Trouble with the Curve -- September 2012

THE BOYS -- AND GIRLS -- OF SUMMER

Why is baseball so consistently popular, particularly in North America, Latin America, and the Far East? Several years back at a humanities conference I attended a lecture titled The American Landscape, which dealt with ways that baseball expresses aspects of the American character and the character of certain other cultures as well. The presenter made these two key points: First, baseball, unlike football, is circular, not linear: a batter starts out at home plate and if he or she is successful rounds the bases and returns home. Second, a baseball game is not governed by the clock as are many other types of athletic games – e.g., football, basketball, soccer, and hockey. No, a baseball game just takes (normally) nine innings to complete – and it's over when those nine innings are over. 

To those two points I would add two more: baseball success is not dependent on size. One does not have to be a giant to succeed at the game; one just needs certain skills. Further, the sport can easily be played by both sexes and by people of many different ages. Baseball has long struck a chord in the American sensibility, as evidenced by the fact that Ken Burns made a whole TV film series on it.

As of this writing, the baseball season is almost upon us. In Arizona and Florida spring training is in full swing, and the 2013 Major League season will be starting within a month or so. With that in mind, it seems appropriate to review a baseball movie, released a few months back, in honor of the boys – and the girls – of summer. Too bad its release wasn't delayed until now. Trouble with the Curve, starring Clint Eastwood, Amy Adams, Justin Timberlake, and John Goodman, hit the theaters in September of 2012. It's not playing in theaters anymore, but it's certainly available to purchase or to order from Netflix. It's a sweet, if somewhat predictable, picture that should satisfy a lot of people, especially if they're baseball fans.

Here's what Trouble with the Curve is about: Widower Gus Lobel (Clint Eastwood) has been one of the best scouts in baseball for a long time now. He has a long history of being able to spot the best future players, partly because he has an uncanny ability to hear the sound of a well-hit ball. The trouble is that, while Gus's ears still work well, his eyes don't:  He's now half blind and is suffering from macular degeneration, along with other ailments. His team, the Atlanta Braves, is thinking of quietly easing him out as soon as his contract expires, which will be soon. Fortunately for Gus, he has at least one friend in high places – Pete Klein (John Goodman), who intercedes for Gus with the team's management as best he can. Gus will have one chance to stay with the club: he's been given the job of evaluating a first-round draft pick, which will mean that, as he's done for years, he'll be attending a lot of small-time games in small, out-of-the-way places.

Besides his declining health, Gus has another problem: his relationship with Mickey, his daughter (Amy Adams). Mickey (in typical reverence for baseball on the part of her parents) was named for Mickey Mantle. She's a rising star attorney who is estranged from her father but who loves him dearly underneath. Gus's friend Pete has a great idea: get Mickey to take some time off from her law practice and attend the games with Gus. She'll be his eyes. But why would Mickey be a good choice? The answer: Having been raised on the sport, she knows more about baseball than almost anyone – maybe even her father. The problem, though, is that Gus doesn't want her help, and she's strongly reluctant to provide it. Enter another character into the equation: Johnny Flanagan (Justin Timberlake), with whom Gus has a positive relationship from previous scouting work. Johnny is about Mickey's age, so we can easily see where this part of the story is going. I don't want to spoil your viewing pleasure, so I won't say anything more about how the events unfold, but I suspect you might enjoy watching them.

The acting of the picture is strong: Clint Eastwood gives a humorous, gruff, crusty performance of a character to whom most of us can relate. Amy Adams provides her usual quality (and edgy) performance. As for Justin Timberlake, this was the first time I've been able to admire a performance of his – this time he plays a good, humble guy. John Goodman also doesn't disappoint.

In Ephesians 6:4, Paul says, "Fathers, do not exasperate your children." Will father Gus and daughter Mickey ever reconcile? Will Gus be able to keep his job? What about the relationship between Mickey and Johnny? Will the Braves sign the star player that Gus, Mickey, and Johnny are evaluating – a player who has considerable talent but who also can't hit a curve ball (hence the movie's title) and is basically a jerk?

The film has been criticized by some reviewers as being far too predictable and clichéd. I don't agree – but I do object to some of the language. There's one use of the f-word, several uses of the s-word, and a number of misuses of the Lord's name. Sadly, that problem has become endemic in films today. Nonetheless, Trouble with the Curve is a heartwarmer. Best of all, its underlying themes of the importance of family and the need for communication and reconciliation come through strongly. Find a way to see it.

