One Long Holy Week

At 10:15 tonight, Good Friday 2008, my Dad, Art Ialongo, died peacefully. My brothers, sister, and I were all there, sad and relieved at the same time. Dad has spent the last four years in nursing homes suffering from a dementia which affected him cognitively and produced a profound aphasia. He knew us to the end, however. That was a blessing and a curse. He remembered enough to make him incredibly frustrated with his situation in life on a regular basis.

My mother died on All Saints Day and my dad on Good Friday. There's a lovely symmetry about that. My mother outlived her doctor's prediction of the time of her death by seven days. She died when we all left her room to argue about where we should purchase take out food. She was finally alone, she knew we would be all right, and, so, she died. My Dad was in the same mode. His doctor predicted he would not live past Tuesday evening. So, we decided to go out for dinner tonight and kissed him goodbye. Five minutes later we received a call that he had no discernible pulse, so we rushed back. He was only breathing every 10 seconds or so. This went on for an hour, so we decided to tell him we were going out to eat again. We just went as far as the front lobby. After about 20 minutes, his nurse told us to come back. She thought he had died, but we noticed that every 25 seconds or so, his jaw and throat would move. This lasted only 10 more minutes or so. He finally rested. I, on the other hand, am very tired.

Valley of the Dry Bones Sermon

My bones have always managed to give me a bit of trouble. I was born with misaligned knees, so the cartilage in my knees wore away until I couldn’t walk more than twenty yards or so without having to sit down. I found it impossible to pick up my grandchildren and could only ascend stairs with my hands on the risers above me. Finally, after using and discarding every arthritis remedy available – glucosomine and chondriton, copper bracelets, and Montmorency cherries to name a few – knee replacement surgery became my only viable option.

In this type of surgery, the old, damaged knee is removed and replaced by a titanium and plastic or, sometimes, ceramic joint. The surgeon looks like he’s dressed for a hazardous materials cleanup. He’s completely covered with a bulky white suit and wearing a helmet and a visor. He saws through the femur and tibia in order to place the prosthetic device correctly. When my first knee was replaced, I had a spinal anesthetic, so I remained awake during the surgery. I have distinct memories of hearing the saw, the hammer, and the drill. I also remember how detached I felt from the whole proceeding. I was no longer in relationship with my body. While I listened dispassionately, sinews and flesh and skin were sewn back into place.

But, like the bones that had come back to bones in Ezekiel, these bones had no breath in them. They did not live. That resurrection would only be accomplished by brutal physical therapy, hard work on my part, and, of course, the grace of God.

Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones showed the dispirited exiles from Judah that rebuilding their community was far from impossible. This group constituted a remnant which had survived through God’s enduring mercy. Through Ezekiel, Yahweh was calling them yet again to an exemplary life as his people. Their heritage had not ended in captivity; it had become a new story, built on the solid foundations of their old story and Yahweh’s special loving-kindness.

We are the Seabury remnant. For one hundred and fifty years, others have come before us. For about half that time, future priests have lived in this corner of Evanston, learning all they could about loving and serving the Lord. Now, only a few of us, a remnant, remain. The sinews, flesh, and skin on our bones have been ripped away.

We can choose to spend the rest of our time here buried, bones piled on bones in the ground. We can choose to acquiesce to our anger and grief -- to live in an atmosphere of victimization.

Or we can choose to do what the returning exiles, the Hebrew remnant, were asked to do. We can choose to envision a new community -- to prepare worship that springs from our spiritual needs, to push the boundaries of our classes to create new spaces for learning, and to be community in ways that may only last as long as we are here, but in ways that will feed us for the rest of our lives.

God calls us to a new place – a bleak, uncomfortable place, a valley of our dry bones. We must don those hazardous material suits. We must do the hard work: replace the sinews, the flesh, and the skin on those bones. We must wait for God’s breath to give us life again. Called or not called, God is here, and God has promised us nothing less than resurrection.

Just A Few Pictures

10 Best Movies of 2007

It's about time that I got around to picking the 10 best movies of last year. After all, the Oscars will be awarded tomorrow night. I decided I have a right to do this because I saw 48 movies IN THEATRES last year. Yes, 48. I don't even want to think about how much this amounts to in ticket and concession costs. I do believe this love affair I have with the big screen points to an addiction on my part. What can I say?

I also believe I have a right to do this because top ten lists among movie critics are notoriously inconsistent. It's rare that one or two films make "everybody's" list. So, here's my inconsistent list.

As I write this, I'm watching North By Northwest. I never get tired of watching this film: "How does a girl like you get to be a girl like you?" It's worth viewing over and over just to hear that line.

