| BULLETIN
BOARD (rules)
Post your comments Email Your Comments
CHOCOLAT:
MAKING TO MUCH OF IT
Subject:
Choclat
Date: 04 Jan 2005
From: Vickie Skelton
I think that everyone is trying to make too much of Chocolat. The
same thing was done with Star Wars. People try to attach Christian
symbolism or while others tried to show how it was anti-Christian
and had a new age message to it when George Lucas simply stated
that all he was doing was making a western that takes place in outer
space. Let's not try to over symbolize the movie and let's keep
it to its very basic simplest message which was in the priet's final
lesson on Easter Sunday at the end of the movie...
"...Do I want to speak of the miracle of our Lord's divine
transformation. Not really, No. I don't want to talk about His divinity;
I'd rather talk about his humanity. I mean, you know, how he lived
his life on earth. His kindness, his tolerance. Listen, here is
what I think. I think we can't go around measuring our goodness
by what we don't do, by what we deny ourselves, what we resist and
who we exclude. I think we've got to measure goodness by what we
embrace, what we create and who we include."
The message I feel is nothing more than that. The message is no
different than basically what Christ came to preach. Self-righteousness
leads to destruction and is not the way to live our lives. Live
a life that follows the moral principles laid out in scripture but
also do not neglect the weightier provisions of scripture . . .
mercy, grace, faith & faithfulness, love, humility, service,
forgiveness, understanding, compassion, justice, truth, kindness,
joy, peace, patience, goodness, gentleness, and self-control. Why?
Because there is no law against such provisions. You follow those
provisions you end up covering all the bases. That is basically
what is written in Matthew 22:35 - 40.
"35 One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him,
36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"
37 And He said to him, " `YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD
WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.'
38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The
second is like it, `YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' 40
"On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."
In other words, if you just followed those two commandments you
will end up following all the others. You don't need any other commandments
or rules.
The mayor became a self-righteousness, self-appointed watcher of
the morals of the town and created all sorts of rules for everyone
to follow so that His town would be tranquil. And Vianne and her
daughter showed more of the weightier provisions of scripture and
bringing a touch of life and hope to some of the people's lives.
Everyone else, including the priest were caught in the middle.
But when the priest was allowed to speak his own mind and from his
own understanding of scriptures, he got the message out as best
as he could...
"Listen here is what I think, I think we can't go around measuring
our goodness by what we don't do, by what we deny ourselves, what
we resist and who we exclude. I think we've got to measure goodness
by what we embrace, what we create and who we include."
That in a nutshell is the message of the movie. How do we know this?
By three things...
It is the message given near the end of the movie and the director,
Lasse Hallström, makes sure we notice it by making it one of
the main scenes in the movie.
The movie followed right down that path of The Measuring of Our
Goodness by...
What We Don't Do: The mayor setting up rules forbidding certain
things.
What We Deny Ourselves: Lent and the simple pleasures of life.
What We Resist: Trying to follow through with Lent by resisting
chocolate and other ideas concerning living life.
Who We Exclude: The Excluding of Vianne and her daughter into the
community and later the "River Rats".
What We Embrace: Life and allowing people to live theirs the way
they desire.
What We Create: Vianne's chocolate creations and the creation of
a town that is living versus the Mayor's creation of a town that
was lifeless.
Who We Include: The including of Vianne and the River Rat people
in the end by some of the town's people. But also Vianne including
the Mayor near the end of the movie into her life. The including
of other people's way of living life as long as it didn't harm others.
Finally, the last thing that tells us this is the message of the
movie is Lasse Hallström's basic philosophy of telling a story..."Find
the most simple way to tell the story with the most honest expression!"
That is what he did. He told the story, gave the message, with the
most honest expression of it through the movie Chocolat.
To make any more of it than that, whether it be about Pentecost,
the Holy Spirit, and so-forth is to go beyond the simple message
of the movie as given by the priest and honestly expressed throughout
the movie. Just as in the bible, the simpliest message is usually
the correct message. When we try to make more of it than what is
really there; that is when we usually miss the message, the truth,
that is being given to us.
