What happens when the only survivor of mass suicide, the twelve-year-old daughter of the leader of a separatist Catholic cult, grows to adulthood? Will she be able to acclimate back into polite society, or will she forever be haunted by her past? Do extreme emotional and environmental isolation, and lack of access to much-needed medicines, impact on the said cult victim-and if so, how? These are questions that I, for one, would never think to ask in this life or the next. Not so, the Austrian filmmaking duo of Veronika Franz and Severin Fiala.
The Lodge (2019) is the newest directorial entry from Franz and Fiala, best known for writing and directing their 2014 breakthrough horror film, the german-language Goodnight Mommy, which was chosen as Austria's entry for Best Foreign Film for the Academy Award the year it was released. Weird, perverse and sick, if admirably original, Goodnight Mommy explored the notion of what would transpire when twin boys are reunited with their mother after an extended medically-necessitated absence. After returning to her children sporting extensive facial bandages, a tv-presenter mother finds it is no easy task to convince her prepubescent boys that she is who she claims to be-a failure that results in harrowing and terrifying consequences. Goodnight Mommy is a film I ultimately cannot recommend. Possessed of strong performances and characterizations, and an intriguing plot (if saddled with a plodding, slow-but-steady way of storytelling) Goodnight Mommy led to the satisfying unraveling of a mystery (including an effective twist) but degenerates to torture-porn (that worst subgenre of horror) and an ending that is anything but elating (unconvincingly disguised as hopeful.)
For The Lodge, Franz and Fiala perform co-writing duties on this newest feature, along with fellow scribe Sergio Casci, best known as a writer for the thriller The Caller (2011) and various UK television series. Gaining this latest edition to their writing partnership doesn't improve the final quality of the writing of the plot, sadly. It also doesn't necessitate the need to remove a trigger warning that this latest production of Franz and Fiala should include: WARNING: this film will cause the viewer to close their eyes and ears on more than one occasion-and not hesitate to look at their watches in anticipation of the ending(!)
The train to depression-town begins when we are introduced to a middle-aged woman, mother Laura (played by Alica Silverstone of Clueless and Aerosmith music video fame-when did she get old enough to play this role? Time flies!) looking at herself in a mirror, crying. Turns out, she's getting ready to take her kids-Aiden, ably played by Jaeden Martell, and Mia, convincingly portrayed by Lia McHugh- to the brutalist-architecture home of her separated husband Richard (Richard Armitage, of all those "Hobbit" movies.) Laura, who is hoping for a reconciliation, is in for a shock when Richard unceremoniously announces to her that he wants a divorce so he can marry his new girlfriend Grace (Riley Keough, best known as Elvis' real-life granddaughter, and playing one of the wives in Mad Max: Fury Road, along with being a Steven Soderberg production regular.) Hearing about the impending nuptials goes over about as well as flatulence in a car to Grace, who is obviously in no mental state to hear bad news. It's not long before we as an audience get our first (disgustingly and offensively graphic) jump-scare, and Richard is reduced to single-fatherhood status prematurely.
It turns out that Richard had been researching Grace, the lone survivor of the Catholic separatist cult, for a book he wrote and fell in love with her (naturally.) Richard decides he has to force his two children to get along with Grace, so they can all get along happily ever after. This would be the first of many bad decisions for the character, who's decisions defy all logic and credibility throughout the movie. Seriously, this character is so exceedingly dull-witted, to me as a man, it's offensive. By the way, "offensive" is a great word to describe much about this movie, but I digress.
Richard decides that it'd be a great bonding opportunity to leave Grace, her dog, and his kids alone for an extended winter break in an old vacation lodge in the middle of nowhere, the nearest town miles away, thick snow blanketing the environs. After all, what could go wrong when cell phones don't work, heating is unreliable, no four-wheel drive vehicle-because the husband has it, the pond is covered with brittle ice, and they're all surrounded by thick woodlands? Oh, and did I mention, the house is overseen by a creepy saintly portraiture (the virgin Mary?!) that does NOT provide the desired calming effect for the denizens of the lodge. What could *possibly* go wrong if Grace doesn't have access to her pills that hold her mental scarring at the hands of the cult she survived at bay?
I decided to post my thoughts of this film in my religion, as opposed to a secular blog, because of the relationship this film has with the concept of religion. As you've no doubt guessed, it is profoundly negative when it comes to its attitude toward spirituality in general. The Catholic Separist cult that Grace survived is clearly modeled on the "Heavens Gate" cult from the late 90s, which I remember not-so-fondly from the late 90s. In that infamous incident, a bunch of cult members decided they needed to hitch a ride on an alien spacecraft riding in the shadow of a comet, and the only way to do that was to engage in a mass suicide. I can remember the photos of the bodies of the Heavens Gate cult members, covered in triangular purple cloths, with sneakered feet sticking out-just like this movie. I suppose that since there are references to Catholic hymns and prayers and crucifix and icons in this movie, and that's where the Catholic connection comes from-but even if it is a separatist organization, to me as a Catholic, it is no less offensive in the portrayal. On an unrelated note, I find it ironic that Reily Kough, an avowed Scientologist (a religion that has had its share of accusations of cultism) plays a former cult member in this film. I'm sure it's just a coincidence. But I digress again.
It's little wonder that The Lodge, like Goodnight Mommy before it, suffers from an unsatisfying, depressing ending-which might be the greatest offense of the film when all is said and done. We do get some pretty decent actor performances, and the setting is effectively haunting and creepy. It's not enough to make up for its faults in plot and characterization, or anti-theist message, in the end. The movie definitely owes a debt to horror movies featuring similar themes of isolation and madness-especially Stanley Kubrick's The Shining-but this film is not on the same plateau as that one.
Sunday, February 23, 2020
Saturday, January 18, 2020
A Hidden Life (2019)
My favorite movie I've seen this past year has to be director Terrence Malick's "A Hidden Life" (2019).
This film is a beautifully filmed, profound, and thought-proving meditation on the ramifications of standing up for what you know is right, despite almost all of those around you-friend and foe alike-holding otherwise.
The great British writer, C.S. Lewis, has been quoted as saying that "Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching." I can think of fewer instances when such is more the case than the story of Franz Jaggerstatter. From the starting point of 1939 Austria, Jaggerstatter-an obscure farmer in the mountains of his homeland-gave up everything for what he knew was true.
Malick's movie chronicles the story of Jaggerstatter, a conscientious objector during World War II who, many decades later in 1964, would have his hidden story told by American sociologist Gordon Zahn in a biography titled Silent Witness. Jaggerstatter would be recognized as a martyr and be beatified by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007 as a key step towards sainthood in the Roman Catholic church.
As the movie begins, a short written explanation on-screen informs viewers of the contemporary policy that Austrian men of the time were forced to pledge allegiance to Hitler and the Third Reich before and during the war, upon penalty of death. Jaggerstatter (played in an outstanding way by German actor August Diehl) is courting his soon-to-be wife Franziska (Valerie Pachner, in an equally strong performance.) They live in the small village of St. Radegund (once an alternate title for the movie). We observe a couple who, in a very short while, fall very much in love. They soon are married and have three daughters. Franziska's sister later joins the family, along with Jaggerstatter's mother (his father notably fought and died in World War I) and these additions contribute to the tight familial bonds.
At the outbreak of hostilities at the start of WWII, Jaggerstatter, along with similarly-aged men of his village, is obligated to go to basic training in the mountain fortress at nearby Enns. We see him train, along with his fellows, sticking a "strawman" with bayonet and rifle. Incidentally, many scenes in this film depict the cutting and gathering of straw and hay-no doubt one of many symbols in the film. Jaggerstatter's doubts start to materialize on his face further for the viewer, as we watch his disgust at being fed a diet of pro-Hitler and pro-Reich propaganda films alongside his fellow soldiers, who display an opposite reaction. Jaggerstatter is visibly uncomfortable throughout the training and attempted indoctrination, and is only too happy to return home to his family after France falls to the Reich and that momentary stability allows his military training to come to an end.
After the war intensifies, Jaggerstatter and his fellow villagers are called back to military service through a draft. There is intense pressure on Jaggerstatter and the rest of his family to support Hitler and the Reich from his fellow townsfolk, in particular, the local mayor. Jaggerstatter is reluctant to follow through on the orders and swear loyalty to his leaders, which he believes are evil. A devout Catholic, Jaggerstatter appeals to the local bishop of Salzburg (veteran actor Michael Nqvist, in his final film role, ) who hears Jaggerstatter's objections to the war but is unable (and/or afraid) to help him resist, theorizing (probably not unreasonably) that Jaggersatter is a spy sent to inform on him.
After being conscripted and sent back to the fortress in Enns along with other men of the village, Jaggerstatter is told to swear allegiance to Hitler and the Nazis. He is the only one of his group to decline, and he is immediately arrested and imprisoned. What keeps him going is the strength and fortitude he finds writing and receiving letters to/from his beloved Frani and children-who face terrible ostracism in their village as a result of Jaggerstatter's decision, and gain their own comfort from his letters. Eventually, Jaggerstatter is sent to Berlin, where his and other inmates imprisonment-and the attendant psychological and physical torture-is particularly harsh (as we are vividly shown.)
