"A movie review is a reflection of your life." -Michael Phillips What's my spin? I'm often looking at film from an ethical (not moralistic) stance. What does a film communicate about right and wrong especially in relationships?
Monday, September 29, 2014
The Boxtrolls: A Poetic Meditation
"My fear is greater than your fear
for to support my terror I
have automatic ammunition
at such speeds that cannot be seen.
I have clubs and armors.
I have motors and missiles and mortars.
What have you?
Barely a toothpick to poke me with?
Your fear is but a paltry thing--
mine is the greater concern
that you must acquiesce to
as I crush you beneath my boot.
I must control and destroy your little life
for you inconvenience my comfort."
Sunday, September 28, 2014
The Beauty of Ida
Some of the themes have been explored before: a young woman
discovering herself (e.g. Blue is the Warmest Color), guilt and revelation
about the Holocaust (e.g. Dekalog 8), a woman forced to seek herself before
entering a convent (Viridiana). But never have these themes been executed with
such beauty and composition. Every scene
is expertly posed, I would want a still from every one on my wall.
Ida herself is almost a still-- completely passive, doing as
other's recommend and command. She is
quiet, meek and serene, even in the face of startling revelations and great
life moments. Until the very last scene
where she is striding, almost running, toward the only decision we see her
make: how she will spend her life. In a
way that stands against modern sensibilities, this is a film about independence
in its freest sense.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
John Donne Meets the Tortures of Cancer: Wit (2001)
Christian theology screws a lot of people up. At this point,
this is a truism, but it is partly true because people do not understand the
basic, everyday terms of the original idea. Take "salvation" for
instance. The original idea of "salvation" isn't spiritual or
other-worldly at all, but it means moving from a state of need to a state of
the satisfaction of need, from starvation to being filled, from neglect to
honor, from sickness to a state of wellness. When we spiritualize the simple,
then we complicate that which is very basic, and turn what we understood at our
mother's knee into a state of confusion and anxiety.
Poor John Donne. When observing the sufferings of Professor
Vivian Bearing, the "treatment" which is no such thing, we observe
the flayings of Donne upon his soul who wishes to be forgotten by God, because
he cannot bear under the sight of a God whose vision is so cruel as to judge
that which cannot change.
If lecherous goats, if serpents envious
Cannot be damn'd, alas, why should I be?
This is not unlike the sufferings of Vivian, but while Donne
spiritualized his sufferings, imagining the loving Mother who seeks him no
matter how much he might hide as a horrible abusive monster, even so Vivian
doubts that compassion and touch and a simple act of kindness could be a
greater balm than the deepest understanding of the medical profession. How we
complicate that which is quite simple, really, and then find ourselves of need
to walk through a morass of maze-like corridors to come back to that which we learned
at our mother's knee.
But that doesn't speak to Emma Thompson at all. Suffice it
to say, I could listen to her speak all day. The fact that she is reading some
of the greatest lines ever written, just causes me to close my eyes and bask in
the delightful lyrics. But only briefly, because she is like Dryer's Joan of
Arc (The Passion of Joan of Arc), beautifully deformed by her anguish.
Tuesday, August 5, 2014
Chatting with my Bud, Darren Aronofsky about Noah
"Noah"
"Okay, I can see this working. Will this be an imaginative interpretation of it?"
"Oh yeah. Lots of innovation."
"Well, that's good because every culture has had a reinterpretation of the flood story. We need a new one."
"Well, it's new-ish."
"What do you mean?"
"Well, it's pretty strongly based on the Bible story. Highly interpreted, but still from the Bible."
"Well, there's some great themes there. And you're interpreting it for modern audiences?"
"Absolutely. With a strong environmental message. The animals are innocent so they get saved, but humanity is judged because they kill animals."
"So... it's a vegetarian message?"
"Environmental."
"So you say. We'll see. Still sounds interesting. What about the racial slant, you're getting rid of that, right?"
"Racial? What do you mean?"
"You know, the part where one race is good and another race is bad and we have to get rid of the bad race?"
"Oh, uh, well, I kept that bit."
"Really?"
"Well, it kinda drives the plot."
"At least you made Noah a pacifist, right?"