Anyway,
I saw the movie for the first time yesterday now (Monday, 1/3/05)
and I enjoyed it. I wouldn't say I loved it, but I enjoyed it and
probably will add it to my library of feel good movies to watch
on a rainy day. Of course, next time with a bag of dark chocolate
covered almonds and maybe a cup of hot chocolate.
I
hope 2005 is a wonderful year for you all.
PROPAGANDA
Subject:
re: Chocolat
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001
From: RGSMKatya@aol.com To: david_E-mail
Could be viewed as pure propaganda. Technically, this was not such a great film---good, but not great. Why all the Academy Award nominations? The Academy Awards are close to being a farce, they are so "political" (sort of like the Miss America Pageant). If your eyes are open, it's amazing what you see. It's also amazing how easily people are hypnotized.
Response: Hypnotized to what? What are you talking about?
IN RESPOSE TO SERIOS
Subject: Chocolat
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001
From: Big daddy rix
I am a college group leader at a church in Phoenix. My wife and I went to see Chocolat and liked it so much we took our whole college group to see it with us. We had a great discussion about the movie and what the symbolism might mean.
Later, my wife and I came across this website and went over these reviews of the movie. We were especially intrigued by your response - So much so that we read it to our college group. Every one of us were really interested in your perspective on not only the movie, but on Christianity as well. We consider ourselves rational, free-thinking, and intelligent people, and we were wondering if we could invite you into a rational,
free-thinking, intelligent, and thought provoking dialog with us via e-mail. You may feel free to discuss any aspect of Christianity, Religion or philosophy that you wish to discuss, in a safe yet thought provoking way. If you would be at all interested in such a dialog, please respond and we'll figure something out. This could be a lot of fun for all of us!
Response: Sure, I would love too. -David
HMMMM...
Subject: Chocolat
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001
From: jm
Good movie, cute, whimsical, are just some of the words I can use to describe "Chocolat". I dont think the religous conotations where meant to be offensive nor sublime. I agree with a little bit of almost everyones comments on this board though . (as odd as that may sound)
I found no flaw in the Priest or the Church, but in the Comte's human ego to control. Mostly driven out of his self pity from his wife abandoning him.
Religously speaking at its most basic level, the movie was about Doctrine vs Grace, Legal vs Human. Almost a parallel between the perception of Jewish vs Christian doctrine even. Or even Tradition vs Non-traditional.
But I think the movie makers used the rigidity of religion as the backdrop for the carefree magical women that whisps in on the north wind. Using two distinct extremes certainly enhances a story ( its a yin-yang thing )
Regardless still a very nice story.
I was curious though about the Mayan myth referred to by Vianne (The travelers/wanderers that followed the northwind supplying remedies and cures along their travel? (especially the element of the chocolate mixed with Chile as magical) Can anyone tell me if this is an actual myth/legend or purely a ficticous element of this movie. if anyone knows please let me know.
RAW WORDS
Subject: Chocolat
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001
From: "Seirios"
Raw Words, hoping to invoke a sweet... "taste".
