Film Review--Fireproof

Fireproof
directed by Alex Kendrick
written by Alex Kendrick and Stephan Kendrick
starring Kirk Cameron, Erin Bethea, Ken Bevel, Harris Malcolm, Phyllis Malcolm, Jason McLeod, Tommy McBride, Perry Revell



The Kendrick Brothers return with their third faith-based dramatic feature starring “Growing Pains” regular Kirk Cameron. Throughout it manages to convey difficult and complex human relationships naturally and with great focus and care.

Cameron plays a frustrated fire fighter named Caleb Holt married to a woman he can no longer tolerate. His wife, Catherine (Bethea) is equally upset with the marriage and decides after Caleb throws a tantrum and gets in her face that she’s had enough. Caleb cannot figure out what he’s supposed to do or if he really wants to do anything at all to rescue his marriage. His co-worker Chris ( Bevel) supports him and models his Christianity even though Caleb wants nothing to do with it. One of Caleb’s major obstacles is internet porn, something that haunts many Christian men who appear to want something more than their wives can provide. Caleb finds it nearly impossible to give it up even after Catherine catches him in the act of downloading images on his computer. Out of desperation Caleb turns to his father John, a man who dedicated his life to Christ a couple of years back and is concerned for his son’s well being. John introduces Caleb to a manual called the Love Dare and challenges him to complete the forty day course designed to improve himself and the way in which he sees his wife. Caleb begrudgingly accepts and begins the journey.

The film focuses on Caleb’s attempt to make his way through the Love Dare as every one of his attempts are rejected by Catherine. She is convinced he is just faking it in order to appear less hostile when the divorce proceedings are finalized. Her girlfriends share her sentiments. There is a separation of men and women in this film and they are treated as two entirely different animals at least initially. Neither is heralded above the other but they are different approaches to the sexual politics that inform any interpersonal situation. Catherine is a hard working woman who feels she has to perform more than her share of the chores at home. Caleb is hard headed and refuses to compromise his belief that a man ought to be shown respect at home. He complains that he commands respect everywhere he goes except in his own home.

Each person in this tortured relationship seek solace in different realms. With Caleb it’s pornography whereas Catherine starts to warm up to a doctor named Gavin Keller (Revell) who seems to have a thing for her. Catherine lets it go far enough to the point that she claims to one of her friends that he is the kind of man she needs. It is clear by the look on her face that she knows instinctively that she is acting in a way that betrays her true desire. Throughout the film Caleb steadfastly performs the daily tasks assigned to him and slowly he begins to ebb away at Catherine’s hard exterior. Caleb takes a monumental task to heart and proceeds along a specific path once he accepts Christ as his savior and, according to the film, learns what true love is. He puts everything he has into winning Catherine back and there are scenes between them that are emotionally charged and filled with tremendous tension. The Kendricks know how to milk the most out of most any emotional situation for maximum impact.


Some might argue that the veer into melodrama territory which is true but it manages to work in the overall context of the film. Some of the scenes are overwrought but they work exceedingly well due to the earnestness in which they are presented. There are amateurish moments in this film–the acting is occasionally sub par but one has to remember that these are not actors but impassioned community members who have taken the project upon their shoulders and helped move it along to where it needed to go. This film is ridiculously cheap by today’s standards–just over $500,000–and will prove to be one of the most profitable films of 2008.

The use of sex as a temptation best to be avoided proves to be an intriguing element in this film. The idea being presented is that men who frequent certain web sites no longer find their wives attractive and go out looking for images that reflect body types that they consider ideal. They can’t see their wives as flawless physical specimens so they look for it via their computer screens. The act of seeking out these plastic women causes tremendous guilt in these men and Caleb reflects this anguish as the film shows him shutting down his computer after gazing upon any number of sexually stimulating bodies engaged in a variety of illicit behaviors. Caleb clearly dislikes himself for this addiction but as with any addiction he feels helpless to find his way out of it. According to the film he finally gains a resolve with God’s help and takes a dramatic step to rid himself of the enemy.

Caleb’s transformation from selfish egoist to compassionate husband is not smooth and it is to the film’s infinite credit that he is not able to get what he truly desires without a whole lot of work, pain and suffering. His sorrow throughout the film makes the inevitable payoff particularly poignant and viable. It’s no mystery that in this sort of film everything solves itself although I felt that it might have been much more powerful if it had ended with Catherine still mulling over whether or not to allow her husband back into her life but that clearly is not an option in a film that is all about the covenant between man and woman. To end it as I envisioned would rob it of an easily digestible closure that ably ties everything together in a pretty pink bow. Still, in pure cinematic terms my alternative ending would have been much more effective as it would have left the audience with a series of questions and no obvious answers. Here we have the obvious answer to everything that has come before and the end result is relatively unsatisfying.

The film employs many regular folks in various roles and some of these are clearly not used to performing in front of the camera. These performances are a bit flat and lack nuance and emotional clarity. Still, for the most part, the cast does a fine job conveying the material which is deeply passionate for the subject matter it is attempting to convey. It’s refreshing to view a film that so unabashedly wears its intentions on its sleeve. There is no mystery here that this is a film dedicated to espousing a specific world view that regards Christ paramount as a living and breathing necessity in the world. It’s a good thing that this film has proven successful because there should honestly be more films that cater to this rather large audience so that they can experience films that reflect back to them their values. There is no reason why there shouldn’t be films coming out of Hollywood that are informed by Christianity although the earnestness and focus of this film might get diluted by any attempt to realize this sort of vision by the industry. It is the homespun aspect of this film that makes it so charming and enjoyable. The simple fact that it is a community effort centered around a specific church lends itself to an appreciation for the herculean effort put into this project.

There are moments in this film that are as strong and effective as anything that can be seen in a darkened theater. It is clear from the beginning that this is going to be a struggle between two people who have clearly not given up on one another. With so many marriages crumbling for a variety of reasons this film chooses to demonstrate a method with which one particular marriage might be saved. It shows how strained and stressful this process is and how devotion takes on many strange forms throughout the course of any romantic relationship. There is terrible pain in this film that merely makes those so afflicted that much stronger in the end. This film is about salvaging something it holds as a sacred bond that can never be broken. In the secular world most people would have dissolved a marriage in this bad of shape. It would be an easy thing to do and the couple would simply walk away from another. The agenda in this film is to show that this way of handling a marriage is not an option. The idea here is that marriage is forever and nothing shall come between a man and a woman strong enough to sever the tie.

The performances in this film are essentially capable of conveying the proper level of intensity required of the script. Kirk Cameron expresses all of the difficulties plaguing his character as he attempts to solve himself and the marriage he has committed himself to. Cameron demonstrates a range that allows him to command the screen during a variety of sequences. Erin Bethea sometimes seems to go a bit flat but for the most part she expresses everything required of her through her character’s various emotional states. Bethea has a slightly damaged look on occasion which works well for the character. Ken Bevel is quite good at conveying strength and assuredness in a gentle manner which provides his character with a sense of grace and clarity. Bevel presents a confident character who knows himself and is at ease with his place in the world. Harris Malcolm is solid and professor-like in his role as Caleb’s father. He demonstrates kindness through his eyes and clearly expresses a Christ like humility that provides the film with a certainty that enriches the experience of viewing it.

Overall, this film has an expressive message that rarely is given this type of treatment. This scenario is played out in the lives of many people who struggle to find the right method of helping them make their way back to the early days when everything was fresh and promising. It conveys the struggle without preaching its vision of the world to its audience. Certainly its focus is to express the love of Christ in a dramatic story designed strategically to promote Christianity but it doesn’t fall into the trap of overselling its message. It’s still an effective story that relates very necessary trauma without becoming sentimental. The simple idea that God’s love has the power to change lives is a profound one and the film does a terrific job holding on to this central idea. This is the story of a little film based entirely on biblical principles that managed to find itself shown in a great number of theaters across North America and beyond. It is a dazzling success story and a tremendous inspiration for others who share this particular outlook. Perhaps it might allow for more films of this type to make it into the multiplexes and show the film industry that Christian films can turn a profit.

Film Review--Diary of a Mad Black Woman

Diary of a Mad Black Woman
directed by Darren Grant
written by Tyler Perry
based on the play by Tyler Perry
starring Kimberly Elise, Steve Harris, Shemar Moore, Tamara Taylor, Cicely Tyson, Tyler Perry,


Life takes a bit of a turn for Helen (Elise) who assumes she had her husband Charles (Harris) figured out. After eighteen years of marriage, she certainly didn’t suspect him capable of any real surprises anymore. Yes, their marriage is really a sham but it seems to her to be a temporary glitch and nothing worth worrying herself over. Charles takes a different tack and boots her out of the beautiful house he’s financed illicitly back in the day when he was a thug. Now he is a respected lawyer who has decided its time to move on so he has the maid pack up everything that belongs to Helen and sends her on her way. Helen falls on her ass and the film is all about how she picks herself up again.

The film focuses on Helen’s life and the struggle she undertakes to make it her own. We see her take a job as a server and before we can blink she finds a man who wants nothing more than to love and protect her. They are a Christian couple who keep it clean and Helen mentions in a voice over to her diary that she is glad they didn’t have sex because he gives her something more valuable which is intimacy. Helen is damaged but she learns quick. She toughens herself up and gains considerable emotional strength. Her vitality comes into play the more she is with her new man Orlando (Moore) and he genuinely seems interested in her. Of course complications ensue which tear them apart but if you’ve ever seen a film of this nature then you know what to expect by the end.

Madea (Perry) makes an appearance here and she’s as feisty as ever with her gun and her low tolerance for idiocy. Again, she is a lunatic invention who brings necessary levity to any scene she’s in. Madea is necessary to this film because otherwise it threatens to slip into bad soap opera mode. It’s the performances in the end that save it and these characters all retain a certain level of strength that serves them all in the end. Everything centers around Madea’s house as she ends up taking Helen in after the blowup with Charles. It’s party central with Madea’s foul mouthed brother Joe (Perry) who seems a bit sauced most of the time although he never takes a drink. Medea keeps the cool with her sharp observations and genuine disregard for manners and politeness. Medea is the rollicking spirit that every one possesses but most keep locked up.

