skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I saw this movie when it first came out in 2006 and at that time I wasn't prepared to make religious decisions for myself so I was just offend that a negative light was shone upon Christianity because after all I am basically a Christian. But in my second viewing of this film I found myself irate and frustrated. As I watched this documentary all I could think about was: my children will never ever be like this. I never want to force my children into something so forcefully. I do not want them to see religion as this epic dividing factor that can essentially destroy nations and start wars. It bothered me that these Evangelicals thought that everything they spoke was the complete and utter truth. They were so ignorant. Or rather they were portrayed in such a painfully ignorant light (but the "potential" bias of this film is a whole other story). They seemed very obsessed with this idea of church and state melding perfectly into one. But perhaps they don't see that so many other religions have that same right to push their religion onto the government and in turn carry tremendous weight when it comes to national decisions. There were so many actions these people took that made me detest organized religion. From what I know it is supposed to be more about your "personal" relationship with God. 
I am all for freedom of expression and I would never condemn these individuals for practicing a religion they put so much faith and passion into, so it is perhaps more the way this movie was made that bothered me. In an interview with the Washington Post the directors of Jesus Camp said that they spent over 10 months editing this film so no bias would appear. But I fear I cannot believe this. There is this one scene in the movie when Becky Fischer asks "Do you believe God can do anything?" to a group of children. Then this mother grabs her sons arm and lifts it up sure to be seen. Then there is the music that is played during moments of prayer, and the camera angles they choose to portray this give speaking in tongues this ominous, mystical sensation. To be bias is natural , but this is a documentary that has so much, maybe too much, power to tarnish a religion and ruin the reputation of a church, or rather a camp, and its pastor.
I recently went to my sisters acting school to see her do an end of semester performance and one of the scenes done was from the play Ordinary People. My family and I decided that the story as described was so compelling that we bought the movie after we returned from the city and proceeded to watch it that night. It sort of reminded me of Good Will Hunting in the way that the main character was really distraught and by the end of the film they were so transformed and brought to a place of excellence. But I found Ordinary People to be far better. It was so powerful. The tag line is so true: "Some films you watch, others to feel." I fell as if any viewer could connect to Conrad (the main character). I mean yes, he did face a horrible tragedy that people typically don't have to endure in their day to day, but the emotional turmoil of anything really is prevalent in many people's life. The power comes with this: that he didn't let the violent emotions be his demise as it was his friend Karen's. It was beautiful and encouraging to see that.
I'm not sure if what I just wrote made sense. I believe it would be far more understandable if the movie is seen, but hopefully it is at least coherent. I think one big reason for this movie being so powerful because the casting was perfect. My sister first stated this and I've thought about it and it's a very valid assessment. Every single character was excellent, even the tiny supporting actors. I clearly have a thing for movie endings, because this movie was made ten times better by the fact that I had no idea what was to come at the end, and when it finally did end it was so bitter sweet. I wasn't sure whether to be happy or mortally destroyed for Conrad. He spent so much time trying to repair this relationship with his mother but she leaves him, but at the same time the closing shot repairs any of the sorrow that goes with that loss. And since I can't find a picture it's this shot that's slowly panning out of Donald Sutherland and Timothy Hutton embraced in this powerful father-son hug.
Ahh, irony at its best. This movie was so perfect. Aside from it being visibly ironic, the end was so unpredictable. It was sort of maddening and shocking, and I must say, I did love that. There were so many brutally ironic elements in M, and I'd like that to be the prime focus of this entry. So much was revealed through the irony about the movie's characters and also Germany at the time. I recall this one scene where Peter Lorre has chalk on his back and the little girl tells him he's a mess. First of all, shouldn't she feel worried that some random man has been stalking her (for lack of a better word), I suppose not. This small girl is treating the murderer like a child. The way she cleans him and even hands him his knife back are all very naive, but at the same time rather ironically mature. Peter Lorre is trying to take advantage of the children but they are being a matronly figure to his disheveled self. Another blatantly ironic element is the way the criminals are taking the police's position as law enforcers. They obviously have their own motives, but it's so irresistibly ironic the way they search for him and catch him and even have some twisted form of a trial. Their proceedings are parallel to that of the polices, but perhaps even a bit more acceptable. (And here lies my theory of the police being more like brutes than enforcers at that time and this is therefore a reflection of German society at the time, but this is merely a prediction of mine). At the end of the trial the man who is trying to do good by defending this clinically insane child murderer gets his way by pulling a gun out on the crowd. It's ironic because you'd perhaps expect him to be a pushover of sorts, or at least a gentle man who would resist such action. I really really enjoyed this movie. I wouldn't venture to say that it was well made or even that interesting, but M had this element of being completely insusceptible. The end was really superior to many I've seen. It was almost sort of corny, but I didn't expect that outcome at all, and I loved that.
So I have a thing about predictable movies: I hate them. I'd almost rather them end really awfully than really happy all the time. But I suppose this isn't a uniform statement because I did actually like Good Will Hunting. But I'm not sure if it's for more than the fact that it was a sincerely excellent "feel-good" film. In every sense this movie was predictable. There was a bad fella, his excellence was unlocked, he fell in love, he gets help, and oh, he ends up with the girl. Of course he does. There's nothing wrong with being predictable, but of late I feel like a lot of the movies I have been seeing bear that unfortunate element of: "Okay, this is so obvious, I could walk out now and know the ending." Well, aside from that, I feel that I should perhaps focus on the movie I've titled the blog with. The acting in this film was supreme, really great. I'm a big fan of Robin Williams, especially when he plays those more serious roles. A lot about this movie was really beautiful. I liked the way Will Hunting sort of humbled himself to become something. I'm totally down with that: when those people who tend to be a bit cocky and macho get over themselves and do something great. I feel that Will Hunting had to do a lot of that in this film to become what he did. Despite the painful predictability this movie was a viewing pleasure.
