"Why do you have to analyze everything? Why can't you just enjoy it?"
Recently, I encountered someone who was clearly disgruntled by the mixed reviews of the movie Fireproof. He responded to the critics' observations by declaring that reviews aren't really important... that "the success and value of the film" would ultimately be determined by "ordinary people"... not by those "paid to review the film." He went on to express disinterest in "movies that win awards," describing those who distribute film awards as "elitists," and noting that "hardly anyone has seen" the films that usually win them.
I'm glad to hear that he found Fireproof meaningful. And I'm glad he's willing to engage in dialogue to defend it. I have no doubt that the film is inspiring people. And I have read substantial evidence of its strengths from moviegoers I trust. But is it flawless? Is Fireproof critic-proof because it affirms values like fidelity and faith? If we take time to analyze it and point out its strengths and flaws, are we being "elitists"?
When I tried to follow this line of thinking, it led me to strange places. If the measure of a film's merit has to do with how many people see it, and its box office success, well... that means Shrek 2 and Shrek the Third are both among the twenty finest movies ever made.
It also means that I should make my moviegoing decisions based on what is packing the multiplex at the local mall. A subtitled masterpiece from another part of the world playing at an out-of-the-way arthouse theater... well, "ordinary people" wouldn't bother with it, so it must not be very "valuable." And an independent film, which cost the filmmakers a great deal, but which lacked a celebrity or some other "bankable" highlight, wouldn't be worth seeking out because a big corporation didn't throw enough money at it to win widespread distribution.
I was still thinking about this perspective, and how if I embraced it I would have missed out on most of the movies that have inspired me and changed my life. Instead I would have seen all of the Saw movies, all of crass sex-comedy blockbusters, every single comic-book action flick good or bad.
And then an email arrived that was not a response to that thread. I found it interesting, though, and timely. This writer suggests that perhaps the process of reviewing and analyzing art is not "elitism," but something else entirely....
I found a good review about Lionel Trilling that you might want to read: http://www.newsweek.com/id/161197.
He argues in some good ways for good literature's refusal to oversimplify human life. (I may have to seek out the book.) A good quote: "Because the liberal imagination needs constant refreshing, it ought to turn to literature, which Trilling called 'the human activity that takes the fullest and most precise account of variousness, possibility, complexity, and difficulty.' At a time when worthy authors offered endless worthy attacks on social injustice, Trilling gave his book a subversive punch line: literature doesn't need more white hats and black hats, it needs 'moral realism,' books that don't just attack the misdeeds of the bad people but 'lead us to refine our motives and ask what might lie behind our good impulses.'"
I'm afraid that our culture's argument for simplicity has degenerated into merely reductionist, simplistic carping. It is refreshing to find someone arguing for the richness of human complexity. The parable of the wheat and the tares comes to mind. Too many Americans, especially American Christians, are too often guilty of busily uprooting the good with the evil. Moralistic religion doesn't have much to offer; bottom-line economics doesn't, either. Only true spirituality does — perhaps most clearly in art. But art is demanding and untidy and ambiguous. Why, even the experts disagree, so what are "us ordinary folk" to make of things? I'm reminded of an exchange with a high-school cheerleader many years ago. Before class started, a handful of students were gathered around the podium, talking about a recently-released movie. We were all making observations and sharing ideas. As she walked by and heard the exchange, she huffed, "Why do you have to analyze everything? Why can't you just enjoy it?" When I asked her if she'd ever considered talking and analyzing as a way of enjoying it, she looked surprised and stumped.
Over the Rhine on The Mountain Stage!
My favorite band just performed for NPR's Mountain Stage!
You can listen to the set here!
And by the way, thanks to an extravagantly generous gesture by my friend Rick Paul Poole, I'll be traveling to Cincinnati to see Over the Rhine three times in one weekend in celebration of their 20th anniversary... one week before Christmas!
Reader Mail: Ballast! Ghost Town! Ted Baehr!
BEHOLD... BALLAST!
A little while back, you posted a trailer for Lance Hammer's Ballast on your blog, which I watched and decided to check out sometime. To my delight, Ballast just had its Canadian premiere at the Vancouver Film Festival, and I was able to catch that screening. I've posted my review of the film at my blog: http://filmatical.wordpress.com/
Ballast is an excellent film, and I want to thank you for putting it onto my radar.
By the way, I've started reading Auralia's Colors and I'm really enjoying it so far. I'm trying to get caught up quickly to join in on the Cyndere's Midnight fun.
cheers,
Nathan
MY REPSONSE:
Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)
This review was originally published at Christianity Today.
