Sunday, May 18, 2008

Movie Review - Prince Caspian

This afternoon, our little community headed to the local theatre to watch the next installment in “The Chronicles of Narnia”: Prince Caspian. The story returns the Pevensie to Narnia 1300 years after their first adventures to discover a Narnia under the tyranny of a false King. They must join with Prince Caspian to battle in a civil war to liberate their beloved land.

With a high paced story-line and darker, more mature content, I was quickly drawn into this enjoyable sequel. If you are a fan of the first film, you are likely to enjoy the second. Purists be warned: creative license is clearly (and perhaps necessarily) taken. Again, I enjoyed the experience.

That being said, there is much about the film that left me uncertain. In fairness, when we consider the medium, genre and intended audience of the original books, we should expect that it will not translate cleanly into such a radically new medium and context. Therefore, I will leave those critique aside for the most part.

At nearly two and a half hours long, parts of the film had to be rushed to reach it’s more critical moments. Sadly, it left character and back-story development lacking, especially with our introduction to the title character, Prince Caspian. Those familiar with the story will fill in the blanks, but it is an awkward start.

Given the significance of Aslan in the symbolism of the story, I was again disappointed by the relatively soft and tame presence they offer, inadequately voiced by Liam Neeson. This was, no doubt, seen as essential to secure him as a “good guy” and lovable in the eyes of younger audiences. Thankfully, his part in this film is brief.

Perhaps my greatest concern- a concern that goes to the heart of the books as well- was an underlying colonialism in the story of liberation. Again, when I consider Lewis’s context and era, it is more understandable. Even when the liberating kings and queens of old make mistakes, the price is paid in the blood of the Narnians. My challenge to Christians is to be as carefully critical of the films they champion as they are of those they oppose.

In all, it was a worthy sequel that will entertain audiences of all ages. Anyone else seen it and want to weigh in?

Posted by Jamie Arpin-Ricci at 04:46:55 | Permalink | Comments (7)

Monday, December 3, 2007

“The Golden Compass”: A Christian Response

With the upcoming December release of “The Golden Compass” film, there has been increasing buzz from the Christian community. Based on the first book of the “His Dark Materials” Trilogy by British author Philip Pullman, the movie follows the adventures of young Lyra, who, in search for a lost friends, discovers herself at the heart of an epic adventure in which the fate of all existence is at stake. Having read the whole trilogy myself, I thought I should comment on the growing controversy.

Many Christians and Christian groups have begun calling for a general boycott of the film (and the books), citing that they were written with the explicit intention to undermine Christian belief (substantiated by an interview with Pullman- found here- where he says “I’m trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief”, though the wider context should be noted). Others have noted how this trilogy clearly tries to represent an opposing version of the Narnia Chronicles, with some interesting parallels between the basic story lines, but diametrically opposed purposes. These and other related factors have stirred many Christians into opposition of the film.

When reading the trilogy, it was obvious to me where Pullman stood with respect to his beliefs. They were as explicit reflections of his beliefs as C.S. Lewis’s beliefs in the Narnia Chronicles. Pullman clearly has a bone to pick with religion, especially Christianity. However, I am not convinced that this qualifies the film or the books for boycott, for several reasons. First, we need to consider the merits of Pullman’s critique.

With respect to the series being a humanist response to the Narnia tales, Pullman finds Lewis’s books laced with sexism and racism. While I believe his critique is overly exaggerated, his point is not without some merit. In our attempt to celebrate Lewis and his success in the broader world of literature, Christians needs to be open to the possibility that he made mistakes (or at the very least, was a man of his times, prone to the prejudices of his day). Further, we need to consider that, to some, the propagandist nature of the Narnia books/films (be it the recent Disney version or the BBC version) are no less exploitive than Pullman’s. Obviously our belief colours our acceptance, but this cannot be ignored in the public arena of arts & entertainment.

As to the explicitly anti-Christian material in the books, Pullman pulls no punches. He clearly fears and opposes the abuses of religious systems and powers, whose self-justifying, self-serving exploits run contrary to their supposed, espoused beliefs. Frankly, Pullman’s critiques (while obviously stronger than we would think fair) are often pointedly accurate. The Church could learn a great deal if we had the humility to listen to such critics, looking past the exaggerated and unfair extremes into the heart of our own, very real failings.

Another interesting point emerged as I read the series. While Pullman was clearly against religion and religious institutions, with a plot moving towards the over-throwing of “God”, his parallels almost never included reference to Christ. Whether he avoided Jesus intentionally or not, I do not know, but his attacks didn’t seem to target Him throughout the series. Further, the “God” that they were seeking to destroy was no “God” at all, but a self-proclaimed “deity” who deceived and exploited people for his own purposes. While Pullman likely sees no difference between our God and this characterization, the fact is that the enemy plays this same role today (as has been so since the Fall). In that, Christians can learn to be aware of how easily we can be drawn away into well-intentioned, but deeply flawed and dangerous religion.

Another distinction needs to be made, that being between the books and the film. The books are clearly written for an older audience, while the film is trying to win the same demographic as the Narnia and Harry Potter films. My brother and sister-in-law saw an advanced screening of the film this weekend, and so were able to report their take on the movie. Interestingly, they noted that (in addition to it being very well done) the religious themes of the book were significantly underplayed in the film, focusing more on the action and adventure. To be sure the thread was still there, but not nearly as explicit as in the books. In fact, the film portray more of an anti-government stance than anti-religion (a fitting twist for todays viewers).