Chocolat is a simple as well as labirynthical kind of film. It is "warm", smart and a little daring. Unfortunatelly no-one noticed the Vianne -Roux pair, as a unity. Everybody coments on how warm and lovely was Vianne, Roux being a mist of freedom around the main character. But is it really so? Or is the main character a two-person affair? I explain: Vianne looks to me as a ... creature of good heart, of denial towards
social rigitness and so on... Now Roux is a free bird, hoping from branch to branch, town to town, just as Vianne, yet is able to live in-between ! He doesn't really need towns and villages, he may need food and go there, and maybe not. He doesn't need the towners - villagers, nor is he on any mission. He doesn't have the running-from syndrome that Vianne has, he doesn't go to places and leaves, he just "goes places". He needs a warm heart as a mate, just as she needs a strong mind as
a guide. And it works vise-versa in other ways as well! The point is that they are both the main characters. Now what do they do? Do they oppose social rigitness and stifness of mind and heart? Yes. Do they confront an opressing church and reveal Christ's true meaning? ... No. If it were so, (although Vianne seeks a "path-home") Roux would be a good Christian. And though he yells "Jesus" in the fire scene he is farr from being a Christian. Why? Because he lives free, his mind is free,
not balancing as Vianne, he has his own way, and doesn't need a "chosen-one" to "show him the way". He is reasonable, the mind, and Vianne "warm", the heart. This may be offensive to Christians, but (here comes the raw part) thing are this way. Although there isn't a single historical fact on which to base the existense of Christ we have a world-spread religgion. How odd... What did he say that others hadn't say, or done before him, written in history books, or preserved in folklore
myths? Pretty much nothing. So how come Christianity is so widelly-spread, as well as its' root Hebrewism, and its' offspring, Islam? Cause, as with all religions, it serves the "system". Like the twin-power in the film, the Count and the Church, State and... Relligion.
The third part is cleverly offerred, in the remarks of monetary nature "people talk"... Pay and you are good, give away and you are foolish, unless if it is for the "good cause" of the Church... Get my drift? Anyway, the main characters don't need books (however wonderfull) in order to "feel" and understand what's going on, especially Roux (the subtle power). They know that it is not just the little chocolat - against
fasting affair. It is the issue of Man's (and Woman's) right to free choice! The choice of eating and drinking whatever they please, the choice of going wherever they wish-to, the right to make love (not sex) with people they love when they so please, the freedom to scream, laugh and dance, and most of all feel and think as nature, or God if you please, has made them to be like.
Christianity is the enemy in the film, not just the Church, and don't pretend it is not so... The "Holy Bible", the "Holy Books" in general, be them Old or New Testament and so on, don't stand a minute's time when analyzed by a free and rational mind, as well as they don't "feel right" to a natural heart and body. Saying "no" to the needs of the body is a bad sign... saying "no" to love (not sex) is also bad, saying
"no" to free thought, by imposing dogmatic rules, based on "God told me so" is... a joke. The good will of the followers of relligions is one degree of "neck-bending" towards power-lust priests and lords (who make sure that the "sheep" are afraid and hungry). The weak will of followers is another. They surrender their freedom, their minds, their lives. I don't think that the... "free" characters in the film had a tendency to bow to "Lords" other than themselves, accepting the price for
being responsible for their lives. They feel fear, as a natural thing, caused by natural causes, they fight back, as Vianne and Roux and so on. They don't live a life of fear, a life in fear of some unkown god waitting for them to make mistakes ( as well as in fear of god's -or state lord's- good minnions who try to prove worthy and are his axe upon unbelievers, un-fitting...). And that is the God of the Old Testament, what about the New one?
Funny isn't it; Christ, the "son"(???!!!) of God, a God himslef (how, in Paradise, why?) is the kind human-god who brings the message of love to the world and when he "returns" to "Heaven" he's again the old angry God we all fear (not moi)?... How rational... Just as rational as the story that Christ just the day before he was capturred he was asking God (are they one,two, three?) to save him, even on the very cross...
On the other hand we have Socrates, knowing he is to die, being given a way to flee, a chance to live, yet accepting the responsability of his action, and he's a mere mortal! (the tale of the Christ is propably a tale, the other is recorded history...) Hmmm... The free mind rebels in the face of dogmas, especially "wisdom" coming from "messengers of God"... Roux is a free man, and Vianne a free woman, with their weaknesses, but they don't think of them as sins! They don't need "in-betweens"
to feel the majesty of the Cosmos, and act in accordance to it's laws. They are not opressed by need, money, guilt, desire, at least not to the degree, or even the way of the villagers. They are not pagans, nor need any label. They are just Vianne and Roux. They think and they love. And that is the meaning of this film for me, how sweet a message!...
P.S. Jane from Illinois, clever remark, 13... (who was Judas, or who was... whatever?)
P.S. 2 I hope I haven't offended the right of people to be servants to a master...
