Are You “Up” for an Adventure?

Of the many themes that could be discussed in the movie “Up”, the pursuit of adventure stands out amongst them all. The film opens with Carl and Ellie meeting as children in the context of wanting to go on a great adventure to the Lost Land in South America. They grow up together, get married, and live a long, full life. Ellie can’t have children (a particularly and surprisingly heart wrenching scene), and Carl makes his living selling balloons. Ellie passes away, and Carl is left at home, alone, and full of regret. He always meant to take Ellie on an adventure to the Lost Land in South America, but “boring life” got in the way.

After her passing, their house became the manifestation of Ellie to Carl. Soon to be sent to a “retirement community”, Carl hatches a plan of escape. Using thousands of balloons of his trade, he floats his house from all who would take him away from all that he had. Of course, the plucky scout Russell is along for the ride, and they have lots of fun together as Carl goes through some great character development, but that could be a topic of another post.

Near the end of the film, Carl shuts himself in his house, now situated in the Lost Land in South America. There’s a need for him to act, but he has finally brought “Ellie” to where he promised he’d take her. Leafing through her adventure journal, he sees the progression of his wife’s life through her eyes, which is her life with him. At the end of the journal, she changes his entire perspective. “Thanks for the adventure,” she tells him. In a few words, she changes his bitterness to joy, as he realizes that he gave the woman he loved exactly what she wanted. His “boring life” was not boring after all. He had been on the greatest adventure he could have been on- living a full life with Ellie.

Emboldened by her words of encouragement, Carl goes off and saves the day. This is only possible because he listens to Ellie, and realizes that he hadn’t missed the adventure of a lifetime. Oftentimes, we think that our life is boring, and that we are missing out on a better, more exciting life. Look around you and see that you are most likely living a great adventure already. Sometimes all it takes is changing our perspective to see that life is not that different from Carl’s, Indiana Jones’, or Frodo and Sam’s adventures.

You just need your Ellie to tell you, “Thanks for the adventure. Now, go have another one!”

You Can Never Keep Up With “The Jone$es”- Spoiler!

A blatant punch in the face to American consumerism, “The Joneses”, starring Demi Moore and David Duchovny, is a smart film that exposes the real cost of materialism. Kate and Steve Jones are the perfect couple and have all the latest gadgets, cars, and fashion items “everyone” wants. Their two high school children also seem to have all the greatest stuff. Everyone in their sphere of influence lusts after the expensive things this family purchases, and lust for these things turns into purchases.

What everyone doesn’t know is that the “Joneses” are really actors paid by a corporation to sell expensive products. The family doesn’t buy any of the things they have- but have to work their way up in the company, selling more and more expensive items. For example, Steve “buys” a fancy sports car that his neighbor and new friend admires. Soon, that neighbor purchases the exact same car. Then, Steve “trades up” and gets an even more expensive car. Frustrated, his friend just can’t keep up, but desperately wants to. He works extra hours, but nothing he can do will ever match what Steve buys next. It’s all based on the lie that the Joneses are an affluent family. Everything is actually given to them with the intent to influence others to buy buy buy. And they do.

Isolation is a strong theme near the end of the film. Since Steve is not really married to Kate, his sense of loneliness is intensified as he has to “pretend” to be in love with someone he’s actually attracted to while they sleep in separate beds. He has to sell whatever the corporation wants him to, and there are things he doesn’t really like but has to pretend that he does. His disingenuous interest in these products begins to weigh him down. Tired of the lies he has to live day after day, Steve starts to change. Meanwhile, in order to pay for everything, others start going into deep, unsustainable debt. Steve clues into this when a pivotal event in the film leads him to change his worldview. He experiences firsthand how greed, lust, and comparison can cause significant destruction and loss in people’s lives. Reformed by the end of the film, he’s a different man.

The film serves as a powerful allegory to all the “Joneses” out there- those early adopters who influence others to consume, often unsustainably. I hope this film inspires us all to look at why we buy what we do. Otherwise, we’ll spend it all on things we actually don’t need or really want. Because no matter how cool an iWhatever is, do you (or I) REALLY need one?

That’s my 2 cents, and you can take that to the bank.