Berlin is ultimately where Jaggerstatter meets his fate. Despite a last-ditch effort to save his life by his lawyer (who argues for him to just sign a piece of paper, which promises non-combat duty in exchange for allegiance) Jaggerstatter continues to stand for the principles he believes in. He is told time and again by his lawyer and others, that his objections to the war won't make any difference in the final outcome, that nobody will ever know or even care about his sacrifice. Then there is an incredibly emotional reunion with Frani and his local parish priest, who travels to Berlin to see him one final time before his trial and execution for treason.
The great and final irony is that although he died in obscurity, Jaggerstatter's final stand would later be the reason why he is known to us all of today. One has to wonder, after viewing this, whether we'd have similar courage in the face of overwhelming opposition?
There's a lot of hallmarks of director Malick, one of the living legends of American cinema, on display in this film. Let's talk about the cinematography: simply breathtaking. Much of the film was shot right on the border of Austria in Northern Italy. There are gorgeous panoramas of mountains, valleys, and lakes. A lot of bright and lush greens, blues, browns come through in the photography. The film does a magnificent job of conveying time and place-I thought I was looking through an actual window back in time to village life in a small peasant community. We alternate from a shaky handheld, closeup camera at times, to a wide view lens. A lot of the film seems to be shot from a vantage point from on the ground, upward-which, if I remember my time in paid film seminars accurately, is the most dramatic camera angle (and it's easy to see why here.)
Another hallmark of Malick's films is a dramatic film score, which pairs with the cinematography like the finest Cabernet with a filet mignon steak. One of my favorite Malick films is "Days of Heaven," which displays a perfect combination of music and photography. This movie is similarly effective, creating a stirring emotional response within the viewer with its perfect pairing of sight and sound.
Malick has been criticized in the past for lack of a narrative and character development in his films, in lieu of showcasing dramatic scenery, landscapes, etc. In recent films, he's shown a propensity to allow improvisation in his movies, while ditching a script. This picture marks a return to scripted drama for the director, and it shows. One really gets to know his character's emotions, the highs, and lows of exilleration and pain, in this film. The strong performances of all the actors contribute to the narrative strength here.
If I have any quibbles with Malick's film, it has to do with the fact that some aspects of Jaggerstatter's religious background aren't fully illustrated on-screen. For example, Jaggerstatter in real life was a member of the Third Order Secular, the Franciscan religious order. This service allowed him to differ from the military for a short time. We also are unaware in the film that Jaggerstatter was influenced by the example of Franz Reinisch, a Catholic priest from Austria, who was executed for his refusal to take an oath of allegiance to Hitler.
Despite my nitpicking, I thoroughly enjoyed Malick's powerful and insightful historical drama. The film is 174 minutes in length, but despite the running time, I was never bored, and was engrossed the whole time as the story unfolded. I appreciate that this is a religious film, without being too heavy-handed on the subject, as well. I can't recommend the movie enough, and it is a worthy addition to Malick's oeuvre.
This film is a beautifully filmed, profound, and thought-proving meditation on the ramifications of standing up for what you know is right, despite almost all of those around you-friend and foe alike-holding otherwise.
The great British writer, C.S. Lewis, has been quoted as saying that "Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching." I can think of fewer instances when such is more the case than the story of Franz Jaggerstatter. From the starting point of 1939 Austria, Jaggerstatter-an obscure farmer in the mountains of his homeland-gave up everything for what he knew was true.
Malick's movie chronicles the story of Jaggerstatter, a conscientious objector during World War II who, many decades later in 1964, would have his hidden story told by American sociologist Gordon Zahn in a biography titled Silent Witness. Jaggerstatter would be recognized as a martyr and be beatified by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007 as a key step towards sainthood in the Roman Catholic church.
As the movie begins, a short written explanation on-screen informs viewers of the contemporary policy that Austrian men of the time were forced to pledge allegiance to Hitler and the Third Reich before and during the war, upon penalty of death. Jaggerstatter (played in an outstanding way by German actor August Diehl) is courting his soon-to-be wife Franziska (Valerie Pachner, in an equally strong performance.) They live in the small village of St. Radegund (once an alternate title for the movie). We observe a couple who, in a very short while, fall very much in love. They soon are married and have three daughters. Franziska's sister later joins the family, along with Jaggerstatter's mother (his father notably fought and died in World War I) and these additions contribute to the tight familial bonds.
At the outbreak of hostilities at the start of WWII, Jaggerstatter, along with similarly-aged men of his village, is obligated to go to basic training in the mountain fortress at nearby Enns. We see him train, along with his fellows, sticking a "strawman" with bayonet and rifle. Incidentally, many scenes in this film depict the cutting and gathering of straw and hay-no doubt one of many symbols in the film. Jaggerstatter's doubts start to materialize on his face further for the viewer, as we watch his disgust at being fed a diet of pro-Hitler and pro-Reich propaganda films alongside his fellow soldiers, who display an opposite reaction. Jaggerstatter is visibly uncomfortable throughout the training and attempted indoctrination, and is only too happy to return home to his family after France falls to the Reich and that momentary stability allows his military training to come to an end.
After the war intensifies, Jaggerstatter and his fellow villagers are called back to military service through a draft. There is intense pressure on Jaggerstatter and the rest of his family to support Hitler and the Reich from his fellow townsfolk, in particular, the local mayor. Jaggerstatter is reluctant to follow through on the orders and swear loyalty to his leaders, which he believes are evil. A devout Catholic, Jaggerstatter appeals to the local bishop of Salzburg (veteran actor Michael Nqvist, in his final film role, ) who hears Jaggerstatter's objections to the war but is unable (and/or afraid) to help him resist, theorizing (probably not unreasonably) that Jaggersatter is a spy sent to inform on him.
After being conscripted and sent back to the fortress in Enns along with other men of the village, Jaggerstatter is told to swear allegiance to Hitler and the Nazis. He is the only one of his group to decline, and he is immediately arrested and imprisoned. What keeps him going is the strength and fortitude he finds writing and receiving letters to/from his beloved Frani and children-who face terrible ostracism in their village as a result of Jaggerstatter's decision, and gain their own comfort from his letters. Eventually, Jaggerstatter is sent to Berlin, where his and other inmates imprisonment-and the attendant psychological and physical torture-is particularly harsh (as we are vividly shown.)
Berlin is ultimately where Jaggerstatter meets his fate. Despite a last-ditch effort to save his life by his lawyer (who argues for him to just sign a piece of paper, which promises non-combat duty in exchange for allegiance) Jaggerstatter continues to stand for the principles he believes in. He is told time and again by his lawyer and others, that his objections to the war won't make any difference in the final outcome, that nobody will ever know or even care about his sacrifice. Then there is an incredibly emotional reunion with Frani and his local parish priest, who travels to Berlin to see him one final time before his trial and execution for treason.
The great and final irony is that although he died in obscurity, Jaggerstatter's final stand would later be the reason why he is known to us all of today. One has to wonder, after viewing this, whether we'd have similar courage in the face of overwhelming opposition?
There's a lot of hallmarks of director Malick, one of the living legends of American cinema, on display in this film. Let's talk about the cinematography: simply breathtaking. Much of the film was shot right on the border of Austria in Northern Italy. There are gorgeous panoramas of mountains, valleys, and lakes. A lot of bright and lush greens, blues, browns come through in the photography. The film does a magnificent job of conveying time and place-I thought I was looking through an actual window back in time to village life in a small peasant community. We alternate from a shaky handheld, closeup camera at times, to a wide view lens. A lot of the film seems to be shot from a vantage point from on the ground, upward-which, if I remember my time in paid film seminars accurately, is the most dramatic camera angle (and it's easy to see why here.)
Another hallmark of Malick's films is a dramatic film score, which pairs with the cinematography like the finest Cabernet with a filet mignon steak. One of my favorite Malick films is "Days of Heaven," which displays a perfect combination of music and photography. This movie is similarly effective, creating a stirring emotional response within the viewer with its perfect pairing of sight and sound.
Malick has been criticized in the past for lack of a narrative and character development in his films, in lieu of showcasing dramatic scenery, landscapes, etc. In recent films, he's shown a propensity to allow improvisation in his movies, while ditching a script. This picture marks a return to scripted drama for the director, and it shows. One really gets to know his character's emotions, the highs, and lows of exilleration and pain, in this film. The strong performances of all the actors contribute to the narrative strength here.
If I have any quibbles with Malick's film, it has to do with the fact that some aspects of Jaggerstatter's religious background aren't fully illustrated on-screen. For example, Jaggerstatter in real life was a member of the Third Order Secular, the Franciscan religious order. This service allowed him to differ from the military for a short time. We also are unaware in the film that Jaggerstatter was influenced by the example of Franz Reinisch, a Catholic priest from Austria, who was executed for his refusal to take an oath of allegiance to Hitler.