Perry introduces another spent character in the form of Debrah (Taylor). She’s got kids but she’s way more into shooting up so her husband Brian (Perry) gets fed up and won’t let her back in the house. Debrah certainly plays the part of a junk-fiend as her hair and face are all distressed like junkies are and she has the same tendency to twitch slightly and look in every direction as if something is coming to snatch her away. She is the character who, as in all Tyler Perry plays and films, will be redeemed at some point in the production. So, one can spend much of the film just anticipating when this fine moment will occur because we all know it’s going to happen eventually.

There is a sense of parenthood in this film as junkies clearly do not make good moms and are rightly punished for their acute inability to put their kids (let alone, God) at the top of their list of things to seriously care about. Family is promoted as something to fall back on when times are exceedingly difficult but not something you can fully expect to help raise you out of the gutter you are in. It can help but it can’t do all the work and Helen realizes this as soon as she steps out the door and takes the job at the restaurant. It takes her a few months to finally start to feel a bit more at ease with the condition her life is in. She struggles through a maze but gradually makes it out on the other side. This film is mainly about the ways that the world one must inhabit sometimes throw things at you that you cannot anticipate and the only thing to do is to get right back up and thank God you are still alive.

God in this film comes mostly through the church that all the central characters attend. There are songs of praise and a tremendous uplift but the film as a whole is more secular. The characters (seemingly with the exceptions of Madea and Joe) are all Christian but in this film their faith doesn’t stand out all that much.

The performances in this film are all fine enough for this material. Kimberly Elise slowly unveils her character’s transformation from a dutiful yet empty wife into a woman of more emotional solvency who can make her own decisions and take charge of her life. Elise captures the essence of her character and allows the viewer to gradually come to accept the many steps she takes to become the character at the end of the film who has much more of it figured out. Steve Harris plays it cool in this film until the moment that his character’s world drastically changes and he’s forced to see things in an entirely new way. Harris brings a relatively nuanced character into fruition and conveys many of the shortcomings his character possesses with ease. Tyler Perry plays three characters in this film and they all add a considerable sum to the film’s total. As Joe he’s playful and filled with a strange joy. As Medea he’s brusk, aggressive, and completely without a sense of propriety. As Brian, he’s a calm center of being that serves the courts and plays a vital role in the economy. He’s a good father who is forced to take care of two children because the wife is incapable of doing the job. Brian represents the type of upstanding man who can be relied on and believed in. In that regard, he’s much like Orlando (Shemar Moore). Moore’s character is definitely a contrast with Charles. He’s loving, attentive and utterly transfixed with Helen. Moore plays him with an essence of gentle strength that comes through in his posture and gestures.

Overall, this film captures the essence of a certain type of domestic existence. The characters all seem real and vital and there is a tremendous energy to some of the scenes. It plays well as the story of one woman who decides she simply cannot go on living the same way. In this sense it’s inspirational to anyone who has been slammed down into the dirt and who imagine themselves too weak to pull themselves up. Through work and determination, this angry black woman eases into herself and finds a quiet solace that emerges when the cobwebs clear and she begins to see things for how they are and not how she wants them to be. Clarity is rewarded in this film and it is shown to be a process that takes time and a great deal of care. It cannot simply appear overnight and is often the product of an intense struggle followed by a period of letting go.

Film Review--The Duchess

The Duchess
directed by Saul Dibb
written by Jeffrey Hatcher, Anders Thomas Jensen, Saul Dibb
starring Keira Knightley, Ralph Fiennes, Charlotte Rampling, Dominic Cooper, Hayley Atwell, Simon McBurney, Aiden McArdle, Alistair Petrie



Ah, the sweet decay of an intemperate life. The intensity of beauty encased in a being of immaculate style, commanding attention and praise. The rock star explicit and pronounced, comes flitting about, a shadow self of those lucky enough to apprehend it. Georgiana Cavendish, the Duchess of Devonshire, was such a creature. Everyone worshiped her and mimicked her style. In late 18th century England she was the center of everything and the inspiration for countless portraits and line drawings. As portrayed by Kiera Knightley, she is a handsome figure, a ballerina of sorts, a magical being who sends shivers down the spine whenever she performs the most trivial act.

In this film, Georgiana is betrothed at seventeen to the Duke of Devonshire (Fiennes), a much older man who is utterly obsessed with producing a male heir. Georgiana’s mother, Lady Spencer, (Rampling) approved of the union as she has previously done much to encourage it. The marriage starts off fairly well but the Duke quickly begins to tire of his wife. He allows a young girl named Charlotte (Eva Hrela) to live with them in order to prepare Georgiana for motherhood. Georgiana has two daughters which only proves to irritate the Duke further. Georgiana befriends a woman named Bess Foster and she too moves in with the Duke and his wife. This proves costly for Georgiana as the Duke is unable to keep his hands off of Bess. He is also unable to give her up and so Bess becomes his kept woman and a constant reminder of the Duke’s authority over Georgiana who is forced to face her nemesis daily. There are several scenes around the dinner table where Bess and Georgiana sit near one another as bitter rivals for the Duke’s fleeting love.

With the Duke happily preoccupied with Bess, Georgiana herself goes a-roamin’ and she becomes fixated on the young Whig politician Charles Grey (Cooper), the future Prime Minister of England. The flirtation becomes an all-out affair as Georgiana appears happy for the first time in the entire film. Grey brings something out in her that the Duke is frightfully unaware of. He extracts a deeply rooted sense of joy that the Duke is either too daft or too disinterested to delve into. The result is a woman who has realized a level of contentment within herself that has heretofore been denied her.

The film is lush and the cinematography by Gyula Pados captures the loneliness that plagues Georgiana as she struggles to be an attentive wife to a man who no longer has any need for her. Her desolation is worn heavily on her face as it becomes more apparent that the Duke is not capable of providing the type of intimacy that she requires. He labels her a dreamer and he means it as a pejorative. In his codified world there is no room for such womanly sentiments because the actual world is harsh and cruel and the only purpose a man can find is to conquer it.
Georgiana becomes a burdensome thing and so he finds a woman more to his liking. Perhaps it is all Georgiana’s political agitating that sets him off of her. Whatever it is, she becomes in his eyes persona non grata and she subsequently and rightly slips away from him into the arms of another.

There are many moments in this film where the Duke becomes a reviled individual whose only recognized obligation is to himself. He’s portrayed in such a way that it is impossible to find any sympathy for him because of everything he has done to harm his lovely wife. But he is allowed to live comfortably with his indiscretion and in fact is able to replay it time and again without suffering a single stroke of punishment. It is Georgiana who is punished and who longs for an arrangement that isn’t so cold and belittling. But her status in life, her image demands that she remain regardless of how distressing such an arrangement proves to be. She is a woman who is torn between her heart and her obligation to her people.

Georgiana’s participation in politics is given a short mention in this film. She gets involved but the film readily switches gears and focuses almost entirely on her romantic life, or lack thereof. There is mention of the Whigs party which is ran by a man named Charles James Fox (McBurney) and its political platform. Georgiana is seen conversing with Fox as well as introducing her future lover, Charles Grey. The riveting young man riles up the crowd with talk of revolution and change. Aside from these few moments there is really very little political talk in this film. It becomes the story of a scorned woman who attempts to take back as much as she can. Her intentions seem to be to free herself from the tyranny of the situation at home but this task is far more difficult than she could ever have imagined.

Quite a lot is said about the role of Georgiana in her newfound position. The Duke says later that he made two demands on her when they got married. Loyalty and a male heir. As she has failed on both accounts she is deserving of all the torment he can dish out to her. In the early stages of her marriage Georgiana is dancing a dying swan with exquisite precision and grace and maintains her position with society through a series of exquisite gestures that capture her public and bring them close to her. She possesses a dynamism that draws people into her and they respond with adulation and praise. She represents everything that is regal and pure in their eyes and they worship her accordingly. At one point in the film she is announced to a crowd by a man who says that what she is wearing will be worn by every woman in attendance the following day. Georgiana in this film is a woman of many talents who thrives on the attention that is won with her words and her deeds. She acknowledges that women do not have much of their own and that hats and dresses are their only way to express themselves. She says this with an astute political mind who certainly has much more to offer than her wardrobe.

The dynamic between Bess and Georgiana is well maintained. Their easy friendship is tarnished by Bess’s behavior with the Duke although Georgiana seems able to suffer through the reality as exhibited by Bess whom she is forced to see everyday. The film suggests that she truly has few options and must endure the situation without complaint.

The performances in this film are all air-tight. Kiera Knightley brings both an elegance and mischievousness to her role which is tinged with sadness. She projects a tremendous amount of charisma and charm throughout the film and maintains her character’s intelligence and fortitude. Ralph Fiennes plays the Duke as a man who is quite disturbed with his life when he’s not engaged with the political world. His countenance is darkened and he appears like a man who is criminally uncomfortable. Charlotte Rampling is a picture of control in this film. Her character is a solid woman who knows how to manipulate her way in society. She possesses infinite knowledge about the niceties that are expected from a woman of her stature and passes this on to her daughter. Rampling exudes class in this role and exhibits a commanding presence that is impossible to ignore. Dominic Cooper projects all of the appearances necessary for a politician. His character is charismatic, straightforward and earnest about the ideas he conveys to his audience. Cooper brings all these characteristics easily to the fore and is infinitely watchable. Hayley Atwell certainly plays a very naughty girl in this film and her eyes never quite lose their glint of treachery. Her character possesses a vitality, an exuberance that is readily felt from the first moment she appears on screen.

Overall, this is a captivating film about a fascinating woman who seems most definitely to have been a woman of her times. She comes across in this film as a woman who was damaged by her station and who found herself in a loveless marriage with a man who nevertheless afforded her an elevated position in society. He brought her to their attention but she kept herself their through her charm and capability of directly connecting with them. If this film truly captures the actual woman, it seems as if she was appreciated as a symbol of everything that was considered good and true. Keira Knightley certainly captures this essential quality and conveys a woman who charmed the crowds while harboring her own tormenting regrets.