TICKED EARS
Subject: Tickled Ears
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001
From: Nick Alexander The "Catholic Weird Al"
Due to miscommunication on a non-stop flight, I was only able to catch the final forty-five minutes of "Chocolat" the in-flight movie. I was familiar enough with the story from the reviews I had read, that I was able to jump in the middle. Granted, I missed was the set-up: the initial characterizations of Binochet's character, Dench's, Molina's, and Moss's characters. I missed an apparently offensive scene where
a Eucharist is jump-cutted to a chocolate wafer. I'll give the benefit of the doubt.
For what I did catch: I respected the scene where the Mayor (Molina) confronts Peter Stomare's character... at least that wasn't a complete whitewash of a stereotype. And the scenes of the fire were certainly effectively used to cause sympathy to the heroine.
Maybe it's just me... but the climactic scene where the Mayor was praying--asks God what to do--feels inclined to take a letter opener and destroy all of the chocolate in the store... ESPECIALLY since this was the night before Easter, which was TECHNICALLY Holy Saturday Vigil, which in the Catholic religion, already WAS Easter, making the chocolate ALREADY appropriate for consumption (but who would want to eat
it late at night?). And yet, the Mayor, in his misguided piety, destroys the chocolate, finally tastes it, and converts.
How could you not cringe during that scene? Not only was it insulting to Christians, but it even from an unbeliever's perspective, it was poorly acted, poorly scripted, poorly edited, and an embarassment for both Molina and Hallstrom. Did I miss something in the translation? Five minutes afterward, we are given the director's/screenwriter's true motif--directly stated--in the climactic homily by the parish priest.
In the context of the movie, I suppose his words makes sense. But in the context of Easter, it doesn't. It appears that the priest (and thus, the screenwriter/director) have no inclination of the merits of fasting, the merits of self-denial, AND... in the triumph of Easter, the merits of full scale celebration.
Don't they GET it?? To deny little pleasures, like Chocolate, during Lent so that when Easter comes the Chocolate may be consumed?? To store up some of the storehouses so that when the year of Jubilee comes, that a full scale party can take place? To store up one's virginity so that when the marriage covenant is finally bestowed, one can enjoy its fruits with the abandonment in proper perspective?? To deny yourself
ten percent of finances in tithing, so that God may be honored?
I believe this film is not an examination of "grace vs. works" which would make for a wonderful story (e.g. Les Miserables), but an insidious attack on those who deny self, take up their crosses, and follow Christ. So much for the "tolerance" it allegedly preaches!
Nick Alexander The "Catholic Weird Al"
http://www.nickalexander.com
TRUE COMMUNITY
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001
From: Jane from a corn farm in Illinois
I just discovered your web site and checked out the review of my all-time favorite movie, Chocolat! Having read the other posts, I won't rave on and on, but want to simply add one further thought.
In the scene where Vianne and Anouck are about to leave town (after the urn shatters), their attention is caught be the curious sounds coming from her kitchen. That moment when Vianne walks in to the warm, lighted kitchen (having just harshly forced Anouck to depart upstairs because they didn't belong) is one of the best scenes of True Community I have seen on film!! It was incredible to me how Juliette Binoche
could "show" us the way she "realized" at that moment that she did belong -- that that motley assortment of townsfolks, who she had "ministered" to, were there to do FOR HER what she wasn't able to do for herself at that point. I loved watching that "sink in" to her in that scene. It filled my heart with joy and my eyes with tears. And when Jacquline comes up to her and asks Vianne the same question inside-out that Vianne had asked her on the visit to the Cafe -- it was perfect! It was
a marvelous scene and depicts my idea of Christian Community at many levels.
Also: Did anyone notice? At Armande's birthday feast -- weren't there about 13 people present at the table? Interesting.
I grieved that Serge was "lost" in the film. He in fact was banished from his home. Beautiful film. Inspiring story!
Jane from a corn farm in Illinois
BULLETIN BOARD continued |
STUDIO SYNOPSIS:
