Cool Star Wars Pic

The cast for the 7th Star Wars movie was announced today-here's a link with a cool picture of the cast and crew all seated together...excited to see what comes of this...

http://starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-7-cast-announced.html

Gravity

I did myself a great disservice when I sat down in my living room to watch this movie.  Namely, I sat down in my living room and watched this film, and did not see it in a movie theater.  With that in mind, this is still a startling piece of work.  What makes it stand out to me is its simplicity.  This is a work of cinematic minimalism (if that is a category that actually exists).  Alfonso Cuaron brings us a movie with a singular title and a singular purpose.  Few times have I watched a movie that is so well summed up by its title.  The only other title I can think of for this movie would be "survival".  It is a simple story, told remarkably well.

Sandra Bullock stars as Ryan Stone, a scientist in space for the first time.  She is accompanied by two other astronauts.  One of them is Matt Kowalski, played by George Clooney.  Kowalski is a seasoned astronaut, and his experience is vital to Ryan Stone.  Within minutes of the film's beginning, the principal characters are told of a shower of debris that is headed straight for their space shuttle.  The debris completely destroys their spacecraft, and Kowalski and Stone are forced into survival mode.  This is the set up for the movie, and the rest of the movie really is about what happens next.

The movie is very short.  In this case, that actually helps it to be a cohesive work of art.  This is a simple movie, brilliantly realized.  In some ways it reminds me of a student film with a big budget.  We only see two living faces in this whole movie, and we hear only a couple more voices.  Part of the theme of this movie is survival in the face of being alone as well as being in danger, and the presence of so few actors assists us in seeing that theme.  Any discussion of this movie would also be incomplete without a thorough regard for its visual imagination.  Though I know that I am seeing unreal images, the images in this movie made me believe I was watching something quite real.  At the same time, paradoxically, the movie's images were just fanciful enough that I still was able to see great visual imagination rather than simple documentary style film making.

This movie received great accolades upon its release, and it actually went on to win more Oscars (7) than any other movie in 2014.  I have not yet seen "12 Years A Slave", so I will have to withhold judgement as to which of these movies "deserve" the award more.  It certainly becomes an interesting thing to debate when two movies with such different content are up for awards.  This movie certainly has a universal theme.  While it is set in space, the universal will of humans to survive (and the despair that can come when hope for survival seems lost) is a theme in many great works of art.  It also is worth noting that so many great works of suspense never fully receive their due (Alfred Hitchcock, after all, never won a best director Oscar).  This movie is a cinematic wonder, but I failed to be as wrapped up in it as I am with a Hitchcock film or other works of suspense.  As I mentioned above, I do think I lost something significant by seeing this at home (though I do have a sporty flat screen TV).  As my children continue to mature, I am sure I will begin to be able to be less selective of which movies I can get out to see.  However, there is a fine line between something which is artistically minimal and something which is predictable.  I knew before it was mentioned in the movie that the mission in question was probably Kowalski's last, because that seemed to fit with the genre I was watching.  Fortunately, the movie more than makes up for some of the predictability by many surprises, and by a basic humanity.  It gives every viewer a way to identify with its principle character.  I have not seen such effective uses of silence in a movie in quite some time (possibly since "2001: A Space Odyssey).  The silence serves a dual purpose.  It's awkwardness creates more tension, but it also reminds us of where the movie is set.  Space is silent, and the use of the lack of noise helps us feel Stone's danger all the more.  It may be that the Oscars got it right this year by giving the technical award to Cuaron and the grand prize to Steve McQueen (the director and producer of "12 Years A Slave).  When I see McQueen's work, it will let you all know what I think.

Ben Hur Revisited

I wrote an entry on "Ben Hur" 3 years ago.  I still have not watched it again, though the time may well be prime to watch it with my kids.  Two years ago, we celebrated Easter in Southern California with my family, and we did not know then how significant it would be.  My father died two months later, leaving me with an emotional resonance during this holiday that has begun to supersede other holidays.  Dad loved this movie, so I think I will always associate this movie with Easter and with him.  I rejoice in the hope we have in the resurrection of Christ.  This movie can remind us of how great an impact Christ's life had on one family.  This is the type of impact He has on all those who follow Him.  Here's my entry:

I remember watching this movie every year growing up, and I always loved it.  Whether you are religious or not, the epic scope of the film and the wonderful story certainly carry the day.  The film tells the story of two young men: Judah Ben-Hur, a young Jew from Jerusalem, and his boyhood friend Masala, a loyal Roman soldier who attempts to recruit his old friend in an attempt to bring the Jewish people into allegiance with the Roman Empire.  When Judah refuses to turn his back on his faith and his people, Masala casts off any loyalty to his old friend, and allows his to suffer in an almost Job-like manner.  Most of the film is Judah's story of how he survives imprisonment to come back and seek his revenge on Masala.  All of this takes place at the same time that a young teacher from Nazereth is beginning to gain a following.

The Christ of this film is seen as a powerful moral example.  The filmmakers make a  decision of never showing his face, only shooting him from the back or from a distance.  This is a very effective portrayal of Christ.  One of the most powerful scenes in the film is a foreshadowing piece.  As Judah is being led off to imprisonment through the desert, he staggers and falls in weakness.  There, he is met by Christ, who gives him a miraculously endless supply of water.  Judah never forgets this act of kindness, and when he sees this same man who gave him water fall under the weight of a heavy cross near a well in Jerusalem, there is only one thing he can do.

The film preaches the power of Christ's teaching of forgiveness.  Judah has to learn what he should do to Masala in the face of horrible injustice.  The injustice that has been done to Judah is enormous, and Masala does deserve recompense.  The question Judah has to come to grips with as his bitterness increases is what is he to do with the teachings of this young man from Nazereth?  Should he hold onto his anger, or should he let it go before it consumes him?

As a Christian myself, it is always wonderful to see elements of my faith brought to the screen well.  It seems that many times, elements of the faith are brought to the screen that are far too didactic.  In other words, why make a movie when the filmmaker would rather just deliver a lecture?  It has been years since I have seen this film, and I noticed that a new Blu-Ray is on its way this fall...maybe it's time to take another look.  Happy Easter.

1000 Greatest Movies

I found this fun list while surfing the web the other night.  It was published 10 years ago, so I'm sure there are lots of movies over the past few years that would be on it.  I have seen about 1/4 of them (257, to be exact).  It makes me realize just how much I haven't seen!

https://www.nytimes.com/ref/movies/1000best.html#G

Life of Pi

I really enjoyed the book upon which this film was based, so I have looked forward a to seeing this movie since the day it was released.  I was not only intrigued by the story, but also by the presence of Ang Lee as the director intrigued me greatly.  If ever a director works like a painter, it is Ang Lee.  I have not seen all of his films, but the ones I have seen are exquisite visual works.  Not only that, they also depict human emotion and struggle very well.  Here, we are given a story that is laced with tragedy and survival, pain and hope.  Furthermore, it is an adventure, and the multifaceted spirit of the book is depicted in the film very well.

Piscine Patel is a young boy growing up in a part of India called Ponticherry, an area which was colonized by France.  He is named after a swimming pool in Paris, but because his name sounds like a crude word describing a bodily function, he shortens his name to Pi.  He grows up as a Hindu, but along the way comes to fall in love with elements both in Christianity and Islam.  While his rationalist father mocks his faith, Pi attempts to maintain his Hindu-Chrisitan-Islam-ness.  Pi's Father owns and runs a zoo, so Pi grows up with animals around him, and learns to both appreciate them and have a healthy respect for them.  When his family begins to encounter financial trouble, they decide to move to Canada.  They board an ocean liner with the animals (which they have sold), and head to North America.  Tragically, the ocean liner sinks, and Pi alone survives the wreck, along with several of the animals on the ship.  The story then becomes one of survival, as Pi is force do coexist on a life boat with 4 animals-a zebra, orangutan, hyena and a fearsome tiger named Richard Parker.  This whole story is told in flashback by a middle aged Pi, who is recounting his story to a man suffering from writer's bloc.

The story that originally comes from the book is one that is tough to visualize outside of the imagination.  That is what makes the film rendering of it so special.  Ang Lee uses brilliant colors in this movie almost as if they themselves are characters.  There is also such extraordinary imagination in his use of the camera and the shots he uses to communicate the story.  There is a stunning shot early on in the movie which surrounds adult Pi's recounting of the pool in Paris which was his namesake.  The pool is described as containing crystal clear water, but the shot that Lee uses to communicate that is so wonderful that we hardly needed the spoken description of Pi.  The visual imagination of the movie pairs well with the story it tells.  This is not merely a special effects piece.  The movie gives us living, breathing characters who have struggles, doubts and triumphs.  Their story is every bit as captivating as the visuals themselves.  It also deals in ways with faith and doubt that few films approach.  Its depiction of religion is somewhat positive, as Pi finds his own faith, even as it is criticized and mocked by his father.  Whether the viewer is a person of faith or not, the film deals with people's faith, which is a major part of the human experience which is not dealt with in film as much as I would like.  To be able to balance such extraordinary visuals with a great story and the deep pondering of the big questions is a noteworthy achievement.