Fighting as a “Gladiator”

Among the battle scenes and epic storyline of redemption in “Gladiator”, there is a deeper tale dealing with personal identity being told under the surface. Most have seen the film helmed by Ridley Scott so I won’t bore you with a synopsis of the entire movie, but there’s much more to the story than grisly battle scenes and political scheming. Maximus learns the true value of who he is and what he’s willing to fight for. Maximus has just been offered to succeed the dying Ceaser. Ceaser’s son Commodus, of course, isn’t going to let this happen. It’s his job to rule, and he will stop at nothing to get it. After the smothering of his father, Commodus has Maximus arrested and taken to be executed. However, Maximus is a resourceful and skilled Roman soldier. He escapes and kills his would-be executioners and races to save his family. Too late, he is taken by slavers to be a gladiator. It’s as a gladiator that Maximus takes a knife and scrapes off the tattoo on his arm that designates him as a soldier and citizen of Rome.

What a crazy response! That would be akin to an American citizen renouncing their citizenship and losing all the benefits thereof. The tattoo removal tells us something important about Maximus. He no longer identifies himself with Rome, an empire he once swore to protect because he loved and believed in what it stood for. He was wronged by the very institution he had previously given his life to, and under Commodus and as a slave he can no longer consider himself a citizen. He doesn’t want to. It’s not that he is rejecting Rome, he’s rejecting the idea that Rome gives him his identity. This is in stark contrast to the cultural norm of the day- blind allegiance to and worship of Ceaser no matter what. Anything other than that was deserving of punishment by law- an effective tactic at ruling the large empire that was Rome. Maximus knows himself well and has the courage and self-determination to fight for what is right, and nothing can take away that away from him. It’s not his Roman citizenship that defines him and determines his life anymore. He is defined by the ideals he holds, which contrast with what Rome under Commodus had become.

This isn’t about political reform, although I see how it could be taken as such. This is about identity, and what informs it. It’s an interesting character study, as Maximus defines himself based on his convictions not his circumstances. His identity shift occurs with the removal of his tattoo, and from that point on he is a different man. He is no longer a soldier, but a gladiator. He’s given up his old life as a soldier and has embraced his new life as a gladiator so that others can benefit.

He knows who he is no matter what others do to him, with or without shackles.

Writing a Great Story with “Ink”

The indy film “Ink” is a fresh take on the battle between good and evil as they fight over our souls in the unseen, spiritual realm in which they interact. The film, which was not wide-released, focuses on the redemption of the relationship between John and his daughter Emma. This battle takes place in an extra-dimension in which our world can be seen but not interacted with physically. Two groups, the Incubi and the Storytellers, within this existential realm are in constant opposition. The Incubi seek to recruit members by infusing fear and hatred through nightmares. The Storytellers seek to recruit by giving people hope through good dreams. When the two sides clash, street-fighting style battles erupt.

Ink, a recent addition to the spiritual world, needs to deliver Emma’s soul to the head Incubi in order to join their forces, in a sort of initiation. He’s intercepted by a gang of Storytellers when he abducts her soul and successfully takes Emma with her as he journeys to the Incubi headquarters. Meanwhile, in the waking world, she lies in a coma. John, estranged from his daughter for reasons revealed in the film, battles with himself over whether to visit her in the hospital. This battle is intensified by the influence of the Incubi and the Storytellers as they both try to sway John’s decisions through the dreams that they give him.

As the spiritual realm affects those in the film through dreams, there’s a cause and effect that happens. Will characters be influenced by the evil, dark, destructive Incubi or the hopeful, valiant, heroic Storytellers? Taken a step further, what can be said about decisions that we make every day? The idea that our decisions are affected by and affect a reality we don’t see is provocative. The stakes are high, as decisions to love or to hate either add to the good guy side or the bad guy side. Will bitterness help evil forces at work in the spiritual realm, or will love and forgiveness add to those who fight to give hope to the hopeless?

There’s not much mention of any kind of leader of each of these groups. There’s a sort of head Incubi, but not much is explored with this character. There’s a brief mention of God from the Storytellers. Perhaps this was done on purpose. Spiritualizing the film too much would have turned many off. However, the absence of any kind of mastermind behind each group begs a lot of questions. Does the film mean to invoke the idea that God and the devil are involved? Who gives the orders? Who strategizes? What are the motives of both sides, other than to recruit members? Why does one side need good to flourish, and the other side need evil?

