There Will Be Blood

I've been sitting on this post for a while now, I saw There Will Be Blood back in January with Kaz and I've been thinking about it ever since. Blood was so good, so memorable on so many different levels its hard to know where to begin talking about it. But here goes...

Protagonist (the hero)
This brutal bio-pic of fictional oilman Daniel Plainview has no classical protagonist. To be sure Plainview is the driving force of the film and thus he is the protagonist, but there are no heroes in the classical sense, no "good" characters with the exception of H.W. who is visible in much of the film but has a mostly background role. Plainview's most notable nemesis, the pentecostal boy-preacher, Eli, is just as twisted a character as Daniel himself and Daniel's "brother" Henry Plainview/Brands we find is just a posing conman.

Unconventional story arc
While films like Eastern Promises and No Country for Old Men have raised the bar for unconventional story arcs this year, it's certainly true that Blood was unconventional in its own way. We begin with Plainview picking away at the earth deep in a hole in the desert and end with him as a wealthy oil tycoon. But what lies in between didn't feel as much like character development as it did character intensification. Daniel doesn't have any a-ha moment, any crisis that particularly changes his course. He is ambition embodied. He is drivenness in human form. Like many tracks from the score, Daniel's is not so much a tale of "beginning, middle and end," but rather of snowballing intensification. If there is a climax in the story it is Daniel's "conversion" moment but this changes nothing about where Daniel was headed or where he will end up. It is an emotional climax for us the viewer, but it is simply one more step along Daniel's ever intensifying journey of greed and conquest. The film ends, not after the story has been neatly tied up, but after one of the most shocking moments in the story.

Acting
Daniel Day-Lewis gives what has to be one of the best performances I have ever seen. His character will be burned in my memory forever. Paul Dano's (who played the older brother in Little Miss Sunshine) portrayal of the young preacher Eli Sunday was nuanced so well that it always keeps you guessing as to how much he buys into his own message, just terriffic.

Score
Jonny Greenwood's (from Radiohead) score provided the snowballing and ever-intensifying context that the film swam in. In scenes where visually there might not have been much to make you anxious the soundtrack kept thumping that theme home.

Poetic Justice?
During the film we come to really sit uneasy with both Daniel and Eli's characters. Both have moments where they are taken down a notch by the other (final tally Daniel 2, Eli 1). In all three cases I found myself taking some satisfaction in their being brought low by the other while never really rooting for the one doing the humiliating. Daniel does get the last laugh in a haunting scene where Eli is coaxed into making a dramatic pronouncement of unbelief with all the pentecostal flair he could muster to match exactly in the inverse the "getting saved" scene he made Daniel put on before the church.

I feel like I just scratched the surface on what was undoubtably one of the best films of the year. Oh and... "I. DRINK. YOUR. MILKSHAKE! ... I DRINK IT UP!" I couldn't resist.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 6:30 PM 2 comments links to this post

Juno

Fox Searchlight has either done a great job of picking up indie films over the past few years or they've done a great job of intentionally producing "indie-ish" films over the years. Either way, I've really enjoyed the stuff they've been putting out of late. Juno is the tale of an oddball high schooler who gets pregnant and decides to go through with the pregnancy and give her little sea monkey up for adoption (good for her). Juno is one of those special kinds of people who speaks in a never ending stream of witticisms and poetic sarcasm and yet after a few minutes it feels natural... somehow. What I most appreciated about Juno was the dedication to imperfect, weird characters. No one gets a pass. The would-be suburbanite parents Juno wants to give her baby to are much more broken and odd than appearances first let on. The husband, Mark, is a failed musician writing jingles for commercials who still has aspirations to become a rock superstar. His wife, Vanessa, has become a one-woman religion dedicating herself to "becoming a mother." Her devotion to this task borders on creepy at times. Juno and her baby-daddy, Paulie Bleeker (played by Michael Cera) have plenty of their own coming-of age issues to work out in the midst of bringing a baby into the world and seeing if they might dive dating a second chance (or first, depending on who you ask). It's a touching film without feeling contrived or sentimental.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 1:14 PM 4 comments links to this post

No Country for Old Men

While Kara has been working feverishly to finish up her final papers for the semester she's given me leave to take off and watch movies. This serves dual purposes of not having me around to distract her while she's hardest at work and it gives me the chance to go watch some films that aren't exactly on the top of her list. One of these films was No Country for Old Men.

I grew up in the desert of eastern New Mexico and this film flawlessly captures the quiet, echoing wide-open spaces that the eastern New Mexico/west Texas desert is made of. There are long periods of time where dramatic landscape is accompanied by an equally dramatic silence. This is fitting for the desert of the southwest. Quiet. Dry. Hot. Windy. All these pieces of the setting make this the perfect place for an incredible thriller. But the acting in No Country for Old Men is far weighter than that in a thriller film, it's too nuanced and real to be a horror flick. But I found the mundane elements that dominate the film to make the horror all the more scary.

What's more, I was very pleased to see the story follow a trajectory that was authentic to the groundwork it had already laid [read: bleak and mundane] rather than throwing on the breaks at the very end in order to give the standard happy hollywood ending. By the way this is something that made my fellow moviegoers very unhappy... to the point of actually booing the ending of the film. I however, was cringing near the end fearfully waiting for everything to get tied up in a neat bow. Lucky for me, there was no bow, no finish that would wipe out or give a sigh of relief to the events that had just transpired. I got the sense that I had only seen a window of time in the life of a few people from a town in west Texas. There is no real sense of beginning middle and end, but instead a whole lot of middle. I found that to be more true to life than had this story been neatly packaged with a "fitting ending" where justice is served and we can all go home and erase the brutality of Anton because he got his just desserts.