I'm bothered by how many violent films I have on this list (at the top yet), but they were damn good films. I'm not quite sure why the numbers aren't showing up on the list, but No. 1 is No Country for Old Men.

1. No Country for Old Men



2. Eastern Promises



3. There Will Be Blood



4. Across the Universe



5. Charlie Wilson's War



6. La Vie en Rose



7. I'm Not There



8. Hairspray



9. Lars and the Real Girl



10. American Gangster

Honorable Mention (in no particular order): Breach, Zodiac, 300, Blades of Glory (it really WAS funny), Knocked Up, Ratatouille, 3:10 to Yuma, Michael Clayton, The Kite Runner, Juno, The Savages

Ave atque vale?

Latest Favorite Picture of the Gang

Today I delivered my first sermon at Seabury. It's also possible it will be my last. All we know at this point is that no new students are being accepted for the '08-'09 school year and that Seabury will no longer offer a residential 3-year M.Div. program. Beyond that, we are still waiting for the details. I had written another sermon for today, but it just didn't work anymore. So, last night at 11pm, I wrote another one.

Seabury Sermon: 2/22/08

Yesterday morning I woke up reciting a poem I had memorized 44 years ago for Sister Agnes Joseph in my sophomore English class at Aquinas Dominican High School on the south side of Chicago. She had asked us to memorize one of Shakespeare’s sonnets. My choice was odd for a sixteen year old. The poem is a carpe diem poem. If you saw the movie, Dead Poets Society, you heard a lot of talk about carpe diem, usually translated “seize the day.”
Carpe diem poems generally express, in some poetic way, the sentiment: “life is short and time flies, let’s make the most of it.” Often, in these poems, a male lover addresses a woman he admires and tries to convince her that loving him would be a very good idea indeed. It’s kind of a “Birds-do-it.-Bees-do-it.-Even-educated-fleas-do-it.-Let’s-do-it.-Let’s-fall-in-love.” approach to life.

What made this poem an odd choice for a sixteen year old in a girl’s prep school was that the speaker of the sonnet is wooing the addressee with the argument that he is quite old, so “time’s a wastin.’” -- love me or I may be gone soon.
Right now at Seabury, I daresay all of us are experiencing a veritable panoply of emotions. Sadness, fear, anger, confusion, skepticism, helplessness, powerlessness, paralysis, grief to name a few.

Right now, we are living in ambiguous uncertainty. It doesn’t feel good. In times like these, Carpe diem may be a helpful world view to adopt. The past is gone. We have no hope of bringing it into the present. The future isn’t here. We can’t control it. We can’t act in it. There really is no point in worrying about it. As Jesus said, “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life?”
Although our emotional rollercoaster will continue to climb and drop, let’s seize the day. Let’s practice letting go of the past and letting go of worrying about the future. Let’s be present to one another in the here and now. Let’s be mindful of each other’s gifts. Let’s rejoice in this day, the day the Lord has made. Let’s remember that we are loved and that nothing can separate us from that love.

Yesterday morning, as I lay in bed reciting my Shakespearean sonnet, I thought how, as with the Bible, we can read and reread Shakespeare and hear it every time in a new way. As I listened to the sonnet, I heard that it was Seabury that was the speaker.
I now know that the reason I memorized this unlikely sonnet 44 years ago was to recite it to you this morning:

That time of year thou mayst in me behold
When yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang
Upon those boughs which shake against the cold,
Bare ruin'd choirs, where late the sweet birds sang.
In me thou seest the twilight of such day
As after sunset fadeth in the west,
Which by and by black night doth take away,
Death's second self, that seals up all in rest.
In me thou see'st the glowing of such fire
That on the ashes of his youth doth lie,
As the death-bed whereon it must expire
Consumed with that which it was nourish'd by.
This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong,
To love that well which thou must leave ere long.

Review: Juno

Juno: ***
Nonna Rating System: $$$

I actually saw Juno about a month ago and completely forgot to write the review. -- not that the movie was forgettable! Quite the contrary. It's as delightful as everyone seems to think it is and it manages to please teenagers as well as senior citizens. That, in itself, makes it a film worth seeing.

By now, everyone knows that Juno gets pregnant as the result of her first sexual experience. The father of the baby is Juno's good friend Paulie Bleeker, played by Michael Cera with the same blend of innocence and naivete he employed so effectively in Arrested Development. Juno recognizes that keeping the baby is neither in her or the baby's best interests. She decides to select the adoptive parents herself -- and then the story gets a bit more complicated.