"What do you mean, pacifist?"
"Well, in the text the world was wicked because they were murdering each other without consideration. Noah, in context, was righteous because he didn't kill anyone. He refused to judge."
"Huh. I didn't read that."
"So, you didn't make him a pacifist?"
"Not exactly..."
"You had Noah kill?"
"A little bit. I mean, what do you expect? It's Russell Crowe! It's in the contract-- someone has to be killed! By Russell!"
*shakes head*
"Hey, but I got giant rock monsters in there! That's good, right? And Jennifer Connelly really knocks it out of the park. Every one of the dozen lines she and Emma Watson speak are perfect."
"I'll watch it on DVD."
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
The Three Acts of The Deer Hunter
Yes, it is long. Three hours long. But it is neatly
segmented into three distinct acts, with clear divides between them, so it is
not much of a burden to watch.
Act One: The Wedding
It is amazing that he spends a full hour setting up
characters and setting, without much going on. It reminds me of Dazed and
Confused without the nostalgia, or perhaps the first segment of Fanny and
Alexander. We are watching our main characters and most of our supporting
characters in their everyday life, over a single 24 hour period. The wedding is
central, but it isn't the only event, and it arguably isn't the most important
event. What stuns me about this segment is the detail. Every bit of every frame
is used, and filled with details. This is a film that deserves to be seen on
the big screen or else you couldn't possibly see it all.
Act Two: War
As rambling as the first act was, so this act is direct and
fast paced. The minutes fly as the action keeps us attentive. It is brutal, but
after so many war films we are almost used to that, but what amazes me is the
repetition. The "game" is repeated countless times in this film, but
the intensity is never less. I can understand how one might be addicted to the
game, even perhaps playing the game. The danger, once one is used to the level
of stress, draws one to it's inevitable tragedy. The various reactions to it
feel very true to life. And once we think about it, we realize that war itself
is just a version of the game, whether one is a revolutionary or a defender or
an invader or a defender. It is an act of suicide through which one intends to
harm one's enemy.
Act Three: Home (Spoilers below)
By this time we realize that setting is everything in this
film, and the points are left to the end. You can't step in the same river
twice. Community changes as the goal of community are met. Life's a bitch and
then you die. Tragedy changes everyone, even those who haven't experienced it.
Suffering isn't always for good. And any number of other cliches. Yet watching
it, we see that when people are living it out, these life lessons cannot be
reduced to a cliche. By this time, these are real people and we can't just
dismiss them or their experiences. All the characters are caught in a catch-22,
unable to live and unable not to live.
Certainly some brilliance there, especially in the
cinematography and direction. It's one of the few times I can say that I saw a
movie with Meryl Streep and she wasn't the best thing about the film. It is big
and sweeping and somewhat tragic and, probably unforgettable. A great
achievement. Epic.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
The Madness of Sorcerer (1977)
It is one of my wife's pastimes to play Sims on the computer
while I watch a film on the other side of the room with headphones in. She
knows when a film is really good because I can't keep quiet. I'll moan or talk
to the characters or gasp, and she sits there and smiles. When I watched
Sorcerer, she had a full evening's entertainment, without ever hearing a single
line of dialogue. I was especially noisy that night.
I honestly think that William Friedkin of the 70s is one of
the greatest storytellers of cinema. The French Connection, The Exorcist, and
Sorcerer are three of the best told stories we have. In Sorcerer, we are thrown
immediately into the action in Jerusalem where a bombing occurs. Then in Paris,
where an executive is threatened with jail. Then in New York where heist goes
all wrong. And these disparate stories are not only captivating, but they
introduce us to the world through the film's eyes-- desperate and without hope.
Every time hope emerges, there is another dousing of ice cold water to bring us
back to this reality. This doesn't mean the film is always dark, but we can
understand the motivation behind the characters because desperation leads to
extreme choices.
And the film is extreme. To a degree that a kind of madness
took over even during the making of the film, where William Friedkin, looking
back, regrets putting his actors in an extremely dangerous situation to film
the famous bridge scene. And the insanity comes through. By the end of the
film, I was desperate myself and the ending had me throwing up my hands,
exclaiming. Which amused my wife to no end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