Despite my nitpicking, I thoroughly enjoyed Malick's powerful and insightful historical drama. The film is 174 minutes in length, but despite the running time, I was never bored, and was engrossed the whole time as the story unfolded. I appreciate that this is a religious film, without being too heavy-handed on the subject, as well. I can't recommend the movie enough, and it is a worthy addition to Malick's oeuvre.
Tuesday, April 16, 2019
Godspell (1973)
It's probably not a stretch to say I grew up with Godspell. The songs of the musical version, anyway. My teachers at my Catholic grade school of St. Helena's in Centre Square, PA were big fans, apparently. Growing up in the 80s, the decade of the 70s-in which the musical originates-was far from a distant memory. So, in music class in those days, we learned all the classic songs. In particular, "Prepare Ye the Way of the Lord"; "Day by Day"; and "All Good Gifts" stand out as my favorites of the ones we had to learn as a class and perform.
I'd only seen snippets here and there of the film version on tv, growing up. It was only in more recent years that I actually sat down to watch the whole thing. I find the songs just as entertaining now, as I did back then. The film version is, for the most part, faithful to the original musical-though the movie does have the advantage of being filmed all around New York City at or near iconic landmarks.
Doing research I uncovered a number of interesting facts about the origin of the musical. I had not realized that the genesis of the project was in fact, in my home state of Pennsylvania (this might also account for my teachers' love of it?) Godspell, the musical, was the Master's thesis of the late John-Michael Tebelak at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. A great majority of the book of the musical he based on the Gospel of Matthew, with additional material provided by Gospels of Luke and John (sorry, Mark.) For the music, most of the lyrics were taken from the Episcopal hymnal (drawing on Tebelak's religious background) and supplemented with original material. Godspell was first performed by students at Carnegie Mellon, later performed off-off-broadway, and taken to off-broadway in 1971.
The play really took off when it first reached off-broadway. Edgar Lansberry (Angela's brother) had a hand in bringing it off-broadway, as did a multitude of other producers, including Carnegie Mellon alumnus Charles Haid. A big change was made in the move to off-broadway by hiring another Carnegie Mellon alumnus, Stephen Schwartz, to re-score the production. Schwartz would go on to even greater fame and fortune as the composer and writer of lyrics for Broadway musicals Pippin (1972) and Wicked (2003); and contributing lyrics to a plethora of big-budget Disney films-like Hunchback for Notre Dame, 1996, and Enchanted, 2007.
In 1973, Godspell was adapted for the big screen. It would be nominated for the Golden Palm at the prestigious 1973 Cannes Film Festival. The film is directed by David Greene (later an Emmy-winner for Roots, 1977) and stars Victor Garber as Jesus and David Haskell as Judas/John the Baptist. I must say, being more familiar with Garber for his performances in such fare as James Cameron's Titanic (1997) and the J.J. Abrams tv spy series Alias, it was a bit jarring at first to see him in such a different role as Christ in this movie. Eventually, that oddness dissipates, and one is left to marvel at Garber's performance in the central role. So, too, can be said for one of the other roles, that of Lynne, the college student, played by the late great Lynne Thigpen. Thigpen, to me, will always be "The Chief" from the original "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego?" tv series.
In large part, the movie is a faithful adaptation of the musical. Basically, we have here the Gospel of Matthew, primarily a series of parables acted out by the performers. A band of eight disciples are called from their various walks of life at the start of the film-in contemporary New York City-by John the Baptist, to follow Jesus around the town. As in the stage play, the characters retain the same first names as the actors who play them. One huge difference from stage to screen is the setting of the play-in the film, the director takes advantage of the grand canvas of the city. We have dialogue and musical numbers performed in such places as the Brooklyn Bridge; Central Park; Times Square; The Andrew Carnegie Mansion; Lincoln Center; St. Patrick's Cathedral; and, my favorite, from atop the North Tower of the (almost completed, in those days) World Trade Center.
Staging the movie amongst the hustle and bustle of New York helps make scenes feel less long and tedious, and breaks up the monotony when there are no musical numbers. However, I must admit that there are times when the pacing is a bit slow, and the action bogs down, particularly in the scenes where the cast acts out certain parables. As modern-day moviegoers, we've been conditioned to not appreciate such long, dialogue-heavy scenes, unfortunately.
Things that really stand out in the movie, as in the musical, are the cast's costumes, make-up, and the film's production design. I had always assumed that they were modeled on the fashion of the "hippyish" 70s, but the truth is much more interesting and detailed than that. Here is an excerpt from Inside Godspell by Scott Miller at http://www.newlinetheatre.com/godspellchapter.html, by way of explanation:
John-Michael Tebelek wrote Godspell in order to give people a "way in" to religion in general and the teachings of Christ specifically. The physical production must work toward that end as well, through the sets, costumes, staging, and acting style. The show's original concept was based on Harvey Cox's 1969 Feast of Fools, which argued that for religion to once again reach the people, it had to reclaim its festivity and fantasy. Much of organized religion had become so somber, so serious, that the joy had gone out of it. From this concept, Tebelek seized upon the idea of using clowns to recapture that lost feeling of celebration and revelry. The cast put on clown make-up and wild colorful costumes after being drawn together by Jesus. This concept was based not only on Cox's work, but also on the joy and freedom of the youth movement of the 1960s and early 1970s. The cast as ordinary people becoming clowns illustrated a dramatic change, a very visible kind of conversion. This hybrid of clowns and flower children was a familiar image to audiences of the early 70s. It is not, however, to audiences of the 90s.
All four of the original musicians from the off-broadway production and cast album were utilized again for this film. The band includes Steve Reinhardt on keyboards, Jesse Cutler on acoustic and lead guitar and bass, Richard LaBonte on rhythm guitar and bass, and Ricky Shutter on drums and percussion. Key studio musicians were also added, such as keyboardist Paul Shaffer (yes, that Paul Shaffer, longtime David Letterman associate.)
Watching Godspell, for me, has in recent years become a Holy Week tradition. I added this to my already established tradition of watching Jesus Christ Superstar (1973) another film based on a "rock opera" that came about around the same time and is sometimes confused and/or compared with the other. It probably doesn't help that Victor Garber, as Jesus, wears a "Superman" inspired shirt in his film. Both films, unfortunately, omit any overt scene of the resurrection of Jesus. However, it should be noted that the film version of Godspell included the new song "Beautiful City" written specifically for the film, that was later added to future stage productions. In some of those subsequent productions, the curtain call at the end after "Beautiful City" is considered symbolic of the resurrection. According to lyricist Schwartz:
Over the years, there has been comment from some about the lack of an apparent Resurrection in the show. Some choose to view the curtain call, in which JESUS appears, as symbolic of the resurrection; others point to the moment when the cast raise JESUS above their heads. While either view is valid, both miss the point. GODSPELL is about the formation of a community which carries on JESUS' teachings after he has gone. In other words, it is the effect JESUS has on the OTHERS which is the story of the show, not whether or not he himself is resurrected. Therefore, it is very important at the end of the show that it be clear that the OTHERS have come through the violence and pain of the crucifixion sequence and leave with a joyful determination to carry on the ideas and feelings they have learned during the course of the show.-Godspell Notes for Directors, Musical Directors, and musicians, Producers, 2018.
I can't say I agree with Schwartz's reasoning here, but, there it is.
Over the years, there have been a number of revivals of Godspell on Broadway and Off-Broadway, and touring productions all around the world. I believe the time might be right, in the wake of the successful NBC Live tv production of Jesus Christ Superstar starring John Legend, for a live tv version of Godspell. I know I would watch :-)
I'd only seen snippets here and there of the film version on tv, growing up. It was only in more recent years that I actually sat down to watch the whole thing. I find the songs just as entertaining now, as I did back then. The film version is, for the most part, faithful to the original musical-though the movie does have the advantage of being filmed all around New York City at or near iconic landmarks.
Doing research I uncovered a number of interesting facts about the origin of the musical. I had not realized that the genesis of the project was in fact, in my home state of Pennsylvania (this might also account for my teachers' love of it?) Godspell, the musical, was the Master's thesis of the late John-Michael Tebelak at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. A great majority of the book of the musical he based on the Gospel of Matthew, with additional material provided by Gospels of Luke and John (sorry, Mark.) For the music, most of the lyrics were taken from the Episcopal hymnal (drawing on Tebelak's religious background) and supplemented with original material. Godspell was first performed by students at Carnegie Mellon, later performed off-off-broadway, and taken to off-broadway in 1971.
The play really took off when it first reached off-broadway. Edgar Lansberry (Angela's brother) had a hand in bringing it off-broadway, as did a multitude of other producers, including Carnegie Mellon alumnus Charles Haid. A big change was made in the move to off-broadway by hiring another Carnegie Mellon alumnus, Stephen Schwartz, to re-score the production. Schwartz would go on to even greater fame and fortune as the composer and writer of lyrics for Broadway musicals Pippin (1972) and Wicked (2003); and contributing lyrics to a plethora of big-budget Disney films-like Hunchback for Notre Dame, 1996, and Enchanted, 2007.
