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.