For The Bible Tells Me So... Part One

I apologize for the delay. My computer decided to show me its famous "blue screen of death." I wrote this last week. So when it says yesterday I mean last Wednesday.

Yesterday I witnessed something amazing. Something like Jesus, awaking Lazarus from his eternal sleep or feeding the multitudes with a bit of bread and a bit of fish. I saw a man stand up and proclaim from a place of deep faith and power that the film we just watched has changed his perspective. He then apologized to the entire GLBT community and confessed, almost in the way one might do at a religious ceremony, that he was guilty, like everyone I suppose, of being prejudice. His God, Christ in his case, was a God of love. And that, above all else, was the film's primary goal. To remind us that religion is not meant to promote intolerance and bigotry. The film, For the Bible Tell Me So examines , both positively and negatively, the way the families of a variety of people in the gay and lesbian community are affected by their children's "coming out" and how that fits into their religion.

Daniel Karslake, the film's director, stayed after the film to answer some question . This was both an insightful and moving experience. But, first let's examine the film.

The primary makeup of the film is a group of families affected by the the impact of discovering the one of their own is, in fact, a homosexual. The film shows some famous people like Senator Richard Gephart, his wife Jane and their openly lesbian daughter Chrissy. Also, in the section of the film I found most riveting, the story of the first openly gay bishop of the American Episcopalian church, Gene Robertson. Perhaps the most brave part of the film comes from Mary Lou Wallner, who blames herself for his daughters' tragic suicide. Daniel told us afterwards that she wrote a book called The Slow Miracle of Transformation. It is currently out of print, but I hope to find it soon and give it a read. The other families, the Poteats and the Reitans, are both truly interesting to get to know. In fact the most powerful scene in the film comes when the Reitan's take a stand on a particular issue. I won't give it away. See the film, available on DVD now, to uncover this part of the story.

One of the film's most compelling features was the addition of several theologians and scholars who both passionately and objectivity examined the true intentions behind the infamous bible verses that are said to condemn the practice of homosexuality. Nothing about their observations are entirely new ideas, but I imagine to the film's target audience this could be seen as somewhat of a revelation.

Another extremely intriguing aspect of the film was an animated section about what it is that makes people gay and the science behind it. The animated section works in two distinct ways. One, it allows the film to take a break away from the weighty subject material and two, it saves the viewers from what may have been a boring section of "talking head" scientist.

That's the film. But in part two we will get to the touching part. Including a story that Daniel told that made me almost cry.

Also, because we are in the middle of final papers season this blog may not be too active until school ends. However, if I don't get a chance to tell you here are few things you should know.

1) This Thursday for those of you in the Wilmington area there will be an avant-garde (experimental film night.) Afterwards there will be something called a "Live Cinema Explosion" Trust me, as someone working to bring this film festival to Wilmington, it should be a truly memorable night.

2) Also on Friday night is the Reel Teal Festival. A collection of student films will be shown and those in the audience get to vote to for their top picks. If you attend wear something a little nicer.

3) On Saturday, and this only for my UNCW readers, there will be a 24 hour move lock-in where a whole plethora of exciting and classic films will be playing. I went last year and had a blast. There is free food and time to relax before exam study sessions. If you attend wear the opposite of what you wore to the Reel Festival. Like sweat pants maybe?

I should mention that 1-3 are all taking place at Lumina Theatre on the UNCw campus. All of these events are free to the public.

4) If I don't have time to formally write a review I wanted to mention Forgetting Sarah Marshall. I was able to attend a preview screening of the film last week and let me tell you it is a truly funny film. Nothing too new, but funny enough to make up for that.

TO BE CONTINUED...

Film Review: Rocket Science

I am not anti-Juno. I liked Juno. I liked it quite a bit. And when it came time for people to debate its intrinsic value I kept my mouth shut on the subject. I honestly didn’t feel strongly about it either way. To me it was just okay, and not worthy of its numerous Oscar noms but not bad enough to really complain. Today I saw the film that should have filled its place. The little indie drama/comedy which should have taken all of Juno’s accolades away no questions asked. A film which, had I seen it before the creation of last year’s top ten list, the place of Paris Je Taime would have been called into question. This film is Rocket Science and while it is not about teen pregnancy its character could just as easily have inhabited the same world as Juno, except, of course, only better. And more importantly than that, it is a million times funnier.

The story is of Hal Hefner (Reece Thomas), a young man with a suturing problem, whom through the influence of a certain young beauty, Ginny Ryerson (Anna Kendrick,) decides to join the debate team and take the place of a the fallen hero of the debate team. The fallen hero’s name is Ben Weskelbaum (Nichols D’Agosto) and after one crucial screw up he gives up and does something very dramatic. He completely drops out of school.