Film Review--Thunderball

Thunderball
directed by Terence Young
written by Kevin McClory and Jack Whittingham
original screenplay by Jack Whittingham
screenplay by Richard Maibaum and John Hopkins
starring Sean Connery, Claudine Auger, Adolfo Celi, Luciana Paluzzi, Rick Van Nutter, Guy Doleman, Bernard Lee, Desmond Llewelyn



In this, the fourth installment in the Bond mega-franchise, the Bahamas play as the backdrop for a great number of intense, physical encounters.

Bond is back as an emissary of style, calm, and impeccable timing. He’s dutiful to the cause and controlled in a languid fashion that allows him to remain on top of his game at all times. In this one, a sinister plot is underway to uses stolen nuclear weapons to blow up a major city either in Europe or the United States. Naturally Bond is dispatched to the Bahamas in order to track a woman he is interested in named Domino (Auger). He learns that this woman is hooked up with Emilio Largo (Celi), the man behind the plot.

The film focuses on the cold relationship between Largo and Bond. They toy with each other for much of the film and this leads to a grand confrontation under water where the United States Coast Guard and Bond battle Largo’s henchmen in a stunning battle that seems to go on for hours. As I’m watching all the Bond films in chronological order I can only speak for the first four films. But, this is so far the single greatest scene in the series as it captures Bond at his best and also involves the outside forces of the Coast Guard. The only thing missing is a coy smile and a tossing back the sheets to bed one of the infinite beauties on display throughout the film.

Bond is a cad, for sure. He even tries to kiss his physiotherapist named Patricia Fearing but she fends him off after a fashion. It seems as if no woman is safe with him and most of them give in to him eventually. The only one he hasn’t put the moves on is Miss Moneypenny (Lois Maxwell) and he really ought to give it a whirl. I suspect he cannot because he actually respects her and he can only sleep with women for whom he has a quiet disdain for. It is a temporary situation as he ultimately falls softly at their feat and gives them the ride of their lives. His promiscuous nature works the same way his spy skills do; it feeds his sense of importance and provide him with a cover lest he ever feel inadequate or unnecessary. Indeed, he rarely feels anything but motivated to do the job or do this or that woman. There doesn’t seem to be another mode to this character as he builds upon each conquest with an expert precision and sublime timing.

There is nothing like seeing a man take full charge of his physical attributes and wipe out someone who is bearing down on him. Bond does this with more style and flair than any other such character and it’s what has driven the franchise for forty six years. His charisma is what sets him apart from the rest and it is a driving force in this film. It sends him out into the world as a beast out looking for his prey to devour. Many times this comes in the form of a sexy girl just aching to have the top agent in the bureau buried deep inside her. Otherwise he’s fighting the forces of what passes for evil. It’s a charmed life that is built around Bond’s impossible charm and elegance. The way he moves is charged with a furious energy that comes through in his posture and the way he presents himself. Impeccably dressed and fully engaged with the world that meets him, he conquers every dilemma with ease and purpose.

In this film Bond is forced to play a little game with Largo and it lasts for a great part of the film. His sole intention is to find the missiles in order to avoid a terrible catastrophe that would shake up the known world. This threat hangs over the entire film although one knows emphatically that Bond will solve everything and look impossibly dashing doing it. Naturally Bond manages to bed Domino and gets her to tell him what she knows about the missiles. It’s a case of losing your head to pleasure and forfeiting your loyalties for a piece of ass even if it is James Bond’s.

Bond has a way of throwing himself on women that has been described as akin to rape. It is true that he doesn’t seem to take no as a definitive answer and in today’s soft climate he would be deemed a rapist of sorts assuming he immediately takes them to bed which seems to be the case. Of course once they go Bond they don’t really need any other man because he’s the consummate lover along with the rest of his many skills. He’s a force of nature who kills as easily as he devours women. It’s interesting to consider if he sees much of a difference between the two.

The performances in this film are all stellar. Sean Connery continues his graceful and debonair turn as the ultimate agent and procurer of information. Bond really seems to enjoy killing in this film as much as he does screwing the various women who throw themselves at him. Connery has mastered the necessary calm and pristine posture which make Bond so memorable. Claudine Auger is delectable, aggressive and mean for much of this film before her character caves to Bond’s immaculate charms. Adolfo Celi conveys all the mystery and hostility of his character while hiding behind an eyepatch which accentuates the uncertainty with which one approaches him.

Overall, this film captures the essence of Bond without going too far over the top. It manages to give Bond enough room to glide through and the character does so sublimely. This is a magnificent display of form and style that is exceedingly rare in cinema. Most often the hero is a brash, culture-deprived behemoth who wouldn’t know his way around a Dom Pérignon ‘53 and certainly wouldn’t be seen dead wearing an expensive tailored suit. Bond remains an impeccable icon who kills with a clean conscience and a fundamental ability to wreak serious damage on those who get in his way.

Film Review--Trouble the Water

Trouble the Water
directed by Carl Deal and Tia Lessin


There is a moment of exaltation in Trouble the Water where a woman named Kimberly Rivers Roberts locates the only copy of her CD in Memphis and quietly plays one of the tracks. She raps along to the disc and nearly blows the doors off the place harder than any mere hurricane could. It’s a song about despair, being mired in poverty and having to deal with drugs and violence as a way of life. Kimberly is a former or current drug dealer who has lived with her family in New Orleans’s Ninth Ward. It’s a comfortable neighborhood filled with familiar people. It’s also a direct target for Hurricane Katrina and as the film opens Kimberly is beginning to record the day because she feels it promises to be interesting. We see her world through the lens of a jumpy camcorder. We also know that Katrina is heading directly at Kimberly and her family and that there is no way they are going to be able to move away from it. This is the case for thousands of people who are too poor to leave and must do whatever it takes to ride out the storm.

The use of Kimberly’s camera work creates a disjointed, confusing space that readily mimics the chaos that will be brought down upon her and her family by the storm. The anticipation before landfall is fraught with tensions that are only exacerbated once Katrina hits. Suddenly a once quiet street is filled with water and many people all over the area are trapped with limited supplies. Meanwhile Kimberly gets as much of it on tape as she can. The film intercuts Kimberly’s footage with actual news broadcasts which appear to be disconnected from the actual tragedy. There is a tremendous gulf between what Katrina tapes and what is being shown on the television. Naturally, it is impossible for the media coverage to get the story from the inside and this is what make’s Kimberly’s camera work all that more powerful.

The film cuts between just before and during the storm and two weeks after. Afterward the only real trauma that is set before them is just when or if they are going to receive a check from FEMA which has promised survivors of the storm over 2 grand for their aggravation. There is a real sense in this film that the government did not react fast enough to the poorer areas of New Orleans and it becomes clear that repairs even a year on were not being undertaken in many of those areas. It’s a grim picture of an event that seems to be only the precursor to the actual tragedy.

The life energy sucked out of much of New Orleans is immense and naturally it required much time and patience to even begin to put it all back. In this film the streets are lined with debris from the homes and lives of actual breathing human beings, some of whom ended up dead in their attics or favorite chairs. It is difficult to determine which is more depressing–the poor and insolvent losing their lives because they have no transportation and no place to go or the images of people stuck together attempting to survive the convention center or the Superdome.

This is really a story about a resilient woman’s quest to survive something that has just about wrecked everything in her life save her relationship with her husband. She loses her grandmother who was staying in the hospital and much of the film leads to her funeral where her family just wants an opportunity to say goodbye.


It’s easy to condemn these people, to label them in a most specific way, for putting themselves in this situation. One cannot imagine being forced to face a level 5 hurricane with absolutely no ability to leave to higher ground. But poverty in this case and lack of connections has lead to a dire situation where the only choice is to stay behind and attempt the impossible, to ride out the storm in the blind hope that it won’t utterly swamp you and suck you into oblivion.

Kimberly finds one of her neighbors dead in his house and it’s one of those moments in the film where the reality of the situation comes in hard. Many lives were lost to this behemoth and again outside of the scope of the storm it’s easy to forget just how devastating to human life it actually was. Watching it on television as demonstrated in the film creates an instant disconnect that severs the viewer from the events as they unfolded in Louisiana. One remains a casual observer looking in on a surreal experience that through the television seems both beyond real and ultimately fascinating like very few things before on tv. The human drama unfolding before one’s eyes remains a stark and painful reminder of just how tenuous we cling to the material aspects of our lives. Katrina sends a message to all of us that our lives are more than the accumulation of our stuff. This film cements the idea that a major storm cannot strip a person of their dignity or their humanity. If a person survives they are left fundamentally with the only possession that truly matters.

Overall this is a film that resonates for a great number of reasons. It’s a tale of a remarkable woman’s survival through one of the deadliest cyclone storms in American history. Kimberly Rivers Roberts plays music that brings down the house as if she alone were doing God’s work through the terrible storm. Her music is sad and emblematic of a situation that defies human comprehension. It tears into the soul and forces the mind to accept the reality that continued to plague these survivors long after the storm had finished playing it’s symphony of chaos and destruction.

Film Review--Goldfinger

Goldfinger
directed by Guy Hamilton
written by Richard Maibaum and Paul Dehn
based on the novel by Ian Fleming
starring Sean Connery, Honor Blackman, Gert Frobe, Shirley Eaton, Tania Mallet, Harold Sakata, Bernard Lee, Martin Benson, Cec Linder, Austin Willis, Lois Maxwell



In this, the third James Bond film, a sinister gold-sniffing megalomaniac upsets the perfect sex-hungry world of Bond and puts his life in peril time and again.

James Bond (Connery) is sent on a mission to monitor the habits of one Auric Goldfinger (Frobe), a man whose gold fetish seems to know no bounds. He foils a card cheat and beds a woman named Jill Masterson (Eaton) who is helping the deceitful Goldfinger trick his foe and steal his money. The woman is later covered with gold paint and suffocates from lack of oxygen to the skin. Bond travels around Europe and discovers a plot in Switzerland but is captured before he can warn anyone back home about it. Much of the film has Bond in captivity although before he is captured he manages to bed Jill’s sister Tilly who is attempting to murder Goldfinger for the death of Jill.