So as it is with so many films, the best ones often do not have "happy" endings or uplifting subject matter, but are brutally honest in how tragic events can end up. Frustratingly tragic and anti-climatic.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 1:13 PM 3 comments links to this post

I Am Legend

Kara and I got to go see Will Smith's new sci-fi dystopian flick, I Am Legend this past week. I had been looking forward to this film since I saw the first trailer so I've been trying to avoid all the trailers since to preserve at least some kind of surprise. I find that these blockbusters have a tendency to get over exposed in their trailers. So after almost a month of shielding my eyes every time the trailer would come on tv we finally were able to see the flick.

[spoilers to follow from here on out]
I was happily surprised at much of the film, for instance the opening sequence where Robert Neville (played by Smith) is deer hunting in downtown Manhattan by chasing his prey down in a Ford Mustang with an assault rifle hanging out the window was eerily reminiscent of one of the first scenes of 28 Days Later where the streets of London are entirely abandoned. At times Legend had the kind of adrenaline inducing scenes of anxiety mixed with terror (the scene when Smith gets trapped by the "dark seekers" is particularly well done), but what I was most surprised about and most appreciative of was Smith's performance. He masterfully portrays a scientist wrecked by tragedy after tragedy who is in turn driven and disciplined to fix what has happened around him. But no amount of testing rats with "the virus" is enough to keep this man from crumbling under the weight of being so alone. Smith portrays Neville as being on the verge of entirely losing it if not for the companionship of his German Shepherd, Sam. Neville's relationship with Sam reminded me of Chuck Noland's relationship with the volleyball Wilson in Cast Away. Sam becomes Neville's best friend, conversation partner, child.

It's not a flawless film by any means but the criticisms I would have would only make for a longer film (which I'm almost always for anyhow). One thing that was puzzling about the film was the shift at the very end when it apparently becomes a tribute biopic of the fictional Robert Neville. It's a great film to check out this holiday season for both the suspense and Smith's performance.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 12:24 PM 4 comments links to this post

Arrested Development

Last week Kara and I watched the final episode of Arrested Development. We'd stretched watching the three seasons of the show over two years. We felt guilty that we were not among the loyal fans of the show when it was on the air. But like so many people we only came to know of Arrested Development after the fact. How lame is that! COME ON!

Buster, we will miss your one-handed mama's boy hilarity.

George, we will miss your fanatical drive to stay out of prison even though it was the only place you really belonged.

Lucille, we will miss your pre-lunch vodka rituals.

Gob, we will miss you accidentally spraying lighter fluid on strangers and then explaining how the magic trick should have worked with enough flare to last any normal human being a lifetime.

Lindsey, we will miss your sad attempts at flirting.

Michael, we will miss your constant need to be a better dad than your own... and how you always find a way to mess it up.

George Michael, we will miss you boyish awkwardness (actually we probably won't because you're in tons of movies these days reprising that part).

Tobias, we will miss all the ways in which you would unknowingly speak in innuendo.

Maybe, we will miss seeing all of your below average B-movies and their theme park offshoots.

Labels: Film, Funny, TV

permalink

posted by Charlie at 12:15 AM 1 comments links to this post

March of the Penguins

A few weeks ago Kara and I finally watched Happy Feet. I didn't really feel like blogging about it. It was alright for an animated film, but was nowhere as memorable as a film like Finding Nemo. Even as a person who supported the "message" in Happy Feet (cultural tolerance, global warming awareness, environmentalism) I felt beat over the head with these themes. There was little to no subtlety in the approach and the result was a story that suffered. That being said, Robin Williams was still great.

Then there's March of the Penguins. Pretty much the exact same film, only it's a live action documentary. Well to be fair, it seems like Happy Feet took March of the Penguins and added pop music and Saturday-morning morality.

Morgan Freeman narrates the yearly journey the penguins make from the shores of Antarctica to 70 miles "inland" (or is it inice?) where they mate, lay eggs, and care for the eggs in the midst of the harshest cold weather on earth. It was mind-blowing. I was amazed the entire time that any of this could be possible, let alone just normal penguin life. The fathers go without food for around 4 months in order to make the journey inland and then care for the eggs. It seemed as though these penguins lived lives of perpetual sacrifice and hardship in order to continue their species. I am amazed at God's creativity in his creation.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:04 AM 1 comments links to this post

The Darjeeling Ltd.

Kara and I caught Wes Anderson's new film The Darjeeling Limited the other night at Princeton's little art-house theater, the Princeton Garden. It is the story of three estranged brothers who meet in India at the request of the oldest brother. They board the Darjeeling train looking for a spiritual journey. Like all of Anderson's films, Darjeeling is funny... but not that kind of funny. It's funny in the way that looking back on life can be funny, a mixture of tears and laughter. The three brothers are very broken people, untrusting, dishonest, depressed, bandaged... people. They can't go a minute into their spiritual journey without being interrupted by each other. As adults they continue to live out brotherly tensions. In the midst of their journey in the heart of India they face some particularly hard times, but do so as brothers and friends. In the end we realize it is particularly good news that brothers from this family stuck together.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:03 AM 1 comments links to this post

The Queen

I finally got around to watching The Queen, which hit it big this past year at the Oscars. The Queen follows the reaction (or lack thereof) of Queen Elizabeth in the wake of Princess Diana's death in Paris. I was still in High School when Diana was killed in that car accident. I didn't really know much about her at the time and have only recently come to realize the roll she played in global activism for things dear to my own heart. All that aside, that's not why I wanted to watch The Queen. Rather, it was all the hype surrounding Hellen Mirren's portrayal of Elizabeth. I was actually surprised at the way in which her performance excelled. Unlike Forrest Whitaker's performance in Last King of Scotland, which was so powerful that you never stopped thinking "wow, this is really incredible acting," Mirren's performance is so subtle that you get drawn into the story and only afterwards realize what a performance it was. In the end I think that's probably the best kind of acting, the kind that makes you forget someone is actually acting (even if it doesn't come off as overwhelmingly powerful).