In 1973, Godspell was adapted for the big screen. It would be nominated for the Golden Palm at the prestigious 1973 Cannes Film Festival. The film is directed by David Greene (later an Emmy-winner for Roots, 1977) and stars Victor Garber as Jesus and David Haskell as Judas/John the Baptist. I must say, being more familiar with Garber for his performances in such fare as James Cameron's Titanic (1997) and the J.J. Abrams tv spy series Alias, it was a bit jarring at first to see him in such a different role as Christ in this movie. Eventually, that oddness dissipates, and one is left to marvel at Garber's performance in the central role. So, too, can be said for one of the other roles, that of Lynne, the college student, played by the late great Lynne Thigpen. Thigpen, to me, will always be "The Chief" from the original "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego?" tv series.
In large part, the movie is a faithful adaptation of the musical. Basically, we have here the Gospel of Matthew, primarily a series of parables acted out by the performers. A band of eight disciples are called from their various walks of life at the start of the film-in contemporary New York City-by John the Baptist, to follow Jesus around the town. As in the stage play, the characters retain the same first names as the actors who play them. One huge difference from stage to screen is the setting of the play-in the film, the director takes advantage of the grand canvas of the city. We have dialogue and musical numbers performed in such places as the Brooklyn Bridge; Central Park; Times Square; The Andrew Carnegie Mansion; Lincoln Center; St. Patrick's Cathedral; and, my favorite, from atop the North Tower of the (almost completed, in those days) World Trade Center.
Staging the movie amongst the hustle and bustle of New York helps make scenes feel less long and tedious, and breaks up the monotony when there are no musical numbers. However, I must admit that there are times when the pacing is a bit slow, and the action bogs down, particularly in the scenes where the cast acts out certain parables. As modern-day moviegoers, we've been conditioned to not appreciate such long, dialogue-heavy scenes, unfortunately.
Things that really stand out in the movie, as in the musical, are the cast's costumes, make-up, and the film's production design. I had always assumed that they were modeled on the fashion of the "hippyish" 70s, but the truth is much more interesting and detailed than that. Here is an excerpt from Inside Godspell by Scott Miller at http://www.newlinetheatre.com/godspellchapter.html, by way of explanation:
John-Michael Tebelek wrote Godspell in order to give people a "way in" to religion in general and the teachings of Christ specifically. The physical production must work toward that end as well, through the sets, costumes, staging, and acting style. The show's original concept was based on Harvey Cox's 1969 Feast of Fools, which argued that for religion to once again reach the people, it had to reclaim its festivity and fantasy. Much of organized religion had become so somber, so serious, that the joy had gone out of it. From this concept, Tebelek seized upon the idea of using clowns to recapture that lost feeling of celebration and revelry. The cast put on clown make-up and wild colorful costumes after being drawn together by Jesus. This concept was based not only on Cox's work, but also on the joy and freedom of the youth movement of the 1960s and early 1970s. The cast as ordinary people becoming clowns illustrated a dramatic change, a very visible kind of conversion. This hybrid of clowns and flower children was a familiar image to audiences of the early 70s. It is not, however, to audiences of the 90s.
All four of the original musicians from the off-broadway production and cast album were utilized again for this film. The band includes Steve Reinhardt on keyboards, Jesse Cutler on acoustic and lead guitar and bass, Richard LaBonte on rhythm guitar and bass, and Ricky Shutter on drums and percussion. Key studio musicians were also added, such as keyboardist Paul Shaffer (yes, that Paul Shaffer, longtime David Letterman associate.)
Watching Godspell, for me, has in recent years become a Holy Week tradition. I added this to my already established tradition of watching Jesus Christ Superstar (1973) another film based on a "rock opera" that came about around the same time and is sometimes confused and/or compared with the other. It probably doesn't help that Victor Garber, as Jesus, wears a "Superman" inspired shirt in his film. Both films, unfortunately, omit any overt scene of the resurrection of Jesus. However, it should be noted that the film version of Godspell included the new song "Beautiful City" written specifically for the film, that was later added to future stage productions. In some of those subsequent productions, the curtain call at the end after "Beautiful City" is considered symbolic of the resurrection. According to lyricist Schwartz:
Over the years, there has been comment from some about the lack of an apparent Resurrection in the show. Some choose to view the curtain call, in which JESUS appears, as symbolic of the resurrection; others point to the moment when the cast raise JESUS above their heads. While either view is valid, both miss the point. GODSPELL is about the formation of a community which carries on JESUS' teachings after he has gone. In other words, it is the effect JESUS has on the OTHERS which is the story of the show, not whether or not he himself is resurrected. Therefore, it is very important at the end of the show that it be clear that the OTHERS have come through the violence and pain of the crucifixion sequence and leave with a joyful determination to carry on the ideas and feelings they have learned during the course of the show.-Godspell Notes for Directors, Musical Directors, and musicians, Producers, 2018.
I can't say I agree with Schwartz's reasoning here, but, there it is.
Over the years, there have been a number of revivals of Godspell on Broadway and Off-Broadway, and touring productions all around the world. I believe the time might be right, in the wake of the successful NBC Live tv production of Jesus Christ Superstar starring John Legend, for a live tv version of Godspell. I know I would watch :-)
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Unplanned (2019)
Unplanned is a film that is difficult to watch-which is a big understatement. In particular, the first ten minutes of the movie are especially harrowing. It's also a challenging film for me to express the right words when writing about said film. Whatever I do write about it, I suspect will probably be inadequate. Accurately conveying to others the feelings that watching this movie engenders in the viewer-both during, and long after seeing the movie-is a particularly daunting task. Nevertheless, it is not unreasonable to posit that this is an important movie-one that, whatever your beliefs, background, or politics-deserves to be seen. Full disclosure-I do identify as Pro-Life. However, I did attempt to write this reflection on this film with a neutral mindset.
Unplanned is an adaptation of the story by the same name by Abby Johnson. Johnson based the book on her own personal experiences and memoirs. At a certain point in time, Johnson was one of the youngest ever clinical directors at a Planned Parenthood clinic in the United States. Johnson would resign from Planned Parenthood in 2009, after a first-person experience assisting during an abortion at her clinic. This was one year after the clinic named her employee of the year. Now an author and public speaker, she is a founder and the president of And Then There Were None, a ministry to help abortion staff leave the industry.
Planned Parenthood is shorthand for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (PPFA.) It operates under a non-profit tax status in the United States, and throughout the rest of the world. According to diverse sources such as Forbes, USA Today and NPR, it is the largest single provider of reproductive healthcare services in America. Also according to these sources, It is the largest single provider of abortions in the United States.
The movie opens in dramatic fashion, at what turns out to be Johnson's last day working at the Texas clinic-we, the viewer, are privy to an abortion being performed. We see a flurry of activity, as the clinic's medical staff, including the doctor, prepare for the procedure around the young pregnant mother. Although never present during procedures in the past, Johnson is unexpectedly called in to help out the short-handed staff. We see an impressive, life-like visual representation of an infant in the womb through an ultrasound projection. We also see the doctor pursue the unidentified boy or girl with a vacuum-powered suction device. Twisting and turning in silent protest, we witness with Johnson as the unidentified s/he is sucked into a tube, slowly, piece by piece. "Beam me up, Scotty" are the last words Johnson hears, as she abruptly leaves the room to collapse in a heap of tears onto the nearby restroom floor.
The film then flashes back in time to when Johnson (here played by the extraordinary Ashley Bratcher) is a psychology student in college. Throughout the course of the story, we follow her journey from student, to experiences with her own abortions, to Planned Parenthood recruit, to committed Planned Parenthood new employee, to Planned Parenthood clinical director, to conversion experience, and finally to her transformation into a Pro-Life activist. We get a good glimpse into her personal life, including relationships with her family, husbands, daughter, parents, co-workers, and friends. These friends include people from The Coalition for Life (Now 40 Days of Life) who played a big part in her conversion.
I admire this film for not being afraid to show the ugly side of the Pro-Life movement: we do have scenes shown here outside Johnson's clinic, with pregnant mothers being accosted viciously and unsympathetically by angry extremists-especially one man in particular, who does not hold back his disgust for these mothers as they approach the clinic doors. There is a nice juxtaposition shown here between men like this, and Pro-Life men and women like Shawn (Jared Lotz) and Marilisa (Emma Elle Roberts) from The Coalition for Life, who are shown calmly and respectfully engaging in dialogue with these same women, as well as with Johnson herself.
I admire Unplanned even more for not being afraid to expose Planned Parenthood, warts and all. As this film is based on Johnson's recollections, we see her boss and co-workers in an unflattering light. Particularly frightening is Johnson's boss Cheryl, played with effective menace by Robia Scott. We see the dark underbelly of the organization, the rampant hypocrisy first-hand. Sometimes, it's through simple, underhanded tricks-like turning on the clinic's lawn sprinklers that face outward, to harass protesters outside the gates. At other times, it is more insidious-like when we are led into the P.O.C. room, officially known as the "Products of Conception" room, but unofficially and chillingly referred to by Planned Parenthood staffers as the "Pieces of Children" area. This is where aborted babies are re-assembled in specimen tables, to ensure that none of their tissue is unaccounted for inside their mothers.