Bond in bondage is a nice trick and it works quite well in this film. He can’t move about, he is incapable of any brave action, his life hangs in the balance and he is at the mercy of a super villain who seems fully lacking in social mores. Of course the new sex toy appears in the form of the aptly named Pussy Galore (Blackman) who is hard, talented, and seemingly off limits with her lesbian chic and ice cold demeanor. Of course she warms up and begins to dress appropriately for the part of Bond’s love object which changes the dynamic of the film entirely.

This Bond film features nifty gadgets and a fabulous new car, the Aston Martin DB5s. Bond is given brand new tricks to mess with the movement of his enemies and uses them ingeniously to turn the game in his favor. Naturally it doesn’t work altogether and he is brought low by Goldfinger and his primary henchman, the mute Odd Job (Sakata), a forceful man with a solid physique who proves to be a worthy foe for Bond. Odd Job has a really neat trick of his own and employs it regularly to cause significant mayhem.

As usual Bond is fully capable with women and they seem satisfied with his performance and willing to take him on for another go. The women are so easily won over to Bond’s charm and his hyper masculine mien. There is no mystery, no sense of quiet and tortured longing, and nothing approaching even a moment of genuine titillation. It is the power of charisma and few can withstand its charms for very long. Witness Pussy Galore and her strict, clearly defined barrier which surrounds her and protects her from having to deal with the forthright advances of a man like Bond. She is the leader of a group of aerial acrobats as well as a private pilot for Goldfinger. She does not need Bond for any reason but she starts to slip gradually over the course of the film which one naturally expects any woman, no matter how militant her stance against such dalliances, will eventually have no choice but to give in to the master of seduction. Bond knows a key rule in this sultry game which is to commence an argument or a disagreement of some kind and allow the woman to imagine that she has the upper hand. Most of the women Bond takes are really no challenge so it seems likely he enjoys it more when they are feisty and not forthcoming like Pussy Galore.

Goldfinger is a suave stack of meat cakes. He’s a bit pudgy but he is resourceful and his mad scheme is genius as well as diabolical. His instincts are usually quite good and he knows precisely what is happening about him at all times. He has no desires other than gold and he has dedicated his entire existence to procuring as much of it as he can get his thick little fingers on. He is a potent villain who is capable of eliminating large groups of people in order to carry out his plan. He’s willing to watch large swaths of the population die for his art and this makes him one of the more lethal cinematic arch fiends of recent memory.

Odd Job makes for a spectacular enemy as he is relentless in his devotion to Goldfinger and his master plan. He does all the dirty work for his master and doesn’t seem to be awarded particularly well for his efforts. Nevertheless he is incredibly strong (Sakata was a professional wrestler) and pretty much the most vital threat that Bond has encountered thus far. Odd Job moves about with the authority that comes when a man knows he can kill someone with his bare hands. He knows his place and where he should stand and it takes wholly unusual circumstances to divert him from his directive.

There is a tremendous amount of energy in this film as scenes are volatile and highly combustible; each character presents a formula for putting themselves in harm’s way and either extricating themselves from danger or succumbing to it. Pussy Galore is a tough broad who is fully capable of taking care of herself and maintaining her own existence against any man who might imagine he can have his way with her. With Bond bearing down on her, under the illogical assumption that he might use his famous wide smile to entice her, she holds her own and literally puts him in his place. Perhaps Pussy is a feminist but she’s not one who merely whines about inequality and being undermined by the present economical structure. Instead, she firmly establishes herself as a totemic figure fully able to fend off the enemy while managing to look quite stunning in the process.

The performances in this film are all apt and capture the essence of the Bond mystique. Sean Connery remains a marvel of cool, unregulated carnal charm. He knows he is irresistible to all women and he naturally takes advantage of any situation that brings them into his orbit. He’s capable at every turn and manages to do everything in his power to defend the reputation of the Secret Intelligence Service. Connery maintains his perfect posture and precise method of moving across the screen. Honor Blackman plays Pussy Galore with a strong physical presence that makes her one of the most dynamic and alluring Bond girls. Pussy is dangerous and fond of putting herself in harm’s way. Blackman gives a nuanced performance that reveals a character who knows what she is on about at any given moment. Gert Frobe does most of his best work in this film without speaking. He merely has to stand still and he’s forceful, intense and certainly as formidable as any screen villain of note. As Odd Job, Harold Sakata demonstrates just how an actor can play a role successfully without having to suffer the distress of speaking. He’s fluid, threatening, and leaves a definitive impression once the film has come to a close.

Overall, this film is an effective inclusion in the James Bond franchise. The characters are vivid, believable, and worth investigating. It follows a familiar format but manages to keep it intriguing straight through to the end. The performances all add to the mystique of the picture and the locales are lovely and engaging. Ultimately, the film succeeds because it puts Bond in an extended fit of peril and leaves him still, unable to mount much of an escape. This allows the rest of the film to develop so that it eventually comes into its own and evolves into something that approaches the messianic aspects of the Bond character.

Film Review: The Dhamma Brothers

The Dhamma Brothers
directed by Andrew Kukura, Jenny Phillips, Anne Marie Stein



To any inmate on death row, time must seem like an awful weight to bear. Any effort to learn how to more readily control one’s relationship with time must be considered beneficial to anyone but particularly prisoners.

Donaldson Correctional Facility in Bessamer, Alabama is one of the most brutal maximum security prisons in America. As mentioned in this film stabbings are a routine occurrence and murders happen regularly as well. In this documentary a group of prisoners gather together to undergo a 10-day program that originated with Gautama Buddha called Vipassana that is, as one prisoner puts it, more difficult than his time on Death Row.

The film provides back stories for several of the inmates and we learn of their crimes while being inundated with images of them as children in order to impress upon us the fact that these are actual human beings who once had lives as well. It’s manipulative but it serves the purpose of the film. A big part of the process of Vipassana is to delve deeply into oneself and extract exceedingly difficult truths that are then held in the mind and dealt with in a practical, pragmatic manner. Of the prisoners interviewed for the film, several of them seem to have developed a deep sensitivity toward the victims of their crimes. One prisoner whose daughter is murdered during filming said that he had to love the murderer because he is a human being. It’s a startling statement that suggests a legitimate transformation has occurred. It isn’t clear if Vipassana contributed to this equanimity but it’s highly likely considering the nature of the meditation and the extent to which it is practiced.

Initially several officials at the prison question the efficacy of the program. They are unsure if a Buddhist treatment is appropriate in a state where most of the citizens are Christians. Gradually they come around and see it for what it is: a timeless method for gaining insight into one’s spirit and mind. In this world of systematized behavior where time can become for the unwitting a grievous enemy, Vipassana seems to offer an alternative to merely sitting around and allowing the same old thoughts to torment you into a stupor. Instead, it gives its practitioners an opportunity to clear their head for many hours at a time and focus only on the breathing. It is stated in the film that the sessions used to be six months in length and were eventually whittled down to ten days. Seven days was attempted but this proved to not be enough time to reap the full benefit of the treatment so it was increased back up to ten.

There is an infinite sadness to the prison and the weight of the bars is oppressive on the viewer and one cannot imagine how much more so this is true for those who call this place home. Yet, within those walls, within the hearts and minds of a few men, there is hope. Most have resigned themselves to never leaving prison and very few who have gone through the program have been released back out into the world. Subsequently it’s difficult to gage just how successful the treatment is in helping prisoners learn skills that can be adapted to life on the outside where temptations are legion. It remains an experimental series of techniques that have proven to teach some inmates who took it most seriously how to relax amidst the cacophonous reality of life behind bars. Many inmates continue to meditate and adopt it into their daily routine. It is a method to achieve a state of grace in an environment that promotes brutality, pain and infinite suffering.

Upon the session that was initially filmed, one of two things happened that inevitably led to the demise of the program for three years. The chaplain of the prison complained to the commissioner and he either stated that he was losing his congregation or that Vipassana must be terminated because it is promoting a religion other than Christianity. Regardless of the reasoning, the program was shut down and it wasn’t until a change in administration that it was reinstated.

It seems relatively clear that prisons are filled with individuals who have not learned to access the core of their hurt, anger and frustration. One prisoner in the program said essentially that he can exercise his body with weights and running but nobody has taught him how to exercise his mind. This program, as difficult and challenging as it is, gives the inmates a sense of accomplishment as they realize they have done something that is exceedingly difficult. The film suggests that this is perhaps the first time in their entire lives that some of these men have felt this way. It’s a difficult feeling to manage regarding these men. On one hand they are rapists, murderers and thieves. Yet, as an advocate suggests, a man should not be judged by a single act but by his entire life. This is a difficult sell to those who would see such men locked away for an eternity in order to protect property and potential other victims from meeting the same fate. Still, they are human beings who deserve to live with dignity and be treated as humanely as possible. They deserve to laugh, to experience joy, to be able to show their emotions openly amidst each other. Unfortunately, the unwritten code of prisons forbades any sign of open affection as homophobia is one of the essential terrors that plague these men.

It is strange to contemplate the simple idea that a person can have their life stripped away due to a single foolish act. That there are single moments that can change the course of our lives forces us to think about what causes a person to make such a clearly fateful decision. Most of these men have faced that quandary and have made the incorrect decision. This film suggests that the trigger that is pulled within the souls of these men whenever they get agitated can be stilled through the practice of Vipassana. They can learn to put the safety on this weapon that has so betrayed them in the past. They can also learn to slow down their internal clock while remaining oblivious to actual time. Indeed, they learn to divorce themselves from emotional reactions to every situation including the situation of time. They do not get disappointed, agitated, hurt, depressed, or scared. In other words their minds and bodies are in synch and they are not imprisoned within a prison by their emotional reaction to their environment.