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:30 PM 0 comments links to this post

Across the Universe

Kara and I just got back from Across the Universe. This is a musical-film not too unlike Moulin Rouge in concept. It is the story of the turbulent 60's (race riots, Vietnam war, drug culture, etc.) told through the songs of the Beatles. In one ad I saw the tag line was "In the lyrics of the world's best known songs lies a story that has never been told... until now." A fitting description. Across the Universe takes incredibly popular even ubiquitous Beatles songs that can seem sentimental to us young folk and puts them back in the uncertain times from where they came. So much more than a music video could, this film embodies the Beatles music, letting the lyrics rise from the people who sang these songs as if they were their own stories.

Labels: Film, Music

permalink

posted by Charlie at 11:16 PM 7 comments links to this post

Iraq for Sale

Iraq for Sale is a documentary about the corporations that have been given contracts to do work formerly done by the military, and how a corporation's first priority to make as much profit as possible is in direct conflict with what is good for the American military and the American taxpayer.

I first heard about this phenomenon (specifically Blackwater's role in Iraq) on NPR sometime last year, so I was very interested when I found this documentary. Blackwater is a corporation that offers specialized military forces. They are not part of the US military, they are a private firm that can be hired to perform military-like duties. The US military out-sources a lot of work to firms like Blackwater, CACI and KBR (a division of Halliburton). These firms do a number of jobs such as providing security to top level officials, washing soldiers laundry and even interrogating prisoners at places like Abu Ghraib.

Some of these corporations are getting attention because information has come out showing that they've been ripping off the government, for example KBR was charging $95 to do a load of laundry for soldiers in Iraq. Stuff like that. These corporations are getting contracts to do things the military used to do itself and then they, like all corporations, proceed to maximize profit. You can imagine that a lot of patriotic folks are unjustifiably upset about how these corporations are putting profit over serving the military and about the cost to the American taxpayer for the incredible waste. My own anger over the issue has less to do with how this affects my taxes. What upsets me is the incredible profit war provides some corporations. This is only exponentially so in an administration so committed to the "free market" that they out-source intelligence gathering and interrogation to a private corporation. Of course this shields most of what happens in such operations from any kind of criminal prosecution. If a soldier harms an Iraqi civilian they can be court martialed. If a Blackwater employee kills an Iraqi civilian they cannot be brought to trial.

This marriage between military-corporations and the US government is a particularly horrible one. When war breaks out these corporations stand to make HUGE profits, and when the government uses these corporations there is an added "safety layer" from investigation and prosecution. These corporations are staffed by surprise... former government and military officials. This marriage only serves to make war an incredibly lucrative business to be in and consequently much more frequent.

Have mercy on us Jesus. Your ways are love and peace, but our ways are greed and violence. You are THE truth, but we are a people of deception and lies.

Labels: Film, Military, Politics

permalink

posted by Charlie at 3:16 PM 0 comments links to this post

Liturgical Film - Advent

This past year I've been thinking a lot about film as a medium to tell the stories of our faith. At the same time the church calendar has been increasingly guiding my own journey through the year and shaping my faith. In this vein I got together with some friends (like Wil and Thomas) last November to create our first "liturgical film" which we intended to be a narrative short film that told an Advent story. Not "the" Advent story, but an "Adventish" story. What we were setting out to do was to take everyday life and (re)narrate life by connecting it to the different stories we tell at each season. Our Advent film was about waiting, hope vs. cynicism, what it looks like to look forward to the return of Christ. It was a learning process in many ways but sparked something that I hope will continue.

So over the next week or so I'm going to be asking you to think liturgically with me about films we've already seen. And appropriately so, we'll begin with Advent. What films have you seen that strike you as having an "Adventish" feel to them. What films tell an Advent story even though they may not intend to? Why? Let's (re)examine some movies in light of the Advent story!

I'll get us started. Among the top "Advent" films on my list would be last year's Children of Men. This is a story about a deeply troubled dystopian future where women no longer are able to bear children. Those on the margins of society, minorities, immigrants, etc. are trampled upon by the oppressive government. The population is in despair and most give in to either depression or cynicism. Suicide is a given (and widely advertised) part of day to day life. These are a people whose future is in limbo. And then a child is born. The very presence of this child brings hope to a people who were previously hopeless. This child means that a future is possible. He is not born to those in power but rather to a poor immigrant, and early on his life is in danger from those who would take him from his parents. The fate of the world hangs entirely in the tiny hands of a baby born to a poor mother.

So, what about you?

Labels: Christian Time, Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:52 PM 0 comments links to this post

the Invasion

Kara and I walked over to our favorite local theatre last night to catch the Invasion. Thanks to Rusty for the heads up on this film several weeks ago. The Invasion was an interesting thriller playing in the schoolyard somewhere between zombie movies and twilight zone episodes about space aliens. This alien invasion/zombie/virus outbreak thriller doesn't wait long to let the cat out of the bag, you know exactly what's going on within the first part of the film but that only serves to unnerve you all the more for the duration of the film. (spoiler alert) The crux of the problem are these microscopic alien spores that attach themselves to your cells, effectively hijacking your DNA and therefore you, without changing anything about your appearance or memory. This process happens during REM sleep after you have come in contact with one of the spores (through a kiss, a handshake, or you know... getting pinned down and having your face puked on!). What becomes one of the creepiest elements of the film is the nonchalant way in which the ever increasing number of aliens calmly "hunt" down people, infect them and then let them loose, knowing that all it will take to bring the prey to "their side" is a little bit of sleep. The infected show no emotion and act like automatons, it feels at times like a massive case of group-think a la 1984, and as we learn later (spoiler alert) that's exactly what's happening. The infected are still human, although mentally in some kind of sleep like state, and the aliens have a very real kind of mental connectedness to one another. As one of them says towards the end describing his own existence,

"I am still Ben, but I am also so much more. I am connected to everyone else. There is no more "other."

What gave depth to this otherwise great zombie/sci-fi thriller flick was the commentary on human nature and it's relationship to theodicy (the problem of evil). As we begin to see in the film, rather than the infection causing worldwide chaos and war to break out it actually leads to worldwide peace. At one point we see George W. Bush and Hugo Chávez shaking hands as they sign a treaty together. However, the cost of this kind of peace and eradication of poverty is something like joining the Borg. The cost of being truly human - the presence of evil in the world. A doctor at the end of the film is asked if the infection was eradicated and he replies with the last lines of the film,

"Just take a look at a newspaper. For better or worse, we're human again."

This understanding of human nature, that evil is essential to our nature, is common in our culture. We often hear the phrase "I'm only human," used to justify terrible wrongs we commit against one another. But what does our understanding of Christ's incarnation tell us about human nature? It seems as though in Christ we can begin to understand that our bent towards evil is less-than human, it is indeed a betrayal of our humanity, and the way in which Jesus lived is what it looks like to be truly human.

So I'll end with some questions for us to discuss. How might that understanding (re)narrate the underlying assumptions of the Invasion? How does this understanding still resist the automaton alternative of a complete loss of individuality as the way towards living in peace?

Labels: Film, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 4:15 PM 4 comments links to this post

Simpsonized!

Kara and I can't wait to see the Simpson's movie!

That's all.

ps-for your own Simpson's avatar check out simpsonsmovie.com

Labels: Film, Life

permalink

posted by Charlie at 8:31 PM 2 comments links to this post

SiCKO

Rusty was out visiting the other day and we caught a matinée of Michael Moore's new film, SiCKO. While it has become popular to criticize Moore for his bias and question the facts in his films I think, as usual, we need to take seriously the argument he makes rather than get hung up on the critiques from conservatives on his editing technique. And just to be precise, Michael Moore did not edit this film, like most films there is an editor who is assigned this task. While some are already questioning a fact here or a fact there, Moore has said repeatedly that everything in the film was based on solid research. That being said, it wouldn't be hard to find other research which contradicts his own. This does not mean he lied, this means you are consulting differing sources. Moving on.

Moore's argument isn't a surprising one. The American health care system is set up to put profit above caring for all. This means that many people just plain get screwed by the system because unlike other public institutions (Fire Dept, Library, Police, etc.) the health insurance companies' number one priority is profit. A corporation seeking profit before the good of all people no doubt cuts corners in order to maximize profit. Rather than understanding paying for someone's medical needs as the goal of business, insurance companies understand this as a "loss" and seek to minimize losses. So that's a small summary of how our system is rigged to benefit the shareholder above the insured client.

The second part of Moore's argument is that all the fear-mongering about how the rest of the western world does medicine is just plain unfounded. So we visit Canada, the UK, France and even Cuba to see what publicly held health care looks like. Conservative politicians have familiar talking points when it comes to public (or socialized) health care. They say that we won't have any good doctors left (assumption: medical professionals are all incredibly greedy people and if the government pays less doctors will quit). They say that wait times will increase (assumption: if everyone has access to health care, then when I have a heart attack I'll be told to come back in two months), but Moore's trips are full of people who are incredibly happy with the speed at which they're seen by a doctor and emergencies are treated as such. They say that the government can't handle the health care system (assumption: only corporations can be trusted to oversee such a large and complicated system), but when corporations are in charge it is profit rather than care which is the primary goal, this is fundamentally mismanagement.

I think this is Moore's best film to date and his argument is a good one. Savage Capitalism is doing to the health care system what Enron did to power in the west. Like the library or the fire department the health care system must be held by the public, not privately held by corporations.

Check out biblical scholar, Ben Witherington's take on the film here.

Labels: Film, Politics

permalink

posted by Charlie at 5:30 PM 0 comments links to this post

Evan Almighty

Kara and I walked down the street to the theater last night to see Evan Almighty the sequel to Bruce Almighty starring Steve Carell. Okay, so being a Christian makes watching "God movies" a complicated experience. On the one hand there is this instinct to hold the film at arm's length and critique every frame that doesn't match up with my own theology. Being a seminary grad makes this all the more appealing. Then there's this other side of me that really wants to see something good, something of real value in a film like this. So I've usually come to movies with the bar set very very low for theological orthodoxy. Doing so means that I've been surprised a time or two by how many things a "God film" got right. Case in point, Bruce Almighty's theme of God's non-coercive love for us.

So before I get into what I thought Evan Almighty did right I'll just lay out a few of my beefs lest anyone think I'm an uneducated heretic. Okay, God in Evan is only vaguely the Trinitarian God of Jesus. God here is pictured as more or less the kind of nice dude we Americans tend to think of... kinda (I'll take issue with this later). God's "mission" for humanity is incredibly easy for Americans to swallow: ARK (Acts of Random Kindness). Loving one's enemies and sacrificing creature comforts to be better stewards of creation are hardly "random" acts of "kindness" but are disciplines lived out in community. But you know what, Stanley Hauerwas didn't write the screenplay for Evan Almighty so I approached it like he didn't.

Whew. Now that I've sufficiently "distanced" myself from the theology of the film and hopefully convinced you that I am not dropping out of Orthodox Christianity and enlisting in Evan-anity let me tell you what I think this film got right. By the way, thanks to Scott for writing a similar post.

1. God loves his creation. Creation meaning ALL of creation, not just us humans. God is concerned with the lack of stewardship of plants and animals at the expense of human consumption.

2. God is funny. God is a God of laughter.

3. God is amused by what we seem to think are really important "plans" we have for this life. God is more concerned with our obedience to his will and joining in the Missio Dei (Mission of God) than with our image, our job, etc. God is content that we makes ourselves foolish by joining his mission. For more on this check out Scot McKnight's post about Missional Jesus.

4. God loves everybody and is about the business of redeeming relationships, corrupt political systems, and even urban sprawl. God acts to redeem.

5. God interprets the scriptures. God actually reads Genesis allegorically rather than scientifically.

6. God does not "zap us with fuzzy feelings" but gives us opportunity to practice love/patience/etc.

7. God is the main actor in the events that transpire but does so through people (like Evan) who forsake themselves to follow God's lead. God works through broken, fallen people.

8. God smiles when fathers put their family before their careers.

Those are just a few of the surprising theological themes in Evan Almighty that I thought were profoundly true. So go check it out. Realize that there are going to be some shallow or cheesy moments that don't live up to our theology and that the Missio Dei can't be summed up by "Acts of Random Kindness." But go with an open mind, this film might just surprise you with how much it does get right.

Labels: Film, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:50 AM 3 comments links to this post

PotC: At Worlds End

As someone recently remarked, it might just be destiny that I was born on May 25th since it is traditionally one of the biggest weekends for movies. Star Wars, Spider-Man and this year Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End have all been released on May 25th. It's a good time to be me. Kara rounded up 15 of my closest friends in KC and some of us even dressed up as Pirates in celebration of my birthday. After some gluttonous California burritos we trekked on over to Kansas City's coolest theatre, the Screenland Grenada (of which I am an alumni). It was a great day and in my estimation a great summer blockbuster of a movie. It's long 2hrs 40minutes... so that made me happy. And it looks as if they've even left it open to do a fourth film if they so choose. Good times. There's even a Keith Richards cameo as Jack's dad. He looks the classic Pirate part a la Dustin Hoffman in Hook.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 4:43 PM 2 comments links to this post

28 Weeks Later

Kara, being the trooper she is, endured her fifth zombie movie at my hands last week.(1) We went to go see 28 Weeks Later, the sequel to what I think is one of the best zombie movies ever made-28 Days Later. In the original film the "rage virus" is contracted by animal rights activists who break into an animal testing facility to "free the monkeys," but end up getting their deadly disease instead. We meet Jim, a young man who wakes up in a hospital all alone only to find out that London is a deserted wasteland. The rest is the story of Jim and a few other survivors in London and their attempt to find rescue and escape the zombies. 28 Days Later broke a few zombie-movie formulas and the result was a true horror movie rather than a campy fun zombie flick. The "infected" in 28 Days Later had a virus that turned them into wild violent creatures not the drowsy stumbling walking dead in most films. These zombies sprint! In the end it was other human beings that may have posed the gravest threat in 28 Days Later, the same can be said for 28 Weeks Later.

In the sequel we return to London, long since quarantined. NATO has taken the lead in the "reconstruction" effort after all human/zombie life on the British Isle had been killed or starved to death. We begin the film sometime around when we left the first one, but now with a different set of people. What follows is one of the best zombie-chase-scenes ever (few, though they may be). Without going into too much detail and ruining the movie for you, I'll say that the "originality" of 28 Days Later doesn't live on in 28 Weeks Later. Not very much new ground is broken in this sequel but it still is among the top zombie flicks I've seen. The social commentary is thick and fans of Romero's critique of materialistic mall culture in Dawn of the Dead will appreciate the questions about military occupation, blindly following orders and the wisdom of giving people filled with fear guns and unilateral power. Much like the first, this installment pits both zombie and humans against our band of protagonists and it is often the humans who seem to be the greater threat.

(1) 1. Evil Dead 2. Evil Dead 2 3. Dead Alive 4. 28 Days Later 5. 28 Weeks Later

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 4:37 PM 2 comments links to this post

Hot Fuzz

After Shaun of the Dead there was no way I was going to miss the next parodyriffic film from Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg. Hot Fuzz lampoons buddy cop movies like Bad Boys II and Point Break, well not movies like those, but those exact movies. Danny, the sidekick, actually references how awesome these two movies in particular are over and over again. It's a hilarious jab at the all too formulaic buddy cop genre, but like Shaun of the Dead, respects the genre enough to actually pull off being a decent buddy cop action flick.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:20 AM 1 comments links to this post

Spider-Man 3

I saw Spider-Man 3 this past weekend with Kara and despite all the nay-sayers I loved it. Well maybe I'd like to watch it again without being surrounded by movie talkers. I am an avid "non-movie-talker" and we were surrounded by moviegoers who did not share my convictions. No matter though, this was a fun summer blockbuster. I grew up reading Spider-Man and this chapter was just another example of those comic book stories coming to life. Sure Venom wasn't the HUGE bulking dude he was in the comics. But then again the films seem to take the story one tiny step back towards realism and Topher Grace was a good choice for the journalist with a victim-complex, Eddie Brock.