•
In 2007's Oscar-winning thriller No Country for Old Men, Javier Bardem stormed across Texas as one of the most fearsome villains in film history—a big, bad wolf who could huff, puff, and blow down any house in his path. Even though it's a relief to see Bardem escape that horrible haircut and slip into some stylish shirts in Woody Allen's new "erotic comedy," Vicky Cristina Barcelona, it's tough to shake the memory of that indelible, terrifying performance.
And there may be a good explanation for that. After all, despite Bardem's impressive good looks, he's still playing the wolf. This time, he's even more dangerous—as Juan Antonio, he's a well-dressed wolf who gets women huffing and puffing with desire, whether they're promiscuous or principled. He's a devil who inspires his victims to enjoy, and even volunteer for, their own destruction.
Even Woody Allen seems enamored of this Latin lothario. He paints the ruination of these women in such romantic colors that, if we aren't smart enough, we'll end up falling for the seduction ourselves. Vigilant viewers will notice the pleasure that Allen seems to find in illustrating gullible, self-destructive women. And as he exploits the warm glow of Barcelona's art galleries and streetscapes, the natural beauty of the film's four gorgeous actresses, and Juan Antonio's Don-Juan charm, he makes Vicky Cristina Barcelona a dangerously seductive picture.
Newcomer Rebecca Hall plays the beautiful and somewhat-sensible Vicky, who is engaged to an off-puttingly practical young man named Doug (Cris Mesina, who bears an uncanny resemblance to the young Steve Gutenberg). Vicky's a graduate student developing an M.A. thesis on Catalan culture, so she's happy to accept an invitation to Barcelona from her wealthy friend Judy (Patricia Clarkson) and her husband Doug (Kevin Dunn).
Vicky brings along her friend Cristina (Scarlett Johansson), a reckless beauty prone to plunging into promiscuous adventures. Johansson, who seems likely to catch up with Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow for frequent appearances in Allen's work, throws herself into this kamikaze role with shameless abandon.
Vicky and Cristina first encounter Juan Antonio in an art gallery, and Cristina is immediately smitten. Later, when Juan boldly proposes that both women accompany him on his private plane for a luxuriant weekend in Oviedo, indulging in art, food, and three-way sex, Vicky turns him down with the kind of rebuke he deserves. But Cristina taunts Vicky for her convictions and accepts the invitation.
And so the film's central (and simplistic) questions are announced: Which is better—to be like Vicky and strive for love in the context of marriage? Or to be like Cristina, throwing caution to the wind and following our lusts in search of adventure and excitement?
In this filmmaker's world, both characters are doomed. Allen seems to see women as pushovers, fickle, doomed to make mistakes and suffer severe dissatisfaction. But it's obvious, from the way he slows down and savors scenes of sexual abandon, which route he prefers to imagine.
In fact, in this film Allen gives his plot threads a few more kinky twists than usual.
As Vicky and Cristina become entangled with Juan Antonio, both are destined for confrontations with Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz), the tempestuous ex-wife of Juan Antonio. When Maria Elena moves back into Juan's home for a season of recovery after a suicide attempt, you'll expect fireworks, and you'll be right. (She stabbed him once before, after all.) But the fireworks between Juan and Maria lead to even more alarming fires: Soon, Maria and Cristina are making out in the photographer's dark room, much to Juan's delight. And before long, the two Spanish artists are persuading Cristina that she "completes" them. She's the missing piece—"the secret ingredient"—that has kept them from finding satisfaction all along.
Woody Allen is famous for giving great actors juicy supporting roles that end up earning Oscar buzz, and this time the prize goes to Cruz, whose sparring matches with Bardem are feisty, flagrant, and funny. Maria Elena and Juan Antonio have a complicated relationship—one moment it's a passionate love affair, and the next it's a violent clash of the titans.
This attractive cast frolics against the romantic Barcelona backdrop, providing opportunities for eyefuls of Gaudi architecture and earfuls of exquisite Spanish guitar. Yes, Vicky Cristina Barcelona is one of the most aesthetically pleasing confections from Allen's oven.