It would make for an intriguing study to follow a group of these men once they escape their bondage and return to society. Recidivism rates are extraordinarily high at Donaldson and it would be most difficult for any man, no matter how strong, to avoid slipping back into his old way of life. If it could be proven that Vipassana can reduce these rates it would make sense that many more prisons would then feel comfortable implementing the program. It is possible that this treatment could be the single most effective factor toward rehabilitation that has ever been attempted with this country’s prisons. I imagine we are a long way off from this potentiality but the fact that it exists should at least give us pause. Unfortunately, many prison administrations aren’t in the business of rehabilitation. They focus almost exclusively on meting out punishment. The emotional and spiritual lives of prisoners under there care are immaterial and they see no purpose in attempting to teach the prisoners how to better deal with their emotions. This approach is majority and subsequently the prison system has done nothing less than create men who do not know themselves and do not understand the source of their motives. Subsequently when they are released they immediately commit another crime and return into the system. They have no clue how to face their emotions and fear and terror often guide them toward criminal acts.

Overall, Vipassana suggests that men can be treated and released back into the wild. This film shows that it is possible to calm the raging sea that exists in the lives of many either locked away or roaming free. In the film the prisoners adapted their lives to include the pursuit of tranquility through meditation. It is possible that such behavior if it were to become widespread might truly revolutionize the prison experience and lead to a decrease in inter-inmate violence while making society safer when prisoners are released. This film clearly suggests that Vipassana works in the short term to clear the minds of troubled men who take part in the program. Although it hasn’t been proven whether or not prisoners effectively return to society because of the treatment, there is certainly hope that this might be the case. If so it would prove to be a most useful tool for decreasing criminal activity and improving the lives of those who have the deck stacked against them whenever they finally do leave the prison system.

Film Review--Ghostbusters

Ghostbusters
directed by Ivan Reitman
written by Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis
starring Harold Ramis, Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Sigourney Weaver, Annie Potts, Rick Moranis, William Atherton, Ernie Hudson, David Margulies



Ah, the special, bullish necessity of ridding the world of the undead. In this film, we have three men who have been researching paranormal activities for many a moon without much success. They get a call at a library where an elderly librarian is haunting the premises and that experience doesn’t go particularly well. Then they are kicked out of Columbia University and have their grants revoked. Undeterred they go into business for themselves and set up shop in an abandoned fire station.

Dr. Peter Venkman (Murray) is a slap-happy scientist who begs to be put out of his misery. He’s a bit daft, a bit crafty and entirely enslaved by the chilly, spirited idea of getting his own with the spooks and calamity causing entities who threaten all of New York. He’s a cautious man who seeks only to do his work without getting trammeled although he is slimed during one job. Dr. Raymond Stantz (Aykroyd) is a bit more practical and technically oriented. He knows every major poltergeist case going back hundreds of years and can name every technical aspect of the machines they implement to successfully secure their locations. Dr. Egon Spengler (Ramis) is the serious one who is the true student of the paranormal and tracks the ghosts with fancy Geiger like equipment. Between them the three men seem to make up one man who is finely tuned and capable of getting the job done.

To this heady mix is added a woman named Dana Barrett (Weaver) who sees some crazy schitt in her kitchen. She visits the Ghostbusters and Venkman immediately hits on her because he imagines he’s in love with her. (There is definitely a sense of sexual dysfunction among the three men although Venkman seems willing to approach it from a practical angle.) Later Ms. Barrett is accosted in her apartment and possessed by the spirit of an entity called Zuul. She emerges as a highly sexualized being capable of great feats of physical dexterity including but not limited to levitation. She moans, grinds and seems perfectly willing and able to capture the seed of any man who comes within fifty feet of her. Her body is a calamitous weapon and her flesh feels hot through the screen. This character at this moment is a dry humping, salacious, victimless machine of oozing potentialities. She is also one of the most sexually blatant characters to grace the screen since, well, ever. She’s certainly not the sexiest character of recent memory but she is definitely the most ready.

The work the men do takes them all over town as business explodes after they rid a hotel of an entity although they nearly destroy part of the hotel in the process. Nevertheless, business takes off and they can hardly keep up with orders. Their secretary, Janine Melnitz (Potts) finally has something to do and they are resigned to hire another ghostbuster, a man named Winston Zeddmore (Hudson) with little experience who proves to be an asset to the team.

The effects in this film are all well constructed and thrilling. Before CG ruined everyone’s day, there were actual effects that implemented models, scale, and various other hard scrabbled methods of conveying the odd universe that this film inhabits. The results are nearly seamless although on occasion the ghosts do look rather cheesy. Still, the film has an energy that is the direct product of a stellar effects team and proper editing. It possesses a vitality that moves through every scene and each actor adds something unique to the overall process.

The performances in this film are all quite adequate for the material. Bill Murray plays his usual schtick and pulls off a character who is a bit daft, a bit deranged, and thoroughly engaging. Dan Aykroyd is solid, contained and believable in his role as a semi-hysterical scientists who so desperately wants to be proven right in his assumptions. Harold Ramis brings a certain elegance to his role and does a good job conveying his character’s devotion to his work. Annie Potts plays a character who is a bit dazed. Her character is likable throughout and possesses an intriguing back story that is never really investigated. Rick Moranis is involved with some of the more obvious gags that wear out their welcome the third or fourth time they are implemented. Still, he’s a classic cinematic nerd and desperate for a piece of grade A ass. Sigourney Weaver plays raw sex in this film and pulls it off admirably. Her character is easily the most interesting to watch mainly because it’s Sigourney Weaver doing sex moves and one cannot deny the appeal of such a thing. Ernie Hudson plays it straight mostly and keeps his character grounded throughout.
Slavitza Jovan sears the retinas with her turn as a sinister god. She’s a bit cruel and terribly sexy which proves to be a rather exquisite combination.

Overall, this film lives up to the experience I had with it when it first came out 24 years ago. Apparently it is exceedingly funny based on the reaction of many of those who were in the theater with me; I found it mildly amusing and not without it’s charms. It’s a silly movie that seems to have aged well, particularly the special effects. The actors know how to use gesture and posture to milk as many laughs as possible and the overall film benefits greatly from their expert comedic timing. It’s mostly designed to entertain and there isn’t that much depth to it; the film simply floats by without stimulating any serious thinking that might spoil the fun with over analyzation. Ultimately, the film continues to be interesting and hasn’t lost any of its punch.

Film Review--Nights in Rodanthe

Nights in Rodanthe
directed by George C. Wolfe
written by Ann Peacock and John Romano
based on the novel by Nicholas Sparks
starring Diane Lane, Richard Gere, Christopher Meloni, Viola Davis, Scott Glenn, Pablo Schreiber, Mae Whitman, Charlie Tahan



Against the backdrop of a forthcoming hurricane, two deeply wounded people take solace in each other’s company.

As the film opens Adrienne Willis (Lane) is contemplating whether or not she should let her husband Jack (Meloni) back into her life. She heads off to her friend Jean’s inn to stay while Jean does some work out of town. Meanwhile Dr. Paul Flanner (Gere) is traveling 200 miles at the request of a man who wants Paul to explain something to him. He first stops off at the inn and makes himself comfortable. He is the only guest.

The film builds up to the inevitable coming together but it doesn’t focus on this particular aspect of the story. Sadness and loss take center stage and the relationship is periphery. The core of the story is the various miseries that these two characters are enduring and how finding each other helps each of them recover slightly from their sorrows. It isn’t their bond that is important but rather the fact that they are able to connect with another person for whom they are able to establish legitimate feelings for. These are individuals who both have been afflicted by a death and it’s been difficult for each of them to get over it.

The actual romantic scenes between Adrienne and Paul are syrupy and typical of films dealing with couples hooking up. There is a tremendous scene leading up to the mingling of lust and sentimentality that involves an argument between the two just as the storm is hitting. To the wild cacophony of wind and water, the pair struggle to board up the inn to withstand the torrents and the fierceness of the storm. Soon afterward she lays with her head on his shoulder and instantly the scene changes into a brief romantic interlude followed by the typical scenes prolonging the experience. Once they find each other in that specific way it takes a while for the film to regain the essence of the buildup. Why is it that peak moments in some films lead inevitably to a let down and often never recover. Everything save two scenes after the storm lack the poignancy of the first half of the film. Perhaps it’s just more enjoyable to watch a film that is replete with tension that to sit through something where that tension has dissipated. Fortunately for this film that lack of tension is quickly replaced with a moment of profound significance that is truly riveting.

This is a film that deals with concerns of psychological torment and real loss. These are complicated people who have fallen into a trap that they themselves did not create. Circumstances have conspired to create a life that is terminally haunted by the ghosts of others whose lives were greatly impacting. Adrienne is a mother of two children–Amanda (Whitman) and Danny (Tahan)-- for whom she lives for. She is anguished over the possibility of saying yes to her husband who cheated on her with a very close friend. Early in the film she’s unsure where her heart is at but as soon as Paul arrives and they connect it’s obvious which way she is leaning. She falls hard for Paul and decides she wants to build a life with him. He travels overseas and they write love letters back and forth and it is during these moments that Adrienne is ecstatically happy and brimming with anticipation.

This is not a sappy film overall. It deals with real people who find each other quite randomly and really seem to fit. It also explores the nature of human suffering and self-appointed torments that often lead a person to persecute themselves for various imaginary indiscretions. In this case Paul is truly suffering from a pain that will not heal. Adrienne is recovering but not in the same way yet she can relate to Paul just enough so that their bond is sealed in familiarity. It’s a film where love slowly unfolds and the characters are so that one can only say that they seem to deserve it considering all that they have been through. Still, this isn’t a film about that love, necessarily. It’s about escape. It’s about losing oneself in the moment of another’s kiss or embrace. The love is just a byproduct of the electricity that passes between them. They are dazed into a stupor and endorphins kick in which they imagine must be love because it feels so expansive.

The kids are interesting as far as film kids go. The girl is something of a little wanna be goth tart with a boss tattoo on her navel. She so desperately wants to be hard and impossible but her mother is always getting in the way. And she hates her mother for what is going on between her parents so she blows off steam, rattles a few chains, and otherwise makes a nuisance of herself at her mother’s expense. In other words she’s rather typical for the spoilt brat type and nothing she does is particularly novel or unusual. As for the boy he’s typical weak, sickly computer geek and not much else. Mostly he just looks pathetic and tries to get out of the way of his sister’s taunts. Between them they make up a happy little unit that don’t exactly defy expectations.

