VP IS MOVING

The contents of this blog actually have already been moved, so soon this one will be deleted. To see my latest blog on Philip Seymour Hoffman go to:
http://www.readthespirit.com/visual-parables/category/eds-blog/
Moving the blog to ,y publisher's site will bring both this and my Visual Parables journal and movie reviews together at one site. You can easily move back and forth from one to the other without the need of links.
 This weekend I will be posting a blog on Ten Films For Valentines Day, but not here. Please join me there.

My Hero Pete Seeger

Although not a surprise--he was 94!--the death of folksinger/acitivist Pete Seeger saddens me. For more years than I like to admit to he has been one of my heroes. I was in high school when his and Burl Ives' recordings introduced me to folk music, and through folk music made me aware that the Fifties were not all that the later TV show HAPPY DAYS made them out to be. Mr. Seeger's involvement in the birth and spread of the Civil Rights Movement made me aware of the racial divide in our country and of the possibility of overcoming it.

I also became aware during those "happy days" of the anti-Communist witch hunts that rabid Congressmen were conducting against entertainers and actors suspsected of being even slightly "leftist." I had rejoiced when the folk group Pete had helped found "The Weavers" broke into the Top Ten songs with their hit "Good Night, Irene," but with the Congressional witch hunters branding Pete and his friends "Communists," their music soon disappeared from radio. It would not be until years later when Pete would be invited to sing on a TV program, and I am proud that it was one sponsored and produced by the National Council of Churches.

I eagerly bought the singer's LP records, listening to and being inspired by them, along with classical music and operas. I had my first opportunity to hear him when fellow pastor Roger Smith and I journeyed to Jackson, MS to join other "outside agitators" in The Miss. Summer Freedom Project. It was a sweltering night in an overcrowded "Negro church" in Jackson that the folksinger was entertaining the troops. This picture, whether taken by myself or by my friend Roger I can't recall (we both took so many and exchanged them that summer), is not detailed enough to show Pete's shirt soaked clear through and clinging to him. Hot though it was, he played and sang--or I should say, led singing, as he always saw himself as much of a catalyst for group singing as a solo performer--for over two hours. No one left, or as far as we were concerned, even thought of leaving early.

He was loved by all the Project participants for his courage as well as his music and advocacy of racial justice. Many other celebrities came to Jackson, which was good, but as far as I know, he was the only one who would go outside the city to some of the dangerous areas where the Klan ruled. Roger and I left early the next day to go to our assignment in Shaw (up in the Delta region), and all during our almost 3 weeks engaged in teaching, advising, canvassing for voter registration, and transporting would-be voters to the courthouse, memories of his leading us in singing of freedom and justice kept ringing in our minds and hearts.

The only other time I heard and met him in person was years later at the Chautauqua Institute in upstate New York where he stayed for a few days and presented a concert. I thanked him for his inspiring work through the years and hesitatntly held out several of his albums for autographing, which he graciously did. These are cherished items, even though today I listen to the songs on digitally transferred copies.

As a fitting way to remember him I recommend that you borrow a copy of the wonderful documentary PETE SEEGER: The Power of Song, probably available at your local library. Even though I was familiar with some of the events of his long life, it revealed a wealth of additional ones that made me admire him all the more. My new book Blessed Are the Filmmakers, due out sometime this year, will contain a review and discussion guide for this film. Let us thank God for the long and useful life of this wonderful man!

This will be one of the last blogs on this site, My publishers at ReadtheSpirit.com are going to be moving all of the content from this blog to visualparables.org so that all my materials will be under one roof, so to speak. Please log onto that site to see the many film materials available here, and within a week or less, future postings on this blog.

But Do We Honor the Prophet?

Today there were the usual eulogies of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. that we expect to hear and see on TV, cable, and radio. If you are an older adult, you might know much of the "I Have a Dream" speech by heart, having heard it so man hundreds of times since this Holiday was established. Well and good, but for those really familiar with the life and writings of this great American, the question arises, "Are most of the effusive tributes being made to a very sanitized Dr. King, a Dr. King the American who no longer poses a threat to the status quo? Dr. King made his famous speech in 1963, which is mainly what we heard today...

But on April 4, 1967 he made a very different one that was not praised but condemned, even by some of his own staff. To them he went "off message" by condemning the Vietnam War, rathering than speaking just of civil rights. This cost him the support of President Johnson as well as many white liberals, and even most of the established black Civil Rights leaders. It confirmed to FBI head J.Edgar Hoover and many white racists that this radical was indeed a Communist in league with Russia.

Thus  I was glad tonight (Jan. 20) that Lawrence O'Donnell on his MSNBC program brought this speech up. A better student of history than most cable and network commentators, Mr. O'Donnell brought up the fact that Dr. King  not only saw the connection between the growing expense of the Vietnam War (in lives, black lives especially, and money) and the dwindling resources for the War on Poverty, but was willing to speak out on it at New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967. One of the reasons I like the old TV miniseries KING is that it includes this important sequence in Dr. King's life, showing that he was indeed a great prophet willing to walk in the footsteps of such prophets as Jeremiah, who was roundly despised by his fellow Jews for calling his countrymen to task for disobeyting the Covenant laws of mercy and justice. (You can see my review of the film at http://www.readthespirit.com/visual-parables/category/movie-reviews/) The film has some historical flaws, but all in all, it presents in a dramatic way the major events in his life.

So, as we honor the man whose eloquence virtually everyone now admires, let us also honor the prophet who, exactly a year after he made his costly prophetic speech in New York City, was struck down in Memphis because his mission was to help those who were victims of economic as well as racial oppression--who indeed pointed out that the two were intertwined.

Reflections on Oscar Nominations for 2013

Well, the list of Oscar nominations has been released, and now the Oscar buzz really begins. As usual, I was happy and disappointed by the choices. Happy that so many good films are being recognized. Disappointed that such a good one as Lee Daniels’ The Butler didn’t make the cut for “Best Picture,” or that the Saudi Arabian Wadjda and British-South African Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom were not honored. I suspect that we still are living in a time when the inclusion of a “black” film is a token gesture, so that there is room for just one such film on the list.

The Academy’s list differs greatly from my Top Ten List for Visual Parables because their criteria are centered more on aesthetics and box office success than spiritual or moral content. To see the list and also reviews of the various films available on visualparables.org click onto the title.

Best Picture

It is good that so many films are again included, though I wish that there were the full possible contingent of 10 so as to include either the Coen Brothers’ wonderful Inside Llewyn Davis or Lee Daniels’ The Butler. Despite the quality of such films as American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street, I don’t think either is equal to the two omitted films.

American Hustle

David O. Russell’s “based on a true story” film features some wonderful performances, but the subject of the rise and fall of scam artists isn’t nearly as important as that of several of the other films on the list.

Captain Phillips

This is a good parable of courage and resourcefulness, with another fine performance by Tom Hanks. Another plus factor is the all too brief depiction of the plight of the Somali peasants who are forced by world economic circumstances beyond their control (or understanding) to choose between starving or stealing. I find it remarkable that the Academy members seem to understand this by nominating the nonprofessional Barkhad Abdi for a “Best Supporting Actor” award for his excellent performance as the pirate leader.

Dallas Buyers Club

It is no surprise that Matthew McConaughey was nominated as “Best Actor” in this character transformation film. We move from intense disapproval of his philandering, gay bashing, and drug ingesting early in the film to a grudging admiration for the way he emerges from total self-absorption to championing the underdog gay community later on. That the film is based on a “true story” makes it even moe compelling.