Hal’s home life is not much better as his parents have recently separated and his mom is seeing someone new. Many people make mention of the fact that the new boyfriend is a Korean-American and that the characterizations of him and his dim witted son are somewhat negative. They attribute this to racism. These people have no life and are in some ways helping to make the race fight continue and that is simply fuel for the fires of racism. The characters are simply not prefect, like all the other flawed characters in this film. It would be the same as showing a black or gay villain and automatically presuming racism or homophobia on the part of the film maker. Sometimes films are racist or homophobic. This one simply isn’t.

Now that that little defense thing is over allow me to continue to praise this film. Diablo Cody may now be the proud owner of a bright little golden man, but the talent that oozes from the screenplay, written by Jeffery Blitz (also the director of the film,) is something Diablo Cody, talented as she may be, could never come close to, at least not yet. Forgive the run-on sentence there.

Also let’s talk about the acting. In fact the acting on the part of Kendrick won her an Independent Spirit Award nomination. I have no doubt of why. Her character is neither evil nor good, and I mean that in the best way possible. She has many layers and with each scene you see her in you learn something new. The main actor, Reece Thomas is quite good too. However, I must submit the majority of my praise to the young actor who plays Ben. He has film presence that is both devilishly charismatic and also painfully shallow. He, I predict, will one day be a bona fide movie star.

And then there’s the direction of the film by Jeffery Blitz. Blitz before directed the Oscar nominated documentary Spellbound. Spellbound, like Rocket Science, is about children attempting to live up to impossible ideals and the disappointment that this ideology will ultimately yield. Both of the films are mini-masterpieces in their own way and deserve to be seen. What I like most about Rocket Science is how it is funny without sacrificing emotion and how honest it is, without sacrificing on style. That previous sentence describes the antithesis of what Juno turned out to be.

Allow me to reiterate upon closing that I don’t wish to join the Juno wars. In fact those wars have been fought and now, I presume, we are talking of history. However, I mention Juno because so many others did. Of course Roger Ebert compared the film to Election and Clueless and decided that this film belonged beside those films as zeniths of the teen “coming of age” film genre. And while this is not an original concept I agree with him. Of course he did go on to crown Juno the best film of 2007, proving that even great critics like Ebert get it wrong from time to time.

If you don’t mind, forgive any grammatical errors or word omissions from this entry. I have written the first 15 pages of a paper and by now words are all just running together. However, just so that I could spread the word about this film I just had to go ahead and write this blog entry. So go rent this film and think about how, even though I was sleepy and weary I wrote this blog just for you. Unless of course you hate the movie. In which case, blame Ebert. He liked it before me you know.

Film Review: Kite Runner

I don’t tend to watch many films that make their home on Lifetime Movie network. I can only take so much weepy drama, mediocre acting and scripts written in two hours flat without the slightest bit of subtlety or grace. So that is why I am forced to give The Kite Runner, a film based on the beloved book of the same name, a negative review, as it feels exactly like a Lifetime Film, a Lifetime film with a really great production value.

I have read the book and while it is fundamentally wrong to judge films based on their book versions, the film doesn’t hold up to the amazing power of the book. In fact the movie is like reading the cliff notes of some great novel and expecting to be as fully enriched as reading the actual novel. This is not say that movies can’t be better than their book version (Clockwork Orange for instance,) but this film is seriously like watching a collection of filmed highlights from the novel infused with weepy falsehoods that negate the power of its source subject. And, that my friends, is a shame.

The movie tells the story of Amir and his friend of lower class, Hassan. The story begins in Afghanistan and spans countries and time periods. It is a story of a life, of redemption, of finding a “way to be good again.” But, the real power of the story comes from the relationships Amir has with his Hasan and his father (or Baba.) I am not going to go over to many plots points here as the film is nothing but plot points and most of you have probably already read the book.

Marc Forster, the film’s director has always been hit or miss with me. I loved his films Monster’s Ball and Finding Neverland, but I have to say another of his films Stranger than Fiction was a miss for me. Stranger than Fiction is not a bad film, but it does not live up to its excessive praise and don’t get me started about the horrible cop-out ending of that film.

But, let’s avoid that tangent and move to a different one. A friend of mine actually mentioned this too, immediately after seeing the film, the visual style in The Kite Runner is so boring and cliché. The camera work is too Hollywood and something is lost in it. Something about the camera’s determined focus and the musical score as well seems to negate the power of the film. Unlike the book nothing in the film can be a surprise since the score insists on playing the role of physic.