These questions and more make “Ink” a provocative and psychological mind-bending, accessible film.

Exploring Cultural Differences in “District 9”

Produced by Peter Jackson, District 9 is a dark movie that examines what happens when two cultures collide. The alien species, or prawns as they are called by humans because of their crustacean-looking bodies, have a ship that hovers above Johannesburg, South Africa for 20 years when the film opens. They seem unable to operate their ship, and are stranded on Earth. Living in tenements below, they scavenge what they can. They love raw meat and strangely enough, cat food. MNU, a military contracted private corporation, "keeps the peace" between aliens and humans. This means all kinds of maltreatment and abuse, carried out with military precision. The filmmakers have said that the story is not a political statement, but it's hard to hide the fact that those in power have abused those who are weaker in the film.

The story plays like a reverse colonialism scenario. The aliens, who have traveled from some distant planet, have landed on a spot on Earth and have taken up residence. Instead of taking ownership and invading, like many other alien films, they are destitute and must rely on the help of humans. They seem as though they don't even know how to operate their own technology very well, causing the question to be asked: Did a "higher" intellectual class exist before some mutiny on board their ship?

For the past 20 years, interactions between the aliens and the humans have allowed the two species to be able to understand the other's language, although misunderstandings are frequent. It's easy to sit in an ivory tower and judge the humans for their poor treatment of a helpless group. Ask yourself these questions: What would I do in the same situation? What policies would I enact to ensure the safety of humans while also aiding the aliens? What would I do about communication? Those are not easy to answer.

As you might have guessed, after 20 years, the aliens start to fight back. They are tired of the oppression that is undeserved. They just want to go home. An especially bright alien enacts a plan to reach the mothership in order to leave Earth. The closing scenes are incredibly graphic as humans explode when the alien weaponry is used. It's ultra-realistic, and the CG animation of the aliens, as well as the special effects of explosions, spaceships, and robots is impressive as the plot unfolds. Half the movie is shot like a documentary, the other half like a true sci-fi movie. Most of the cameras used are handheld, lending a very intense, in-your-face experience.

What a great experience it is!

Clint Eastwood Makes Good Movies

The impressive films directed by Clint Eastwood, “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima”, expose the often unheard of parts of the Pacific offensive during World War II. Each film tells the story from the point of view of either the Americans or the Japanese as they fight each other during the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Helmed by Clint Eastwood, the stories are unabashedly honest from both sides. History tells us that Americans are the good guys and the Japanese are the bad guys, but these movies showcase that's not the case. This has been done before, and the concept is not new, but these movies do a really good job of showing the human side of war.

In “Letters to Iwo Jima”, the main protagonist Saigo just wants to get home safely to his family and his journey was harrowing. It was frustrating that the American soldiers and Japanese officers made his efforts next to impossible. The Americans were bent on decimating "the enemy," while the beaten Japanese field officers ordered their men to kill themselves rather than be "dishonored" by being caught.

In “Flags of Our Fathers”, American soldiers violated human rights because it was convenient for them. The traditional view from World War II is that the Americans are good guys, but they committed war crimes just as the “bad guys” did as well. Now, the severity of war crimes was different, but mistreatment is mistreatment. America did not do horrific "medical research" on our enemies, but cruel treatment was common on both sides. This honest look at this issue was well executed by Eastwood.

Although a difficult pair of movies to watch, they show the need for the humane treatment of people during war. It seemed as if Eastwood flipped stereotypes on their head- the bad guys were the Americans and the good guys were the Japanese. Hats off to him for boldly exploring alternation views to a historically and popularly held conception of how World War II really was!

Being “A Man Apart”- Spoiler!

The fairly predictable “A Man Apart” shows a little grittiness, a tough but sensitive Vin Diesel, and lots of action. The story plays like a textbook script- a cop brings down the leader of a drug cartel, the new leader “El Diablo” sends hit men to take him out, his wife is killed, and our intrepid cop goes on the rampaging revenge path. He breaks a few skulls and rules along the way, and then has a final showdown with the new leader and blows him away. Wait. No he doesn’t!

This is where a Season 1 of “24”ending would feel most natural. Diesel cathartically killing the man who was responsible for the death of his wife would have been the predictable Hollywood ending. Diesel has the means and the “moral right” to exact his revenge. Armed, he finds El Diablo in a Mexican village sipping on a margarita or whatever. You think he’s going to grab his gun, point, and pull the trigger.