Therefore, with proper supervision and discussion, I believe the movie could be very enjoyable to watch with opportunities to discuss the issues beneficially. After all, there are far worse films we let our kids watch that aren’t explicitly opposed the Christianity, but are intrinsically incompatible (but that is another topic for another blog). The books, again aimed at an older audience, are also very well done, but again should be read with care and intentionality. Ultimately, I do not see either as a genuine threat to our faith that should be avoided at all costs. That response is an over-reaction.

Finally, I am simply stymied at the impulse of Christians to raise a public outcry to boycott the film. While I understand their concerns, it seems we don’t learn from our mistakes. If your intention is to keep people from seeing this film and to undermine its success, then boycotting and public attacks are the last approach you should take. People need to be aware that many film companies contribute to negative critiques of content (not quality) in order to stir public interest. The Da Vinci Code film, while critically doomed for its lack of cinematic quality, can credit a significant amount of its commercial success to the Christian community. These attacks only feed success. It is a proven marketing tool.

In the end, I will be seeing the film- just as I read the books- out of both an interest in the nature of the content & critique, as well as with respect to the very creative literary crafting of a great story. I caution parents to be aware of the realities of the film, just as I would of any film these days (including the Narnia Chronicles), but would not call for a general ban. Further, I would encourage my fellow Christians to recognize that our well intentioned, but dangerous over-reactions will not only fuel the fire you seek to put out, but may also alienate and discredit your witness to the very people you seek to love and serve.

Posted by Jamie Arpin-Ricci at 16:39:14 | Permalink | Comments (29)

Monday, October 15, 2007

Movie Review - “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”

In 1999, a few weeks before our Discipleship Training School (DTS) started in the Okanagan, a group of us went to see a movie. One of the students had arrived early, so we invited her along. She was (and is) a gorgeous, red-headed Australian named Kim. She is now my wife and the movie was “Elizabeth”. It was only fitting then that on Saturday, being the 6th anniversary of our wedding (the first of three, but that’s another story) we went to see the sequel “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”.

Before I reflect on the film, I should mention that over the last few years I have been very interested in Elizabeth and the era of history surrounding her life (before and during). This last year has especially been interesting with the excellent new TV series “The Tudors” and a few good books such as “The Other Boleyn Girl”. So, as I watched the film, I went in with more than the average background information and an already stirred imagination. I am sure that played a part in how much I enjoyed the film

Sadly, the film has received some very cool reviews from critics. Reading their critiques, I can see some merit to their criticisms, but I think they fail to see to the heart of the film. Some have dismissed it as focusing too much on the romantic back stories. This could be a fair point, except a powerful point the film was attempting to make (and I believe they succeeded) was the significance of Elizabeth’s internal death as a woman, even as an individual. It demonstrates clearly why the tradition of royalty referring to themselves individually as “we” is so significant.

What she accomplished in her life time is stunning and often admirable (though I am under no romantic illusions about her failings), but it is even more remarkable in that she did so as a woman in that era. When her mother (and aunt) were barely teens, they were already lovers in the bedchamber of the king, amusements, political tools to used and discarded as was “necessary”. For Elizabeth to survive upon the throne at all, let alone lead England into such a glorious age into her 70’s, is testament to her character. While I will not go into detail here, we also cannot underplay the role she had in shaping Christendom of her day, the waves of which we still feel today. For better AND for worse, she represents an undeniably significant figure in our world and church history.

The film was beautiful, rich and moving. Cate Blanchet captured Elizabeth with such forceful conviction that I found myself moved with emotion again and again, whether it was joy, anger or sorrow. If you enjoyed the first film, you will certainly enjoy this sequel, especially if you recognize that the film was not intended to be a dramatic documentary focusing on the socio-political dynamics of the age (though they are obviously explored), but to reflect on the humanity of so important a woman.

Did you see the film? What did you think?

Posted by Jamie Arpin-Ricci at 16:28:45 | Permalink | Comments (10)

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Film & Culture

Last night I spent a wonderful evening with a group of fairly new friends, the Watershed community. The Watershed crew has been incredibly generous and supportive of both The Dusty Cover and us personally. It is really nice to find other Christians in genuine community within Winnipeg’s West End. It helps that we share a great deal of interests- namely books and movies.

It was the latter that had Kim & I over last night, watching the excellent Cohen brother’s film “O Brother, Where Art Thou?”. So that you understand, when this group gets together to watch a movie it is far more than casual entertainment, but a wonderful exercise in exploring the story’s depth and nuances. Of course, this film offers SO very much. I won’t try to go through all that we explored, but it was really refreshing.

Recently I was watching a re-run of Northern Exposure (without question one of my favourite TV series of all times) in which Leonard, a First Nations healer, was trying discover the stories the informed the white man’s worldview, their guiding mythology. Try as he might, none of the stories he heard fit. Then he found young Ed, a shaman-in-training, watching the cinematic classic “Citizen Kane”. After discussing the beauty and impact of the film, Leonard realizes that in many ways, film represents the core stories of white culture.

I believe this to be very true. Despite our espoused ideas and beliefs, it is often influences within popular film that shape how we understand and respond to the world. My hope in the coming months is to look at a number of films from this perspective. I have some in mind, but I would really love your input. What films do you think significantly shape our worldview?

Posted by Jamie Arpin-Ricci at 06:36:19 | Permalink | Comments (14)