Zero Dark Thirty

It's kind of nice to be in a position in which I have absolutely no idea how close to accurate this film is, so I can enjoy it for what it is.  Make no mistake, there are things in the film which are controversial, so their veracity is important.  But, since the end of the movie is already known going in, the journey to the ending is what makes this movie noteworthy.  The movie clearly wants to depict certain things with which the viewer can grapple, but I felt that the movie's strong point was the fact that it didn't preach.  With some of the things depicted in this film being very controversial, I think it would have been easy for director Kathryn Bigelow to stray into the realm of moralising, and I think it is to her credit (and the film's) that she did not.

The film follows the 11 year journey of one CIA agent named Maya.  After the attacks on September 11, 2001, America got involved all over the world in leads regarding terrorism, and became particularly entangled in Iraq and Afganistan.  Maya moves to Pakistan to help the CIA track down terrorists, particularly the ehad of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden.  Some of the opening scenes involve Maya acclimating to the difficult world of interrogation.  The scenes depicting water boarding and other interrogation methods are handled honestly, and with very little commentary.  It is clear that the first time Maya sees an interrogation that she is uncomfortable.  She clearly becomes more comfortable over time with the methods (or more calloused, you be the judge), and the movie leaves ambiguous how directly these methods affect the eventual outcome.  One cannot watch the interrogation scenes and not at least question the appropriateness of these actions, but given the scale of the attacks on America, it certainly makes things murky at best, and the movie seems comfortable leaving it that way. 

Once some of that depiction is out the way, the movie actually settles into a standard underdog movie.  Maya believes that one person (Abu Ahmad) is the key to finding Bil Laden.  Maya's boss (a one note character played very well by Kyle Chandler) is not only not convinced that this lead is a good one, but he doesn't even think that finding Bin Laden is that big of a deal.  He feels that the attacks that the US has been under in other places show that Bin Laden is not where the CIA should be focusing.  In a turning point confrontation scene, Maya asserts that all of the other battles he has been fighting are roads that lead back to Osama Bin Laden anyway. Maya is eventually able to land some key intelligence and thus begins the slow march toward that fateful night in May of 2011 when a group of Navy Seals penetrated the home where Osama Bin Laden lived.  As the day of the operation draws near, Maya's obsession with catching Bin Laden takes center stage.

Many have criticized this movie as being pro torture because torture is depicted, and it leads the viewer to think that "torture" was necessary to catch Bin Laden.  I don't necessarily disagree with the position, but after seeing the movie, I think it kind of misses the point.  The film is depicting a world in which terrorism and interrogation exist, and doesn't spoon feed the viewer what to think of it.  The world of war is a very different one.  One of the reasons war is to be avoided is that it creates a myriad of moral ambiguities.  Saying that interrogation of this nature is evil sort of begs the question, since war itself is evil (though I believe it can be morally justified at times-a necessary evil.)  I think that the viewer needs to ask whether or not this film does a good job depicting the world in which these things happen, and I think this film does do that well. 

The acting is also very good.  Jessica Chastain seems to land one great role after another (the mother in "Tree of Life", the isolated housewife in "The Help").  She carries this movie very well in the put upon "against all odds" story.  The supporting cast is also quite good.  I thought James Gandofini truly stole the scenes he was in as CIA director Leon Panetta. All of the actors (including several actors of Middle Eastern descent) create a very effective portrait of this man hunt.  I do not think this movie will be a classic, but it was very effective, and it stands out as a movie for our time.  It is a story very close to all of us who have lived in the post 9/11 world.

Les Miserables

    2012 will always be always be remembered by me as a very complicated year.  But one thing stayed with me almost the whole year.  In May, I decided to begin the task of reading Victor Hugo's colossal novel Les Miserables.  I cannot remember if I knew at the time that a movie version of the musical was being made, but I knew that I wanted to read this book that I had heard so much about.  As I began the book, the opening pages were both verbose and beautiful.  They recount the life and character of a Bishop in a French village called Digne.  The opening chapters go into tremendous detail about this Bishop, but he does not figure at all in most of the story.  Instead, it is essential to the greater arc of Hugo's narrative that he show this Bishop's character so that when Hugo's protagonist (the paroled thief Jean Valjean) comes to him, we already know how he will treat him.

    As I found myself enthralled in the beginnings of this story back in May, I called my dad to tell him how much I was enjoying this book.  He was very aware of the book and the musical, but had never read the book or seen the play.  I was so excited to share this work with him, and I hoped that some day he too would read the book and we could discuss it, as we had discussed so many works of art over the years.  When I finally finished the novel in October, I no longer had my dad with me to discuss the work.  Also, I had begun to await the arrival of the movie version of the musical with great anticipation.  I am confident that any time I return to this story, whether I see it on the stage, the screen, or read the book again, I will be reminded of this time in my life, and how the story of suffering and grace that Hugo gave us all became a soothing balm for me in a troubling time.

    The story of Les Miserables is a story that touches me for many different reasons.  The primary reason I find it so moving is its understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  The movie which Tom Hooper directed does very little to water down that element of both the musical and the book.  I want to here issue a SPOILER ALERT...some of the thematic elements upon which I will reflect involve plot point from the end of the story.  As I mentioned before, the character of the Bishop at the beginning of the story is key.  He figures in this way: as Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) leaves his life as a prisoner, he is given papers by a French officer named Javert (Russell Crowe) to show that he is an ex-convict.  As such, no one will hire him for work, nor take him in.  When the Bishop of Digne is the only one who takes him in, Valjean repays him by stealing his silver dishes and heading out of town.  Unfortunately for Valjean, he is caught trying to escape, and when the police bring him to the Bishop, the Bishop merely states that Valjean had forgotten to also take the silver candlesticks that he had given him as well.  As the police leave, the Bishop charges Valjean to become an honest man with the silver. 