  

Gravity

Technically perhaps the most complicated of the films, and aesthetically perhaps the most beautiful, this tale of pluck and survival certainly deserves to be on the list, even though I did not include it on Visual Parables Top Ten list. Beyond the mere technical aspect is Sandra Bullock’s great performance as the heroine for whom our daughters can look up to.

Her

Spike Jonze’s truly great film cautionary film about our relationship to our digital devices and r relationship to each other bumped the wonderful Wadjda from the Top Ten list for Presbyterian News Service because of its late arrival in the Cincinnati area. The last shot of the two friends sitting together on the roof of their apartment building is the perfect ending, designed to make us think about how we are involved with social media and friends and neighbors.

Nebraska

This reversal of the Prodigal Son parable confirms that Alexander Payne is one of the best directors in Hollywood. Seldom has unconditional love been presented as effectively as in what the son does for his father through the course of their trip from Montana to Nebraska and back.

Philomena

Both a social problem film (the mistreatment of out of wedlock mothers by the Irish Catholic Church) and a personal memoir, this is a moving story of a woman of faith so strong that she can forgive the nuns who sorely abused her 50 years earlier.

The Wolf of Wall Street

I think this “true story” is way too over the top to be on this list, as entertaining as it is. It is the name of its director Martin Scorsese and the performances of Leonardo De Caprio and Jonah Hill that swayed the Academy voters to nominate the film.

12 Years a Slave

This is my favorite candidate both because of the light it sheds on our dark past and the skill of  director Steve McQueen and Chiwetel Ejiofor’s truly magnificent performance as the runaway who moves from total despair to acceptance to hope. I believe that it would be good for the country if this film were so honored, hopefully convincing more people to go and see it. Already the possibility of it being nominated has moved the studio to re-release it. I hope those who have seen the film will talk it up, maybe organizing a discussion group to explore the film’s relevance for today.

Best Actor

I am torn between three of the excellent nominees.

Christian Bale, American Hustle

Very good as a guy who scams the gullible, yet who still has a touch of decency so that he tries to protect a good-hearted politician who unwisely attempts to use underhanded means to achieve public good.

Bruce Dern, Nebraska

This may be the last chance that this fine second tier actor for this award, so I would be happy if it he is chosen, even though my favorite is the star of 12 Years a Slave.

Leonardo DiCaprio, The Wolf of Wall Street

One of our finest actors, but I think this should not be his year in a film that is not as important as some others.

Matthew McConaughy, Dallas Buyers Club

He is deserving of the title because of the incredible preparation involving weight loss, as well as his on-screen performance. He convincingly moves us from repulsion to acceptance.

Chiwetel Ojiofor, 12 Years a Slave

Both because of the importance of the film and because of his on-screen performance, I hope he wins. When I watched that scene at the slave cemetery wherein we see his face change from despair to hope as his friends sang “Roll, Jordan Roll,” I felt that he had at least a nomination clenched, if not the award itself.

Best Actress

Amy Adams, American Hustle

A wonderful performance, but…

Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine

It is good to see Woody Allen back in great form, as well as Ms. Blanchett’s fine performance as a woman who is her own worst enemy.

Sandra Bullock, Gravity

A very good performance to place along the one in Blindside.

Judi Dench, Philomena

My favorite to win because of the importance of the film’s theme of discovery and forgiveness, as well as her delightful performance.

Meryl Streep, August: Osage County

Still another great performance by this phenomenal actress, I would not be too disappointed if she noses out Ms. Dench. What a portrait of a woman so shaped by her own sad childhood that she is making everyone else as miserable as herself!

This probably enough for now, though I do want to add that I have seen but one of the foreign films nominated--part of the penalty for living in “fly over country” is that we often are weeks or months late in seeing films available much earlier on the West and East coasts. Still, because of the great way that the themes of unjust persecution and reconciliation are tied in with the celebration of the Nativity, I am rooting for The Hunt.

Other nominations worth thinking about, but not now:

Best Supporting Actor

Barkhad Abdi, Captain Phillips

Bradley Cooper, American Hustle

Michael Fassbender, 12 Years a Slave

Jonah Hill, The Wolf of Wall Street

Jared Leto, Dallas Buyers Club

Best supporting actress

Sally Hawkins, Blue Jasmine

Jennifer Lawrence, American Hustle

Lupita Nyong'o, 12 Years a Slave

Julia Roberts, August: Osage County

June Squibb, Nebraska

Best director

Alfonso Cuaron, Gravity

Steve McQueen, 12 Years a Slave

Alexander Payne, Nebraska

David O. Russell, American Hustle

Martin Scorsese, The Wolf of Wall Street

Best Foreign Film  The Hunt, Denmark

More on Nelson Mandela

This is the second of what will be three posts on Nelson Mandela. I know, there has been so much on him, but there is so much good material available, that I hope you are not tired of hearing about him. This time I want to bring to your attention in case you are like me and missed the PBS "Front Line" 2 hour special on the leader "The Long Walk of Nelson Mandela":

It's available in its entirety at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/mandela/ . I don't know how long PBS will make this accessible, so I suggest that you go and watch it soon,

The documentary begins with his youthful rebellion against his tribal chief  and on through his early days as a student and then an activist after meeting and coming under the influence of Walter Sisulu and on through his incarceration, release, sad divorce from Winnie, and his remarriage during his presidency. Along with the video you can also read material below it about aspects of his life. Embedded in these are some short videos. Quite a treasure trove of information!

One glaring omission, however--at least in what I've read thus far--is any discussion of the man in the ANC who opposed Mandela's resorting to violence, Chief Albert Luthuli, then the head of the ANC. Nor have I heard or seen him mentioned in the many other TV/cable tributes to Mandela. This is a glaring omission in that Chief Luthuli received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1960 for his advocacy of non-violence against the apartheid regime and his persecution and imprisonment by the authorities. He was the first non-Euroean or American to be so honored, quite a precdent for that time. More on him next time.

I also will be bringing to your attention a DVD that I discovered I had bought a long time ago--one of almost 60 that I knew nothing about but which was appealing, either because of subject matter or their actors or director. This one is The Color of Freedom, the story of a racist guard who watched over Mandela for 20 years and moved from racist to admirer. It stars Joseph Fiennes as the guard and Dennis Haysbert  as Mandela. I tried to find out about it at the Imdb, but there was no listing, something very puzzling, that site suposedly having every film ever released in its databank.

Then good old Google came to the rescue by revealing that it was known elsewhere as Goodbye Bafana. I plan on seeing this tonight, so will include it in the next posting, as well as reviewing it for Visual Parables at visualparables.org. I don't know whether this is the same person featured in the about to be released Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom. We shall see,

Also one of the issues I want to raise in the third installment is Nelson Mandela's giving up on non-violence, as I believe this was a sad mistake that set back the cause of South African freedom rather than advancing it.

Nelson Mandela

It has been too long since writing on this site, so now, while the last night's news of Nelson Mandela's death is fresh, I am impelled to respond to this world event. Like many of you, I was glued to my TV set last night, soaking in all the well-produced tributes on ABC and MSNBC. Even though I have followed his career for a long time--as one involved in civil rights, how could I not?--I learned a lot of new facts, such as his learning Afrikaans while in prison so that he could speak his enemy's language when the day would come, as he always believed it would, that he was freed. There was a quote from him to the effect that when you speak to a person you connect with his mind, but when you speak in his native language, you speak to his heart.