Instead, Diesel lets his law enforcing buddies surround El Diablo and arrest him. This is a surprising ending in a world and culture that values revenge. We want to see the bad guy go down, to “get what he deserves.” And yes, criminals deserve justice for sure. But at the hands of a lone avenger, a vigilante? There are laws against such actions. Everyone is lawfully guaranteed a trial. If guilty, any criminal is allowed due process, sentenced, and given punishment in accordance with crimes committed. Usually in Hollywood, the hero dispatches the bad guy, dispatching as well the rights of the due process guaranteed by law.

“Children of Men” Save the World

The premise of “Children of Men” is pretty ingenious. In an apocalyptic future in which no woman can get pregnant, the world is in chaos. The youngest person alive is a celebrity. No cause is found for this bizarre phenomenon. The end draws near. Suddenly, a young woman is found to be pregnant. If people knew about this, there would be riots. So, in secrecy, she is shuttled off to a mysterious island so that scientists can find out why she's pregnant. The movie spans this transport of the pregnant woman to a place of safety. There is a major biblical parallel; a helpless baby born in a dark world and the sacrifice it took to ensure the safety of mother and child by the protagonist. The movie really played up the idea that the birth of a baby was a scientific impossibility.

What the premise says about our world is up for debate. I had a conversation with a man on a train one time about M. Night Shyamalan's "The Happening," a movie we both disliked. However, I was given a new perspective on the movie that may translate to "Children of Men," I suppose. In Night's movie, plants start releasing a neurotoxin that causes people to dramatically commit suicide. The "point" of this is that we are killing ourselves by killing the planet, kind of like global warming but on a much more personal and dramatic level. Is the point of "Children of Men" that we as a human race are so antagonistic to each other that we are rendering the race sterile? Are we killing ourselves out of existence? Genocide, civil war, fighting over resources, religious fanaticism- are all these the possible cause of human extinction?

It’s an interesting allegory used at times in films for such purposes. If death is what we do, than death is what we’ll get. It’s sort of the reversal of Chaos Theory as explained in Jurassic Park. Instead of “life finding a way,” we find that “death finds a way.” We’ve been entrusted to take care of an earth. We have a moral responsibility to treat life as sacred. How are we doing on those fronts? The writer of “Children of Men” may have something quite provocative to say about that.

Let’s Go “Good Will Hunting”

Einstein once said that, “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” Will Hunting (Matt Damon), an Einsteinian genius, is nevertheless a fish who is trying to climb a tree in “Good Will Hunting”. Although he knows his mind makes him a mathematical powerhouse, he is the epitome of a self-sabotager. Those around him, especially the MIT professors who envy his ability to solve mathematical theorems with ease, wonder why Will wants to throw it all away to live in a seedy south Boston neighborhood and work as a laborer.

Will is smart, and not just with numbers. His incredible wit is matched by his sarcastic attitude about everything. Instead of dealing with any personal issue he’s confronted with, he’ll throw out all kinds of facts and cynical philosophy to avoid the personal introspection needed to answer the question. His brutal honesty about how he’s feeling and thinking is extreme, and the walls he’s built up are high and thick. The average psychologist is not a good fit for him, and he knows and exploits this to their utter exasperation. It takes an equally strong personality to counter Will’s verbal attacks, and Sean Maguire (Robin Williams) is just that man. Matching expletive with expletive, the two verbally duke it out like the street brawlers they grew up as.

Will’s defensiveness is hiding his wounds, and he doesn’t even know it. It takes Sean’s style of in-his-face therapy to eventually get Will to begin to tear down his walls, to admit his pain. It’s only then that Will sees the bigger picture, and that he was stuck in an endless, self-destructive cycle that kept him from the fulfilling life that he wanted. He finally realized that he was a fish meant to swim in the water, not scale a tree.

Scary Bunny in “Donnie Darko”- Spoiler!

The cult classic “Donnie Darko” is smart, inventive, and provocative. Made on a shoestring budget, it stars Jake Gyllenhaal, as well as his sister Maggie who incidentally (or perhaps not) plays his sister in the film. If you’ve seen the film, you either love it or hate it. It’s a dark film, does not have a “happy ending”, and is rather strange. The director’s cut tries to explain things a bit better, but many think the movie is much better in its original version, as the ambiguity lends itself to the enjoyment of the film. It’s probably best to watch it twice before making a judgment, as the plot is rather complex.