Of the many criticisms I've heard of the film a few stand out as odd to me. 1) It was too long. I disagree, I couldn't get enough and wished they would have spent even more time with Venom. Folks, good movies are never long enough. 2) It was cheesy. HELLOOO! It's a comic book movie, directed by Sam Rami (Evil Dead). It's cheesy on purpose! Don't be surprised when Peter Parker's "dark side" is still a bit nerdy. But alas, some people just love to hate. I thought it was funnier and more reflective than the previous two installments. Although I'm enjoying it for what it was, a fun spider-man movie, not a hip metaphor for Christian forgiveness. If you want to watch a film about how revenge will consume you and forgiveness is freedom check out the Count of Monte Cristo. There's no need to turn spider-man 3 into a sermon to get something from it. Sometimes movies are just plain fun!

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 3:35 PM 17 comments links to this post

Mr. Deity and the Book

posted by Charlie at 10:15 AM 2 comments links to this post

300

Having heard some high praise for the recent Frank Miller adaptation, 300, I trekked off to the theatre a few weekends ago to catch it myself. What followed was an interesting mix of emotions for me. I am usually easily able to suspend disbelief and enter into the world of a film, and it is indeed almost always my goal to do so when watching a film. But some films make that really really hard to do. Or maybe to put it more accurately; sometimes John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas make that really hard to do.

300 lacks nothing in stylistic cinematography or art direction. Every single frame lives in a creative land somewhere between Miller's original comic book and modern day Photoshop art. The texture and style of the film exude a larger-than-life mythical quality that enhance the tale of 300 Spartans fighting off Xerxes' vast armies. It is a story that can only be told in paintings and campfire tales, and in that regard 300 does exceedingly well.

Some have called 300 one-part Art Film one-part Action-Adventure war movie. I would agree, and the first part is done masterfully. But it's that nagging issue of content that kept irking me about the second part of 300. While I was continually drawn into this Spartan world by the artistic beauty I was constantly ejected from it as I heard Yoder, Hauerwas and especially Jesus ringing in my ears.

The overtones of what Walter Wink calls "redemptive violence" are nowhere more pronounced than in 300. The Spartan culture while shown as a somewhat barbaric solider society is nonetheless glorified in perhaps every barbaric trait other than their systematic killing of "less than ideal" babies. While this is shown in a horrific light, the rest of their violent ways are glorified as essential parts of a "rational" and "democratic" society. The overtones connecting American culture and military (especially American Marines) to the Spartan warriors are obvious. King Leonidas' wife, Gorgo lectures the politicians about the necessity for violence using today's popular phrase "freedom isn't free." All these themes kept me from truly entering the movie. Instead I held it at arms length, thinking to myself, this is exactly what Jesus subverts in the Roman empire. This society built on violence, the culture that disciples its people in warfare no matter the personal cost to children and wives. The Roman empire Jesus lived under and was crucified by was heavily influenced by the Spartan legends and ethos. This is the same warrior-culture that the Gospel has a harsh judgment for, and while we have tended to privatize our war-making, we Americans buy into many of the same illusions that the Spartans did.

I kept trying to see where Christians would fit into this whole story (had they been around back then). I think that the Jesus people wouldn't be caught dead on the side of Xerxes, the Persian emperor who called himself a God. The followers of Jesus wouldn't march with the Persian army in it's goal to conquer the world. But neither would the Jesus people devote their lives to being discipled as killing machines in the city of Sparta. The Spartan story of redemptive violence would be in direct conflict with the followers of Jesus who practiced redemptive suffering.

Labels: Film, Military, Non-Violence, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 5:15 PM 10 comments links to this post

Black Snake Moan

Purg and I caught Black Snake Moan a few weekends ago. This is the story of Lazarus (a man who's wife has left him for his younger brother), Rae (a young girl who was abused as a child and now is literally an nymphomaniac) and ??? (Rae's boyfriend who is eventually kicked out of boot camp for an anxiety disorder). If you haven't seen the poster or TV spots, then you don't know about one of the most interesting oddities of this film. Lazarus takes it upon himself to redeem Rae from her wicked and sad state, but his methods are not taken from any pastoral care and counseling class. No, Lazarus chains Rae to his radiator to keep her from running off on him and avoiding the "desert" she must travel in order to be transformed.

I really appreciated that Black Snake didn't fall into a number of tired cliches about judgmental clergy or protagonist-redeemers who are misunderstood. Ben Witherington gives us some very good thoughts on the film here.

Just a word of warning, the film is pretty raw and gritty and earns it's R rating. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone in high school or younger.

Labels: Film, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:03 PM 0 comments links to this post

Bridge to Terabithia

Kara and I saw Bridge to Terabitha a few weekends ago, thanks to Mike's recommendation. What a surprisingly wonderful film! If your kids aren't old enough to sit through Pan's Labyrinth, Terabithia may well be a great alternative. I was particularly drawn into the story of a young boy named Jesse who lives in the country and have a love for drawing. Reminds me of someone I know...

Jesse deals with what most kids do, bullies and the like. But this school year Jesse meets an interesting new girl named Leslie who just happens to live next door to him. Leslie is a poet. Together the artist and the poet learn to use their imaginations to build a whole new kingdom in the forest where bullies can be bested in battle. The imaginary kingdom of Terabitha begins to inform the real life world at school that Jesse and Leslie encounter everyday. They are able to draw on their imaginations to change things at school in some really redemptive ways.