The timing of his death--am so thankful that he was able to live to a ripe old age, unlike some of his colleagues such as Steve Biko--is interesting. The film I am most anticipating this month is MANDELA: Long Road to Freedom. I heard last night that the film was being premiered in London, with the crown Prince and other dignitaries present. At the end of the film the actor starring as Mandela, Idris Elba, came out from behind the screen and told the audience that Mandela had just died. He and the Prince then paid tribute to the great man.

Click on the images for more info..

I have seen two other films centering on the leader, INVICTUS and MANDELA & DeKlerk. The first starred Morgan Freeman as Mandela. He himself was chosen by Mandela to play the role, and Freeman in turn chose the film director with whom he had enjoyed a close working relationship, Clint Eastwood. It is a marvelous film illustrating all of the comments being made about him concerning his eschewing retaliation and stressing reconciliation. You can see my review of it by going to visualparables.org and clicking onto its title in the Film Index. The title, you may recall, came from Mandela's favorite poem about maintaining control over one's inner self ("I am the captain of my soul") which helped him endure those long tough years as a prisoner at hard labor on Robben Island.

                                        

The second was a TV film aired in 1997 starring the great Sidney Poittier as Mandela and Michael Caine as the last apartheid era president. As the title indicates, it dramatizes the story of how the white president decided to contact his most famous prisoner and negotiate his release.

Those involved in civil rights in this country have long felt connected with the South African freedom movement. In my own case as a high school student it was the far away scourge of apartheid that made me more aware of the situation in our own country. Recommended by adults, Alan Paton's Cry the Beloved Country, a novel about a priest searching for his lost son, moved me deeply, as did Zoltan Korda's 1951 film adaptation. There is a later film version, also very good in that it stars James Earl Jones and Richard Harris as the two grief-stricken fathers. Through the years I have referred to the novel and film in my sermons and discussion groups.

     

            

I loved the interview last night in which Congressman John Lewis, once one of Dr. King's  brilliant young assistants spoke of his meeting Mandela for the first time and telling him how he and the struggle of fellow South Africans had inspired him during his own struggle for equality in America. Mandela told him that he knew him and his work for freedom. something that surprised and humbled the Congressman.

Back to Alan Paton and his novel--he was exiled and his book banned in his native country--but almost as soon as the novel was published it was adapted for the Broadway musical stage by Maxwell Anderson, with the composer Kurt Weil creating the music. I discovered this during my college years and listened to it often, it becoming one of my favorite record albums thanks to Weil's haunting music and Anderson's retaining so much of the poetic language of Paton's novel.

The album is now available digitally from Amazon, well worth the asking price of $9.99. Go there, and you can listen to a few opening measures of the songs. 

This album figures in my only direct connection with South Africa, an event that took place in the 1980s when I pastored a church in Westfield, New York. Located a mile inland from Lake Erie, you might expect this little upstate New York town, known only as the home of the Welch Grape Juice Company, to be so isolated that nothing so far away as South Africa could touch it. However, this was not the case, because busy I-90 and US Route 20 that connected it with Erie and Buffalo the world was easily brought to the village. A year or two earlier a group of Japanese and American Buddhist nuns and monks walked along that route on their Peace March across America, and our people agreed to house them for the night. (What a dinner and discussion we had that night, but that is another story.) 

Our Presbytery, wishing to keep its member churches informed on world issues, and South Africa in particular, invited a team of South Africans to visit and speak at the churches. The South African who spoke to us and stayed the night was Willy (I am ashamed that I cannot recall his last name!). Director of a social service center for blacks, Willy described the terrible pass system, the brutal arrests, beatings and killings, and expressed the fear that his own teenaged children no longer believed in nonviolence as the means for change. Thus he feared for the future of his country, something stressed in Paton's novel when a black priest observes in words to the effect, "I fear that when they have turned to loving, we will have turned to hating." Willy's report was an interesting contrast to the glowing report of conditions in South Africa that the son of one of our conservative members gave after being a guest of a white organization that sponsored a student tour--never taking them to a township or allowing them to talk with black dissidents.

After the dinner meeting I asked Willy if he knew of LOST IN THE STARS, and he replied that he certainly knew of Alan Paton and his novel, but had not heard of the play. After hearing some of it, he was eager to take back the tape I made for him, planning to smuggle it in with his personal suitcase so he could use it in his work of encouraging his oppressed people. It would have been confiscated and he would be in trouble if the customs agent had been aware of the cassett's contents. Because I never heard again from Willy I have often wondered if it did get through and if he was able to play it.

Well this enough for now. Perhaps more later, especially when MANDELA opens here in Cincinnati. Actually, this might not be enough: for a wealth of material on Mandela go to ReadtheSpirit . Plenty of photos, interviews, and articles there!

    

                           

  

Two New NOTHING SACRED Guides

Two new guides for the TV series Nothing Sacred have been posted on the Fuller Theological Seminary media blog "Reel Spirituality." Episode 3 "Mixed Blessings" deals with unexpected consequences from the staff's winning lottery ticket, and Episode 4 "Parents and Children" deals with both sides of the abortion controversy when a staff member is impregnated.

Both episodes are taken from You Tube postings, but you do not have to go to another site, just click onto the pictures to sart watching. I started this series of guides because there are so many ethical and theological issues in each episode that could challenge a group of believers to stretch and exercise their thinking faith. Episode 3 includes 12 questions, one of them being a link to the words and a concert performance of the beautiful sacred song that figures so prominently in this story, "Panis Angelica." Episode 4 includes 10 discussion questions.

Next month we will be posting two more episodes. If you use these materials, please let us know, as this would be an encouraging note that someone "out there" is paying heed. To access the blog go to:
http://www.brehmcenter.com/initiatives/reelspirituality/film/articles/show/contributors/ed-mcnulty/

New VISUAL PARABLES Launch

I am happy that ReadtheSpirit has launched the new Visual Parables site. There are lots of features to explore which will add to the fun of viewing movies through the eyes of faith and ethics.

Check it out at http://www.visualparables.org

To the Wonder

 Rated R. Our ratings: V-1; L- 1; S/N -5. Running time: 1 hour 52 min.
Related Scriptures: Psalm 42:1-2; Song of Solomon 8:6-7; Matthew 5:43-44; Mark 9.24.



 From the very beginning we see that this highly unusual film will be more of a visual meditation than the ordinary story-based film. As it opens we hear a woman’s voice musing, accompanied by a montage of shots,  “Newborn. I open my eyes. I melt. Into the eternal night. A spark. You brought me out of the shadows. You lifted me from the ground. What is she dreaming of? How calm she is. In love. Forever at peace.” The shots show a woman and a man playfully teasing one another on a train, walking the streets of Paris while enjoying some of its monuments, lying together in a park, standing on a bridge over the Seine as a boat passes beneath them, and admiring a medieval tapestry, the camera lingering on the Lady in the tapestry as we hear “In love. Forever in peace.”

Director/writer Terence Malick’s film is a meditation on two kinds of love and the yearning or thirst that sensitive humans experience—the first love is that between Neil (Ben Affleck), traveling in France, and Marina (Olga Kurylenko), a divorced Ukrainian émigré living in Paris with her 10-year-old daughter Tatiana. This Eros love, as the Greeks called it, is juxtaposed with the agape love of Catholic priest Father Quintana (Javier Bardem). The yearning, on the one hand, is Marina’s longing for the love vouchsafed in marriage, and on the other hand the priest’s thirst for the God whose presence he cannot feel. Through much of the film he suffers the dark night of the soul akin to that which afflicted Mother Teresa.