Some have criticized the movie for making teen pregnancy "too attractive." They contend that the pregnancy seems to constitute only a minor interruption in Juno's life, a blip easily forgotten. There are, they argue, too few consequences of her irresponsible behavior. I can't agree with this assessment. The film makes clear to us, for example, that being pregnant generates all sorts of physical discomforts. In addition, Juno agonizes over her decisions about the baby and, finally, must deal with the fact that life often presents us with ambiguous situations for which we must make difficult decisions. After I watched the film, I thought, "If I had a teenage daughter and I wanted to talk to her about the possible negative consequences of sexual experimentation, I would take her to see this film and then sit down with her to talk about it."

Ellen Page's performance as Juno deserves the accolades being heaped on it. She manages to be funny and vulnerable at the same time. There is something very real about her performance. There were a few moments, however, when I groaned, when I realized that Diablo Cody, who wrote the screenplay, had put words in Juno's mouth that no teenager would utter. There were a few references which were joltingly out of place, appropriate for a 50 year old, but not a teenager. Nevertheless, Juno's smart mouth was generally a delightful entertainment. the film is definitely worth seeing. Go to the reduced price matinee. Take a teenager. You might learn something. I would have.

Nonna Rating System:
$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price
$$ = Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: Charlie Wilson's War

Charlie Wilson's War: ****

Nonna's Rating: $$$$

Phillip Seymour Hoffman is reason enough to see Charlie Wilson’s War. A truly marvelous actor with the malleability of Robert DeNiro. Think of Capote, Magnolia, The Savages, and Boogie Nights. In Charlie Wilson’s War, Hoffman steals every scene he’s in – and he’s usually in scenes with Tom Hanks and/or Julia Roberts. Both of them, by the way, deliver fine performances in this film. Hoffman plays a CIA maverick, an operative so far down in the bowels of The Company that he really doesn’t give a damn what anyone thinks of him – including U.S. Congressmen.

The movie is only about 90 minutes long, and it moves at a rapid pace, aided by snappy dialogue and rapid fire exchanges reminiscent of movies like His Girl Friday. And the dialogue is that good, thanks to the writing of Aaron Sorkin and the directing of Mike Nichols. I wanted to see the movie again just catch all the witty repartee -- and I just did. My Seabury friend Kristin and I are off on “Plunge,” a two week trip for future priests in which we immerse ourselves in the daily life of a church somewhere in these United States (we’re in DC). We decided to take a break tonight, have a quick dinner at Maggiano’s, and go see a movie. Washington insider movies almost always fascinate and even more so when you’re watching them in The District as we were. We’re staying with a couple whose next door neighbor knew Charlie Wilson. We’ll be having dinner with her on Sunday. That’s something to look forward to.

In the meantime, we have a delightful, funny, thought-provoking movie in Charlie Wilson, a much better movie than Atonement (sorry, Golden Globes). The movie focuses on the U.S.’s clandestine involvement in the war fought by Afghan rebels against the Soviets. When they movie finishes, there are no postscripts, no what-happened-to-so-and-so words flying across the screen. We’re not even reminded that the weapons we supplied to the Afghans became the weapons of the Taliban that are still being used against our troops. We don’t hear a narrator tell us that our failure to invest in education and infrastructure in Afghanistan and its consequences is similar to our failure to do the same in Iraq with its consequences. We’ve been told enough when Hoffman’s character says, “We’ll see.”

Nonna Rating System:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price

$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price

$$ = Worth a rental

$ = Wait for cable

# = Skip it

Review: American Gangster

American Gangster: ***1/2
Nonna Rating System: $$$$

American Gangster is stunning in that Ridley Scott sort of way. It doesn't hurt to have Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe in your movie, even if they only have one scene together. Why is it that, so often when two major male stars are in a picture nowadays, they rarely have scenes together -- for example, DeNiro and Pacino in Heat?

In the end, it really doesn't matter. This is an excellent, complex film with meticulous performances by both actors: Washington, a drug kingpin whose private life is controlled, conservative, and drug-free and Crowe, a hyper-honest cop whose personal life is a shambles. In one sense, this is a classic Hollywood story: the cop no one listens to is convinced he can identify the who and how of the influx of drugs into the U.S. He is the only one who finally understands that the drugs arrive from Viet Nam in the false bottoms of metal coffins containing dead soldiers in body bags.

What makes the story original is the subtext of institutional racism that permeates the film: the white law enforcement establishment can't even begin to imagine that a black man might actually be the mastermind behind the drug trade in New York and its environs.