But there's poison in the cake beneath such dazzling frosting. Marriages are made to seem boring and bland, while affairs are painted as vivid and delicious. Allen is at his most shamelessly manipulative in his portrayal of Vicky's fiancé Doug, who is annoyingly chatty about investments and real estate, with nothing resembling personality or passion. Comparing Doug to Juan Antonio is like comparing a slice of Wonder bread to a slice of fresh-baked rosemary-olive soaked in olive oil. Doug's character is the type of storyteller's cheat that Allen employs again and again—a dislikable figure whose sole purpose is to make us hope that a beautiful woman will be "saved" from marriage by a fling or an affair. Many will happily sympathize with Vicky as she reluctantly slips into the claws of the seducer. Like Madame Marie de Tourvel in Dangerous Liaisons, it's seemingly beyond her control to resist.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona is being praised by some critics as an erotic delight; one described it as "a funny, bright, and witty meditation on love, in all its romantic and sexual exhilarations and heartache, in all its intriguingly elusive and inherently mysterious nature."
Let's give credit where credit is due: It's easy to appreciate the movie's wit, wordplay, cinematography, and performances. Rebecca Hall is quite a discovery; she may well become a remarkable leading lady in the future. And some viewers may find some needles of wisdom—as in just-say-no—in this haystack of hot-and-heavy hedonism.
But it's a shame to watch what's happening to Scarlett Johansson, who once stood out from a crowd of young actresses for her air of intelligence (Ghost World, Lost in Translation). More and more, in films like The Island, Match Point, and the upcoming Frank Miller comic book flick The Spirit, she seems happy to embody the fantasies of sophomoric, sex-obsessed males. Who will come to her rescue?
And it's an even greater shame to watch Woody Allen fall farther and farther from attaining any insights about faith or true love. In the best movies of his past—Sleeper, Hannah and Her Sisters, Zelig, Annie Hall, The Purple Rose of Cairo, and Bullets Over Broadway are standouts—romantic idiots fumbled their way from folly into occasions of almost accidental insight. His seducer-devils and troublemakers have occasionally come away from their conquests and mistakes haunted by conscience (Crimes and Misdemeanors and Match Point). And once in a while, he's aspired to the kind of substance so often achieved by his hero, Ingmar Bergman, raising significant questions about faith, sin, and consequences.
But there are no moments of theological inquiry here, save for a moment when Antonio hails a beautiful crucifix as his "favorite" work of art—but that's more of a pickup line than a provocation for spiritual reflection. And his characters seem untroubled by conscience, bothered only by dissatisfaction.
As he broadens his geographical interests beyond Manhattan, Allen's understanding of love seems to be narrowing. His work should be taking him deeper into complex and revealing stories about the heart. Instead, he's becoming more and more preoccupied with the lurid and the lewd. In the end, like Cristina, he comes away knowing only what he doesn't want, never managing even a glimpse of what he, his characters, or his audience, really need.
Auralia's Adventure in The Netherlands?
I am thunderstruck to discover that the sequel to Auralia's Colors has made it so far already. Thanks to Bart Cusveller, who tells me, "I liked Cyndere's Midnight a great deal, I suppose even better than Auralia's Colors."
Read more
"Cyndere's Midnight": Reviews and Interviews, Part One
Reviews are beginning to pop up here and there for Cyndere's Midnight:
Today's Favorite: Dragons!
Guillermo del Toro has said that he cannot wait to bring Smaug to life in the big-screen version of The Hobbit.
Curator and the Coens
When Alissa Wilkinson, editor of The Curator, asked me if I'd contribute some perspectives on the Coen Brothers' movies, I revisited my original reviews of Barton Fink, Fargo, and The Big Lebowski, and decided to hold them up and compare them with the Coens' latest... Burn After Reading.
By comparison, the new film doesn't hold up so well with either of those three memorable, masterful films. But it's still a hoot and a holler, and I recommend it to Coen fans... but not necessarily to everyone.
Here's my "insufficient appreciation" of the Coen Brothers. I'm absolutely delighted to be a part of this new arts journal.
An Unforgettable Night at Third Place Books, Celebrating "Cyndere's Midnight"
Here are a few moments from Thursday night's crowded Cyndere's Midnight release party. Over 100 people packed in for the reading. I read a chapter from the middle of the book called "The Watcher and the Ruined Farm," talked about the profundity of "Beauty and the Beast," and reminisced about my favorite monsters. It was an unforgettable evening, a wonderful time to chat with old friends and meet new friends. I was greatly encouraged by the enthusiasm.
Check out these pics by photographer Fritz Liedtke, whose new website is beautiful!
Read more
To Save Ourselves?
It's extraordinary to me that the United States can find $700 billion to save Wall Street and the entire G8 can't find $25 billion dollars to saved 25,000 children who die every day from preventable diseases.
- Bono, rock star and anti-poverty activist