The lovers travel to Mont St. Michel, the island abbey off the coast of Normandy, basking in the wonder of their newfound romance. As they ascend the stairs Marina comments, “We climbed the steps to the Wonder”—this is followed by their walking through a garden and the vaulted nave of the church—which apparently gives the film its title. Most of the reflections and sparse dialogue involve Marina, with Neil scarcely saying more than three lines throughout the entire movie, and the priest’s prayers and sermons. Neil seems withdrawn, unable to express himself and, worst of all, unable to make the commitment that Marina yearned for while she was gazing at a medieval tapestry in which a maiden is flanked by two unicorns.

Neil does invite her and Tatiana to return with him to Oklahoma, where mother and daughter are happy at first, Neil joining in their frolicking in one tender scene. But we see his reticence in the supermarket scene in which Tatiana runs around marveling at the abundance and cleanliness of the place, and then asking if Neil will marry her mother and become her step dad. He makes no reply. In a later brief revealing shot we see him outside their house looking in as mother and daughter dance merrily together.

Neil works as an environmental inspector for an oil company. When a number of people tell him about a pollution problem, he seems very concerned for their welfare. While wading in a stream he speaks on the phone about the lab tests confirming the pollution caused by the oil extraction, but I am not sure what he does about it, because then the scene shifts to Marina reflecting on love. For a while Marina lives off the loving relationship that was so enriched by their experience together in France, but Oklahoma is so bleak by comparison, and Neil is gone so often. Even when he is present, he is so remote.

Tatiana, unable to forge friendships at school due to her poor English, is the first to express dissatisfaction. “Something is missing,” she tells her mother. When her visa is expired, and Neil has made no marriage proposal, Marina returns to Paris where she hopes to reconnect with her former husband for the sake of Tatania. She longingly reflects that had Neil said the word, she would have stayed.

 Neil discovers an old flame, Jane (Rachel McAdams), a lonely widow who cannot manage alone the bison ranch she has inherited. But will this relationship hold up, given Neil’s withdrawnness and inability to make a commitment?

Neil’s inability to commit is underlined in a brilliant earlier scene in which he and Marina are attending mass at Father Quintana’s church, and during the homely the priest declares, “ Man is in revolt against God. The prophet Hosea saw in the breakdown of his marriage the spiritual infidelity of his own people. In that broken marriage we see the pattern of our world. We wish to live inside the safety of the laws. We fear to choose. Jesus insists on choice. The one thing he condemns utterly is avoiding the choice. To choose is to commit yourself. And to commit yourself is to run the risk, is to run the risk of failure, the risk of sin, the risk of betrayal. But Jesus can deal with all of those. Forgiveness he never denies us. The man who makes a mistake can repent. But the man who hesitates, who does nothing, who buries his talent in the earth, with him he can do nothing.” When the camera switches from the priest to Neil he appears uneasy.

The priest himself is wracked with the yearning for God, similar to that of the writer of Psalm 42. Fr. Quintana moves among his people preaching and living a faith that he himself no longer feels. Many of his parishioners are poor, and he faithfully visits them, or tries to, as some will not respond to his knocking at their doors. At a wedding which he presides over he is the unsmiling one amidst the festivities. An elderly woman says that she is praying for him to receive the gift of joy. He replies, “Me?” and she says that it is because he looks so unhappy. This is reinforced when in the nave of the church the bearded church sexton says virtually the same thing to him. As each of them places a hand on a pane of the stain glass window the old man, so filled with God that he speaks in tongues, talks of the warm spiritual light.

Much more occurs in the last half of the film, again Malick giving us just fragments of plot and dialogue, so that I felt like I was working on one of those children’s connect the dots pictures that sometimes surprised me when the full picture emerged. No filmmaker that I know and admire makes me work as much as does this enigmatic film artist. The result, however, is worth all the effort, especially the nearly last scene in which Fr. Quintana recites part of the beautiful hymn known as St. Patrick’s Breast-Plate, set to some moving visuals.

It is sad that the film could find no one willing to distribute it to theaters, but given the poor box office response of his magnificent 2011 film Tree of Life, this is understandable. Again, I thank God for DVD and streaming video for making this masterpiece available to us. The critical response has ranged from calling it “muddled” and “boring” to that of “masterful.” It might not be for you, but I urge you to sum up your patience and give it a try. But do this with several spiritually astute companions who like to discuss films: this is a film that will prove the mantra I teach at my film workshops on the need for group involvement with a film, “All of us see more than one of us.”

The full review with a set of 12 questions for reflection or discussion appears in the Sep/Oct issue of Visual Parables, which will be available on Sep. 23 when VP's new site is launched..

Closed Circuit

                       Rated R. Our ratings: V -4; L -2; S/N-3. Running time: 1 hour 36 min.

Claudia and Martin appear before the special judge, but most

of the drama takes place outside the courtroom.

(c) 2013 Focus Featues

                                           The eyes of the LORD are in every place,
                                           keeping watch on the evil and the good.
                                                             Proverbs 15:3

                                           They sit in ambush in the villages;
                                              in hiding-places they murder the innocent.
                                          Their eyes stealthily watch for the helpless
                                                               Psalm 10:8

Director John Crowley and screenwriter Steven Knight demonstrate that a thriller does not have to include blazing guns, falls from great heights that do not injure, or cars making impossible maneuvers through heavy traffic and crowded sidewalk to hold the interest of the audience. (Though there are a couple of foot chases we must admit, but these do not require stunt drivers or CGI effects.) Just give us a story that is relevant and characters that are more normal than the impossible to stop heroes of the CGI-enhanced blockbusters. With all the debate over the US government’s intelligence gathering, no film is more relevant than this one, even though it is set in London and not in Washington, D.C.

The film opens with a split screen showing images from a dozen or more security cameras. We see shoppers and vendors in a large London market. We can hear snatches of the subjects’ conversations as they pass close to a camera. A white truck pulls up, and vendors call out that it cannot park there. Suddenly an explosion demolishes the place. Over a hundred bodies are found amidst the rubble. The police quickly track down the alleged perpetrator, an Arab immigrant Farroukh Erdogan (Denis Moschitto) entering the country from Germany.

Barrister Martin Rose (Eric Bana) is assigned to defend the man because the original lawyer had died. Because the Crown wants to protect the secret intelligence the prosecution will submit as evidence, a vetted defense lawyer, Claudia Simmons-Howe (Rebecca Hall), also has been appointed as a Special Advocate to review the classified evidence in the government's case. The two are ordered to have no communication between them that would taint the evidence. The problem is that Claudia had once been Martin’s lover, which had led to the breakup of his marriage. How will they relate in their common cause to defend their client?

Two other important figures are the Crown’s Attorney General (Jim Broadbent), who often approaches Martin with warnings about his going too far in his investigation. New York Times reporter Joanna Reece (Julia Stiles), successfully maneuvering to meet Martin at a dinner party, really sets the intrigue into motion by suggesting that the original defense lawyer did not just die, but was murdered because he learned too much about M15 and its operations.

Though this seems far-fetched at first, upon further investigation Martin learns that his client had been arrested in Germany on a drug charge. Despite this he was able to come to London with no problems. How could this happen? Also, Martin is worried because the same taxi keeps showing up when he needs a ride. Hmmmm. The intrigue becomes more complex as the trial at Old Bailey proceeds and a special M15 and Farroukh’s teenaged son Emir are brought into the case.