I always regret liking a violent film, but Scott doesn't ask us to revel in the violence here. He weaves scenes depicting the brutal, horrid reality of drug use throughout the movie. There's nothing pretty about these flashes of reality. We are confronted with the unspeakable consequences of drug use on individuals, families, children, and the neighborhoods they live in.

In 1971, my wasbund was stationed at Travis Air Force Base north of San Francisco. I did my grocery shopping at the Base Commissary which was next to the flightline. I often saw KC-130s from Viet Nam taxiing close to the Commissary parking lot after they had landed. One day, I just stood by my car and watched as soldiers got off a plane in their fatigues. Many of them kissed the ground. Some cried. After they had disembarked, the plane taxied and parked next to the base hospital. First, bandaged men were unloaded on stretchers, IV bottles attached to their arms. Then, the metal coffins were unloaded; they rested on the tarmac waiting for connecting planes that would take the bodies home. Some of them were headed to the East Coast. The film makes me wonder. Did some of those coffins contain drugs?

Nonna Rating System:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price
$$ = Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: The Savages

The Savages: ***

Nonna Rating: $$

Sometimes movies are uncomfortably close to our everyday lives. Not too much danger of that from Spiderman, but The Savages is definitely too close to the bone for me. I'm not too sure that I'm being entirely fair to this film. It's well written and stars two of today's best actors: Laura Linney and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Throw in Philip Bosco, an older character actor you've seen a million times, and it's a nearly perfect little film which made me squirm.

Linney and Hoffman play a brother and sister who have no choice but to deal with their father's declining competence. I've played these scenes myself with my own father and siblings. That's why I find it so difficult to be objective about this film. And that, in turn, makes me think about how artificial it is to pretend that film reviews are objective at all. I completely understand why my personal experience is interfering to such a great extent in my evaluation of this picture. I, too, sat with my father as his cognitive abilities were being assessed by a series of questions administered by an assisted living administrator. I, too, tried to help him give the answers the questioner was looking for. I, too, was desperately anxious, worrying that he would be rejected as suitable for the facility. I, too, had to face reality when he was, indeed, rejected.

I also understand that siblings are often in different stages of denial, acceptance, anger, and grief. We all think that there must be a better place for our dissolving parent. We all think that there is a place where he can be happier. In many ways, this film is too real for me, so it's impossible for me to be objective. But what makes me think I'm more objective when I'm writing about Spiderman? Am I not also bringing my own experiences to that film? Experiences different from yours? Of course I am. So, all I'm offering here are occasional idiosyncratic opinions which you can choose to accept or ignore.

Nonna Rating System:
$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price
$$ = Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: The Golden Compass

The Golden Compass: ***

Nonna Rating: $$$

I prepared myself to dislike this movie. I've read Pullman's Trilogy, His Dark Materials, and have rarely had so negatively visceral a reaction to literature. Just for the record, my reaction had nothing to do with the so-called "anti-Christian" subtext of the books. Granted, you don't find much anti-Christian children's literature, but there certainly exists a great volume of adult literature that is anti-Christian. And, let's face it, the history of Christendom isn't exactly squeaky clean. Good Christians would do well to face up to the darker moments in our bloody history in Europe, the U.S., and the rest of the world. But I digress. What I didn't like about Pullman's books was the hopelessness that rests in the core of the novels. There is, indeed, something dark in these books, something I'd rather have children face when they are a bit older (at least adolescents) and can handle it better. I do sound like a disapproving grandmother here. Sorry.

To my surprise, however, I found myself enjoying the movie. Some of the special effects are stunning, especially the daemon animal souls that accompany humans. Children's daemons, which change shape constantly and don't take their final shape until adolescence, were especially charming. The actors are exceptionally fine. Almost every venerable older male English actor has a role, including Derek Jacobi, Ian McKellan, Tom Courtenay, Ian McShane, and Christopher Lee. Dakota Blue Richards plays the demanding role of Lyra and exudes competence, bravery, and cleverness. Daniel Craig as Lord Asriel isn't on screen enough. We'll probably have to wait for the last two installments to see more of him. Nicole Kidman portrays Mrs. Coulter, Lyra's long-absent, chillingly beautiful mother. Her performance is good, but doesn't convey the evil that resides in the core of her being in the books.

I wondered if the densely plotted movie was only coherent to me because I had read the book, so I asked my ten-year-old grandson what he thought of it and whether it made sense to him. He genuinely enjoyed it and was able to follow the storyline easily. I am somewhat surprised at the alarm being raised in some Christian circles about the film. A friend tells me that her nine and eleven year old daughters were warned repeatedly at Sunday school that they should not see the movie. Actually, I doubt most children will even understand that the Magisterium, the reigning power in an alternate universe (definitely not our own universe) is meant to represent the established Church, presumably Roman and/or Anglican Catholic. There is nothing in the movie that identifies the Magisterium as a religious body.