I've had but limited experience in the Pro-Life movement, such as praying occasionally outside Planned Parenthood clinics during my parish's 40 Days for Life Observance. I am aware that there are groups of Pro-Life individuals that behave like the extremist man in the film. I am also aware of groups such as Generation Life, which take a compassionate and warm approach to the Pro-Life ministry. And I also have seen the anti-protestor tactics of Planned Parenthood staff and allies first-hand, too numerous to mention here.
I went to see the movie the Friday after it opened with a group of friends. There were several moments in the film that elicited tears, as well as cheers. When it was over, a majority of the audience-it was a decent crowd-stayed long after the credits finished rolling. The best, most effective movies are ones that engender discussion and reflection after they are viewed. Unplanned is no exception- our group, as well as many others in the theater, were caught up in thoughtful, animated discussion for at least an hour, and maybe longer.
This film is rated "R" for violence by the MPAA, which is telling. The "R" rating may restrict viewership, but I would urge those who are able to see the movie to keep an open mind, and go see the picture. It has been said that there are films that, similarly rated, should be seen by everyone. I've heard the power and intensity of scenes in Unplanned be compared to the similar effect of scenes in noteworthy films like Schindler's List (1994) and Saving Private Ryan (1998)-I would say that this is no exaggeration. I would also rank the intensity of Unplanned with what we get from violent scenes in The Passion of The Christ (2004) or Come and See (1985.)
Unplanned is skillfully directed by Chuck Kozelman and Cary Solomon, who also wrote the screenplay based on the book of the same name by Abby Johnson. The duo produced it, along with Daryl Lefever, Chris Jones, and Joe Knopp. It is distributed by Pure Flix.
Unplanned is an adaptation of the story by the same name by Abby Johnson. Johnson based the book on her own personal experiences and memoirs. At a certain point in time, Johnson was one of the youngest ever clinical directors at a Planned Parenthood clinic in the United States. Johnson would resign from Planned Parenthood in 2009, after a first-person experience assisting during an abortion at her clinic. This was one year after the clinic named her employee of the year. Now an author and public speaker, she is a founder and the president of And Then There Were None, a ministry to help abortion staff leave the industry.
Planned Parenthood is shorthand for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (PPFA.) It operates under a non-profit tax status in the United States, and throughout the rest of the world. According to diverse sources such as Forbes, USA Today and NPR, it is the largest single provider of reproductive healthcare services in America. Also according to these sources, It is the largest single provider of abortions in the United States.
The movie opens in dramatic fashion, at what turns out to be Johnson's last day working at the Texas clinic-we, the viewer, are privy to an abortion being performed. We see a flurry of activity, as the clinic's medical staff, including the doctor, prepare for the procedure around the young pregnant mother. Although never present during procedures in the past, Johnson is unexpectedly called in to help out the short-handed staff. We see an impressive, life-like visual representation of an infant in the womb through an ultrasound projection. We also see the doctor pursue the unidentified boy or girl with a vacuum-powered suction device. Twisting and turning in silent protest, we witness with Johnson as the unidentified s/he is sucked into a tube, slowly, piece by piece. "Beam me up, Scotty" are the last words Johnson hears, as she abruptly leaves the room to collapse in a heap of tears onto the nearby restroom floor.
The film then flashes back in time to when Johnson (here played by the extraordinary Ashley Bratcher) is a psychology student in college. Throughout the course of the story, we follow her journey from student, to experiences with her own abortions, to Planned Parenthood recruit, to committed Planned Parenthood new employee, to Planned Parenthood clinical director, to conversion experience, and finally to her transformation into a Pro-Life activist. We get a good glimpse into her personal life, including relationships with her family, husbands, daughter, parents, co-workers, and friends. These friends include people from The Coalition for Life (Now 40 Days of Life) who played a big part in her conversion.
I admire this film for not being afraid to show the ugly side of the Pro-Life movement: we do have scenes shown here outside Johnson's clinic, with pregnant mothers being accosted viciously and unsympathetically by angry extremists-especially one man in particular, who does not hold back his disgust for these mothers as they approach the clinic doors. There is a nice juxtaposition shown here between men like this, and Pro-Life men and women like Shawn (Jared Lotz) and Marilisa (Emma Elle Roberts) from The Coalition for Life, who are shown calmly and respectfully engaging in dialogue with these same women, as well as with Johnson herself.
I admire Unplanned even more for not being afraid to expose Planned Parenthood, warts and all. As this film is based on Johnson's recollections, we see her boss and co-workers in an unflattering light. Particularly frightening is Johnson's boss Cheryl, played with effective menace by Robia Scott. We see the dark underbelly of the organization, the rampant hypocrisy first-hand. Sometimes, it's through simple, underhanded tricks-like turning on the clinic's lawn sprinklers that face outward, to harass protesters outside the gates. At other times, it is more insidious-like when we are led into the P.O.C. room, officially known as the "Products of Conception" room, but unofficially and chillingly referred to by Planned Parenthood staffers as the "Pieces of Children" area. This is where aborted babies are re-assembled in specimen tables, to ensure that none of their tissue is unaccounted for inside their mothers.
I've had but limited experience in the Pro-Life movement, such as praying occasionally outside Planned Parenthood clinics during my parish's 40 Days for Life Observance. I am aware that there are groups of Pro-Life individuals that behave like the extremist man in the film. I am also aware of groups such as Generation Life, which take a compassionate and warm approach to the Pro-Life ministry. And I also have seen the anti-protestor tactics of Planned Parenthood staff and allies first-hand, too numerous to mention here.
I went to see the movie the Friday after it opened with a group of friends. There were several moments in the film that elicited tears, as well as cheers. When it was over, a majority of the audience-it was a decent crowd-stayed long after the credits finished rolling. The best, most effective movies are ones that engender discussion and reflection after they are viewed. Unplanned is no exception- our group, as well as many others in the theater, were caught up in thoughtful, animated discussion for at least an hour, and maybe longer.
This film is rated "R" for violence by the MPAA, which is telling. The "R" rating may restrict viewership, but I would urge those who are able to see the movie to keep an open mind, and go see the picture. It has been said that there are films that, similarly rated, should be seen by everyone. I've heard the power and intensity of scenes in Unplanned be compared to the similar effect of scenes in noteworthy films like Schindler's List (1994) and Saving Private Ryan (1998)-I would say that this is no exaggeration. I would also rank the intensity of Unplanned with what we get from violent scenes in The Passion of The Christ (2004) or Come and See (1985.)
Unplanned is skillfully directed by Chuck Kozelman and Cary Solomon, who also wrote the screenplay based on the book of the same name by Abby Johnson. The duo produced it, along with Daryl Lefever, Chris Jones, and Joe Knopp. It is distributed by Pure Flix.
Friday, August 31, 2018
God Told Me To (1976)
Somehow, some way, God Told Me To (1976) a sci-fi/horror flick by veteran genre director Larry Cohen, escaped my notice until summer of this year. I caught the end of it on an obscure cable channel late one night. I was so intrigued, I had to go off on a search to find the film on my own, on-demand, to watch it later.
My knowledge of Cohen's movies includes Q: The Winged Serpent (1982) a sci-fi-fi/horror tale about a giant prehistoric creature-visualized through stop-motion effects-terrorizing New York City. This film has no less than Kung-Fu and Kill Bill's David Carradine, Shaft's Richard Roundtree, American Graffitti's Candy Clark, and Law and Order's Michael Moriarity standing in the way of the monster. Also, I associate Cohen for the film of which he is best-known, It's Alive!(1974) a horror film focusing on the aftermath of the destructive path of a mutant baby(!)
I decided to write about God Told Me To in my religious movie blog, because of the thread of religious themes woven throughout the movie. Truth be told, the resultant film indicates the director is not entirely sympathetic or positive, when it comes to the supernatural nature of religion.
I doubt that God Told Me To could be made today-or, at the very least, could open the way it opens-with a literal bang. At the start of the movie, we see crowds of people walking the streets on a sunny, busy afternoon day in New York City. Suddenly, we hear a series of random shots fired-and folks start dropping like flies on the sidewalks. It appears that a hidden sniper is picking off civilians left and right, and frightened people run every-which-way for cover.
In the wake of national firearms-related tragedies, like the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, where a hidden sniper massacred a crowd of concert-goers outside the Mandalay Bay Casino, it is not hard to understand why a film scene such as this sniper scene could be considered in bad taste. Little wonder that God Told Me To languishes in obscurity on late-night cable television today. In the interest of fairness, this scene does not define the movie.
