August viewing list

8-2-05		Together
8-4-05		Medea
8-5-05		Power and Terror: Noam Chomsky in Our Times
8-6-05		The Aristocrats
8-6-05		Happy Endings
8-10-05		The Weather Underground
8-11-05		Hustle and Flow
8-12-05		Play Misty for Me
8-13-05		The Mayor of Sunset Strip
8-13-05		Open City
8-13-05		High Plains Drifter
8-14-05		The Apartment
8-15-05		Closely Watched Trains
8-16-05		White
8-17-05		Saint Ralph
8-18-05		Down by Law
8-19-05		Junebug
8-20-05		Broken Flowers
8-21-05		Bird
8-22-05		The Basket
8-23-05		Two Family House
8-24-05		2046
8-25-05		The Incredibles
8-26-05		Metallica: Some Kind of Monster
8-27-05		Stone Reader
8-29-05		We Don't Live Here Anymore
8-30-05		Two Brothers
8-31-05		White Hunter, Black Heart
8-31-05		Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress

Junebug

What is home? What is family? In Junebug, screenwriter Angus MacLachlan and director Phil Morrison, look at these questions from their North Carolinian roots.

Madeleine, a Chicago art dealer specializing in outsider art (art done by untrained artists, often from visions they have) has recently met and married George, who comes from North Carolina. When she makes a trip to North Carolina to persuade an artist to let her show and sell his work, the couple also makes it a trip to visit George's parents and family.

For Madeleine this is a very different experience from her life. She is somewhat rootless. She was born of British parents in Japan and moved around the world as her father served in the foreign service. Now she lives in Chicago, where her real family is the art world in which she works.

Entering into the world of George's family is a bit of a shock for her. George seems to be very much of her world, but his family is a typical, working class, Middle American home. They are religious (Southern Baptist to be precise), and George is well known in church for his voice. Madeleine had no idea that George had anything to do with church. Madeleine really has no idea of who George really is. Madeleine quickly finds herself as the outsider.

In the art world, the "outsider" is someone to be fascinated with -- someone out of the ordinary that draws attention because he or she isn't part of the more orthodox art community. That may manifest itself in wonder or condescension. In North Carolina, Madeleine is not at all orthodox by this community's standards.

The filmmakers do a wonderful job of presenting the family without being condescending. This isn't about a city girl meeting country hicks. This is far more an exploration of a world that many people know, but that isn't very well represented in films. Films are often referred to as a "slice of life," but that slice is often not a center cut. We far more often see the edges of life.

MacLachlan and Morrison give us a taste of typical life. All the characters are believable: the taciturn father, the mother who is in charge of the home, the younger brother who is resentful of all the praise the elder brother gets, the bubbly sister-in-law. It is a family with its share of relational problems, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Even when they show us those of the community who are out of the ordinary, we perceive them as real. The film begins with a hollerer sharing a particularly local form of vocal art. The outsider art that Madeleine is seeking is done by a very odd man, but even then it is not done in such a way as to degrade him.

That Madeleine finds herself such an outsider reflects a bit of the class divide in society and reflected in films. More people live like George's family than life like George and Madeleine. But films show us many more people like George and Madeleine. That becomes a model that we think we should be aiming for. Like George's brother, we may feel left out when we have a typical everyday job and life.

Like many families, this one has its problems, but when crisis comes, they all know their roles and how they fit together. All, that is, except Madeleine. Her rootlessness has made it hard to know how to respond to a family crisis. She is still too busy with her own life to be fully involved with the family.

The end of the film is somewhat problematic. After the crisis, George has found his place in the family once more. It's possible to move on and perhaps even for Madeleine to find her own place in the family. But too soon, the couple leaves to go back to Chicago. On the road, George says, "I'm glad to be out of there."

What seemed like a family affirming film suddenly becomes a negation of the theme that has been developed.... The bonds that we saw in action return too quickly to alienation. It is as if the filmmakers, who have treated this life with respect and perhaps even love as they portrayed these people, want us to know that even though it's their roots, they don't really want to be part of it.

That's too bad, because the people they have shown us are well worth meeting.

Saint Ralph

--Overview

“Do you have to be a saint to perform a miracle?” Ralph asks this of Father Hibbert in his religion class. Ralph has a vested interest in the answer, because his mother is in a coma and the doctors have said it will take a miracle for her to wake up.