There are always healthy debates about movies made from books.  I cannot think of too many movies that realize books better than this.  Perhaps "To Kill a Mockingbird", "Lord of the Rings", and the "Harry Potter" series are in this category.  This movie does what the best movies made from books do.  It honors the story told in the book, and brings a visual imagination to the words in the book that in no way diminish the book.  This movie is one person's recounting of a novel.  It shows Ang Lee's (and his collaborators) mental picture of the words found in Yann Martel's novel.  I still can have my own mental images of the novel, but being able to see a fine film maker like Lee's vision is equally captivating.  Ang Lee won the best director Oscar for this film while his film lost to "Argo" for Best Picture.  While "Argo" was an enjoyable caper, this movie is in a different category.  What a profound work of vision and imagination it is.

Mickey Rooney

We all grew up watching Mickey Rooney, in one way or another.  I have two major memories.  One is his work in "The Black Stallion", a film that came out when I was 5, and in which he figured prominently.  The other is as one of the ensemble in It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World, in which he played one of the desperate treasure hunters who ends up on a plane with a drunk pilot.  He was a great talent.  He started making movies at such a young age that he really was a final link to a bygone era.  Here are the words of the LA Times' Kenneth Turan:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-mickey-rooney-appreciation-20140408,0,4196162.story#axzz2yCxWDN5a

20 Feet From Stardom

I have always been entertained and fascinated by anything about the history of Rock and Roll.  This documentary (which just won the Oscar for Best Documentary a few weeks ago) not only is about Rock and Roll, but it tells a great story as well.  It examines the lives and careers of several people (mostly women) who have served as background singers to major stars.  Some of the people we hear from are people whose voices we have heard for years, but we have not had a name and a face to match the voice.

The principle character in this film ends up being Darlene Love, who ended up becoming a star in her own right, after years of being not only a background singer, but also being used by Phil Spector for her voice, all the while pushing other a "artists" who lip synced using her vocals.  Darlene Love has gone on to be a member of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and has become a legend as a solo artist.  The other singers about whom this film focuses all have had varying levels of success with solo artistry, and the movie does a good job of showing their different stories.

Merry Clayton rose to fame being the female vocalist on the Rolling Stones "Gimme Shelter".  She tells a funny story about how she sang the vocal with curlers in her hair.  Anyone who has heard the song and the words of her vocal can get a chuckle out of the notion that she sang the words with curlers in her hair.  Merry dreamed of having a solo career, but despite several efforts to make her dream come true, her solo work never sold albums.  She seems to be fairly comfortable in her own skin, but one cannot help but see some of the disappointment she still feels about not having more success with her solo career.

The most interesting person that I learned about in this movie was Lisa Fischer.  As is the case with everyone in this film, her vocals are familiar to me (she has worked with Sting, and now, she tours permanently with the Rolling Stones, and has for years), but I did not know her story.  Fischer was able to make it as a solo artist.  She won a Grammy in the early 90's for her solo work, but she opted instead to work in relative obscurity as a background vocalist.  She explains at one point in the movie that one of the reasons she does what she does is that she wants to be able to go to restaurants and not be recognized.  Fischer comes across as someone who is quite comfortable in her own skin.  She has tasted fame and glory, and is comfortable using her amazing voice in a way that takes the spot light off of her.

Judith Hill (a fellow Biola Eagle) rose to fame by working side by side with Michael Jackson on "This Is It."  She was working closely with him when he died, and the movie uses her in a way that is different from the other artists.  Since she is still young (the age when the other singers were doing their most famous work), she is at the stage where she is figuring out where she wants to go with her career. She wants a solo career, because that has been her dream.  Since she presently is pursuing that, the viewers don't know the end of her story.  Her story ends up reminding us that this dynamic is current as well.  As long as the need for background singers remains, there will be highly skilled people who can fill that role.  Furthermore, as long as the role of background singer remains, there will be singers who dream of being in the lime light.

I have written before on this blog about the fact that the best documentaries are not so different from other kinds of movies.  They tell a story that is every bit as engaging as fiction, and they use real life to tell their story.  The artistry that is brought to this film is effective because it gives us real people whose life has real drama.  Though we might not view these singer's plight as the tragedy that they do, their humanity shines through and we do feel sympathy for them.  The movie allows us to walk a mile in their shoes, and anytime we can do that, it is a credit to the film maker.  I walked away from this film feeling genuine sympathy for the singer's who have been ignored.  There is a great scene wherein Darlene Love talks about hearing one of her most famous songs on the radio while she was cleaning a house.  She had begun cleaning houses to make ends meet, and when she heard "Christmas (Please Come Home)", she realized she wasn't doing what she was supposed to be doing.  To me, it wasn't that cleaning was beneath her dignity.  It was more that she had been given a voice and an opportunity to use it that others would die for.  To see her go back to her craft and pursue it was great, and her story makes up a major part of the heart of this wonderful story.