For the special effects, which are stunning on the big screen, I recommend paying the matinee price for this one.

Nonna Rating System:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price

$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price

$$ = Worth a rental

$ = Wait for cable

# = Skip it

Review: The Great Debaters

The Great Debaters: ***
Nonna Rating: $$$

We've seen this plot a hundred times before. Spunky little underdog college team works the kinks out of their performance and doggedly wins game after game until they have the chance to confront the BIG COLLEGE team in the ultimate showdown. And we all know what happens. After all, if they hadn't been successful, there would be no reason to make the movie. The plot is tired enough that it takes an awfully special movie to transcend it. Great Debaters does just that. We expect good acting with Denzel and Forrest, but that doesn't guarantee a good film. They are, however, assisted by four young actors who deliver superb performances: Nate Parker, Jurnee Smollett, Denzel Whitaker (no relation to Denzel or Forrest), and Jermaine Williams. And, yes, we're not watching a story focused on athletic events; we're watching the cerebral activity of debaters. But even that's not enough to make it an exceptional film.

It is the context of this David and Goliath story that makes it so special. The film concerns a little college no one has heard of up against Harvard -- a little black college in 1935 Texas. In the film, slavery is much closer to the characters then than it seems to us now, and the law looks the other way when black men and women are harassed or, as in one pivotal scene, lynched. The contrast between the college where the students study and live and the racist world outside the college is profound and disturbing. (This is a good movie for adolescents to see. Not only does it celebrate the power of education, hard work, and determination; it also serves as a platform for difficult discussion of systematic racism and America's sad history of racial oppression.)

I do have a quibble with one aspect of the film: the topics for debate and the assignation of debating positions. The Wiley College team always was given the liberal side of any issue; for example, pro-welfare. This made for some dramatic, impassioned speeches (especially from Ms. Smollett), but it didn't reflect what must have been the actual situation. In debate competitions, one often has to argue passionately on the side of an issue with which one does not agree. It's an integral part of the process. Arguing the other side of an issue provides an understanding and empathy for the other position which, in turn, allows one to argue the side one actually believes in more logically and with even more confidence. Perhaps the film makers thought that the viewing public would be confused by a debate in which the Wiley team took, for example, an anti-welfare position, but I contend this could have been handled in the story as it exists and it would have enhanced the drama.

I recently participated in a disputatio in my Christian Ethics class. A disputatio is a medieval form of debate very similar to modern debate competitions. I was assigned the argument that torture should be used to elicit information. This was an arduous task for me because I don't believe torture is an effective means of gleaning information, but, in arguing it, I had a greater appreciation for the other side of the argument and a better understanding of how to argue against torture in future. Given the nature of that debate and the fact that we often employed proof texts from the early Church Fathers as well as Scripture, I was especially delighted in the movie when Denzel Whitaker quoted St. Augustine in the last debate against Harvard.

Nonna Rating System:
$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price
$$ = Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: The Kite Runner

The Kite Runner: ***1/2

Nonna Rating: $$$

I expected to be disappointed in this movie. Like many, many others, I've read the book -- actually, I've raced through the book, compelled by the author's haunting narrative. I found the "return to Afghanistan" section a bit contrived, but I forgave it for the realistic ending which refrained from "and everyone lived happily ever after." I'm certainly not one of those who demands that the screen translate a beloved novel without plot or character detours. I fully accept that the medium of film dictates the delivery of a story and sometimes necessitates changes. I often think of Being There, a novel by Jerzy Kosinski, in which the author set out to demonize media culture in a rather heavy-handed way. It's an OK book. Translated to film and starring Peter Sellars, the satire and media critique are just as evident but much more subtle. Minor plot changes assist in making the film the masterpiece that it is.Kite Runner is not Being

There, but it is a fine example of a book translated well to film. Readers of the book who demand adherence to plot and character in film interpretations will not be disappointed. The makers of the film made the courageous and appropriate choice to shoot much of it in foreign languages; specifically, Dari, Pashtu, Urdu, and Russian. Courageous because the decision will probably keep subtitle-phobic American film goers away from Kite Runner. The use of the other languages, however, beautifully underscores the sense of loss that Amir suffers on many levels after the abrupt end of his childhood and his displacement to the United States.