Donnie is, more or less, a fairly normal kid struggling with borderline schizophrenia. His visions of a tall devilish bunny giving him apocalyptic warnings may be in his head, or may be real. This bunny did save him from a falling jet engine of mysterious origins as it crash lands in his bedroom. As the plot unfolds, the countdown to the end of the world gets closer and closer and the stakes get higher and higher. The destructive pranks that the devilish bunny tells him to complete only add to the mystery of what’s going on. Is this Donnie’s mental illness, or will the world really end on Halloween if he doesn’t break into his high school and flood it?

Donnie completes each task as he tries to live out his day to day life. Not knowing what’s going to happen, he hopes that his actions will help stop the world from ending. He’s probably motivated by the fact that he just got a girlfriend, Gretchen, and he doesn’t want to die a virgin. In any case, at the end of the film, he does all that is asked of him. As he completes his last task, time rewinds and Donnie finds himself in his room, moments before the fateful crash that the bunny had saved him from.

Donnie sacrifices himself, and the entire month of experiences that he had. Gretchen never met him. The world is safe, but at Donnie’s expense. When I saw the film for the first time, I wanted Donnie to run out of the room. I wanted him to live, to re-meet Gretchen and live his life. No such luck. It’s sad, but his death was necessary for the survival of the world. I just wish it could have been saved another way.

Who is “The Machinist”?

Trevor Reznik has a problem. He hasn’t slept in a year. So begins 2004’s “The Machinist”, a hallucinatory trip down crazyville. For his role as Reznik, Christian Bale lost 63 pound, and it shows! One might think that some CG or camera trick was employed to make him look so emaciated, but his gaunt cheeks and bony body were the real deal. Bale reportedly ate a can of tuna and an apple a day to lose the weight that he did. Behind the scenes film trivia aside, the film is a powerful depiction of a man searching for answers. It’s much more about why he can’t sleep, and we’re taken on a psychological roller coaster as Reznik pieces together his own story. Mysterious clues along the way help both he and the viewer to figure out what’s going on, and by the end he’s faced with a choice that determines not only his fate, but the fate of others.

The pieces of the puzzle are nebulous. There’s the disturbing coworker who drives a red Mustang, both of which may or may not exist. There’s a picture of two men fishing. There’s Reznik’s relationship with a Spanish waitress, as well as her son. There’s a game of hangman that keep showing up on the door of his fridge, changing as he plays the game. Throughout the film, there are times when Reznik is faced with a decision- go left down a dark pathway or go right toward the light. He consistently chooses the left. There’s an eerie carnival ride that mirrors his life a little too closely. All of these are clues to the answer of Reznik’s problem.

Reznik’s search for answers ultimately results in revealing a secret he had been hiding, even from himself. His long term insomnia has caused some serious memory loss, and our protagonist’s answer lies in remembering a forgotten event. Like Reznik, we too can have amnesia, although it’s usually self-induced. I’m sure part of the reason we busy ourselves with social networking, workaholism, or hobbies is so that we won’t think about our problems. For example, when I was going through a rough time in my life I asked my boss for a personal day off. He suggested that I immerse myself in my work instead, saying that it helped him feel better if he distracted himself when he was struggling with a personal issue. It’s this attitude and practice that causes us not to examine ourselves when life gets rough. What would it look like for us if we spent 5 minutes alone with ourselves? I’m sure all sorts of things would bubble to the surface, as it does in the finale of “The Machinist”. What does Reznik do when faced with the truth? You’ll have to watch to find out.

When Redemption Costs a “Blood Diamond”

“Blood Diamond” was billed as an adventurous thrill ride about a pricey “blood diamond”. The film has Leonardo DiCaprio (He’s been in every good movie for a long time.) and Djimon Hounsou (He's a slave in the movie Gladiator.), both outstanding actors. Many went to see a good action movie. Many came from the film with a better understanding of sacrificial love.