The performances in this film are natural and believable. Diane Lane creates a strong, vital character who is struggling to find a direction that makes sense. She is slowly unveiled before Paul and learns to unleash an energy that heretofore she’s kept bottled up. Richard Gere is solid in this role and he conveys the hurt in his character’s eyes for a goodly portion of the film. He gives the audience a complex man with emotions that often confuse him. Viola Davis is quite good in a limited role. She establishes a cool, fun-loving woman with a penchant for decorating and a keen artistic eye. She just looks like an artist and possesses an openness that is instantly recognizable. Scott Glenn gives an intense, heartbreaking performance as a man searching for answers after suffering a terrible loss. His deliberate phrasings stretch out the agony of watching him struggle through reliving the nightmarish event that took his wife.

Overall, this film captures the essence of what a sudden romance is. But it does so while managing to focus its attention on the gravity of certain lives to whom the lot of suffering is more pronounced and immediate than most folks. These are not easy characters to understand as their motivations are hidden for much of the film. They don’t even seem to know themselves precisely what they want and it is this factor that make them the most believable. They are merely broken types who find another who sets out to heal them. It’s a simple tale, really, and one that has been told hundreds of times in various formats. At one point it seems that nothing could possibly pry these people apart, so dynamic do they appear, how like themselves. This is a film that uses the concept of transformation to showcase how it works in the lives of two people who desperately need something to go right.

Film Review--Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading
written and directed by Joel and Ethan Cohen
starring Frances McDormand, Brad Pitt, Richard Jenkins, Tilda Swinton, George Clooney, John Malkovich, David Rasche, J. K. Simmons



This lunatic film is as queer as anything that has been released into theaters in a very long time. Mostly all the humor is incidental and if you blink you will miss it and feel awfully sorry for yourself. It’s brash, perverse, and entirely without a moral sense of right and wrong. It’s a portrait of perhaps the world as it is and not how certain interest groups pretend it to be. It’s the kind of film that truly defies description so it’s pointless to waste time trying to explain the plot. Still, it’s probably necessary to give a brief outline.

The entire film is built around a misconception. All the characters get involved in a conspiracy that isn’t a conspiracy at all. Many of these characters slip in and out of each other’s bed so nobody really knows which way is up. Some undergo vast changes in their personality or their personal lives and another is driven by selfish reasons that she imagines will greatly improve her life forever. There is also a dolt who just wants to ride in the car with his head out the window although he never actually does that in this film.

All the relationships in this film are heading south very fast. There is rampant infidelity and none of the characters appear to be particularly torn about the correctness of their behavior. There is a tremendous unease about each character and none of them can find any semblance of a balance in their lives although much of this is because of their own doing. These are the kind of people who deserve everything that happens to them in this film. There is no cheering for these characters because they are all rotten to the core. Well, there is one man who seems a bit dazed but that’s only because he has the hots for his co-worker and all she can do is blather on and on about how hard it is to find a proper man. Imagine his torment; all he seems to do is stare at her blindly with that pathetic look on his face like he’s waiting for her to turn the other way so he can take a tasty dump in the yard.

The story simply gets more bizarre and darker as it goes along. The humor is in the facial gestures, asides and reaction shots. This is most definitely a film that needs to be seen many times because there is just so much subtlety involved that you miss much of it after a single viewing. The interactions between characters are laden with subtext as there is always something entirely different going on beneath the surface. Several of these people are deceitful, vile people who care nothing for the feelings of those to whom they are supposed to show the most loyalty. There are also innocents who get trapped in the quagmire and some fare worse than others. Mostly, everyone come together circumstantially and their relationship to the core event is direct for some and tangential for others.

The characters in this film are basically all idiots who have no idea what is happening to them. None of them have a firm grasp on the situation at hand and each of them stumbles blindly through a maze of their own devising. Even the CIA doesn’t have a clue what they’ve gotten hold of and they are relieved when the terrible saga finally comes to an end. Each character in this film imagines themselves in full control of their situation and reality never kicks in so they stay that way for the duration of the film. There are no lessons here, no moral other than that very ill equipped people can cause a whole lot of damage just be leaving the house.

It’s a terribly simple and clearly defined story. There is no ambiguity or confusion and the result is a straightforward narrative that tells the story in a decisive manner. The characters are all clearly written and their personality quirks are instantly recognizable. There is one character who holds on to a singular dream throughout the film; her sole motivation for getting involved is to secure enough funds to realize this dream for herself. She strives only for this one hope and her innocence is a nice counter to the hideous people that make up much of the film. The others seem to possess neither motive or imagination; they are merely cogs in a terrible wheel that turns and turns devoid entirely of their input. They are successful people who know how to live a productive life filled with work, parties, and social significance yet they are essentially stupid when it comes to their personal lives. All of these characters are supremely flawed in how they approach the world in which they live and part of the joy from the film is taken from the many wrong steps that are taken throughout the film.

The film seems realistic in terms of how it treats all its characters. This is how real life is and how horrors can be bestowed upon a person merely by happenstance. None of the characters seem to suffer unless you consider acute paranoia as creating a type of suffering. There is no guilt, no capitulation, no self-abnegation. In fact there is no self examination whatsoever. These are not characters who think a whole lot about anything beyond what is immediately in front of them or some scheme that they imagine can benefit them. Two of these schemers are punished in the worst way and their crimes are laid bare for everyone to see. They are innocents who get caught up in the adventure of the thing and cannot help themselves but to take massive risks to discover more about the mystery they are gladly engaging in. Still, they are guilty of a crime and they suffer immensely for their behavior. Another character suffers a fate worse than death after he loses control in broad daylight and is immediately brought low because of it.

Sexual mores are exploded in this film as they are treated loosely and with no guiding principle. Nearly half the characters seem to be playing musical beds and enjoying themselves immensely. Marriage is treated as a vulgar institution that deserves no allegiance and all of those involve hold it in disdain. They have no love for those they swore to honor and obey and behave clearly as if they no longer believe in the efficacy of their vows. Again, this is precisely how the world is for many people who can never be satisfied with what is presented to them and must always go looking further afield for their satisfactions. It isn’t that these particular characters are necessarily bad people but they certainly have committed a definable sin no matter how much a person would like to explain it away.

Innocence and Guilt can be placed on a scale to determine the moral outlook of the film. We find that innocence is ambiguous at best. Of the seven main characters three commit moral offenses, three of them commits a criminal offense, and one commits no offense. Of the six who have erred in some way or another, four are punished. There is one innocent who is rewarded and two guilty who escape punishment. Essentially, it leans toward punishing the guilty which would make it a film that is interested in promoting the concept of just desserts. Most of the guilty are punished and the only truly innocent person gets a prize.


The performances in this film are all realistic and their characters are all fundamentally unsound. The acting is hyper kinetic and profoundly focused on being as silly and ludicrous as possible. Frances McDormand conveys her character’s perpetually lost state as well as her desperation to find a man of merit who is good looking and can make her laugh. Brad Pitt’s character is an airheaded dynamo who is nevertheless pivotal to the plot. He possesses the most energy in the film and takes initiative to try and solve the puzzle ahead of everyone else. George Clooney plays a character who seems to always be in on the joke. He laughs routinely, smiles incessantly and always seems to be having a really good time. Then circumstances intervene and everything suddenly goes haywire and there is one moment at the end of the film which is as funny as anything in theaters this year. Again, it’s so quick that you’ll probably miss it but it’s worth it if you get it. John Malkovich plays the most ill-strung character in the film. He’s the one who undergoes the most painful realizations that naturally he does not learn from. Malkovich’s body language says all that needs to be said about the character’s inability to get on the right track and stay there. Malkovich doing pseudo-slapstick is certainly something to see. Richard Jenkins as mentions plays the sad, lonely droopy eyed fool in this film who seems utterly miserable in every way possible. Tilda Swinton is deliciously cold and off putting and it’s difficult to imagine her character in a warm embrace with anyone. Her character is forceful, aggressive, a real A-Type who cannot bear even the hint of failure.

Overall, this film cracks a whip against the flesh of anyone who dares to approach it in a sprightly manner. It’s a black comedy meaning the subject matter is dark and it’s terribly funny all the way through. The actors all convey their character’s flaws, insecurities and penchant for self-deception without turning them into ciphers. There are many moments in this film that will be easily missed if the viewer fails to pay close attention. It’s not a film for lazy film goers because the jokes are mostly in between the lines and not necessarily in the broad context of the film. There is joy here in watching superb actors tear into a script that gives them room to move about and expand themselves. This is a very open film that is nevertheless well contained within a specific universe where slight gestures cause riotous laughter and there are really no heroes and no villains. It’s just all a bunch of petty schitt that afflicts these people. They don’t know what they are doing and they are forced to make it up as they go along. It’s very much like real life in that way.

Film Review--Appaloosa

Appaloosa
directed by Ed Harris
written by Ed Harris and Robert Knott
based on the novel by Robert Parker
starring Ed Harris, Viggo Mortensen, Renee Zellweger, Jeremy Irons, Lance Henriksen, Timothy Spall, James Gammon, Gabriel Marantz



In this epic embracement of space and the mannerisms of two men who can exist together simply in silence, the tragicomedy of the great Wild West is played out. The pace is languid and the story relates myriad complexities that arise when an unforseen element is introduced into a tranquility.

The film takes place on the plains in 1888 Texas. Virgil Cole (Harris) and Everett Hitch (Mortensen) are lawmen who have known each other for a good long while. They are intimate without necessarily being close and it is their distance which proves to be their greatest strengths. They are the fastest shooters in the State and very few men dare to test them. One of those men who is not slightly afraid of their reputation is Randall Bragg (Irons) who as the film opens is having a dispute with Marshall Jack Bell (Robert Jauregui) and his deputies. Shots from Braggs rifle ring out and all three men lie dead. The word gets back to the town leaders who hire Virgil to get to the bottom of what happened. This leads to one conflict that involves the relationship between Braggs and the two lawmen. The other emerges when a woman named Allison French (Zellweger) appears immediately drawing Virgil’s attention. They start a romance and Virgil is visibly nervous around her and projects a vulnerable persona whenever they are apart. Allison proves to be something other than what she appears and it becomes obvious that she represents a certain ease of character that Virgil is only too used to. To complicate matters Everett and Allison develop a strong connection that threatens to challenge the efficacy of the two men’s friendship.