Interspersed throughout the film are shots of clusters of surveillance cameras and then a screen full of multiple images of people going about their business. Often we see Martin and Claudia in them, so we, and they, know that they are under constant surveillance. With M15 brought under suspicion, the film reminded me of Three Days of the Condor, the 1975 film which was one of the first to portray the CIA as a dark force that could be as evil as the Soviet menace from which it was supposed to be protecting us. That film’s conclusion pinned the hero’s hope for justice on the New York Times’ using the documentation he is shown delivering to it in the last shot. But what if M15 can stop such a transaction “by any means necessary”?

Throughout the film I felt a chill or sense of creepiness each time the cameras and their images were displayed on the screen. The nagging question kept arising, in this world so dangerous that we need to have someone constantly watching for possible terrorists, “Who is watching the watchers?” For the author of Proverbs it was a comfort to believe that “the eyes of the LORD are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.” The Lord can be trusted to look out for our good, but how much trust can we place in those humans watching over us? What if the words from the 10th Psalm apply to them?

For Reflection/Discussion
There are several spoilers later on in these questions!
1. How does this thriller compare to the normal summer blockbuster thriller? Why is this one far more believable?
2. How did you feel during the many shots of security cameras and their images? Where do you see them during your normal day? In stores; government buildings; at traffic intersections; in your own home?
3. In a dangerous world, in order to protect democracy, which do you think most people will choose—security or freedom and privacy? What are the arguments for each side? What do you know of the “Red scare” after WW 1; the “witch hunts” of the McCarthy era; the mood of the country right after the US invasion of Iraq when Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks spoke out against the war? (For more on the Dixie Chicks see http://www.savingcountrymusic.com/destroying-the-dixie-chicks-ten-years-after)
4. Though set in London what relevance do you see the film has for the US?
5. What do you think has caused novelists and filmmakers to change, beginning in the 60s, from depicting the CIA and similar foreign intelligence agencies as good and heroic to an agency capable of evil doing? (Another current example is 2 Guns, a thriller in which Naval Intelligence and the CIA are both depicted as unsavory.) What danger in a democracy do you see in entrusting secrecy and great power (and funding) to a government agency with almost no accountability?
6. Three Days of the Condor, especially at its conclusion, saw hope in the battle against government secrecy and corruption in the power of a free press to get the word out to the public. How is this hope quashed in this new film? Were you surprised by the fate of the NYT reporter?
7. How do Martin and Claudia depart from the usual path of the screen hero up against an opponent of immense power? How is their admission of defeat more realistic? And yet how is their resolve to protect the life of young Emir evidence that they have not totally given in?
8. What do you think of the newscast you hear at the end of the film? How is this necessary for this film to avoid being nihilistic or cynical about the issue of great misuse of power? Do you share the filmmaker’s apparent belief that the truth will finally emerge in a democracy, despite attempts to cover up such a major mistake as was made by M15? Note how the psalmist shares the belief that right will win out eventually, especially in Psalms 37 and 73.

Blue Jasmine

Rated PG-13. Our ratings: V -0; L -4; S/N-5 . Running time: 1 hour 38 min.

Jasmine with husband and son (far left) lived a lavish life

style in the Hamptons before fall into the impoverished class.

 (c) 2013 Sony Pictures Classics

  

 ‘But woe to you who are rich,
   for you have received your consolation. 
 ‘Woe to you who are full now,
   for you will be hungry.
‘Woe to you who are laughing now,
   for you will mourn and weep.

            Luke 6:24-25

We hear much in op eds and political debates about America’s class warfare, about how the 1% of Americans who allegedly control as much wealth as the bottom 90% are imbued with a sense of entitlement and superiority. I can think of no better illustration of this than Woody Allen’s new film Blue Jasmine, in which Cate Blanchett’s portrayal of a once wealthy wife is bound to earn her a Best Actress nomination.

Flower lovers will know that the title does not refer to the plant, the flower of which is usually white or blue, but to the mood of the character named after it. Jasmine (Cate Blanchett) and Ginger (Sally Hawkins) were raised together as adopted children from different sets of biological parents. Their parents showered more attention on beautiful Jasmine over the plain Ginger, so the latter left home as soon as she could to make her own way. She married working class Augie (Andrew Dice Clay), the two of them producing two boys, both of whom are destined to have weight problems. Then comes the day that they hit the California Lottery big time, winning $200,000. Intending to start his own business, Augie sees this as their way out of their life of living from paycheck to paycheck.

Meanwhile Jasmine has dropped out of college to marry the handsome and wealthy Hal (Alec Baldwin), a rich Wall Street schemer who is always using other people’s money to fund dubious new ventures. As evidence of her upward mobility drive she has changed her name from Janette to the more upscale name of the flower. They have one grown son Danny. Jasmine’s life of conspicuous consumption in the Hamptons is filled with Manhattan shopping sprees, lunches at elegant restaurants, and hosting parties and lavish charity events. They feel put upon when Ginger and Augie pay them a visit during their trip to New York City, but when they learn that the pair have just won a big sum of money, smooth-talking Hal seduces Augie into investing it in what turns out to be a Ponzi scheme. Ginger, who was not enthusiastic about this, becomes even more worried when she spies Hal lunching with and kissing a woman who is not her sister.

All the above is told in a series in intermittent flashbacks as Jasmine, now popping pills and taking frequent sips of vodka from her flask or glass, tries to cope with her new distasteful circumstances. Not only has she finally caught her philandering husband in one of his numerous affairs, but also she precipitates the series of events that leads to Hal’s arrest, conviction, and imprisonment. Unable to cope he has committed suicide. Jasmine’s survival plan involves her flying cross country and moving in with her sister, whose marriage had ended with divorce after they had lost their money. None of this may seem funny, but Allen’s wit is scattered throughout the film.

As has been pointed out by several reviewers, the plot is very much like that of A Streetcar Named Desire, with Ginger’s fiancé Chili (Bobby Cannavale), a lowly (to Jasmine) garage mechanic, quickly developing a passionate hatred for the one he calls “A phony!” Chili is upset that his plans to move in with Ginger have to be put on hold now that Jasmine is there. Ginger feels caught in the middle, her sister loyalty strong despite the way Jasmine has always looked down upon her. 

Jasmine wants to start life anew by finishing college and taking a computer course so she can obtain an interior decorator’s license, but has to find work to fund this, reluctantly following Chili’s tip to obtain a receptionist’s job at a dental office. However, this soon ends when Dr. Flicker (Michael Stuhlbarg) tries to follow through on his lust for her. Then she meets the man who could restore her to the status she feels she deserves, the well-heeled wealthy diplomat Dwight (Peter Sarsgaard). He has long range plans to enter politics and needs a trophy wife like Jasmine. But will her less than wholesome past marriage and tendency to dodge reality and deceive herself and others get in the way?

Every member of the ensemble cast performs well, but Cate Blanchett’s portrayal of the once wealthy Jasmine is unforgettable, perhaps the only other portrayal of a Narcissistic neurotic     woman that compares being that of Vivian Leigh’s Scarlett O’Hara (she also played Blanche!). Her character is so fully defined—nervous tics, almost incessant drinking, tendency to talk out loud inappropriately in public places, disdainful expressions, and elegant dress—that she emerges as a real person. And even though we see what a despicable person she is, we are still drawn to her and, if not root for her, wish that she might achieve a measure of self-understanding. This is a fascinating, detailed study of a woman whose worst enemy is herself. Her fate seems to bear out what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said in a far different situation, but which applies to Jasmine’s fate, “The Arc of the Moral Universe Is Long, but It Bends Toward Justice” Although not intended as a social justice film, Mr. Allen’s revelation of the hollow lifestyle of “the rich and famous” as seen in Jasmine could be a midrash of Jesus’ denunciation of the uncaring rich, or of the equally harsh denunciation of the wealthy by the prophet Amos. One of Mr. Allen’s best films in years, this must not to be missed!