The intense violence portrayed in South Africa was barbaric, where people's hands were chopped off and child soldiers were conscripted to kill innocent villagers with fully automatic weapons. The horrible atrocities portrayed in the movie aren't just dramatizations; parts of Africa are very much like what is shown in the film. Something has to be done about human rights violations in those countries, but that's a different conversation.

In the movie, Solomon Vandy (played by Hounsou) is on a desperate mission to save his son Dia, who has been abducted and forced to serve as a child soldier in a guerrilla army. Dia has been brainwashed to follow his superiors and kill whoever and whenever at their command. This has been accomplished by telling Dia and his co-child soldiers that their parents hate them and that the army is there for them, to provide for them and make them men. Dia has completely rejected Solomon as a father, and has fully taken on the false identity given him by his commander. This does not deter Solomon, however, even when Dia points a gun at his own father. Solomon deeply loves his son, and will stop at nothing, even death, to let his son know this. Solomon’s speech to his son is deeply moving:

Solomom Vandy: "Dia, What are you doing? Dia! Look at me, look at me. What are you doing? You are Dia Vandy, of the proud Mende tribe. You are a good boy who loves soccer and school. Your mother loves you so much. She waits by the fire making plantains, and red palm oil stew with your sister N'Yanda and the new baby. The cows wait for you. And Babu, the wild dog who minds no one but you. I know they made you do bad things, but you are not a bad boy. I am your father who loves you. And you will come home with me and be my son again."

Solomon gives Dia his true identity back, and gives him assurance that he is part of the family and has a safe home where he belongs. Dia has a specific and special place in his family, and it’s a tragic loss if he isn’t a part of it. Dia has always been, and always will be Solomon’s son. Nothing changes that.

This is redemption at its core: We’ve done terrible things not based on our identity but based on lies, and we have a chance to leave those lies for the truth of love, acceptance, and forgiveness. However, to do so takes incredible sacrifice; a sacrifice that proves that we are loved and cherished despite the fact that we have shown hate to our Father.

A Fun “Night at the Museum”

An all star cast. A Jumanji-like world. A monkey slapping Ben Stiller. Sounds like a recipe for a huge flop. The enjoyable “Night at the Museum”, however, was not! How could a film be bad when Dick Van Dyke is in it? He was great to watch. Robin Williams also did a great performance (Relax! I'm wax!), but this really isn't about a love for outrageous characters in a family film.

Ben Stiller plays a dreamer who hasn't worked a real job most of his life. In order to spend time with his son, his ex-wife gives him an ultimatum to get a job. Grudgingly, Stiller signs up to be a security guard for the night shift at the Museum of Natural . . . whatever. A boring job, right? That's what he thinks, until the T-Rex skeleton wants to play fetch!

Some of us have pretty lofty goals, much like Stiller in the beginning of the movie. However, Stiller took a "lame" job, and that's where he found his purpose and adventure. This may be reaching here (and life doesn't always end up this way), but perhaps we miss life because our perspective is off. Maybe the adventure will come in the mundane, in the "lame" job we refuse to do because we want something "better."

Maybe it’s time to admit we’re wrong, get a “boring” job, and see how exciting life really can be!

Wanting Free in “Amistad”

Any epic that deals with slavery is bound to be heart wrenching, and “Amistad” is no exception. The film boasts a pretty impressive all star cast (including Djimon Housou in his first starring role), and is expertly directed by Steven Spielberg. The movie had some pretty incredible scenes, including an amazing presentation of the Gospel in picture format. Never underestimate the power of pictures to tell a story! Christianity was also used as the reason in defense of the Africans on trial, which is surprising since blockbusters tend to stay away from religious material that is unpopular in mainstream America.

Since the Africans did not know English, they had no idea what was being said about them. There was a translator, but his efforts to communicate between the Americans and the native Africans were hampered by cultural misunderstandings. However, the Africans did hear an English word enough times to understand its meaning: freedom. In a particularly moving courtroom scene, the Africans start chanting, “We want free! We want free! We want free!” Their passion for freedom at the hand of their captors was palatable.

In the film, it was apparent that the majority of whites at that time did not view Africans as equally human, and treated them savagely, having a violent disregard for their lives. The conditions on the slave ships were beyond appalling, and the movie most likely didn't truly depict what it was really like. It’s hard to imagine how someone could have the capability of being so evil as to drown women and children the way they did on slave ships. More appalling is that slavery and inhumane treatment still occurs today. Forced prostitution, child soldiers, and slavery are still modern blights in the world. Although slavery is currently illegal, and in mainstream society unacceptable, human trafficking still occurs. Why do people think that they can enslave others, whose unalienable right is freedom?

