That Should Have Changed the Country," but this is isn't a left-wing propaganda job. The goal here is to examine the infamous address to the nation in which Carter used the word "malaise" and supposedly torpedoed his political future. The focus is not on ideology but on process--that is, how Carter himself squandered the momentum this moment gave him (that's right, momentum; read on) through his own mismanagement, hence the poor reputation of a speech that "should have" changed the United States.

Mattson lays out the particulars of the speech (also presenting the entire text in the back for your convenience), but examines it in context, showing what was going on in the country before it and what, in fact, instigated it. He also takes us through the aftermath of the infamous oratory and in so doing challenges much of the conventional wisdom surrounding it.

I was born in the seventies, but I had a pretty happy toddler life and was unaware of what a drag it was for much of the country much of the time. Mattson's book details the problems Carter and the USA faced: sputtering economy, gas shortages, hostage crisis in Iran...yeah, it wasn't always a fun time outside of the discotheque. Is it any wonder Carter used the word "malaise" in a speech to illustrate how bummed America was?

But while many people believe that people hated Carter for committing the political sin of, like, bringing everybody down, man, contrasting Jimmy with the sunny "Morning in America" reputation of Ronald Reagan, Mattson shows that the truth is much more complex. For example--and this is kind of a big thing--Carter never used the word "malaise" in the speech. It was the media reaction that pushed that word into the discussion and forever linked it to Carter's televised address. Also, Carter's approval ratings actually went up, and the majority of the reaction was positive to Carter's attempt to link honest assessment of some of the country's problems with a positive assessment about the chance to beat the energy crisis.

Mattson convincingly asserts that it wasn't until the media started discussing the politics of the speech, not the substance, that the message got lost. More importantly, Carter made the disastrous move of axing a good chunk of his cabinet just days after the speech, a move which made an already questionable chief executive look out of control at best, incompetent or even unhinged at worst, and this, according to Mattson, is what sunk the presidency and killed the chance of the speech having lasting success.

Whether you agree or disagree with the ideology in here--Mattson isn't writing a policy paper, but he is telling the story from the Democratic POV, and he is clearly sympathetic to Carter-- you'll be impressed by the research Mattson has done and his skill at telling this story. The level of detail brings life to this time in American history and illuminates underchronicled aspects of it (at least I think so). The book is worthwhile if only for its fascinating account of an extraordinary retreat Carter hosted at Camp David before the speech, a kind of intellectual powow where notables like Jesse Jackson and a young Bill Clinton showed up to share ideas.

Mattson has written an entertaining, provocative account of what he demonstrates is a misunderstood but critical moment in American history. I highly recommend it for readers with an interest in history and/or politics.

Brooks on Books: "Over Here! New York City During World War II" by Lorraine B. Diehl

As someone fascinated by life in wartime America, I enjoyed the heck out of this great book. Diehl focuses on New York City during the World War II era, but she covers so much ground so well that she provides an illuminating look at the entire homefront. It was a time full of danger, excitement, sorrow, and joy, and "Over Here!" captures all of it, even while it covers some of the more mundane details of everyday life in a big city during a big world war.

Fortunately, Diehl's writing is never mundane, and the book takes us on a well-organized journey from the early 1930s, when Nazism began to rear its ugly head in certain sections of New York City, to the exuberance of V-E Day and V-J day and (in a thoughtful epilogue) the adjustments the city and the country made as it encountered housing shortages, the removal of women from the workforce, et cetera.

Reading about this era makes you realize how little Americans sacrificed during the "War on Terror." I mean, rising gas prices suck, but at least we have gas. "Over Here!" details the rationing of gasoline, common household items, and even meat. Mayor LaGuardia, who is unsurprisingly a big player in these pages, declared entire meat-free days on which restaurants could not serve it. I'm glad we don't have to endure that now. Could we?

There are so many fascinating elements to cover here that Diehl's relatively short book gives you the feeling of having covered a lot of ground. Topics such as espionage in New York, air raid sirens, entertaining the troops at venues like the Stage Door Canteen--all are included, and all are worthy of further exploration, but Diehl offers an excellent overview here.

It's an attractive book, too, with numerous illustrations. In addition to the many vintage photographs, there are reproductions of editorial cartoons, newspaper pages, ads, and more. I would suspect even a hardcore WWII buff familiar with much of the subject matter and even the details would appreciate the presentation here, in large part due to these illustrations.

I highly recommend "Over Here!" to anyone interested in the time period. When we watch Hollywood movies from the WWII years, it's easy to get a glossy image of the glory and the honor of this part of our nation's history. Yet Lorraine Diehl makes the impact of the Second World War vivid even to those of us who live in a time of constant non-sacrifice. People did without, people pitched in, people did what they could--people even felt fear, even thousands of miles away from the official theaters of battle. "Over Here!" makes you feel the pain and the happiness felt by New York City--and America as a whole--throughout its pages.