    Valjean does indeed accomplish this, but Javert never trusts him.  Many years later, Jean Valjean is a mayor in a town as well as a factory owner who employs a woman name Fantine.  Fantine has had a daughter out of wedlock, and when that becomes known, she is thrown out by the foreman of the factory without Valjean's knowledge.  As Fantine's life unravels, eventually she dies, but not before Valjean promises to raise her child.  The story continues to involve itself with uprisings of the working class poor in Paris as well as the ongoing struggle between grace and law that is symbolized by Javert (law) and Jean Valjean (grace).  The film is a musical, and there are several memorable musical moments along the way which are stunning.

    As a film, this movie is a remarkable accomplishment on many levels.  Each musical number was recorded live on camera, while most musicals have had actors or actresses recording songs beforehand and lip synching on camera.  Modern technology made it possible for director Tom Hooper to digitally remove the microphones on the performers, thereby lending an authenticity to the musical numbers that I have never seen in a musical before.  The photography and visual imagination of the film is also great.  The scenery gives us the rough streets of Paris in all of their poverty and filth. 

    On another front, I think this musical works better as a movie than on the stage.   For instance, in one of the the most popular numbers in the musical, "One Day More", each character can sing their parts in their actual place in the story, rather than all the characters standing next to each other on the stage.  The film allows them to be singing separately, and I think it works better. 

    The cast of this movie does great work.  I cannot think of a more harrowing scene in almost any film than Anne Hathaway's interpretation of the show stopping "I Dreamed A Dream" number toward the beginning of the movie.  Tom Hooper's use of silence in this scene was also quite effective, as the desolation Fantine feels comes across on the screen.  As Javert, Russell Crowe evokes an effective presence.  Even though he doesn't have the finest singing voice, he does a great job of inhabiting the character.  Sasha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter are perfect as the bottom feeding Thenaldeiers.  Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne are very good in their roles as young lovers Cosette and Marius.  Daniel Huttlestone is pitch perfect as the street waif Gavroche.  And Hugh Jackman anchors the whole film with a remarkable presence as Jean Valjean.  He does not have the best singing voice, but his ability to evoke true emotion from these songs and to show this character as the world weary man that he is is truly remarkable.  I quite admired Daniel Day Lewis as Abraham Lincoln, but I think Hugh Jackman's work moved me even more.  The film (and the musical for that matter) have drawn criticism from some for being too over the top and emotional.  It is fair to say that this movie is not nuanced.  It is a "pull out all the stops", weepy, emotional experience.  Since that is not everyone's cup of tea, that should be kept in mind.  On the other hand, a story which wears both its heart and its message on its sleeve can be quite refreshing.  I love a good, challenging art house movie as much as anyone, but I also have lots of room in my heart for a overwrought spectacle such as this.  Tom Hooper delivers a movie musical with a distinct style and vision, and he should be considered for his second best director award in three years (he won for "The King's Speech" two years ago).  This film is at least worthy of appreciation, whether one likes the overwrought romanticism or not.

    But beyond the technical and artistic greatness of this film version, it is the thematic elements of the story that touch me.  The depiction of those themes is done very well here, so that makes the experience that much more moving.  With all of these wonderful performances and music, there is much to be seen as well from the depth of the story.  As Jean Valjean attempts to leave behind his past, Javert will not let him forget his sins.  Javert is a true legalist, and he cannot abide the thought that a man should not be punished to the full extent of the law.  He is, in the end, completely unable to live once he is in turn shown grace, and the struggle between these two men and what they stand for is the heart of the story.  This is what I would have loved to share with my dad.  As a believer in the Christian message, the appeals in this movie to the grace and freedom of the cross are rich.  Dad would have been truly moved by those images as they flickered across the screen.  Ironically, this is also a movie about suffering and how we go to death, and these two issues were brought home to me in a real way last year.  As Jean Valjean's life comes to an end, he sees death very much as St. Paul does in 2 Timothy.  Death is the end of a long race and struggle, and the rest that he can find in death is apparent, especially as he can rest in the salvation of his soul.  I don't know why dad died last year, and I never will.  But I do know that the longer I live, the more I see how much suffering and weariness there is in this world.  There is a certain comfort that can be taken in the possibility of peace beyond the grave.  Jean Valjean has that in his faith, and so, I believe, does anyone who comes under the grace of God through Christ.  This powerful reality does not negate the horrible suffering of this world, but it can redeem it, and that truth became real to me this year more than ever as I buried my father and immersed myself in this powerful story.  Maybe it is not an accident that I saw this movie in the first days of 2013.  Maybe this year will be one wherein I can move forward.  However, I am given no such guarantee.  Things could get worse this year for all I know.  But one thing I know...like Jean Valjean, I hope in the grace of Christ.  The beauty of this message flashes across the screen in this movie with such richness.  This story will always occupy a special place in my life not only due to its content, but when I encountered it on my journey.  To see these truths come across the screen in an ordinary multiplex in an ordinary suburb was truly an extraordinary experience.

"42" Trailer

A trailer for a biopic of Jackie Robinson...with Harrison Ford as Branch Rickey...could be interesting.