One day Leslie invites herself to Church with Jesse's family and during the service she is enthralled by the stories and the stained glass. In the truckride home she says "that whole Jesus thing is very interesting isn't it?" The conversation that ensues between Leslie, Jesse and his younger sister May Belle is priceless. Leslie says these insightful words after May Belle and Jesse proclaim that you have to go to church and believe the bible or you'll burn in hell... "You have to believe it and you hate it. I don't have to believe it and I think its beautiful."

Amen.

Labels: Film, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 8:58 PM 2 comments links to this post

79th Acadamy Awards

So the Oscars are about to begin and I'm going to post who I'm rooting for in each category. Later I'll put in bold those whom I rooted for that actually took home an oscar!

Actor in a Leading Role
Forest Whitaker
The Last King Of Scotland

Actor in a Supporting Role
Djimon Hounsou
Blood Diamond

Actress in a Leading Role
I am lame and have not seen any of the nominated films!

Actress in a Supporting Role
Adriana Barraza
Babel

Animated Feature Film
I've only seen Monster House, which I really liked but can't say I'm rooting for it over the others.

Art Direction
Eugenio Caballero (Art Direction); Pilar Revuelta (Set Decoration)
Pan's Labyrinth

Cinematography
Emmanuel Lubezki
Children Of Men

Costume Design
Again... I'm lame.

Directing
Martin Scorsese
The Departed

Documentary Feature
An Inconvenient Truth

Documentary Short
I'm super lame.

Film Editing
Stephen Mirrione and Douglas Crise
Babel

Foriegn Language Film
Pan's Labyrinth

Makeup
David Martí and Montse Ribé
Pan's Labyrinth

Music (Score)
Javier Navarrete
Pan's Labyrinth

Music (Song)
"I Need to Wake Up" Music and Lyric by Melissa Etheridge
An Inconvieniet Truth

Best Picture
Letters From Iwo Jima

Short Film (Animated)
I'm super-duper lame.

Short Film (Live Action)
Super super super lame.

Sound Editing
Christopher Boyes and George Watters II
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Sound Mixing
Paul Massey, Christopher Boyes and Lee Orloff
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Visual Effects
John Knoll, Hal Hickel, Charles Gibson and Allen Hall
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
John Knoll, Hal Hickel, Charles Gibson and Allen Hall
Children of Men

Writing (Original Screenplay)
Guillermo Arriaga
Babel

So 7 of the 18 I was hoping for hit Oscar gold!

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 7:32 PM 0 comments links to this post

Letters From Iwo Jima

Last weekend I convinced some friends to join me watching Clint Eastwood's latest film, Letters from Iwo Jima. Letters is a companion film to Eastwood's earlier film from this year, Flags of Our Fathers, which I've yet to see. Each film takes a look at the same battle over the Japanese island of Iwo Jima from a different side, Flags from the American perspective and Letters from the Japanese.

Letters may indeed be a compelling war movie, a Japanese tear-jerker in the genre of Saving Private Ryan but I think most would agree that this film has a much more profound message. What Letters does such an excellent job of doing is showing just how much we Americans have in common with the Japanese soldiers on Iwo Jima. Their fears and dreams are the same as ours, their pride is as honorable and as blinding as our own. Letters gives almost no real face time to any Americans in the film with the exception of one kid from Oklahoma who is captured by the Japanese. We completely empathize with the Japanese. We root for them, even against our "own" army. In Letters the Americans are a scary invading force and its the Japanese who's story we've entered into. A few characters in the film are also able to enter into the stories of their enemies and it gives them profound compassion in the midst of blind hatred and violence. The three Japanese soldiers and one American soldier who step out of their own national story which narrates the enemy as nothing more than a savage, subhuman creature to be destroyed are able to see that their enemies are indeed their brothers. It is this connection that paints the entire film and its violence as foolish, ignorant and unnecessary.

Having seen all the other best picture noms (with the exception of The Queen) I don't see any way this film doesn't grab picture of the year... unless Scorsese gets the nod as a recognition of his life's work. But put Departed up against Letters and I think Letters is hands down a better film.

Labels: Film, Military, Non-Violence

permalink

posted by Charlie at 9:57 AM 1 comments links to this post

The Departed

Oddly enough there were large portions of this movie that reminded me of The Last King of Scotland. DiCaprio plays a cop who goes undercover and gets deep into the mafia while Damon plays the opposite, a made man who has infiltrated the Boston police. It is DiCaprio's character, Billy Costigan and his relationship with Frank Costello played by Jack Nicholson that reminded me so much of Last King. Being in a very close relationship with an unstable, diabolical and powerful man but pretending the entire time, hoping not to be found out. The stress is intense. Unlike Last King, The Departed makes no attempt whatsoever at giving you a redemptive resolution. In this world of crooked cops and mafia bosses murder and betrayal is on par for the course and a happy resolution to this film would have seemed out of place, even though we long for it the whole time.

As a side note, Mark Wahlberg has been nominated for an Oscar for best supporting actor... not to take anything away from Wahlberg or his performance, I am afterall becoming a bigger fan of his work every year... but seriously? His role in the Departed is so small, I think he's on screen for 10 minutes max and we don't get much from him other than a smart-ass angry cop, its not really a breakthrough performance or something we haven't seen from him already. Okay... I've just seen way better work from Wahlberg, what about DiCaprio for his portryal of Costigan (or would he be the main actor?)? Anyway that just caught me a bit off guard.