It turns out you don’t need to be a saint. It requires faith, purity and prayer. So fourteen year old Ralph sets out to win the Boston Marathon, which would take a miracle, so that the miracle will awaken his mother.

The problem is that Ralph isn’t too sure he can do it (but his faith grows as he trains), he has trouble praying, and he’s fourteen years old with raging hormones, so purity is pretty much out of the question.

Set at a Catholic school in Hamilton, Ontario, in 1953-54, the plot has a few serious holes. For example, miracles aren’t transferable. If Ralph wins the Marathon, that doesn’t mean he can use that miracle to help his mother. With all the priests in his school, you’d think someone would teach him this lesson.

But in spite of the problems with the story, it is still an enjoyable coming of age story that lets us think about the meaning we find in our lives.

As Ralph commits himself to winning the Boston Marathon, he is caught between two priests: Father Fitzgerald, the headmaster, and Father Hibbert, a younger teacher who is coaching Ralph. For the most part these two characters fit our preconceptions about older and younger educators. The older Fitzgerald is authoritarian. Ralph is on the verge of being expelled from school (for a number of reasons) and often finds himself in Fr. Fitzgerald’s office. Fr. Fitzgerald believes that the best thing they can do for the boys is to teach them their place in the world. In this, Fitzgerald represents the idea that fate rules our lives. Happiness is to be found in accepting our lot.

Fr. Hibbert is more of an iconoclast, reading Nietzsche to his class. Hibbert, we discover, is somewhat faithless. He has adopted more of a nihilist perspective, that God really doesn’t matter and life has no meaning other than what we do. If we are to find happiness, it will be by doing those things we value. Fr. Hibbert may also be a bit frustrated with the life of the priesthood. What is missing for him is not a love life (the typical film convention for frustrated priests), but running. Before he became a priest, he was the top Canadian marathon runner. Just before the 1936 Olympics, he hurt his knee and wasn’t able to compete. On the day he entered the order, he was told, “Basilians don’t run,” so he never ran again.

These two priests, and the poles they represent, are another kind of coma. They are technically alive, but they are asleep to the world around them because they are each so tied to their own philosophy. Fr. Fitzgerald tries to prevent Ralph from running the marathon. Fr. Hibbert helps him train, but forbids any talk of miracles.

As Ralph undertakes his quest for a miracle, he has an effect, not only on these two priests, but others who are stuck in their own waking comas: his best friend Chester who is afraid to risk anything, and Ralph’s potential girl friend Claire who is hiding her own desires under a desire to become a nun. Everyone who knows Ralph is affected by his pursuit of a miracle.

I won’t give away how Ralph does in the race or if his mother wakes up. But I will say that you don’t have to be a saint to perform miracles. They sometimes happen even with little faith, in the midst of struggles with purity, and when we hardly know how to pray.

At the end of the film, when Ralph has set his sights on the next Olympics, Fr. Hibbert asks, “If we’re not chasing after miracles, what’s the point?”

Indeed.

--Overview

Hustle and Flow

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film

I traveled to a distant land. People spoke a strange language (although it was somewhat familiar). There were strange customs, and the way the people there treated women was unspeakable by my standards. The name of this strange place? Memphis, Tennessee, as portrayed in Hustle and Flow.

Okay, so Memphis isn’t all that strange. But this film immersed me in a culture that was thoroughly foreign to me. I have no idea of the difference (if there is one) between rap and crunk music. I don’t know a lot of the slang used. I have no idea what the life of a pimp is like. But that was the world that I was drawn into through this film. And I was happy to have made the journey.

The story centers on DJay, a pimp and drug dealer whose life is going nowhere. It may seem hard to conceive of being able to identify with such a character, but the film (and Terrence Howard’s performance) makes him so emotionally approachable that we easily do so. That is not to say that DJay is an exemplary character. He is a misogynist who mistreats his women. He uses people. He is foul-mouthed and self-centered. We are attracted to DJay, not because of these things, but in spite of them, because we see that underneath all that there is a kernel of ourselves.

When DJay discovers Skinny Black, a now famous rapper who grew up in Memphis the same time as he did, will be coming back to town, DJay plans to make his own rap demo and pass it to Skinny. If he can get a chance to record his rap, he’ll have a way out of the life he is in. Maybe he can become famous and rich.