Amistad dealt with the issue of American slavery very well, and it was obvious that the point of the film was to shed light on part of America’s dubious past.

A “Wild” Movie

The classic children’s book, "Where the Wild Things Are" by Maurice Sendak, seems to be a visual story that lends itself well to film. A purist would want the film to be true to the book, word for word. Yes, pages of the book seemed to have jumped out on the screen, but the content was expanded in a way that was accessible to adults. In fact, it’s doubtful that kids today would understand what the movie is all about. This is not a criticism of the movie at all. Wild Things is an incredibly well made film that says much about the wild mind of a child grappling with real world issues. It dealt with so many issues in a way that is easy to identify with.

The plot is basically the same. Max gets in trouble. In the book, he gets sent to his room. In the movie, he runs away. The transition from real life to the island of the Wild Things is extremely well executed as he floats in a boat across a stormy sea. When Max finds the monsters, he walks right in the middle of a fight they are all having. It makes no sense. The creatures look great, and seem to be pulled straight from the book. However, they act like childish adults. This has been criticized by others, but it works. It's as if Max is having a fight with himself in his head, with people from his life having some kind of input, albeit filtered by Max's own imagination. Max feels abandoned, lonely, hurt, and angry. These emotions are displayed with childish abandon by the Wild Things, and it's fun to watch their interactions. Things don't make sense and are childish in nature, just as it would be if we were looking inside the thoughts of an 8 year old boy. It was brilliantly well written. The movie ends with Max going back home and eating his dinner, which is still warm. The tie-in at the end with the book was a good touch, and it seemed as if Max had grown because of the adventures he's had. What was done especially well was that the closing scene was wordless, which was fitting because this film can leave one speechless.

Scratch That Film Off “The Bucket List!”

Rob Reiner is known for his relationship-based films, such as The Princess Bride, Sleepless in Seattle, and The Bucket List. He has this amazing talent for writing different points of views from both genders that make one think. One good example of this is Reiner’s film “When Harry Met Sally”. If you've seen it, then you know that Harry is opposed to intimacy, while Sally loves it. The dichotomy in their developing friendship throughout the movie and their talks about relationships is very insightful. Anyway, “The Bucket List” is a film about two terminally ill men who travel the world, completing their "bucket list" while talking about life.

Jack Nicholson plays Edward, the very wealthy owner of the hospital he becomes a terminally ill patient in. Morgan Freeman plays Carter, a terminally ill mechanic, who lands in Edward's hospital room. They don't like each other at first. Each has contrary personalities. Edward is a snobby brat, and Carter is a down to earth family man. What's great about the opening of the movie is that the first third of the film takes place in the hospital room where the two men get to know each other. The movie didn't just jump right into the "bucket list" portion of their journey. It slowly got there, while the audience got to know the characters individually and then as their friendship developed. What a great script!

As you may guess, they bust out of the hospital and travel the world on Edward's dime (or many many many dimes!) to skydive, race Mustangs; you name it! They talk about life, faith, and their past. Wounds are brought up, relationships are repaired, and there is much soul searching. The script is a bit contrived sometimes, but it's the heart to heart talks these two men have that are the real meat of the film.

There’s a key scene near the end of the film that explores Edward's journey with faith. Edward had no faith of his own. He believed in money, in the natural order of the world. Carter knew there was something more, that there were things going on that cannot be seen. Beyond that, what Carter believed wasn't clear. The writers probably were being careful not to be too preachy, but that was a major downside. It was never apparent exactly what Carter put his faith in- whether it was a higher power, God, or Buddha. The discussion was good, but lacked that specificity in what gave Carter the will to not become bitter, angry, depressed, etc. In any case, the discussion was good in pointing out the differing world views of the two friends as they faced death. Their worldviews were key in how they lived their lives- Edward as the high spender who trusted in his money, and Carter as the hard worker who “had faith.”

Coming this Nov. 9- "Lincoln"!

Here at Reeldemption, we're excited for "Lincoln"! This film will prove to be the quintessential type of film we review here on the blog. Check out the trailer and get pumped!