The movie focuses on sin, guilt, atonement, and redemption from the perspective of a Muslim child and, later, the Muslim adult. Even though Baba, Amir's father, knows nothing of Amir's great sin, he knows enough of his son to view him sadly with disappointment. Amir returns to Afghanistan to atone for his sins for his father's sake as much as for the sake of his beloved Hassan. Like the author of the book, the movie makers refrained from manufacturing a happy ending. Instead, they left room for hope and healing -- much more realistic given the circumstance's of the story. The story reminds us that we are all called to care for one another and that, sometimes, it may be necessary for us to risk our lives to protect those we must love. It also shows us that, even when we give all we can for another, we cannot guarantee or control the outcome for that person. So much is left up to God and to the person him or herself.

Nonna Rating System:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price

$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price

$$ = Worth a rental

$ = Wait for cable

# = Skip it

Review: Atonement

Atonement: **1/2

Given all those Golden Globe nominations, I expected a bit more from this film. The acting was fine and very English in its attention to the details of the historical period -- prior to and during the beginning of the second World War. I don't ever remember a film in which so much attention was paid to the evacuation of Dunkirk -- not so much the evacuation itself as the plight of the men waiting in France. There's a lot to like about this film: good acting, beautiful cinematography, an interesting, if somewhat derivative story. The chemistry between Keira Knightly and James McEvoy is evident and Saoirse Ronan, Romola Garai, and Vanessa Redgrave, who play Briony young, older, and oldest, all handle their role well.

So what's wrong with it? Well, it's no French Lieutenant's Woman, and it's no Roshomon, two films Atonement echoes. It's one of those films that just doesn't seem to go far enough with its story. There's something missing. The final question is "Was this story weighty enough for all the money and time spent on its production?" Now that I've said all this, I must note that, according to http://www.rottentomatoes.com/, 85% of critics disagree with me. Of course, I'm not saying this is an awful movie. I'm saying it's worth seeing but probably at a cheap afternoon show. In fact, I think I'm going to develop a new rating system:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$ = Worth paying the Matinee price
$$ = Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

And Atonement gets $$$

Review: Margot at the Wedding

Margot at the Wedding ***

A great film? No, but certainly a fascinating one. Nicole Kidman's performance is especially engrossing. She's the sibling-from-hell, a mess of contradictions, a woman so unsure of who she is, she undermines her relationships with others without much thought but with plenty of low-level viciousness. So much is left unexplained in the movie. There are hints of an out-of-kilter relationship with her father. There is another sister, dependent on her mother, who may have been the victim of a rape -- or might not have been. There are a marital relationship and an adulterous relationship that both appear on the brink of disintegration. But explanation isn't important here.

Margot's boundaries are permeable to non-existent. Trust and fidelity are fluid. Her sister tells her a secret and elicits Margot's promise of silence. Almost immediately, Margot divulges the secret to one person after another. Later, she, in a matter-of-fact way, suggests to her son, Claude, a possible sexual relationship with her sister's babysitter, Maisy. Claude, mistaking this conversation for a permissive attitude of openness on the part of his mother, later tells her about a masturbatory experience and is confused when she reacts in horror and tells him his conversation is inappropriate. Self-obsessed by her own needs and opinions, Margot is unable to read people accurately. She's quick to label others as child abusers, autistic, or suffering from ADD with little or no evidence to support her opinion.

Several other performances are noteworthy. Jennifer Jason Leigh, Margot's sister Pauline, portrays a woman who hasn't had an easy life -- and Leigh has the courage to look burnt out used in the film. Jack Black shows us again that he's much more than just a funny guy. As Malcolm, the groom in "the wedding," he portrays a ne'er-do-well loser who confidently struts his stuff until his fictions can no longer sustain him. Zane Pais as Claude delivers one of those painful adolescent performances that make it all too easy to remember those awkward years. Finally, although he's only on film for a few minutes, John Turturro contributes another subtle performance, communicating the many problems in his relationship with Margot without ever having to talk about them.

As I said, it's not a great film. For many people, it won't be enjoyable to watch. None of the major characters are particularly likable people. But, if you like watching the portrayal of complex personalities and relationships on film, then this is a movie you'll enjoy.