What he is really seeking is to have a voice – that is, to be someone. That search for a voice is where all that seems foreign to me is transformed into a universal story. We all want to have a voice. We may not care if we are rich or famous, as long as there is some evidence that we have a place in the world – that we are not invisible – that we are heard.

Being white, male, educated and in a profession, I am in a position of privilege in our society. As a pastor, I even have an outlet for my voice each week. But even with all that, there are times I yearn for a voice. I yearn for my pain to be heard over the ambient noise of so much other pain. I yearn for my views to be heard as loudly as the views of those in high places. If I, from my position of privilege, want to have a voice, how much more for those in society who have traditionally been silenced.

That yearning for a voice is what we see first in DJay, and then in those around him as he begins his quest to be heard. The technicians who help him make the recordings are searching for their own voices. The women in his house find their lives open up as they are allowed to have a voice (in singing or promoting).

In time, DJay gets a vision that the fame that Skinny has achieved may not be as fulfilling as DJay had thought, but still he pushes on, not for the fame anymore, but because of his dream to become more than he is.

It should be noted that there is a lot of mistreatment of women in this film. They are treated as unimportant. They are expected to support the man (financially as well as emotionally) without complaint. Their voices have been even more silenced than DJay’s. It is hard to decide how to view this misogyny. Should it be seen merely as a reflection of the subculture? Should the film have addressed it more forcefully? We see, by the end of the film, some progress made by the women, but still, they only find their voice in service to DJay’s.

The film doesn’t quite make it to the point of a completion of DJay’s dream or a redemption of his life, but it brings us to a point where we see those things as possible. The end of the film really gives us the idea that there is a new story ready to begin. That story may or may not lead to a better life, but it represents a hope that the weight of DJay’s life so far may not be a burden that can not be escaped.

This may seem like a distant land to many people, but it really isn’t. This may seem like a Black film, but really, it is a universal story. I fear many will see the actors and hear a bit of the music and think this film isn’t for them. Hustle and Flow is certainly worth a journey to a culture that may seem foreign to find the truth that this film gives voice to.

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film

Happy Endings

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film

Everyone has secrets. Everyone tells at least a few lies (or omits the truth, at any rate). Sometimes it just seems like the right thing to do. These secrets and lies may even keep others or us from pain.

Happy Endings is an amalgam of somewhat interrelated stories that all revolve around secrets and lies. Like many independent films in the last few years, the ensemble story telling gives us a chance to see the story in a broader context than films with simpler plots. If not done well, it can be confusing and distracting. On the other hand, when done well, it can show us the ways in which what one person does often has effects on a wide range of people. Happy Endings ends up somewhere in the middle of these two poles. It doesn’t quite make it to uniting the stories into a whole. Because of that, it seems a bit unconnected when all the loose ends don’t quite get tied up.

The moral of the film, put simply, is that honesty is the best way to find happiness. Each of the characters has secrets they have hidden for some time. Otis is gay, but doesn’t want his father to know. Mamie gave up a child many years ago and never told her step-brother Charlie who fathered the child that she didn’t have an abortion. Charlie thinks that a lesbian couple stole Charlie’s partner’s, Gil, sperm to have a child. Gil doesn’t want Charlie to know he’s had an affair with someone else. And the list goes on.

As the film progresses, many of these secrets come to light. It is in the unfolding of the secrets that people find their liberation – and a bit of salvation.

Throughout the film, we are shown a statement of the truth in half of the screen. In a sense, we know the truth, even as we are being told the lie. In some ways, that commentary by the film makers seems a bit distracting, but as I look back, it serves as a guide as we watch to know what is and is not real.

The key metaphor about truth and falsehood is the documentary being made. Nicky is blackmailing Mamie with information about the son she gave up long ago. He doesn’t really want money; he wants to make a documentary about their reunion. Instead, Mamie and her lover Javier, a massage therapist, convince him to make a film about Javier as a sex worker. (“Happy ending” refers to the extra “service” that might come with a message.) This documentary is staged. It is truly fiction. So too are the lives of the various people in the film. They think they are living authentically, but in reality they are really just staging their lives.

In the end, most of the people find a happy ending – not the euphemism for the massage, but years of satisfying life. Those who find this satisfaction are the ones who have faced their secrets and let them go. Those who continue to hang on to their lies are doomed to less gratifying futures.