The location of the hidden gunman is quickly revealed to be a perch atop a tall water tower amongst the skyscrapers. The police, including NYPD detective Peter Nicholas (Tony Lo Bianco) quickly rush to the tower to confront the gunman. In a questionable move, Nicolas volunteers to risk his life to climb to the top of the tower to confront the gunman-and hopefully, talk him down from his perch.
Nicholas manages to get in the gunman's face as he is preparing to re-load his .22 caliber rifle. The shooter is revealed to be a young, disheveled white male in his 20s. When Nicholas asks why he is shooting people, the young man replies "God told me to," and, without warning, jumps off the tower to his death. The young man's horrified mother witnesses the entire spectacle from down below, and swears this murderous behavior is completely out-of-character for her son.
Over the next several days, Nicholas is charged with investigating a diverse series of random, unplanned murders. There is a knife massacre in a supermarket; a shooting at a St. Patrick's Day parade (perpetrated by a cop, in a distracting cameo by legendary comedian Andy Kaufman!) and a father's slaughter of his own family. One common element to these seemingly-unrelated murders? The assailant in each case claims "God Told Me To" when asked for a motive for the slayings.
A mysterious anonymous phone call received by the police before the St. Patrick's Day parade murder indicates that these killings may be less unplanned than the public is led to believe, but, the police have nothing further to go on.
Nicholas is able to find a connection between one of the killers and a long-haired man named Bernard Phillips (Richard Lynch). It appears that Phillips is the leader of a religious cult, and the members of this cult are the perpetrators of these murders. Phillips is influencing the murderers via strange psychic powers-the members feel they are being contacted by God, but it is Phillips who is manipulating them.
In a very interesting story development, we find out that Nicholas, in a confrontation with Philips, has more to play as a central part in this story than we first believe. We see it all has something to do with the two men's (possible) extra-terrestrial origins (!) Thus, we are gradually led to a final confrontation between the "angelic" Nicholas (who we learn, despite an extra-marital affair, is a devout Catholic) and the "demonic" Phillips.
Director Cohen also produced and wrote this film. The director appears to delve into the rhelm of scientism, using science-in this case, the existence of aliens, alien abduction, and ESP-to explain what was previously believed to be supernatural aspects of religion. Cohen is on record as stating that, along with the Bible, an inspiration for this movie is Chariots of the Gods?, author Erich von Daniken's 1968 novel hypothesizing that the religions of ancient civilizations were given to them by ancient aliens mistaken for gods.
God Told Me To is an entertaining movie, misunderstood by critics on its initial release. It's definitely a cult classic in it's own right, like Cohen's other movies. It's filled with a good amount of action, thrills and chills, and surprising plot-twists. Don't think for a moment though, that you'll be convinced by Cohen's explanations for the supernatural, and the origins of religion. Just enjoy the ride :-)
My knowledge of Cohen's movies includes Q: The Winged Serpent (1982) a sci-fi-fi/horror tale about a giant prehistoric creature-visualized through stop-motion effects-terrorizing New York City. This film has no less than Kung-Fu and Kill Bill's David Carradine, Shaft's Richard Roundtree, American Graffitti's Candy Clark, and Law and Order's Michael Moriarity standing in the way of the monster. Also, I associate Cohen for the film of which he is best-known, It's Alive!(1974) a horror film focusing on the aftermath of the destructive path of a mutant baby(!)
I decided to write about God Told Me To in my religious movie blog, because of the thread of religious themes woven throughout the movie. Truth be told, the resultant film indicates the director is not entirely sympathetic or positive, when it comes to the supernatural nature of religion.
I doubt that God Told Me To could be made today-or, at the very least, could open the way it opens-with a literal bang. At the start of the movie, we see crowds of people walking the streets on a sunny, busy afternoon day in New York City. Suddenly, we hear a series of random shots fired-and folks start dropping like flies on the sidewalks. It appears that a hidden sniper is picking off civilians left and right, and frightened people run every-which-way for cover.
In the wake of national firearms-related tragedies, like the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, where a hidden sniper massacred a crowd of concert-goers outside the Mandalay Bay Casino, it is not hard to understand why a film scene such as this sniper scene could be considered in bad taste. Little wonder that God Told Me To languishes in obscurity on late-night cable television today. In the interest of fairness, this scene does not define the movie.
The location of the hidden gunman is quickly revealed to be a perch atop a tall water tower amongst the skyscrapers. The police, including NYPD detective Peter Nicholas (Tony Lo Bianco) quickly rush to the tower to confront the gunman. In a questionable move, Nicolas volunteers to risk his life to climb to the top of the tower to confront the gunman-and hopefully, talk him down from his perch.
Nicholas manages to get in the gunman's face as he is preparing to re-load his .22 caliber rifle. The shooter is revealed to be a young, disheveled white male in his 20s. When Nicholas asks why he is shooting people, the young man replies "God told me to," and, without warning, jumps off the tower to his death. The young man's horrified mother witnesses the entire spectacle from down below, and swears this murderous behavior is completely out-of-character for her son.
Over the next several days, Nicholas is charged with investigating a diverse series of random, unplanned murders. There is a knife massacre in a supermarket; a shooting at a St. Patrick's Day parade (perpetrated by a cop, in a distracting cameo by legendary comedian Andy Kaufman!) and a father's slaughter of his own family. One common element to these seemingly-unrelated murders? The assailant in each case claims "God Told Me To" when asked for a motive for the slayings.
A mysterious anonymous phone call received by the police before the St. Patrick's Day parade murder indicates that these killings may be less unplanned than the public is led to believe, but, the police have nothing further to go on.
Nicholas is able to find a connection between one of the killers and a long-haired man named Bernard Phillips (Richard Lynch). It appears that Phillips is the leader of a religious cult, and the members of this cult are the perpetrators of these murders. Phillips is influencing the murderers via strange psychic powers-the members feel they are being contacted by God, but it is Phillips who is manipulating them.
In a very interesting story development, we find out that Nicholas, in a confrontation with Philips, has more to play as a central part in this story than we first believe. We see it all has something to do with the two men's (possible) extra-terrestrial origins (!) Thus, we are gradually led to a final confrontation between the "angelic" Nicholas (who we learn, despite an extra-marital affair, is a devout Catholic) and the "demonic" Phillips.
Director Cohen also produced and wrote this film. The director appears to delve into the rhelm of scientism, using science-in this case, the existence of aliens, alien abduction, and ESP-to explain what was previously believed to be supernatural aspects of religion. Cohen is on record as stating that, along with the Bible, an inspiration for this movie is Chariots of the Gods?, author Erich von Daniken's 1968 novel hypothesizing that the religions of ancient civilizations were given to them by ancient aliens mistaken for gods.
God Told Me To is an entertaining movie, misunderstood by critics on its initial release. It's definitely a cult classic in it's own right, like Cohen's other movies. It's filled with a good amount of action, thrills and chills, and surprising plot-twists. Don't think for a moment though, that you'll be convinced by Cohen's explanations for the supernatural, and the origins of religion. Just enjoy the ride :-)
Thursday, August 30, 2018
The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005) and Requiem (2006)
Today I choose to write my reflections on two films, a first for this blog. The movies I choose to spotlight are: an American drama film directed by Scott Derrickson titled The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005); and Requiem (2006) a German drama film directed by Hans Christian-Schmidt. Both Requiem and Rose are based on the strange, real-life case of German woman Anna Elisabeth "Anneliese" Michel. I feel a connection to this story, being a Catholic Christian interested in the ritual of exorcism, but also due to some odd coincidences-like the fact that in the past I have visited the town of Wurzburg, where Anneliese Michel attended college in the 1970s.
Annelise Michel (1952-1976) was a West German young woman who was diagnosed with epileptic psychosis. She had a history of ineffective psychiatric treatment. After five years of ineffective treatment, her devout Catholic family sought the help of the Church. She underwent Catholic exorcism rites a year before her death. She died as a result of dehydration and malnourishment. Her parents and two priests were charged with negligent homicide in her death, and were sentenced to fines and probation.
Scott Derrickson, the director of Emily Rose, minored in theological studies in college. He is a Protestant believer, who is not afraid to examine questions of faith and morals in his movies. He is also a veteran director who concentrates on speculative fiction subjects. Some of his most popular movies include Sinister (2012), Deliver Us From Evil (2014), and Doctor Strange (2016).
As regular readers of my blogs already know, speculative fiction is one of my favorite film genres-and this includes the horror genre. It can be difficult at times to reconcile my faith with this envelope-pushing genre. It is particularly interesting, when the subjects of religion and horror intersect. This intersection is often most noticeable in the horror sub-genre of the "exorcism" movie.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose really stands out from the pack from your standard exorcism movie, particularly with regards to its structure and characterizations.
Emily Rose opens with the arrest of Father Richard Moore (veteran actor Tom Wilkinson) a Catholic diocesan priest who is accused of negligent homicide by the government, following the death of one 19-year old college student, Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter, of Dexter tv fame.) Father Moore had recently performed an exorcism on Emily Rose, but she did not survive the ritual-dying of self-inflicted wounds and malnutrition.
Father Moore's Archdiocese begs him to plead guilty in the case, to avoid any further bad publicity, but Father Moore maintains his innocence. The case comes to the attention of attorney Erin Bruner (Laura Linney, in a strong portrayal) a hungry and ambitious agnostic, who sees the high-profile case as a potential springboard to a partnership in her firm. Moore agrees to be represented by Bruner, in hope that the truth of the Emily Rose incident can be brought to light in court.
What's particularly novel about Emily Rose among exorcism movies is the setting-most of the drama of the film takes place in the courtroom. Emily's past is told through flashbacks during the trial, through witness testimony. And yes, this gives the film the opportunity to showcase some considerable melodramatic special effects. Judge Brewster (Mary Beth Hurt) presides over the trial-though, we never get a sense of her religious beliefs, or lack thereof. The prosecuting attorney chosen for this case is one Ethan Thomas (Campbell Scott, in a convincing performance) a devout Methodist, who is deeply skeptical of the rite of exorcism.
The prosecution highlights Emily Rose's history of epilepsy and psychosis to explain her strange behavior at college that prompted Father Moore's exorcism. Emily failed to respond to the anti-seizure medication prescribed to her by doctors to curb her strange visions and physical contortions. She was driven home from college by her friend Jack, after which, her religious family summoned the priest.
Bruner's defense of Moore relies on the idea that the possibility is that Emily Rose could have, in fact, really been possessed by demons-a possibility that, though possibly untrue, cannot be entirely ruled out. Bruner highlights this possibility by questioning authoritative witnesses such as Sadira Adani (Shohreh Aghdashloo) an anthropologist who relays to the court the spiritual possession legends from other cultures.
Though an agnostic, Bruner comes to question her own lack of religious conviction-we see her awakened at an odd hour of the night (3 am, the hour when demons choose to mock the Holy Trinity, according to exorcism lore.) She experiences various supernatural phenomena at home, and is reminded by Father Moore that he, too, suffered such exposure to the demonic on the night before the exorcism.
The trial, and the film, ends in a not-quite-expected way, and we are given a glimpse of future events that, depending on your point-of-view, could be cause for hope for the future.
Make no mistake about it, this is a frightening film. The audio and visual components of the movie add up to quite a few jump-scares. Definitely not a movie to watch late at night all alone in a dark house!
The film was co-written by Derrickson and Paul Harris Boardman. Derrickson has said in an interview that he chose Boardman specifically because he is a non-believer. Derrickson saw the pairing of a man of faith and a skeptic, as infusing the screenplay with two different perspectives. This pairing was necessary to create a sense of ambiguity with regard to the story, allowing viewers to make up their own minds regarding whether the film is a religious/supernatural interpretation of events, or a secular/medical interpretation.
There is also ambiguity regarding the story of Anneliese Michel when it comes to Hans Christian-Schmidt's 2006 film Requiem, based on the same case as Emily Rose. Hans Christian-Schmidt, despite his name, is not a believer. He appears focused on the question: why would an intelligent young woman, an epileptic, choose the arcane ritual of exorcism, over continuing medical treatment for her disease?
Scripted by Bernd Lange, the film unfolds slowly, and not much happens but gradually. The cinematography is such that it looks as if it was actually filmed in the the period it is based in (the 70s) though filmed decades later. Definitely a lower-budgeted affair here, as compared to Rose. Sandra Huller plays central character Michaela, and she is very believable in this pivotal role. We get a great sense of her sheltered upbringing as an epileptic in her strong Catholic family in her small town, and the culture shock she experiences when she goes off to college. At college, she encounters new experiences, becoming re-acquainted with an old friend from her town (Anna Bloomier) and meeting a new boyfriend (Nicholas Reinke.) Unfortunately for Michaela, the symptoms of her epilepsy (an illness she had been concealing and controlling with medication) start to manifest themselves under the stress of college, and she experiences the hearing of voices, along with the seizures this time. Perhaps as a result of falling into sinful behavior at school, Michaela decides to turn back to the Church for help.
Michaela runs into trouble when she finds it hard to trust either the pastor of her parish, or the parochial vicar, both of which have wildly deferring positions on the rite of exorcism. Complicating matters is the fact that although her father loves her, and wants what's best for her, Michaela's relationship with her domineering mother is very strained. The film seems to imply that it is Michaela's mother that forces Michaela to trust the rite of exorcism, over the medical solutions to her condition-despite her father's objections.
In the end, the only thing we're really sure of in Schmidt's film is that mental illness is a terrible thing. The film is scary, but not in a traditional horror film way. It's scary, because it shows demonic possession to be a subjective and perspective condition. As a believer, I find this POV lacking, but, the possibility of it being remotely true, as highlighted by Requiem is considerably scary to me.
Annelise Michel (1952-1976) was a West German young woman who was diagnosed with epileptic psychosis. She had a history of ineffective psychiatric treatment. After five years of ineffective treatment, her devout Catholic family sought the help of the Church. She underwent Catholic exorcism rites a year before her death. She died as a result of dehydration and malnourishment. Her parents and two priests were charged with negligent homicide in her death, and were sentenced to fines and probation.
Scott Derrickson, the director of Emily Rose, minored in theological studies in college. He is a Protestant believer, who is not afraid to examine questions of faith and morals in his movies. He is also a veteran director who concentrates on speculative fiction subjects. Some of his most popular movies include Sinister (2012), Deliver Us From Evil (2014), and Doctor Strange (2016).
As regular readers of my blogs already know, speculative fiction is one of my favorite film genres-and this includes the horror genre. It can be difficult at times to reconcile my faith with this envelope-pushing genre. It is particularly interesting, when the subjects of religion and horror intersect. This intersection is often most noticeable in the horror sub-genre of the "exorcism" movie.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose really stands out from the pack from your standard exorcism movie, particularly with regards to its structure and characterizations.
Emily Rose opens with the arrest of Father Richard Moore (veteran actor Tom Wilkinson) a Catholic diocesan priest who is accused of negligent homicide by the government, following the death of one 19-year old college student, Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter, of Dexter tv fame.) Father Moore had recently performed an exorcism on Emily Rose, but she did not survive the ritual-dying of self-inflicted wounds and malnutrition.
Father Moore's Archdiocese begs him to plead guilty in the case, to avoid any further bad publicity, but Father Moore maintains his innocence. The case comes to the attention of attorney Erin Bruner (Laura Linney, in a strong portrayal) a hungry and ambitious agnostic, who sees the high-profile case as a potential springboard to a partnership in her firm. Moore agrees to be represented by Bruner, in hope that the truth of the Emily Rose incident can be brought to light in court.
What's particularly novel about Emily Rose among exorcism movies is the setting-most of the drama of the film takes place in the courtroom. Emily's past is told through flashbacks during the trial, through witness testimony. And yes, this gives the film the opportunity to showcase some considerable melodramatic special effects. Judge Brewster (Mary Beth Hurt) presides over the trial-though, we never get a sense of her religious beliefs, or lack thereof. The prosecuting attorney chosen for this case is one Ethan Thomas (Campbell Scott, in a convincing performance) a devout Methodist, who is deeply skeptical of the rite of exorcism.
The prosecution highlights Emily Rose's history of epilepsy and psychosis to explain her strange behavior at college that prompted Father Moore's exorcism. Emily failed to respond to the anti-seizure medication prescribed to her by doctors to curb her strange visions and physical contortions. She was driven home from college by her friend Jack, after which, her religious family summoned the priest.
Bruner's defense of Moore relies on the idea that the possibility is that Emily Rose could have, in fact, really been possessed by demons-a possibility that, though possibly untrue, cannot be entirely ruled out. Bruner highlights this possibility by questioning authoritative witnesses such as Sadira Adani (Shohreh Aghdashloo) an anthropologist who relays to the court the spiritual possession legends from other cultures.
Though an agnostic, Bruner comes to question her own lack of religious conviction-we see her awakened at an odd hour of the night (3 am, the hour when demons choose to mock the Holy Trinity, according to exorcism lore.) She experiences various supernatural phenomena at home, and is reminded by Father Moore that he, too, suffered such exposure to the demonic on the night before the exorcism.
The trial, and the film, ends in a not-quite-expected way, and we are given a glimpse of future events that, depending on your point-of-view, could be cause for hope for the future.
Make no mistake about it, this is a frightening film. The audio and visual components of the movie add up to quite a few jump-scares. Definitely not a movie to watch late at night all alone in a dark house!
The film was co-written by Derrickson and Paul Harris Boardman. Derrickson has said in an interview that he chose Boardman specifically because he is a non-believer. Derrickson saw the pairing of a man of faith and a skeptic, as infusing the screenplay with two different perspectives. This pairing was necessary to create a sense of ambiguity with regard to the story, allowing viewers to make up their own minds regarding whether the film is a religious/supernatural interpretation of events, or a secular/medical interpretation.