I want to avoid sounding sexist and being one of those people that divides film or other art into specific genders. However, with that being said, I have to confess to me the book story was a story of men and boys, and fathers and sons. The movie wasn’t about that. It seemed more feminine, not that is always a negative thing. Some of the power of book is lost on the film, because of an insistence upon weeping sentimentalism and not enough about how Amir learns, even after he has a wife, to become a man and to make his father proud. The film does make mention of these themes, but makes them more Gilmore Girls (a show I admit to enjoying) than something else. That is not to say women are more likely weepy sentimentalist, but in fact the stereotypical women that inhabit the worlds of Lifetime Films are perhaps the women that I am referring to.

Also I can’t help but note, with a bit of irony, how much this film should have allowed us to see more of the violence of Taliban. I know that sounds weird. Especially from someone like me who has in the past argued against excessive violence. But in the scene which I can imagine to be truly brutal of a stoning we are shown very little. Sometimes this is good. Sometimes not showing too much violence is a good stylistic choice. But, this is a film with a goal of showing the real harsh, hellishness of the Afghanistan of the Taliban and realness and perhaps something that would warrant a R-rating would seem necessary here. I imagine there is some studio pressure in this regard and perhaps the good ladies at book club that went to see the film projected up on the big screen are not interested in seeing this reality.

Perhaps I am being too cynical. This film does have some good features and may encourage some people to seek out the book. In fact that is my suggestion with this film. Read the book first and if you have time and worse options for movies, give this one a look. It’s not awful, just extremely disappointing.

RIP Charlton Heston

We knew him as Moses, as an astronaut lost in a world of apes, as a detective fighting against an evil Orson Welles, Ben-Hur and most recently as a real life villain in Micheal Moore's Blowing For Columbine. If we forget the latter characterization for a minute we can not fault Heston for his acting skills, which while not stunningly good, held with with us a real and memorable presence. Rest in Peace Mr. Heston.

Film Review: In The Valley of Elah

Will cinema survive the horror that is Paul Haggis? Yes, of course. But why, oh why, do his works garner such adulation? Crash, the first film he directed, won him a best picture Oscar. In 2004 he wrote Million Dollar Baby and as we all know it too won for best picture. Let’s add to that list a horrible remake of an Italian film with The Last Kiss and Letters from Iwo Jima, a film which was just okay. We all know how much I loathe Crash, but Million Dollar Baby lines up right behind it with films which I really don’t like. His works have the combined subtlety of something like using an elephant to crack open a peanut.

And yet I watched In the Valley of Elah, Haggis’ second time as director. Once again we are presented with an issue movie. This time the war in Iraq. However, unlike the rest of his usual dribble this film works, sort of. The story begins as Hank Deerfield (Tommy Lee Jones) receives word that his son has returned home from Iraq, but is missing. And thus a typical crime solving drama begins. Hank, a retired military serviceman, attempts to enlist help from various unhelpful agencies. In fact one particularly telling scene involves the local police arguing over whose jurisdiction the case falls under. In spite of all these unhelpful folks, Detective Emily Sanders (Charlize Theron) a single mother in a man’s world, helps Hank on his quest. Susan Sarandon plays as the missing boy’s mother and even though she is only in a few scenes, she is quite an intriguing character.

One of the film's great triumphs is the amazing performance on the part of Tommy Lee Jones. In a so-so film, his performance really stands out. Like in No Country for Old Men, Jones is best when he is in pursuit of something. And watching a master of his craft like Jones act is an actual pleasure. Although I would argue that his performance in No Country for Old Men is slightly better and I imagine the Academy chose to nominate his performance in this film as more a recognition of his entire year’s work.

However, the film’s fatal flaw, like all of Haggis’ films is enduring the endless barrage of sermons that Haggis’ hopes to preach to us. In this film “war is hell.” Wow, Haggis that is an insightful as this little ditty “racism is wrong” from Crash. With restraint, In the Valley of Elah could make a profound statement, even if that statement were as simple as the aforementioned one, but Haggis decides to trade in story and style for message. Yes, it is less a problem in this film as with Crash, but still it is a real shame. A shame, because somewhere within this mess of this film is a really, really great film. A film which could have struck some important chords, changed some minds and never once have sacrificed its value as a film for the previous things.

Could Haggis be a good director? Yes, of course. And with some restraint and maybe with the help of a more subtle screenwriter he will write and direct some great stuff. I’m waiting.