Labels: Film

permalink

posted by Charlie at 8:20 PM 2 comments links to this post

Last King of Scotland

Last night I went to a movie alone, as has become my habit of late, and one that I don't really mind. Going alone often allows for much more reflection and immersion in a film. Needless to say though, I will be glad to go to movies with Kara again! The movie I went to see was The Last King of Scotland in which Forrest Whitaker plays the terrifying and somewhat charming Idi Amin, the brutal president of Uganda during most of the 1970's. While Amin is the gravity of the film, all plots and figures being drawn into his world, we observe him mainly through the life of a young Scottish doctor named Nicholas Garrigan. The young Scotsman is as charming as Amin himself and they quickly become friends.

When Garrigan is drawn into Amin's world however, he looses sight of the real Uganda. It isn't until its almost too late that Garrigan realizes what and who Amin really is. What ensues is a terrifying and claustrophobic tale of Garrigan trying to stay alive by appeasing Amin and simultaneously trying to get the heck out of Uganda. Scary. And more scary than your average horror movie because of the reality of it all. This horror tale doesn't have radio-active desert zombies bent on killing, it's about the insane insecurity of a man with a lot of power.

Labels: Film, Military

permalink

posted by Charlie at 4:26 PM 0 comments links to this post

Pan's Labyrinth

I've been meaning to blog about Pan's Labyrinth for a while now. I first saw it back in January when Kara was in town. I was expecting it to be great, I'd heard so much good stuff about it before going, and I wasn't disappointed. Pan's Labyrinth was everything that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe wasn't... frighteningly dark, sinister, subtler in its allegory and definitely not for kids. Pan's Labyrinth is brutally violent early on in order to convince us of the ruthlessness of the antagonist. Later in the film more scenes could have shown even more violence but mercifully don't.

For those of you who were confused like me, Pan is the name of a Faun. Not this particular faun, but a faun. In Spain where the film was made it was named Faun's Labyrinth. Okay, now that aside... Pan's Labyrinth begins with an "incarnation" of sorts. The king of the underworld's daughter escapes to go live among us land-dwelling people, but as a consequence she dies a mortal's death like us. But the King waits for her soul to return one day in another body. The rest of the story takes place in WWII Spain where fascists are fighting off guerrillas in the forest. Ofelia, a young girl is the stepdaughter of a fascist general (Yet another movie about children living in a broken world). She encounters a faun at the bottom of a spiral staircase in the center of a giant labyrinth behind the fascist stronghold.

[spoiler alert: seriously if you haven't seen it yet, don't read this until after you have]

The faun gives Ofelia several tasks to complete before the moon is full. The first, Rusty pointed out (perhaps soon in blog form), could be an allegory of capitalism. The second is retrieving something from behind a tiny door with a key from her first mission. She retrieves a knife from the door and gets into some trouble on the way back. The last mission requires that she get her newborn baby brother and meet the faun at the labyrinth. When shes does so he tells her that the knife is to draw blood from her brother. Well if the faun wasn't sketchy enough the entire film now it's obvious... he, like almost everyone else in Ofelia's life is rotten. She refuses and just as she does her fascist stepfather stumbles upon her, snatches his son back and promptly kills Ofelia. She lies at the mouth of the staircase in the center of the labyrinth, blood running out of her nose. This is the scene that opened the film. Just as it seems like this movie is going to end one long train wreck of violence and cruelty Ofelia opens her eyes in paradise. Her father, the king of the underworld welcomes her home and the faun tells her that she passed the final test. She chose to shed her own blood rather than that of an innocent.

Obvious Christ-figure metaphor aside, what I find even more fascinating is Ofelia's resurrection and how it completely (re)narrates the tone of the film. What was once macabre is now a celebration. What was once a tragedy is now a comedy (in the Greek sense). Her resurrection bears witness to a deeper reality. Her fascist stepfather has no real power, his violence is in vain a mere illusion of power.

Labels: Film, Theology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 10:00 PM 2 comments links to this post

Chad Vader

posted by Charlie at 8:35 AM 1 comments links to this post

DVDpedia

If you're like me and have a large DVD library from which friends are always borrowing movies and you use a Macintosh, then you might want to check out DVDpedia. I found this little gem a few weeks ago and I absolutely love it. The initial setup was great, it was able to use my iSight camera to scan the bar code on my movies and add them to my library. It will keep track of the movies friends have borrowed and even lets you send them an email reminder to return them. For more info check out their site http://www.bruji.com/dvdpedia or browse my own collection by clicking on the blue DVDs button in the sidebar (DVDpedia will export your library to HTML).

Labels: Apple, Film, Technology

permalink

posted by Charlie at 8:24 AM 2 comments links to this post

The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)

Tonight was the first night of my Film Theory class and after watching some of the earliest films ever made along with 1902's A Trip to the Moon by Georges Méliès we watched The Passion of Joan of Arc filmed in 1928.

Wow.

Seriously. If you agreed with me that Seven Samurari was ahead of it's time just get your hands on a copy of The Passion of Joan of Arc! The story of how we even have the film is interesting in itself. The film was originally censored and much of it was destroyed in a fire, bits of it surviving via the scrap clips that could be found, and then in 1981 the entire film was found in a janitor's closet in an insane asylum in Oslo! The film itself is incredibly striking, like Seven Samurai it feels right at home in 2007. Director Carl Theodor Dreyer used a TON of close ups and in so doing captures up-close and personal some great performances. The use of camera angles is dramatic and serves the story well. Joan is almost always shown from above with soft lighting. Her monastic acusers are shot from below, towering above her. Hard lighting is used on the old monks and every wrinkle, every skin pore sticks out in these extreme close ups. In the midst of the acusatory rants thrown at Joan are cut extreme close-ups on angry, shouting mouths. The cinematography in this film is nothing short of beautiful. It is art! I have so much to learn from this film, I can't wait to watch it again.

Labels: Film