For Reflection/Discussion

Spoilers near the end.

1. Compare Jasmine to Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire. Or to Scarlett O’Hara. What does the opening sequence of Jasmine talking to a fellow plane passenger reveal about her?

2. How is Chili a good stand in for Stanley Kowalski? What insight does he have into Jasmine that her sister lacks?

3. Despite her many flaws, what did you find attractive about Jasmine? Was this mainly physical characteristics? From what you see of her relationship to her husband and to Dr. Flicker, how do you think that she is a victim of life’s circumstances?

4. What do you think of her efforts to develop the one skill she seems to possess—her sense of style and décor? Do you think that she could become successful as an interior decorator? What might get in the way of such success?

5. What fatal error does she make when she meets Dwight? Which of her many flaws do you think lead her to commit this mistake?

6, Although their story is secondary, how does Ginger and Chili’s story compare to that of their sister-in-law’s? How is his love close to agape love?

7. Why does her son Danny act toward her the way he does when Jasmine hunts him down? Do you think that the ending bears out the insight of Dr. King’s quotation?

The Spectacular Now

Rated R. Our ratings: V -0; L -4; S -5/N-1 . Running time: 1 hour 35 min.

Sutter and Aimee are from two different

worlds at their high school.

(c) 2013 A24

But when he came to himself 

Luke 15:17

Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others.

Phillipians 2:4

Based on the novel by Tim Tharp, director James Ponsoldt’s delightful coming of age film has been compared to those in which John Hughe’s so skillfully explored teenage angst for an earlier generation. The major difference is that most teenagers won’t be admitted to this film because of the film’s R-rating. The two love scenes depicted definitely earn this rating, but they are not milked for eroticism, there being little actual nudity involved. The title is interesting, at first sight perhaps suggesting teacher John Keating’s “Carpe diem” in Dead Poet’s Society, but as we listen to this film’s high school senior Sutter Keely (Miles Teller) talk about his wanting to stay in the now where he is enjoying himself so immensely, we perceive quite a touch of irony in it.

The film begins with Sutter at his computer desk trying to answer on a college entrance exam what hardship he has faced and overcome. This sets off a series of flashbacks in which we see that he is an under achiever who has always been the life of the party. Popular with his fellow students, he is not a jock, nor much of anything else—just a guy who can make friends laugh and enjoy themselves. He does hold down a part-time job at a clothing store, where he has a winning way with customers—though we worry over his frequent sips from the whiskey flask he always carries with him. His girlfriend Cassidy (Brie Larson) is also popular, though we soon see, a lot more committed than he—I doubt very much that he has thought about their getting married. And he likes to spike his soft drinks with liquor that he finds easy to obtain through charm and guile.  Sutter’s best quality, one that makes us root for him, is that he likes to help people.

It is while helping his overly shy friend hook up with a girl that results in Cassidy dumping him. Sutter is so upset that he drinks himself to oblivion, waking up the early the next morning on a front lawn to find a worried Aimee (Shailene Woodley) standing over him. She is relieved that he is alive, but has no idea as to where his car is. She needs to move on to finish delivering newspapers for her irresponsible mother, who actually is in charge of the route. Sutter talks her into taking him along to help toss out the rolled up papers and to try to find where he left his car.

Aimee attends the same school, but Sutter cannot recall her name because they did not move in the same circles. He is drawn to the shy and thus a bit withdrawn girl not for romantic reasons—he still hopes to patch things up with Cassidy—but in order to help her come out of her shell. As they get to know each other, he admires her choice of science/fantasy literature. Learning of her dream of going to a Philadelphia college, a plan her mother’s opposes, he urges her to stand up to her. We learn that she, as well as Sutter, has grown up without the presence of a father.

Getting Cassidy back proves more than problematic. At the party to which he takes Aimee he discovers that his former girlfriend has moved on, dating now a student who is a football star and a serious student. (I liked the fact that though this student is black, no one indicated that this was unusual or notable. Maybe we, or at least Hollywood, really are making some racial progress.) Sutter becomes more involved with Aimee, inviting her now to the prom, but it is obvious that she takes their relationship more seriously than he does. Again we worry about his drinking when the prom gift he gives her is a small silver flask.

Aimee, encouraged by Sutter stands up to her mom concerning going away to college. She returns the favor by helping Sutter with his concern to contact his absent father (Kyle Chandler). His mom Sara (Jennifer Jason Leigh), a nurse, has always refused to tell him anything about the man, and his married sister Holly (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) has gone along with their mother’s refusal. He finally persuades Holly to give him the information, and Aimee agrees to accompany him on the three-hour drive. There follows the most poignant scene in the film, one which almost ends in disaster—and which leads at last to Sutter’s coming to himself.

Back to the title again: Sutter seems like a modern day Peter Pan in his clutching at “the spectacular now.” His initial total disregard for the future is appropriate for a hedonist, perhaps someone whose motto is “Eat, drink, and be merry”—and note the rest of that famous dictum is left off because his immersion in the Now blinds him to his mortality. On the other hand, Sutter’s Now is anything but spectacular. He is failing geometry, which threatens his graduation; girlfriend Cassidy has broken with him; his longing to connect with his absent father has been thwarted by his mother, whom he does not appreciate; and he is gradually sinking into the downward spiral of alcohol dependency, which in turn has led to his losing the job he enjoys. The film does a spectacular job of bringing us into the life of a teenager whose great potential might be destroyed, with the boy following in the hollow footsteps of a father whose knowledge of his failure is so painful that he must drown it in alcohol. To his credit, Sutter tries to break with Aimee, believing that he can only bring her down into his world. (Maybe he remembers the gift of the flask, something that Aimee also is now using too much.)

The writing (by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Brown) and acting are so good that this would have been an excellent film for church youth leaders to use, but there are those two sex scenes, this film like most Hollywood productions assuming “everybody’s doing it.” (At least we see Aimee supplying Sutter with a condom.) Thus, this is a dubious choice to show at the church when the film becomes available on DVD. Should you believe, as I do, that it is one of the best films to explore the teen experience since John Hughes was at work, be sure to bring in the parents and explain why you want to use it. In the meantime, simply enjoy it—or maybe, after careful explanation, even work up a theater party of parents and teens.

Note: the full version of this review with 8 discussion questions will appear in the Sept/Oct issue of Visual Parables. Also, I just realized that I have not explained on this blog VP's rating system, based on a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (highest--V = Violence; L = Language; and S/N = Sex/Nudity. This is more impressionist than scientific--I do not sit in the dar counting naugthy words or measure the amount of skin exposed.

Lee Daniels The Butler

Rated PG-13. Our ratings: V-5; L-5 ; S/N-2 . Running time: 2 hours  12 min.

The Kennedys meet the black staff for the first time.

(c) 2013 Weinstein Pictures

I say to God, my rock,

   ‘Why have you forgotten me?

Why must I walk about mournfully

   because the enemy oppresses me?’

Psalm 42.9

I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! I have a baptism with which to be baptized, and what stress I am under until it is completed! Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! From now on, five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided:

father against son and son against father…

Luke 12:49-53

But when he came to himself…

Luke 15:17a 

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.”

Martin Luther King, Jr.