There is also ambiguity regarding the story of Anneliese Michel when it comes to Hans Christian-Schmidt's 2006 film Requiem, based on the same case as Emily Rose. Hans Christian-Schmidt, despite his name, is not a believer. He appears focused on the question: why would an intelligent young woman, an epileptic, choose the arcane ritual of exorcism, over continuing medical treatment for her disease?
Scripted by Bernd Lange, the film unfolds slowly, and not much happens but gradually. The cinematography is such that it looks as if it was actually filmed in the the period it is based in (the 70s) though filmed decades later. Definitely a lower-budgeted affair here, as compared to Rose. Sandra Huller plays central character Michaela, and she is very believable in this pivotal role. We get a great sense of her sheltered upbringing as an epileptic in her strong Catholic family in her small town, and the culture shock she experiences when she goes off to college. At college, she encounters new experiences, becoming re-acquainted with an old friend from her town (Anna Bloomier) and meeting a new boyfriend (Nicholas Reinke.) Unfortunately for Michaela, the symptoms of her epilepsy (an illness she had been concealing and controlling with medication) start to manifest themselves under the stress of college, and she experiences the hearing of voices, along with the seizures this time. Perhaps as a result of falling into sinful behavior at school, Michaela decides to turn back to the Church for help.
Michaela runs into trouble when she finds it hard to trust either the pastor of her parish, or the parochial vicar, both of which have wildly deferring positions on the rite of exorcism. Complicating matters is the fact that although her father loves her, and wants what's best for her, Michaela's relationship with her domineering mother is very strained. The film seems to imply that it is Michaela's mother that forces Michaela to trust the rite of exorcism, over the medical solutions to her condition-despite her father's objections.
In the end, the only thing we're really sure of in Schmidt's film is that mental illness is a terrible thing. The film is scary, but not in a traditional horror film way. It's scary, because it shows demonic possession to be a subjective and perspective condition. As a believer, I find this POV lacking, but, the possibility of it being remotely true, as highlighted by Requiem is considerably scary to me.
Sunday, August 26, 2018
The Big Lebowski (1998)
This year marks the 20th anniversary of what is arguably one of the best films of master filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen (Fargo, Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing, No Country for Old Men, etc.)
It took me a long time to come around to the “Cult of Lebowski."
I recall when the film was released, I was in my early twenties. I didn’t quite understand the appreciation of the film back then. It was particularly embraced by college students.
A friend and co-worker around the time the film was first released loved the movie, saw it for a future masterpiece-and, though a professed teetotaler, would order White Russians (a signature drink of the protagonist in the film) at bars when I hung out with him. This man was a “hipster,” though we didn’t really use that terminology back in those days. I think the fact that he liked the film so much, became a reason for me to dislike said movie. I’ve always had a natural aversion to anything that is popular, in the mainstream or underground, *UNLESS* I discover said thing myself, without help.
Though I don't always agree with the philosophies behind their movies, particularly when they conflict with the tenets of my faith (see-major plot points of Searching for Llewyn Davis, etc.) I make it a point to watch the Coen brothers movies when the opportunities present themselves.
When I first saw the movie, I didn't know what to make of it. I thought there was a lot (in fact, way too much) profanity. And I didn't really "get" the humor.
I also thought the film thin on plot, and overly preoccupied with quirky characterizations.
Now, in my forties, I think I can relate to the film on a deeper level. Particularly, I relate to the central character of The Dude more than I ever thought possible.
The Dude is very mellow and laid-back. Though he's unemployed, he did go to college, and he was involved in activist causes. He is thought a fool by those who don't know him well enough, and judge him on appearance. He's much smarter than folks give him credit, and he has a knack for being underestimated by friends and adversaries alike.
The plot begins as follows: The movie takes place in the early 1990s, around the time of Operation Desert Storm. In a case of mistaken identity, The Dude is ambushed at home by a couple of goons, who soil one of his few prized possessions (his living room rug) and dunk his head in his own toilet, whilst breaking the Dude's recently procured bottle (alcohol?) near his head. The goons have confused The Dude with a man with the same legal name, Jeffrey Lebowski (David Huddleston) the "Big Lebowski" of the title, whose wife owes their boss, porn producer Jackie Treehorn (Ben Gazarra) money. Realizing their mistake, they leave without so much as an apology. The dude is left to ruminate on the strange confrontation with his friends and bowling buddies-Vietnam vet and gun afficionado Walter Sobchak (John Goodman) and Donny (a bullied surfer, played by Steve Buschemi.)
The Dude is convinced by Walter to pay a visit to the other Jeffrey Lebowski, to ask for compensation for his ruined rug (in their minds, the Big Lebowski is responsible for the damage, since it *his* rug the goons had meant to urinate upon!) Thus begins a comedic odyssey full of more twists and turns, and crazy characters than one can shake a stick at.
I decided to write about The Big Lebowski in my religious, as opposed to my secular movie blog, because I notice some strong parallels between certain characters in the film, and major figures/archetypes of Catholic Christian theology. The film has enough depth to write more on other observations in my secular bog, which I will undoubtedly do at some point.
However, as far as religion, the focus of *this* blog, is concerned: much has been written/said about the connection between the philosophy of central protagonist Jeffrey “The Dude” Lebowski (Jeff Bridges) and Zen Buddhist philosophy.
However, what is more interesting to me are the strong similarities between The Dude, and Jesus Christ. Further, I notice a connection between “The Stranger” (Sam Elliot) narrator of the film, and the Almighty God. And then there is the interchangeability of the “other” Jeffrey Lebowski (David Huddleston) the "Big Lebowski" of the title, and Satan/the Enemy/the Adversary. There is a Jesus by name in the film as well-Jesus Quintana (John Turturro) who is actually more of an Anti-Christ.
Like Jesus Christ in the New Testament, The Dude is respected and loved by a small circle of friends. Like Christ, he is disrespected by those who don’t know who he really is. The Dude is attacked without provocation in his small abode, humiliated, his meager possessions in his house vandalized.
The Dude does not have respect for phony authority figures (who also lack respect for him) and like Christ, adheres to a philosophy of do-unto-others.
Though I don’t agree with all the main points posited by the author, most of the significant parallels between The Dude and Christ can be found in this interesting book excerpt: https://www.popmatters.com/165034-takin-it-easy-for-us-sinners-the-dude-and-jesus-christ-2495800788.html
The Christ-like allegory is not a perfect fit: The Dude is not averse to recreational drug/alcohol use, practicing unmarried sex, or totally immune to avarice. Still, there are enough commonalities to justify a comparison.
Additionally, I notice some strong parallels between the character of "The Stranger" (Sam Elliot) and God the Father:
Additionally, I notice some strong parallels between the character of "The Stranger" (Sam Elliot) and God the Father:
-Both are omniscient
-Both are good
-Both dislike cursing
-Both are philosophical
-Both are portrayed in film/artistic renderings as old/gray
-Both are storytellers
-The Stranger has an almost paternal, or at least, friendly attitude towards The Dude; likewise, God has his own son, Jesus Christ
-God has been cited by believers as a reason to eschew alcohol-for instance, belief
in a "Higher Power" by those in Alcoholics Anonymous. The Stranger drinks Sarsaparilla, a non-alcoholic beverage
And so on and so on...
Conversely, "The Big Lebowski", Jeffrey Lebowski, the wheelchair-bound millionaire, is a stand-in for Satan.
Lebowski is a fraud, like the Devil. He pretends to be a bigger deal than he is in reality. He's all about self-promotion, and deception. We find out later in the movie via his daughter Maude (Julianne Moore) that all Lebowski's money comes from his wife. Lebowski shames others, particularly The Dude, for not being what he himself misleadingly pretends to be-a self-made boot-strapper.
Lebowski finds a dupe (The Dude) who he believes nobody will miss, to take the fall for his crimes. There is a connection here between what the Big Lebowski does, and what The Dark One did in utilizing Judas Iscariot for his own nefarious schemes.
Oddly enough, there is a character specifically named "Jesus"-here, Jesus Quintana-in The Big Lebowski. This character is nothing like the biblical Jesus Christ and, if anything, is an exact opposite. The character can thus be considered an Anti-Christ stand-in.
Jesus Christ is known for such quotes as "Let the children come to me" (Matthew 19:14) and "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of Heaven" (Matthew 18:3.)
Quintana's relationship with the subject of children is completely opposite-he is specifically mentioned by Walter as being a pederast, and a registered sex offender. We also see a fantasy sequence of Quintana going door-to-door, to inform his neighbors of said-registered status.
The character of Quintana is meant to be a comedic one, though it is hard in today's day and age of sexual misconduct scandals to find much humor in this characterization. I can deal without him in the movie. It's definitely an element in this film that has not aged well. Particularly troublesome, is the fact that a spin-off movie featuring the character has been filmed and produced.
Despite a character like Quintana, Catholic Christian viewers, and other persons of faith can still find many aspects to enjoy and admire in The Big Lebowski. I still cringe at the overuse of profanity and, at times, distorted views of sexuality presented in the movie. I would advise that the film has a limited audience for those willing to overlook its flaws, to appreciate the cinematic merit that the movie brings to the table.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)