The film focuses on the relationship between Virgil and Everett. Often they sit together at a comfortable distance and hardly say a word. When they do speak it is clear that they understand each other on a level that is almost mystical. This is an intimate, delicate portrait of the psychologies of two men who have seen their share of killing over the course of their careers. Most of the information about them is casually revealed and a clear portrait emerges from these fragments. These are two men who communicate using minimal verbal language and who also connect through their physical language. It is the language that comes from having shared in virtually the same experiences for such a sustained length of time. Their bond has been won through danger and it is a bond that is quite unlike most others.

The characters in this film are mostly outlaws who imagine they have figured out a way to upset the perfect tyranny set up by Virgil and Everett. Bragg has a large gang and his boys routinely attempt to upset the town by acting belligerently in the saloon and annoying the customers. They are presented as pests who pose a direct threat to the order that Virgil is determined to keep. Naturally, this conflict plays a central role in the film as it is directly linked to the actions of Braggs who is the only man who is as equally gifted with a fire arm as Virgil and Everett. He is the primary threat and in virtually every way equal or superior to his counterparts. One interesting aspect of Virgil’s character is that he finds himself routinely grasping at the proper word when he is attempting to communicate. He is forced under such circumstances to ask Everett for the correct word. He also reads Emerson and these two factors suggest a man who isn’t quite sure about things beyond his control yet he strives precisely for this understanding. Braggs is more agile with language and represents a cultured, nuanced criminal which is something Virgil is not adept at dealing with. He confounds Virgil who attempts to mask his confusion through his upright posture and straightforward manner.

Virgil and Everett are plain speaking, honest men who do precisely what they say they are going to do. There is an immediacy about them and they are simply precisely the men they appear to be. They are not duplicitous nor are the apt to attempt to fool anyone through word or deed. Theirs is a practical morality and it guides them toward the actions that are vital to their line of work. They do not seem to think in terms of wrong and right, at least in an ethical sense. The only wrong is something that causes an action to fail in achieving its directive. Right is whatever works, essentially. Death becomes a routine factor that informs every action. The cool possibility of losing their lives has resigned each man to a nonchalance about the entire prospect. They fear nothing and live in accordance to the simplest of laws: get him before he gets you. They are magicians with a gun and brimming with common sense that is nevertheless thwarted when Allison French shows up. She brings in a whole new world of miseries that upset the order that has been maintained. With her flirtatious manner and wanton sensibilities she introduces chaos in their ordered lives. She plants the seeds of discord in the mind of Everett but he is loyal to a fault and cannot betray his friend of many years.

The cinematography by Dean Semler is sparse and poetic. It captures the openness and wildness of the territory. There is a real sense of time and space and his framing of Virgil and Everett is both still and dynamic. The score by Jeff Beal adds a haunting quality to the film work and comes in at just the right time to add a hint of despair to the scenes on the screen.

The action in this film explodes like a wild beast tearing the throat out of its prey. There is surprisingly very little violence in this film but when it does appear it is dynamic and searing. This is a film where each character knows their place and acts in accordance to a personal code that either reflects honor or profligacy. This is a time where honor and loyalty actually meant something and men possessed personal character and truthfulness. The law was paramount and it was easy to enforce when simple resistance or foolish attempts at retaliation always produced the same result. The law in this film is inviolate and the two men administering the bulk of justice are bastions of clarity in both their profession and their personal life. They are feared and loathed by men who possess a different set of standards. These are men like Ring Shelton (Henriksen), another charismatic and villainous type who proves duplicitous and untrustworthy.

The performances in this film are all quite good in their subtle execution. Viggo Mortensen gives an Oscar-worthy turn as a man who speaks with the proverbial big stick. His 8 gauge always at his side he is the cold, hard icon of the law. Mortensen is thoroughly natural and controlled throughout this film. He creates a character who is not lacking anything and who carries himself with a quiet purpose. Ed Harris is a cool hand who derives much of his identity from his ability to out draw any man at the table. Virgil is a character who suddenly finds himself domesticated and it startles him somewhat. Harris allows his character’s insecurities to slowly unfold although it is clear that they in no way come to overwhelm him. They are merely slight aggravations that affix themselves to his otherwise steely exterior. Renee Zellweger pulls off a dubious character with a questionable sense of moral rectitude. Zellweger is believable in this role and certainly capable of conveying a certain coldness throughout. Jeremy Irons is stunningly good as an essentially vital character who possesses his own personal code of honor. Irons brings a strength to his role that resonates throughout the film. Braggs is a man who is equally as self-possessed as either Virgil or Everett. He knows his place and Irons allows the audience to see the clearly defined confidence with which he carries himself. It’s all in his posture and gestures.

Overall, this film creates two men who exhibit a strong, viable masculinity that is honorable and profoundly consistent. They are two lawmen who know where they stand and are free of much doubt until they are confronted with the person of a woman. She turns things around a bit as she creeps inside their heads causing tiny disturbances that are eased in the process of upholding the law. This is a film about loyalty, honor and duty and the two central characters demonstrate each of these traits throughout the film. Ultimately, this film deserves to be considered when the nominations are announced for the Academy Awards. It has all the elements of a great film and the performances truly stand out as definitive and sound.

Film Review: Facing the Giants

Facing the Giants
directed by Alex Kendrick
written by Alex Kendrick and Stephen Kendrick
starring Alex Kendrick, Shannen Fields, Jason McLeod, Bailey Cave, Steve Williams, Chris Willis, James Blackwell, Jim McBride



With a novice cast and a limited budget of $100,000, this film explores issues of faith, determination and capacity in an explicitly Christian milieu.

Grant Taylor (Kendrick) is going through an exceedingly rough patch. He’s a football coach at an all Christian private school who is prone to lose more games than he wins. His car is lousy, household appliances aren’t working properly and to top it all off he finds out he’s shooting blanks. The administration wants to fire him and this knowledge sends him into a depression that threatens to take over his life. His wife Brooke (Fields) is supportive but equally morose over the reality of never being able to spawn.

Despite his difficulties Grant still believes in God and speaks to him directly about his concerns. During much of the crisis Grant remains silent but once it reaches an almost unassailable point Grant’s fear kicks in and he turns to his Lord and Savior for guidance. This leads to a personal philosophy that he applies to his team. They promptly go out and lose the next game starting the season 0-3. Grant fires them up with a speech about how important it is to give God the glory even if they lose and later at practice he used the team captain as an example of what the team can accomplish if they put in their best effort.

From this point on, it’s a predictable sports movie as the team starts racking up wins. With God on their side they are unstoppable and they march on with only a slight bump in the road on to where they should be. There’s no mystery to how it happens and just where this little team will end up. It’s set up in the beginning as one learns of a championship team called the Giants who have won the last three championships. Still, despite the hackneyed approach to the penultimate scenes, it doesn’t much matter because in the end the film makers grab hold with an expert manipulation of emotion. The film is a cleansing at times and often triumphant. It’s a genuine Christian film where everyone involved is related more or less to the same church. The Preacher is named Jim McBride and he plays the irascible coach of the Giants, the fabulously named Bobby Lee Duke. If that’s not a football name, I don’t know what one is.

This is an example of what can be done with a minuscule budget and a whole lot of heart and grit. There are several moments of tremendous emotional weight and they carry the film along with the performances which all seem adequate for the job. These aren’t actors but they stay in the game and give believable, natural performances that don’t seem scripted.

This is clearly much more than a mere sport’s movie. God is thanked in nearly every scene and the intent of the film makers is quite clear. It seems obvious that they want this film to touch people in a most specific way so that they give their hearts to Jesus Christ. In that sense they are sermonizing and trying to get the good word out. This isn’t a terrible thing. There needs to be more room for films like this with an obvious agenda that deliberately intends on influencing the minds of its audience. They are up front and honestly lays their plans all out before the viewer; it’s apparent very early on where this film stands regarding faith. Over the course of the film their message becomes progressively more pronounced and admittedly for non believers it might be a tough go as there is a real sense of being preached at. However if one can get past this legitimate hurdle it is quite possible to enjoy this film strictly as a cinematic experience divorced of any particular agenda. As a film it stands up because it expertly plays on emotions without succumbing to sentimentality. Granted there are scenes that might be construed as melodramatic but this merely proves them to be effective vehicles for conveying the nuances of this powerful story.

As well as being a film about solidifying one’s relationship with God, this film offers a pro-family message that centers around the relationship between Brooke and Grant. Brooke is solid and grounded and she helps support Grant when he feels like he’s being sucked into a very deep, very dark hole. The chemistry between the two actors is quite realistic and it’s easy to believe that this is a married couple who find themselves behind the eight ball. Despite the financial and personal setbacks that Grant is suffering, Brooke remains steadfastly by his side. Her dedication lends the film a direction that football merely carries forth. Brooke’s sorrow is that she is denied what is to her the ultimate gift which is a child to care for. She says in one of the film’s most potent lines, “How can I miss someone I’ve never even met?” The line is delivered with such earnestness and heartache that it resonates throughout the rest of the film.

As Grant struggles to right himself and his team, he hits upon the idea of writing out a personal philosophy based on biblical truths. He presents it to the team as a challenge in order to improve their performances both on and off the field. His intent is to inspire the team to playing with more heart and to give God all the glory should they win or lose. It takes a while to set in and the team is still struggling to adapt their game when Grant shows them precisely what they are capable of if they merely put everything they have into everything they do. Grant uses a training technique with Brock (McLeod) , the team captain, that is painfully difficult and that shows them just where they might be provided they play strictly for God and not for themselves.