Review: I'm Not There

I'm Not There ****

I'm Not There is a terrific film. I loved it -- all 15 minutes of it that I actually saw. I am embarrassed to say that I fell asleep during the movie and woke intermittently, somehow catching all the major plot points (if we can call them that). As so many critics have noted, the film is a deconstruction of the music biopic, those linear biographies which make it look as if a life actually makes sense. This film, using five actors to illustrate five aspects of that complex personality we call Bob Dylan, manages to point out a fact we all know, a fact that movies usually ignore -- that no human being is truly knowable. Unfortunately, for reasons that had nothing to do with the movie, I slept through most of it. I plan to see it "again." I'll alter this review if my opinion of the film changes, but I doubt it

Review: Enchanted

Enchanted ***1/2

Ever since Bambi Meets Godzilla ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXCUBVS4kfQ ), we have been living in a post-Disney world where saccharine sentimentality in children's cartoon's just doesn't do it for anybody. The three Shrek features put the final nails in that coffin. Enchanted proves that even Disney lives in a post-Disney world. No one has skewered the princess-fantasy genre the way this film does -- with broad satire and genuine affection for the decent (if sometimes sexist) values the genre represents. A princess, her prince, an evil stepmother queen, and her bumbling retainer are transported to Times Square, and all sorts of mischief breaks out. And, oh yes, one very frustrated chipmunk makes his appearance too.

There is a romantic love story at the center of the film, but that alone doesn't make it a "chick flick." I asked Max, my grandson and 10-year-old critic of kids' films, what he thought of the picture. He's at that "kissing-is-icky" stage and, so, I thought he might pan the film. But he didn't. He thought "it was really funny." Is this a new genre? Kid's films with chick flick components? Nanny McPhee was one.

My favorite part occured when Princess Giselle, finding herself in a cluttered, dirty Manhattan apartment, summoned all available New York critters to assist her a la Snow White in the dwarves' cottage. If you've seen Joe's Apartment, you know animated dancing cockroaches can be endearing.

Definitely take the kids to see this one, and, if you don't have kids, go anyway. It's that good.

Review: Beowulf

Beowulf ***1/2

I was prepared to be disappointed by Beowulf. I knew the new interpreters of this ancient story would tailor it for the 21st century. That was inevitable. There would be more emphasis on the blood and gore (not that there isn't a lot of that in the poem). I knew they'd probably mess around with the plot -- and they did. Grendel's Mother, played by Angelina Jolie, does not die when she's supposed to, and Beowulf doesn't go home to Geatland to be King. Instead, he hangs around with the Danes and rules them until his final battle with the dragon.

So, before I walked into the film, I decided to forgive its departures from the Old English poem. And I was blown away watching it in 3-D on a large screen. My advice: see it while it's in the theatres in 3-D. The experience is stunning. It might cost you $11.75, but it's worth it. Spears, arrows, and knives come right at you. Blood drips on you and snow falls so near and so gently, you reach out to feel it land in your hand. The animation is similar to that in Zemeckis's Polar Express, but it seems to be a few steps beyond that. And the technique allows for the perfection and alteration of bodies. Ray Winstone and Angelina Jolie both have beyond-belief-perfect bodies. Robin Wright Penn, who keeps her clothes on, is an errily stunning Danish beauty. Her jawline seems more square than in actuality and helps to make her every inch a queen.

The movie does do a fine job preserving the heroic culture of the late first millenium in England. The boasting and exaggeration are all there as well as the political structure of thanes and lords and the centrality of the mead hall. There are even a few nods to the introduction of Christianity to England -- "the Roman god, Christ Jesus." I especially enjoyed the few moments when a scop (a singer of tales) recited Beowulf in Old English. All in all, it's fine movie. If you liked 300, you'll enjoy this one too.

If I Didn't Go to Movies, I'd Have Nothing to Write About.

No Country for Old Men ****

Wow. What an amazing film. Yes, I am a big Coen Brothers fan. How can you not be? Brother Where Art Thou? Fargo. The Big Lebowski. Barton Fink. Miller's Crossing. Raising Arizona. The Hudsucker Proxy. But this film had me holding my breath. So much came together so well. Gorgeous cinematography and, as usual, counterpoint perfect editing. And layered, mesmerizing performances. Tommy Lee Jones exhibits the most weathered, expressive face in film. Weariness just drips from him as he hold on to the moral center of the story. And Javier Bardem transmogrifies into mindless evil incarnate. Josh Brolin manages to rivet our attention in spite of the fact that we all know what's going to happen to him as soon as he make his first dumb decision. Woody Harrelson, Kelly Macdonald, and Tess Harper all deliver nuanced performances worthy of Oscar nods.

The dialogue is spare like the landscape; it lacks the constant wit and satire of Fargo, but that's not a problem. This terse dialogue is probably due in large part to Cormac McCarthy's novel on which the film was based. Often, when Sheriff Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) speaks, however, his thoughtful, witty comments seem not so much directed at another person as toward the out-of-kilter universe or the God who, he is convinced, has passed him by.