Although the film doesn’t hang together as well as it might, it still serves to give us a look at the importance of the truth in our lives and the destructive nature of that which we try to hide.

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film

The Aristocrats

—Overview
—Photos

One of the jokes my wife is fond of is one we first heard on A Prairie Home Companion:

Two penguins are on an ice flow together. One looks to the other and says, “You look like you’re wearing a tuxedo.” To which the other penguin replies, “How do you know I’m not?”

My wife finds humor in such simple juxtaposition of reality and absurdity. I just think the joke is lame.

Different people find different things funny. Why? Some people laugh at things that other people are downright offended by. That brings us to The Aristocrats.

The title of the film comes from the punch line of what is said to be the world’s most obscene joke. Actually, the joke itself is just as lame as my wife’s penguin joke. It has been around probably one day less than there have been comedians and talent agents. It’s not the type of thing that comedians include in their routines, but it is one they all seem to know and enjoy talking about.

This film is a documentary about this terrible joke. It features a number of comics who tell the joke, recall first hearing the joke, and laugh at the joke. Actually, the film is a marvel of editing as the various comics are interspersed with each other in their telling of the joke.

But the film is more than just several tellings of this one joke. It also gives us a chance to parse the humor of the joke. We get to examine why people laugh at such things and why this lame joke keeps being retold generation by generation. It also allows us to consider the way our tolerance for obscenity shifts over time.

The reason comedians are so taken by this joke is that the joke is so basic that it requires each teller to adapt it to their own style. It also allows them to see just how far they are willing to push the envelope in their humor. They have to be inventive to find new ways of presenting the scatological, sexual, violent, and politically incorrect, elements of the joke. In many ways it may be like an essay question for entrance into the comedian’s union. In some ways it may also be a bit of a Rorschach test that reveals something of the inner struggles of the teller.

Penn Jillette (of the comedy/magic team of Penn and Teller) says the joke is a prime example of how comedy is “about the singer, not the song.” That is, it is in the telling of this joke that the humor is to be found. (As I said, the joke itself is pretty lame.) Watching and listening to these comedians riffing on this joke does have its moments. Even though you know where the joke is headed, you just keep listening – even as it offends you. And it is designed to offend. If it isn’t offensive, it just isn’t being told right.

Because of the nature of the joke, this film is filled with vulgarity, obscenity and all around offensive language. I say that as one for whom language really isn’t an issue. It almost gets to the point that all of the vulgarity just rushes over you without you noticing anymore. (Note that I said “almost.”)

Society’s reaction to that is one of the things this film is about. One of the reasons the joke keeps being retold is that what may have been truly disgusting in years past doesn’t carry the same emotional baggage anymore. What was crude and rude a few decades ago seems somewhat innocuous by current standards. As our standards evolve, this joke evolves as well pushing the limits of acceptability even farther. In fact, the film even points out that as we think about families that would be as dysfunctional as the family in the joke, we may think this is terrible. But then we turn on The Osbournes, where we can watch a real family wallow in its dysfunction.

George Carlin points out that he likes to be able to take his listeners a bit over the line with his comedy, and then hope that a few of them will be glad he took them there. As we hear his joke being told and retold, it keeps taking us past the line. Some of the time we may be glad we went, but not always. The onslaught of all that is meant to offend us does grow old as we watch the film. There is humor to be found, and even some social commentary worth thinking about. But it should be obvious that this film will not be to everyone’s liking.

—Overview
—Photos

Viewing Journal for July 2005

7-01-05 - War of the Worlds
7-01-05 - Behind the Sun
7-02-05 - Me, You, and Everyone We Know (favorite for the month)
7-02-05 - A Midnight Clear
7-03-05 - March of the Penguins
7-04-05 - ABCD
7-08-05 - Lost Boys of Sudan
7-09-05 - The Beautiful Country
7-09-05 - Stepford Wives (Frank Oz)
7-12-05 - Taste of Cherries
7-13-05 - Amistad
7-15-05 - A Room for Romeo Brass
7-16-05 - Murderball
7-16-05 - Au Hasard Balthasar
7-18-05 - Aimee Semple McPherson
7-29-05 - 7 Up & 7 Plus Seven
7-30-05 - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
7-30-05 - Chocolat (1988)

Here is the list of films I've seen this year.