Guardians of a Galaxy of One Liners!

"Guardians of the Galaxy", Marvel's irreverent intergalactic hero flick, was one I was initially hesitant to see. However, the previews showed a raccoon character that looked similar to one in a film script I'm writing, so I thought a little research was in order. So, on opening night, I bought a ticket and joined a theater full of high school kids in Ballard to watch Chris Pratt duke it out on the big screen with the help of his rascally team of alien do-gooders.

What a surprise!

The film starts out super serious, a hospital deathbed scene between Peter Quill (Pratt) and his mother, who herself looked like an alien with deathly pale skin and bald head. Traumatized by the ordeal of seeing his mother die, Quill runs out of the hospital only to be abducted by aliens. Enter the super dramatic title sequence, and our story kicks off.

As with any Marvel film, the stakes are high. In this case, a despotic alien who wants to wipe out another alien race is searching for an artifact that Quill obtains at the beginning of the film. Space chases ensue, battles erupt, bad guys are bad guys and good guys are deviously good. Nothing new here.

However, the banter is what makes the movie. Peter, along with Gamora, Drax, Groot, and Rocket trade one liners with each other and others who step into the line of fire of their mouths. John C. Reilly's character even plays along, adding to the banter as only that seasoned comedian can. These one liner's keep coming, and coming, and coming, until it's not your typical hero movie anymore.

And that's a good, refreshing thing!

Maybe it was the opening night excitement and a theater full of kids, but I laughed at almost every joke during the film, and there were a lot! I'd rather not spoil any of them here- they wouldn't be funny anyway taken out of context. Watch the film and see for yourself- the quips never run out!

Finally! We need more films like "Noah"

Panned by the conservative crowd, but fairly lauded by critics, "Noah" is a complex film about faith, theological interpretation, and the human condition. I'm not quite sure where to begin- I was entranced on my initial viewing and saw it a second time in the theater.

In the film, God never speaks audibly to Noah, played by Russell Crowe. Instead, He gives him prophetic dreams about an oncoming flood. As Noah seeks to find meaning to these dreams, he visits his grandfather Methuselah, played wonderfully by Anthony Hopkins. Methuselah helps Noah find the answer he's looking for, and the puzzle is solved. Noah commits himself to saving his family as well as all of God's animals, who are innocent compared with the evilness of humankind. Aided by angels turned into rock behemoths that followed Adam and Eve to Earth after The Fall, Noah and his family build an arc.

Lots of theological complaints have been asserted by many. These are some of them. First, fallen angels are demons, and outside the scope of God's forgiveness. Second, God did speak audibly to Noah in the biblical account. Third, Noah knew that humanity would continue after the flood. Fourth, each of Noah's sons had wives on the arc. Fifth, God flooded Earth because of man's evilness, not their lack of environmental stewardship.

OK, yes, the film is not 100% faithful to the biblical text. Darren Aronofsky took some creative licenses with the story. This allowed him to explore themes that are not a part of the source material. Also, the source material is scant on details. Aronofsky's vision expands on what's missing, even though it undoubtedly does not reflect what had actually happened.

This is not an apologetic treatise defending the film. Instead, I want to bring attention to Aronofsky's vision and what I think he was trying to communicate, without trying to explain what he WASN'T trying to say.

In the film, the leader of Cain's line was a man by the name of Tubal-cain. He and Noah share one thing in common- God had spoken to neither of them. Noah's response was to do his best to respond to what revelation he had received. Tubal-cain's response was to fight against that revelation. In an especially powerful part of the the film, Tubal-cain talks to God, crying out for Him to speak to him, asking Him why he won't. There is no answer, except for the beginning deluge that will ultimately drown the majority of humanity.

It's this cry from Tubal-cain, that I relate to. How many times have I cried out to God, hoping for some sort of answer, but only hearing silence? I'm sure that's a common struggle for many people, and my heart broke for Tubal-cain in that moment- not only for the silence he received, but in how he responded so violently and selfishly. He was a humanist, after all, believing it his divine right to take what he could while he could because "that is what makes a man a man." His conviction was chilling, and hits close to home to many I'm sure.

As far as the watchers, they were angels that knew and loved Adam and Eve. Leaving Heaven to watch over them, they were technically "fallen angels." However, as any theologian will tell you, demons are bent on destroying humans in any way they can. These watchers, although they brutally defended the arc against those who wanted to board, wanted to help the humans succeed, at least in the grand scheme of things. Helping Noah and his family seemed the best way to do that, at least to the watchers. Their scenes were some of my favorite parts of the film, and added an amazing supernatural element that was needed in this kind of film.