The film extracts sections of the bible to make a point about various characters. David Childers (Cave) is a puny kid with zero self confidence. He gets a tryout with the team and manages to impress them enough to land a spot on the team as a kicker. He’s not very good at first because he has a tendency to imagine himself missing before every kick. David asks why did God make him so small and weak. His father Larry (Steve Williams) instructs him that it’s because God always chooses such people to more dramatically show his power. Later David is struggling to find a rhythm in his kicking. Assistant coach J.T. (Willis) uses the analogy of the wide and narrow gates to teach him that he needs to think of the area between the crossbars as the narrow way. It works and David is from that point on his way to being a confident kicker.

The kids in this film all become one solid, impenetrable force that play football exclusively for their God. They kneel and pray at every opportunity because they have given themselves up to something they deem as much stronger, more potent then themselves. It’s the precise opposite of most sports films where the urgency is to believe in oneself and perform exclusively for the team only. The team doesn’t much matter in this film and the games are even less important. The sole purpose of playing football is for this team to honor God and to give him all the glory. It’s the only reason they make the effort everyday because they simply want God to work through them without them taking credit for any good that comes out of their actions.

The performances in this film are spotty but for the most part they work within the context of the film. Alex Kendrick and Shannen Fields despite having limited or no acting experience bring natural performances that are nuanced and realistic. These are people who are recognizable and each actor does a tremendous job conveying emotional truths in this film. Steve Williams conveys a strong presence that grounds the film and provides it with a solidity that keeps it focused. Chris Willis gives a comic touch to J.T., a quick-talking coach who keeps Grant honest and loose.

Overall, this is a film with exceedingly clear intentions. To the film makers this is much more than a mere cinematic work. The hope remains that viewers will be inspired by the film and ultimately get their life right with God. It is designed to bring people into a tighter relationship with their friends and family and to allow the light of God to shine through them. It’s an honorable film that occasionally does feel like it’s trying a bit too hard to accelerate its core principles towards its intended audience. Ultimately, it’s an emotionally solvent film that relates a specific message in a dramatic setting. It doesn’t pull punches and has no qualms with coming on strong with its directive. It’s a refreshing story that celebrates faith as a vehicle for worshiping God and spreading the feeling around a bit.

Film Review--Choke

Choke
written and directed by Clark Gregg
based on the novel by Chuck Palahniuk
starring Sam Rockwell, Kelly MacDonald, Anglica Huston, Paz de la Huerta, Jonah Bobo, Gillian Jacobs, Brad William Henke



Based on the novel by Chuck Palahniuk, Choke is the rarest of cinematic wonders. It is a film that manages to be uproariously funny while maintaining a profound sadness that permeates every frame of the film. Truly its both one of the funniest and saddest films I’ve encountered in many years. Much of this has to do with the superb performance by Sam Rockwell.

Victor Mancini (Rockwell) nails a whole lot of women. The trails of his dedication are scattered all over town as he leaves them where he finds them only panting a whole lot harder and oozing from secret places they will soon scour. These encounters do not salve him although he does make a comment right at the beginning that the worst blow job is still better than the most beautiful bouquet of flowers. Or maybe it was a sunset. What matters is that Victor enjoys his experiences and can never quite contain himself until the next one. He attends Sex anonymous sessions and spends them screwing a fellow addict named Nico. His mother Ida (Huston) seems to be losing her mind and Victor has placed her in an expensive home where they have three possible floors that a patient can travel to on their journey. Nobody comes back from the third floor.

The film focuses quite a bit of attention on young Victor (Bobo) and his tortured relationship with his mother. They seem to have a game where Victor attracts young potential foster moms and then escapes with Ida at the last minute. Ida is something of a domestic terrorist and her entire approach to life is anarchic. Victor grows up both horrified of her and fascinated by her. It’s clear that he desires nothing more than to be a normal kid but Ida denies him every opportunity to do so. She hauls him about and he’s left confused and lonely with nobody to ask for guidance. These scenes are heartbreaking because the film captures such anguish on young Victor’s face. He looks lost and trapped in a world that he simply did not choose and she is forcing him to respond in a most specific manner to the stimulus she is presenting him. In some ways she is doing him a service by making him face his fears but she isn’t providing the care and attention that mothers are supposed to do for their children.

Some of the sex scenes are played up for big laughs. Victor meets a nurse named Paige Marshall (MacDonald) who helps him deal with anxiety over never having learned the identity of his father. This leads Paige to present vital information that stimulates Victor’s imagination. Again, the scenes between adult Victor and his mother are devastating and handled with excruciating delicacy. In these scenes one gets a clear picture of how Victor is haunted by a lack from his past. The film doesn’t go so far as to suggest that he fills the void with saucy, cheeky chicks with handsome thighs and a deeply imbedded lust but the possibility is certainly present. Still, the sex is hot and Victor seems to be having a helluva time getting it on in every scene except the ones where he is unable to perform. The great sex beast finds himself in an awkward position that belies his reputation and leaves him embarrassed and frustrated.

Victor’s friend Denny is a chronic masturbator who seems to have approached the record for most turns in a single day. He collects stones for every days “sober” and meets a hot stripper named Beth who seems a bit dippy and doesn’t say a whole lot once Denny beds her and convinces her to move in with him. She helps him in the stone garden but otherwise seems hardly to exist. She’s the domesticated dissolute who carries with her a semblance of a life that has kicked her along the tracks. Still, she appears to possess a moral compass and keen insight into biblical truth. Her gyrations are agonizing and anguished and hardly stimulating: they speak to a cold desperation that encompasses the entirety of the film. Normalcy, getting through to the point where you literally settle down within your Self, is treated here like an ideal state worthy of all the pain one must endure to establish it. Victor seeks it in every tryst, every penetration, and always comes away with nothing save a few brief moments of ecstasy. Still, these moments sustain him until the next time where he realizes the same bright epiphany that quickly fades and so the cycle continues.

But Victor needs much more than to be subjected to the sad tales of sexual freaks who get off on hearing each other’s tales of excess and primitive wailings. He has already gone through the nurses at the home his Mother lives at. It’s when he discovers a possible explanation for his origins that things get mighty weird. He’s elevated somehow, brought into a rarified state of being that afflicts a certain population that surround him and appear to treat him as something legitimately holy. Victor plays the role a bit and quickly discard it because it really isn’t his style. The title of the film and book comes from Victor’s happy little trick of pretending to choke in places where he hopes to be rescued by someone with money who will continue to support him long after they have “saved” his life. There’s a funny/sad scene where Victor describes the sensations involved in performing this particular act. It ends with Victor’s head cradled in the arms of the savior and Victor says that at that moment he is a child in their arms. The scene takes on a terrible poignancy as one learns about Victor’s identity crisis and his longing to find out more about where he came from.

Victor’s relationship with Paige is strange, hilarious and fraught with longing and perversity. He tries to fornicate with her but fails and he explains his failure by saying that he cannot perform because he likes her. For the first time in quite some time he’s able to have feelings for someone other than his mother yet he is unable to fully express them which creates another simple and horrible situation for Paige. At the core of this film is the painful and excruciating search for love in a world that is essentially indifferent if not downright hostile to such a basic human emotion. Victor is a character capable of immense love which he’s slowly dissipated with careless encounters with women he cannot possibly develop any feelings for. He tries to kiss Nico and she brushes him aside. He is left with the only salvation that makes any sense and it quickly becomes apparent that he must continue to maintain the high that originates with each contact. Eventually, he comes to something of a crossroads and decides to take steps up the ladder away from that initial bogeyman that haunts him and forces him to behave in a most specific manner.

There is something about the emptiness of easy, anonymous sex in this film but there is also aspects of the thrill of it all. It certainly is framed as something that is terribly exciting and worth doing. Victor never seems to be experiencing any guilt or any other messy emotions. He’s simply waiting for the next time where it will also be as good as he expects. To Victor it’s an experience that never fails him. He assumes he can do it forever until his actual emotions do manage to step in his path and he’s unable to push through them. He’s still promiscuous but suddenly there are other possibilities to consider even if he fails to heed them most of the time.

Victor’s life seems to be all about games. He plays at choking, plays at intimacy in the guise of instant gratification encounters, and plays the role of a number of characters with his mother who nearly always mistakes him for someone else. There’s a moment late in the film that is as brutal as anything I’ve seen in a film this year. It underlines the relationship that Victor has suffered with his mother and says everything about his fears and struggle to reach her.

The performances in this film are all outstanding and the actors are perfectly cast for their roles. Sam Rockwell is cool, dynamic and its easy to believe that every woman he meets finds him instantly irresistible. He’s got the swagger, the ease of being, and the carefree posture that suggests a man who just doesn’t care one way or another. Rockwell plays Victor as a deeply wounded character who is seeking redemption in a world that hardly offers many attractive methods for achieving such a state. Redemption in this film is self-willed. Rockwell gives us a character of tender complexity who realizes his flaws and embraces them without rushing to judgement regarding their merits or liabilities. Kelly MacDonald is equally tortured as the film progresses only its exceedingly subtle and difficult to read on her face. Nevertheless, MacDonald gives us tiny clues that can readily be accumulated so that her character comes sharply into focus. MacDonald has an easy manner which is complicated by her stark, direct readings. Her character is very calculated and exacting. There is a formality that tears the heart in two. Brad William Henke is relatively carefree in this film and pretty much outside of the fundamental drama that engulfs the other primary characters. Denny is certainly damaged as the film opens but he finds his bliss quickly and settles into it. He’s not particularly complicated and expects very little out of life. Henke conveys Denny’s basic openness to life and ability to go with whatever happens.

Overall, this film captures a depth of emotion rarely seen in cinema. This is a difficult film to analyze because it’s so condensed. It’s also profoundly tortured by emotional ties that threaten to strangle the characters as they attempt to make sense of the perils of reaching a state of grace. There is a tremendous sadness about these relationships as well as images of loss that resonate long after the film has reached its conclusion. Chuck Palahniuk’s text has been well treated in this film and through voice over narration is used expertly to help the narrative along. There is a stumbling toward a legitimate ecstasy that is hard won and equally difficult to maintain. The performances all bring a certain centeredness to the film and a strong sense of space and posture. Again, it’s a heartbreaking film that wrings great laughter out of absurdities that are more pronounced due to the underlying severity of the script.