How propitious that this powerful drama, based on an article in the Washington Post was released during the celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech! The film’s butler Cecil Gaines (Forest Whitaker) may be a fictionalized version of the real Eugene Allen, but the events he witnessed, inside and outside the White House, are true, indeed historic, including Pres. Eisenhower’s sending in troops to protect the students integrating the Little Rock Central High School; the Kennedys and the Freedom Riders; the Selma March and Pres. John’s “We Shall Overcome” speech; the Mississippi Summer Feedom Project; the urban riots following the murder of Dr. King; the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, and much, much more. Some critics have mentioned Forest Gump in their reviews, but by means of juxtapositioning of scenes in the White House with those occuring outside its orderly interior, as well as by some telling conversations among black characters, Lee Daniels and scriptwriter  Danny Strong have created much more of a social justice film by comparison.

Cecil’s story begins in 1926 in a Georgia cotton field (not the Virginia of real-life Eugene Allen) where 8 year-old Cecil (Michael Rainey, Jr.) is upset to see Thomas Westfall (Alex Pettyfer) force his mother Hattie Pearl (Moriah Carey) into a barn. Knowing what has transpired there, the boy incites his father Earl (David Banner) to make a mild protest, whereupon the white overseer draws his pistol and shoots his field hand. This brutal scene, considered by some reviewers as injected for shock value, actually serves both not only to show how dangerous it was for a black to show even the slightest sign of resistance to white domination, but also to explain why, as years later the now elderly son says that he has always worn two faces, the outward, subservient one, and the private one. Had Cecil had any schooling, he might have used Paul Laurence Dunbar’s famous poem with its opening lines, “We wear the mask that grins and lies,/It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes.” This powerful poem, addressed to blacks, describes what virtually every African American was forced to do during the Jim Crow era in order to survive in a racist society in which a white could kill a black with impunity. In its third stanza the poem reveals the pain of having to wear the mask, “We smile, but, O great Christ, our cries/To thee from tortured souls arise.”

Ironically, it is his father’s murder that improves the boy’s work situation. The white matriarch Anabeth Westfall (Vanessa Redgrave) takes pity on the father-deprived boy and takes him out of the sweltering cotton field to make him a “house Negro,” which means he is taught good manners and dress and how to set a table and serve the dishes. Above all, she gives him the order that will shape his life ever after, “A room should feel empty when you’re in it.” She means to be kind, and so is completely unaware of how dehumaizing is this custom of regarding servants as pieces of furniture. Later on Cecil will see that the attitude at the White House is little different. No wonder that African Americans read far more into the “White” of the Exceutive Mansion than whtes do.

When he is a teenager Cecil realizes that he cannot stay any longer on the plantation where his father’s killer is one of the heirs. His mother, suffering mentally ever since the murder of her husband, barely is aware of his leaving. Mrs. Westfall, obviously supportive of the lad’s decsision slips a book into his bosom as he bids her farewell. I wish more had been made of this—had she been like the white woman in the 1995 film Once Upon a Time…When We Were Colored wherein an aristocratic white woman had encouraged a black boy to read her books? Anyway, away from the plantation young Cecil falls onto hard times, unable to find work, and thus reduced to trying to steal a cake to feed his starving body. The kindly black assistant at the shop helps get him hired on, and teaches the boy even more than about serving—at one point he orders the boy not to say “house nigger.” “It’s a white man’s word,” he says. From there Cecil goes to Washington to work at a posh hotel where the demands for decorum are even higher, and then when a White House staffer is impressed by him, he is taken on at the White House.

Eisenhower (Robin Williams) is the first of the Presidents that Cecil serves, and the episode depicts the days when Ike is agonizing about sending troops in to protect the black students integrating the Little Rock Central High School. He is extremely reluctant to do so, realizing how explosive the racial situation is, and how politically costly siding with the “Negores” would be. An almost spooky scene during his term is the visit to the kitchen by Vice President Nixon (a strangely cast John Cusack) in search of votes in the upcoming election. The discomfort is apparent on both sides, with the blacks reluctantly accepting (but not putting on) the “Elect Nixon” badges he passes out to them. Nixon asks what the men would like. When one of them says that pay equal to that of the white staff, Nixon promises that he will change that, but when he does move into the White House, rebuffs the request—of course, this is 8 years later after the promise, so we can assume that he did not remember the promise.

Of all the presidentail terms depicted, I was most impressed by the incidents unfolding during the all too brief Kennedy admininistration, and not just because of the sorrowful events of the assassination. In this sequence juxtaposition of scenes was used so powerfully, the camera shifting back and forth between guests being served at a White House dinner and scenes of Cecil’s son taking part in the civil rights movement despite his father’s orders. Other than in the TV film about the coming of the civil rights movement to a small Mississippi town, Daniels’ film does the best job of showing the training in discipline and courage of the college students—black and white—who intended to integrate a whites only lunch counter at a Nashville Woolworths dime store.

 Louis, the oldest son of Cecil and Gloria (Oprah Winfrey), is one of many Fisk University students attracted to James Lawson (Jesse Williams), the young minister colleague of Martin Luther King, Jr. leading the workshop on nonviolence. After lecturing on Gandhi, each student in a role play is subjected to a harsh round of taunts and racial slurs from other students. A white lad tells Lawson that he cannot call the person he’s supposed to attack a “nigger,” that just isn’t something he can do. Lawson insists, pointing out that the role playing must be realistic. The student, tears rising in his eyes, complies. Adding to the realism are the mustard and catsup poured onto the heads of the trainees. The camera cuts away to Cecil and his colleagues, immaculately dressed in tuxedos preparing for a state dinner. The student action moves on to Woolworths where the white help and patrons are shocked that the mixed race group of students are transgressing the time honored system of Jim Crow seating. They are refused service, insulted, and soon, as toughs arrive, hateful words transpose into spiteful deeds. “Stand up!” the sit-in students are ordered. “Stand up,” the guests seated at the White House are told as the President and First Lady enter the room. The guests are served courteously by the black staff, whereas at Woolworths those aspiring to eat at the lunchcounter are not only refused service by the waitress, but are covered with condiments, knocked off their stools, and some of them beaten, and then hauled off to jail.

There is much more to tell of this excellent film, that strangely on the Imdb site has been accused by some viewers as boring and too one-sided. Cecil is castigated because he is so subservient, taking little part in the events around him. These posters forget that virtually all his mentors, from Anabeth at the plantation on have trained him to be what novelist Ralph Ellison called “the invisible man,” training that was reinforced by his superiors at the White House—there he was to hear nothing and say nothing—to “wear the mask,” as Dunbar wrote. Indeed, at that time the whole culture—literature, movies, radio, and degrading images of “Negroes” in advertising proclaimed that the Negro was an inferior who must be kept in his place!

Louis is important in the story because he represents the younger generation of blacks who refuse to accept their parents’ obsequious relationship to whites. We watch Louis himself develop from a believer in nonviolence to a period when, disillusioned by the perception of the  failure of nonviolence following the murder of Dr. King, he and his girlfriend  join the Black Pamther Party, leading to Cecil ordering them from the house during a dinner table quarrel. But when told that they must be ready to kill white men, Louis leaves, eventually finishing college and becoming a candidate for office in Tennessee. For many years he remains estranged from his father until…

Both Gloria and Cecil move away from their opposition to the civil rights movent. Gloria herself has  drawn back from an affair she had fallen into because Cecil’s long hours at the White House had left her alone most of the time. The change in Cecil must have begun when Pres. Kennedy asked him about Louis, showing that he already knew about the young man’s arrest record—16 times. Commenting on the Freedom Rides and sit-ins, the President says, “You know my brother says these kids changed his heart. They’ve changed mine too.” It will take a long time for Cecil’s heart to change, but by the time he quietly brings up to Pres. Reagon the matter (the second Presidnet he has approached) of the black staff’s unfair pay, he has come far enough to open up his heart again to Louis. It is a tender and moving scene. The film then returns to the scene which began the film, the retired Cecil sitting on a bench in the White House waiting to be ushered into the presence of the black President he never thought possible. When a black aide comes, expressing his admiration for him and saying that he will show him the way, the old man responds, “I know the way.”