The movie is extremely violent. Death comes suddenly with little warning. On one level, the movie is a thriller, a story of drugs and violence, a good, solid story. On another level, however, the movie channels Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal. A preposterous claim? I think not. The movie works as a metaphor for the transitory nature of our existence. Death comes for all. Some sooner. Some later. Bell is Everyman trying to make sense of it all. Pay attention to his description of his dream at the end of the movie. It is death toward which he moves, just as we all do. As the tagline points out, "There are no clean getaways."

A Few More Movies

Semesters are wonderful, but the relaxed pace is about to run pall-mall into the abyss in these last two weeks. I'm trying to stay on track but, of course, I'm on break, so I'm going to movies:

Lars and the Real Girl ****

The best movie I've seen in a long time. Don't let the plot description turn you away: a quiet, nerdy, lonely young man who lives in the garage of his brother's house, decides to send away for an anatomically correct life-size female doll. The young man, Lars, introduces Bianca from Brazil, the doll, to his brother and his wife. Bianca, it seems, is a missionary who loves children. Lars asks if she can stay in the house with them because it just wouldn't be proper to have her in the garage with him. Recognizing Lar's fragile hold on reality, the brother agrees to Lars' request. His pregnant wife, a wise young woman, suggests they bring Bianca to their family practice physician the next day just to make sure she's OK. And therein begins the real story -- how an entire town, out of deep affection for Lars, comes together to support him and see him through a difficult time in his life. The cast is Midwestern-real. Especially effective are Ryan Gosling as Lars, Paul Schneider as his brother, and the always compelling Patricia Clarkson as the doctor of all our dreams: patient, kind, and insightful. The film testifies to the prodigious power of community.

Dan in Real Life **

How do you make a film about a depressed, emotionally paralyzed man without making it incredibly boring? You make Lars and the Real Girl, that's what you do. Unfortunately, Dan in Real Life just remains a really slow-moving film about a very depressed guy who spends most of his time looking soulfully out into space.

Dan in real life has many of the right ingredients for a fine film, especially its excellent cast. I must admit I have a real soft spot for Steve Carrell. He transcended the silliness of The 40 Year Old Virgin and emerged an appealing, sensitive guy you'd like to take home to Mom. In fact, that sweet appeal of Mr Carrell is what will prevent the American version of The Office from surpassing the satire of the English version, which features the wonderfully vile Ricky Gervais. But I digress.

What is wrong with Dan in Real Life? 1) Zero chemistry between Carrell and his love interest, Juliette Binoche, who phones in her performance. 2) Also no chemistry between Diane Wiest and John Mahoney. Are they a long-married couple or did they just meet before filming? 3) A dreadfully slow pace. It's only about 90 minutes long, but I thought it was more like Return of the King with the extra scenes. Bottom line: rent it some winter night when you're really bored.

The Bee Movie **1/2

I wanted so much to like this movie. After all, Jerry Seinfield wrote it and is the lead bee. I really wish I hadn't read a recent article in the New York Times which detailed how erroneous Hollywood's view of bee life actually is. Reality is actually much more exciting. Here's the article. It's a great read:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/science/13angi.html?ex=1195621200&en=fed2706bf65cfe12&ei=5070&emc=eta1.

And here's my big confession. I fell asleep about a half hour into the movie, right after the homage to The Graduate, which was witty in a Seinfeld sort of way. So, I asked Max, my grandson, what rating he would give it: his answer -- 6 on a 10 point scale. It's a good movie to take kids to -- nothing more.

It's Been a While

From October 25 through last Monday, my Dad was in the hospital with a broken hip. Needless to say, I spent a great deal of time with my Dad and then spent quite a few days driving back and forth from Evanston to see him. He's doing OK, and is recovering from surgery nicely. He has amazing tolerance of pain. He hasn't complained of being uncomfortable since the surgery. The biggest issue right now is that he's not cooperating with the physical therapists. He needs to get up and try to walk around. And that, of course, depends on his mood and how much he feels he's in control of any given situation.

Dad has had dementia for at least eight years and has been in a nursing home for the last four years. He has profound aphasia; he can't communicate in any meaningful way. Sometimes he speaks words, but they usually have nothing to do with the context. His cognitive abilities are seriously impaired. It's been a long, frustrating haul.

I just looked at a picture of him from four years ago. He could no longer take care of himself then and needed 24 hour care, but, looking back, I can say that was a good time for him. He was able to communicate his desires and frustrations. Strangely, if he had Alzheimer's, dealing with him might be easier. He wouldn't know us. He wouldn't care when we came to visit. He wouldn't expect us to take him home. But he does know us, and he still exhibits enough cognitive ability to be frustrated with his inability to communicate. Dementia is a hateful, destructive disease.