At the urging of his wife Naameh (played by the talented Jennifer Connelly), Noah goes to the nearby human settlement to find wives for his sons. Seeing their violence to each other as well as to animals, Noah becomes convinced that humanity is too evil to be saved. Vowing that his family will be the last, he returns to the arc disgusted with the bloodshed and injustice that he's seen. This contrasts with his son Ham, who goes to the settlement and finds a girl his age who he wants to save. It's Noah's choices that lead to her death, and a divide begins to grow between father and son.

Once on the arc, problems multiplied. Tubal-cain has become a stowaway (also not in the biblical account. Tsk, tsk, Aronofsky! ;)), and Shem's wife Ila becomes pregnant after receiving a blessing from Methuselah. Tubal-cain convinces Noah's son Ham that Noah must be killed, and plans his death after he recovers from his wounds. This growing familial powder keg builds as the days pass, while Noah becomes more and more convinced that humanity must end.

A major theme in the film is the idea that the characters do their best in absence of clear direction from God. Would you have reacted differently than Noah if you weren't explicitly told what to do? Would you doubt the goodness of humanity when you saw humans brutalizing each other to fulfill their selfishness? Russell Crowe does a fantastic job of struggling with himself as Noah, the patriarch of his family. His inner battle rages as he must make decisions that affect his family, creation, and the will of God.

It's true, the film is messy at times. It's not the flannel graph story of Noah and the arc from Sunday School. But it's an honest film that deserves discussion of the themes it presents- faith, the human condition, and how we respond to revelation.

His name is "Mud"

I often think of Matthew McConaughey as a doofy, fun loving pretty boy. Historically, he hasn't been known for serious roles. Of course, after "Dallas Buyers Club", that all changed. Before that film, however, his serious side came out in the indie film "Mud".

Playing a seemingly not-quite-safe drifter, he befriends two local mischievous kids in a small Arkansas town. The boys Ellis and "Neckbone", after taking a joyride on one of their father's boat to a nearby island, find a boat lodged high up in a tree. After exploring the boat, they find that someone has been living in it. Enter Mud, the hopelessly lovesick drifter who is in search of Juniper, the love of his life. Of course, with any love story, there's a soap opera drama backstory.

Mud has a relentless love for Juniper, despite her ambivalent feelings toward him. He believes that if he works hard enough, he can win her heart, even though she has rejected him in the past. His passionate love blocks out the past and current reality, and creates for himself an ideal future with him and Juniper together. As the person of his love, Juniper isn't exactly ideal. Sure, she's attractive, but her poor decisions have put her in harms way before, and her flight from Mud, who vows to take care of her, has caused her much pain and anguish.

There's no grand scheme or huge message in the film. It's a fairly simple love story between two small town people, which the film does a good job of portraying. Reese Witherspoon, who plays Juniper, does an amazing job playing a woman who is broken but wants some element of excitement and danger in her man. This adds some great tension between herself and Mud. The coming of age sub-plot that Ellis goes through adds very well to the story arc of the film, as his pursuit of an older girl slightly mirrors the rejection that Mud goes through with Juniper.

Sometimes in love, our name also is Mud.

"Maleficent" is Magnificant!

Disney's new take on "Sleeping Beauty", "Maleficent", is a fresh look at a formulaic tale. Taking many of the themes from the cartoon of yesteryear, it seemed to jump out in live action straight from the source material. Angelina Jolie did well as the title character, as well as the three actors that played the three god-fairies (if a little annoying, at least true to their bumbling nature in the cartoon).

However, instead of taking a good vs. evil approach. the story was turned on it's head. The evil sorceress was not, in fact, inherently bad. She had a back story, and the real villain was King Stephan. Or so at first. Enraged by his betrayal, Maleficent curses his child, a scene straight from the original. Although a Disney film, the script does a good job of balancing her motivation for revenge with the injustice done to her. Although we the audience know she has gone too far, we understand where she's coming from and root for her to make the right choice. I won't tell you how it ends, but it's definitely a classic Disney ending. A small criticism, though, is that I could have done without the narration throughout the film, giving unhelpful commentary.

This new direction from a company that has become known for formulaic film making is a welcome change to the industry. Hopefully other films will follow suit, and we'll have good family films that delve into the human experience, rather than dichotomizing characters into their typical stereotypes. Perhaps a bit of Pixar magic has rubbed off on Disney, as their films tend to be more subtle in their depiction of good and evil (or at least providing better backstories to why the villains are so bad). Also, I was really impressed with the special effects- they were extremely well done, and added to the story rather than driving the story. Use of CG should always do this, and I'm glad that emphasis was on emotions, motivations, and unfolding of the plot rather than some "Avatar" like world where the scenery was more exciting than what the main characters were doing on screen.