Every person of faith should see this film and discuss it with others. White and African American pastors should seek each other out and see if their congregations are willing to meet together and talk about the issues raised. Some of the conversations the black characters have among themselves will surprise many whites about their assumptions and views, one example being how acclaimed actor Sidney Poittier is perceived by militant blacks. It is so good to see a film in which the story of blacks is told without bringing in on an equal basis a white character to share the star credits. Oh yes, the constellation of famous whites playing the supporting roles has garnered lots of attention, but essentially this is an African American story told by African Americans. It may be open to the charge of over simplifying a complex period in our nation’s history, but my response is, “This is a movie, not a history lecture. Lectures are good and necessary to cover the facts, but as a movie it does much more than a factual lecture can—by identifying with the characters we come to feel what they did and see the world through new eyes, their eyes that had welled up with tears so many times by the injustices committed against them.” Few films manage to accomplish so much in the minds and hearts of its audience. No wonder that the audience applauded at the matinee showing I attended.

For Reflection/Discission

1. What did you think of Anabeth Westfall’s  counsel to young Cecil, “A room should feel empty when you’re in it.” Compare this to the way some of the white women regarded their cooks and maids in The Help. How is this advice just the opposite of what motivational speakers say to their audiences?
2. Cecil speaks of wearing two faces? How was this necessary for survival? What price did Cecil’s father pay for forgetting this? To see and discuss Paul Laurence Dunbar’s poem “We Wear the Mask” go to: http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173467
3. What does the teenaged Cecil’s mentor mean when he stops the boy from saying “house nigger” and declares that the last word is a white man’s word? How is this right, that is, how has it become a weapon when used by whites? Note that black comedian and social activist Dick Gregory daringly named his 1964 autobiography Nigger, turning the word around so that a black man could say the word without feeling shamed. In typical Gregory style, he writes in his introduction, “Dear Momma -- Wherever you are, if ever you hear the word “nigger” again, remember they are advertising my book.
4. How do we see at the White House that “white” has more than one meaning? Did you wonder why even the liberal presidents did not address the issue of unequal pay between white and black employees?
5. Which of the administrations were you most interested in?  Due to necessary time limitations each presidential sequence was brief, so were you satisfied with the few details that were covered? Were you surprised at Pres. Eisenhower’s hesitancy to send troops to control the angry mobs threatening the black students newly enrolled at the high school? What were his reasons?
6. Much had to be left out, but what was the glaring omission from the Kennedy era? Why do you think the “I Have a Dream Speech” was not covered?
7. What did you think of the nonviolent training session led by James Lawson? How were the teachings of Gandhi employed in the civil rights movement? What do you think of the discipline and courage required to be an activist? (As mentioned in the review, another good film showing this kind of training is the cable TV film Freedom Song (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0213668/ )
For more on Lawson, who is still living, see the Wikipedia article on him at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lawson_%28American_activist%29
7. Did the Freedom Rider bus incident seem too dramatic or “Hollywood”? This was a tiny part of a long story that is wonderfully told in the PBS documentary Freedom Riders, a film as exciting as any Hollywood thriller. The entire almost two-hour film can be viewed at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/freedomriders/watch.
8. What did you think of Pres. Kennedy’s observation that the youth participating in the sit-ins and Freedom Rides changed their hearts? How is this a testimony to the power of nonviolence?
Here are two Gandhi quotes on the subject:
"Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man."
"Whenever you are confronted with an opponent. Conquer him with love."
These, along with many others, can be found at:
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100929040727AAekTMy
Dr. King also spoke much about nonviolence and love:
“Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend.”
http://www.searchquotes.com/quotation/Love_is_the_only_force_capable_of_transforming_an_enemy_into_friend/1071/
And the quote which begins the movie:
“Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.”
― Martin Luther King Jr., A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches
What do you think he means by “darkness” and “light”?
9. How does Cecil react to his son’s arrest? How was this typical of the black (and white, for that matter) community then? What changed this attitude for the younger generation so that arrest and jail time became a badge of honor? For discussion below are three quotes that helped shape this new attitude toward law and order:
“If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law”
― Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience and Other Essays
“An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Now the law of nonviolence says that violence should be resisted not by counter-violence but by nonviolence. This I do by breaking the law and by peacefully submitting to arrest and imprisonment.”
― Mahatma Gandhi, Non-violence in Peace and War 1942-49
“An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law”
― Martin Luther King Jr.
These and many others can be found on:
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/civil-disobedience
10. How does Louis’s view of movie star Sidney Poitier differ from his parents’? For an example of this, think back to what kind of a character he played in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? How was the concept of “the Noble Negro” (Louis would say “White Man’s Negro”) important in order to get whites to go see the film? Note that author James Baldwin reported that in the Poitier-Tony Curtiss prison escape film The Fugitive that there were two different audience reactions to the scene in which Poitier reaches out to lift Curtis into the back of the truck as it speeds away from their pursuers. Whites expressed approval that Poitier would help the prejudiced man who had once scorned him, whereas black audiences hooted and yelled such things as, “Fool!”
11. In response to the jury’s verdict in the Trayvon Martin case Pres. Obama said, “I think it is important to recognize that the African American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t g away.” How does this relate to the above?
12. What do you think of the film’s Forest Gump-like scene in which Louis is present with Dr. King in his room at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis? When pressed about his father, Louis reluctantly says that he is a butler. What does Dr. King say that seeks to raise the son’s opinion of his father?
13. What do you think of the film’s depiction of the Black Panthers? What influenced Louis and so many other blacks (Stokely Carmichael being the most famous) to give up on nonviolence and embrace a more militant approach that could include violence? What was written on the blackboard in the scene of the Black Panther meeting? How did it suggest a different view of the Panthers from that promulgated by the media and the FBI (a vicious gang of killers)? And yet Black Panther ideology did embrace violence: what does Louis reveal about his values when he tells his girlfriend that he is leaving the group?
14. What do you think of the spiritual journey of Cecil? What influences him to move from his go-along-to-get-along viewpoint? How did you feel after the reconciliation scene? How has Louis grown as well as his father?
15. During the over 50-year period covered by the film how has the country grown? What has it cost for a black man to be able to become President of the USA? A good way to review this cost is to read, or if a group, to sing, what has been called “The Negro National Anthem,” James Weldon John’s “Lift Every Voice and Sing.” It is included in many modern church hymnals, and its history, along with the words, can be accessed at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_Every_Voice_and_Sing
Pay attention especially to the middle verse that begins with “Stony the road we trod, bitter the chastening rod,/Felt in the days when hope unborn had died.”  How do you see God in all of this history? What societal/personal changes do you think we still have to make before the last lines of that stanza are met—“Out from the gloomy past, till now we stand at last/Where the white gleam of our bright star is cast”?
16. The Washington Post article “A Butler Well Served by This Election” c an be accessed at
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-11-07/politics/36906532_1_white-house-black-man-history