 

Get the word out!

We're really excited about the films that will be reviewed in the next 12 months! We hope you'll enjoy reading and discussing redemption themes in film on this blog. Keep up with our weekly posts by liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter, and subscribing to the RSS feed. We've made it easy to do so. At the top of the page are options for keeping connected to Reeldemption. So like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, +1 us on Google, and subscribe to our RSS feed!

Holy Trilogy, "Batman"!

Christopher Nolan’s eipic Batman trilogy resurrected the embarrassing franchise filmed in the 90’s (the ones not directed by Tim Burton). Nolan’s Batman is relatable, and the world he inhabits believable. This realistic approach is what made the films the masterpieces that they are. There is so much that could be discussed about the three films. The overarching theme, however, is the question of whether Gotham city is redeemable. Bruce Wayne/Batman is steadfast in his belief that redemption is possible. The League of Shadows is bent on Gotham’s destruction.

This dualism is explored in many ways. In “Batman Begins”, the League uses the mob and Dr. Jonathan Crane to release a psychotropic neurotoxin in the city. This sets up the Joker’s rise in the “Dark Knight”. Although not part of the League’s plan, the Joker’s goal was to show everyone how “crazy the city had become,” that he and Batman were just “ahead of the curve.” The mob that the League had empowered soon empowered the Joker to wreak havoc in Gotham. Near the end of the film, the mob is done and it’s the Joker’s town now. There’s no telling what the third film would have been like if the untimely death of Heath Ledger hadn’t happened. I like to think that it would have been a continuation of the “Dark Knight,” an epic showdown between the Joker and Batman. That character was amazing! Instead, in the “Dark Knight Rises,” Bruce is a disgraced wreck, both physically and emotionally 8 years later. The loss of Rachel, his unjust status as a criminal, and the physical tolls from fighting have almost crushed him. Bane enters the scene, and his goal is to finish the job- to crush Bruce completely.

Batman is attacked mercilessly, falling again and again in all three films. One comfort that he clings to is something his father said to him when he was a child.

“And why do we fall, Bruce? So we can learn to pick ourselves up.”

And learn to pick himself up he does. His belief that Gotham is worth saving, that there’s hope, and that he stands in the way of total destruction motivates him to keep fighting.

He overcomes challenges differently in each film. In the first film, he has to face his fears. He has to become his fears so that he will be feared. In the second film, his identity is questioned. Is he really crazy, dressing up to fight crime? The Joker’s assertion that they both belong at Arkham is a provocative accusation. However, while the Joker’s goals are to create chaos to bring “order” to society, Batman’s goals are to bring order to society by fighting chaos. The Joker really is the antithesis of Batman in every way, and it’s interesting to see what this means as they duke it out through the film. The Joker is no physical match for Batman, and he knows it. He doesn’t even fight back when hit. He seems to welcome it, in fact. No, the Joker fights with his mind, with his intellect. And he almost wins. Contrast that to Bane in the “Dark Knight Rises.” He’s a physical match for Batman in every way- in fact he’s more than able to beat him in a fistfight. Now it’s Batman’s turn to fight with his intellect instead of his fists. In order to face Bane after being exiled in prison, Bruce must be afraid to succeed. His attempts to climb out and jump for the ledge are thwarted by the fact that he’s attached to a rope in case he falls. Fear of falling to his death without a rope is what he needs to succeed.

What motivates Bruce to fight in each film? It’s that he sees the potential Gotham has to be a society that works. The philanthropic ideals passed to him from his father help shape him into the hero Gotham needs, but doesn’t deserve. Sacrificing his life is worth it to him, as he knows he’s just a part of a bigger picture. What do you think? Is humanity redeemable? And what will bring about that redemption? Nolan’s Batman trilogy does a great job exploring this question, and does so with intelligence and style.

Reeldemption launch!

Check out Reeldemption, and anticipate our first film review this Monday! Spread the word!

Movies have the ability to say a lot about life, love, and why. This blog is devoted to the exploration of themes of redemption, personal development, and the way movies make us think.

September 3, 2012

It was a Monday like any other. But something was different. There had been rumors of something coming, but no one could have guessed what it would be when September 3, 2012 finally came. Don't miss the excitement. Don't miss Reeldemption. Find out what happens on 9/3/12.