It’s a Hard Knock Life for these “Freedom Writers”

Any film about the struggles of inner-city high school students belongs in a redemption-themed blog. The problems these kids face are mind blowing. Death, abuse, abandonment- it’s the world they live in. As someone who doesn’t relate to that world, “Freedom Writers” helped to close the gap for me. Based on a true story about newbie teacher Erin Gruwell, the film opens with her idealistic expectations of “helping kids succeed.” Her first few weeks on the job, however, show her that her job won’t be easy. Just as she’s about to give up, a racist drawing by one of her students gives her an idea. Teaching them about the Holocaust, the students start to understand the implications of their lifestyles. Her next step is to have them journal as an ungraded assignment. Erin starts to learn what life is like for these kids.

There are many examples of redemption in this film. Erin’s devotion to helping her students succeed is perhaps the biggest example. She gets two part time jobs to help pay for field trips. Her marriage suffers. She’s opposed at work. However, nothing stops her quest to fight for her students.

This is all very heartwarming when coming from a Hollywood film. If the film is really based on a true story, then Erin’s commitment to her job of helping her students succeed is nothing short of unbelievable. She sacrifices her personal life, loses her marriage, and risks her career for inner-city kids who hate her. The costs are high, but so are the stakes. It’s not like Erin wanted to lose her free time, husband, and acceptance by her teacher peers- she had a mission and she was true to what she knew she wanted to do. Her biggest loss, her husband, was heartbreaking to watch. Losing one’s spouse because of ambitions is a bitter pill to swallow, and the film did a good job of portraying it as the unfortunate loss that it was. Still, Erin continues on.

Not many would go so far.

There’s Only Two Kinds: “The Quick and the Dead”

The highly stylized “The Quick and the Dead”, directed by Sam Raimi, is not your typical Western. All the ingredients are there, but there’s a feeling that the film is just a little left off center. It’s this slightly quirky feeling that Raimi loves to play with in the film. The quick draws are fast, the bullets leave holes that sunlight squints through (yes, even through a poor slow gunman’s body), and the main character is mysterious. There are two main plots: one involving the mysterious appearance of the vengeful “Lady”, and the other involving the antagonistic relationship between the town’s evil leader Herod (played by the entertaining Gene Hackman) and his former gun Cort (played by a talented young Russell Crowe), who is now a reformed preacher.

The avenger “Lady” story arc is fairly predictable and understandable. It’s the Herod vs. Cort story that is the most interesting. As gunmen duel it out and the field is weeded of the slow shooters, Cort’s story is slowly revealed. Despite the challenges that Herod forces on him, Cort survives- and not by luck. It seems that Cort really has an exceptionally quick draw, a worthy match for Herod’s ability with the gun as well. Cort is a master of his former trade. He doesn’t have a gun, as he’s given up the life of an outlaw. No matter, Herod provides him one. The rusty, cockeyed piece of junk he’s given is a sure sign that Cort is done for. He refuses to use it. However, when the time comes and the clock strikes “high noon,” instinct takes over and he uses the inferior gun to win each duel.

The entire time, Herod throws all kinds of verbal abuse at Cort, attacking his character and gunmanship. Cort looks beat down, but after all is said and done he lives to fight another day. It’s really remarkable how he knows how to handle guns so well it doesn’t matter what he’s got in his hands- they are used to perfection. I won’t give away the end of the movie, but Cort is surprised when he finds redemption, a redemption he didn’t think he deserved or would get.

Riddick Sees the Light in “Pitch Black”- Spoiler!

It’s ironic that the beginning of “Pitch Black” starts with a spaceship marooned on a planet with 3 suns. Stuck in a place with a seemingly endless day, the survivors must figure out how to escape, and deal with hardened murderer Riddick. This might have made an interesting film all in itself, but when the suns do set, creatures emerge who are more bloodthirsty than our anti-hero who can see in the dark, and the dynamic changes. Suddenly, a man who has survived the harshest of conditions is pitted against the harshest of predators.

Riddick, motivated by the promise of freedom, does what he can to help the survivors escape the planet. Of course, he’s not without his agenda of getting rid of the bounty hunter Johns that had captured him and who was transporting him to “the slam.” After Johns is taken care of, Riddick heroically brings the few remaining survivors and fuel cells to the ship that was left by previous settlers. The ending scene of the film transforms Riddick’s life forever.

The pilot Fry has just gone back out into the dark to rescue Riddick after he has been fighting for his life. Bloodied, Riddick can hardly stand. Fry supports him and starts taking him back to the ship. She tells him that, “I said I’d die for them, not you.” Moments later she’s taken by one of the creatures. She dies to save Riddick, a man seemingly unworthy of such a sacrifice to everyone who’s ever met him as well as himself. His cries of, “Not for me!” are met by the pitch black of the cold, wet night. He understands the cost that was paid for his life, and it’s a cost he never asked for or expected. She didn’t have to go back for him. She could have left him there to die.

When they are safe in space, the child Jackie asks what they plan to say about him when they are found. Riddick replies with the most truthful answer that he can.

“Tell them Riddick’s dead. He died somewhere on that planet.”