Film Rating: PG-13

My Rating: 3 stars

Lincoln -- November 2012

HONEST ABE

This must be the year of the president from Springfield. In 2012 we saw the great success of Bill O'Reilly and Martin Dugard's book Killing Lincoln. The National Geographic TV
channel has been presenting features about our 16th president. And we now have the motion picture Lincoln, directed by Steven Spielberg and nominated for 13 Academy Awards. Will the film win Best Picture and Spielberg Best Director at the Academy Awards on February 24? Time will tell.

There's no doubt that Lincoln is a quality film that is probably well deserving of many of the awards for which it is nominated. What is it really about? The focus is not Lincoln's assassination as is the case in the book by O'Reilly and Dugard. Rather, it's the passage of 
the 13th amendment to the Constitution, which abolished slavery in the United States.

Here's how the events unfold historically: The time is January and February 1865. The Civil War is not far from ending, and Congress is in a Lame Duck Session – since at that time in our history the presidential inauguration and the opening of the new Congress took place in March, not in January. Abraham Lincoln is passionate about fulfilling one his major quests: slavery's abolition. He well knows that the Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal. He also knows that this principle has generally not been upheld. It's a tricky issue because, on the one hand, if Lincoln ends the war immediately, the South will have no motivation to make peace. On the other, if the war plays on for a time and the South is defeated, the Confederacy will insist on keeping slavery, and nothing will really have changed. The key is to abolish slavery before the war ends, and to do that Lincoln must persuade Congress to pass a Constitutional amendment. Almost everyone tells him this is impossible given the political climate and the fact that he has only a month to get it accomplished. Lincoln is undeterred, however, and pushes ahead in resolute fashion.

One of the most interesting things about the film is what we learn about Lincoln as politician. The image most of us probably have is that of Lincoln the great statesman and orator. We don't often associate him with nitty-gritty political efforts. As we see in this picture, however, Lincoln was a shrewd politician who got into the rough-and-tumble of political action and worked hard to get deals made. There are several good reasons why Lincoln was ultimately successful in his quest:

• He was close to Congress, involved in the day-to-day happenings and not an above-the-fray, ivory tower observer. 
• He was patient in his efforts. 
• He created good will in diverse ways – e.g., visiting the Union troops often.
• He was a consummate communicator who charmed and persuaded many by illustrating his ideas with colorful stories. He was not above resorting to "tricks" to get his goals accomplished. In his negotiations with Congress, for example, he empowered lobbyists to get votes for passage of the Amendment by offering future jobs. (These were not bribes.) 
• Also, Lincoln was entertaining peace offers from the Confederacy while the negotiations were going on. Opponents in Congress accused him of inviting Confederate representatives into Washington. Lincoln responded that he had no knowledge of Confederates being in the city. This was true up to a certain point: he did not specifically know whether they had entered Washington, though he had arranged for their coming.

Spielberg's picture has excellent production values and strong performances. Daniel Day-Lewis is superb in the title role and is said to be likely to win the Best Actor Oscar. Sally Field is effective as the emotionally unstable Mary Todd Lincoln. And Tommy Lee Jones gives a stellar performance as the "Radical Republican" Senator Thaddeus Stevens, who 
was a key player in getting the 13th Amendment passed.

One Area of Reservation

The one aspect of the picture that troubles me is its use of language. We hear the character of Lincoln, for example, use the s-word, and we hear the character of one of the prominent senators utter the f-word. Movieguide, a reviewer of films from a Christian point of view, counts about 40 uses of obscenity in the picture. The Dove Foundation says that "The language they use in the film does not line up with the morals and language of the time period." David Barton, a historian who has appeared on Fox News and CNN, observes that soldiers of the time could be court martialed if they used profanity and that Lincoln would not have tolerated it. Lincoln biographer James McPherson notes that "The profanity actually bothered me, especially Lincoln's use of it. It struck me as completely unlikely – a modern injection into Lincoln's rhetoric." What we seem to have here is a case of presentism rearing its ugly head.

Bottom Line: Well worth your time, effort, and money. The picture portrays Lincoln as both idealistic and practical, as both saintly and earthy. Its greatest strength is its dramatization of the ending of the evil of slavery. HOWEVER: The use of profane language is problematical. I certainly wouldn't take children to see it.

Film Rating: PG-13

My Rating: 3 ¼ stars

Argo -- October 2012

A PREPOSTEROUS IDEA, BUT IT WORKED

Moe: Hey Joe, I've got a movie question for you.

Joe: OK, shoot.

Moe: It's about Argo. I know the Academy Awards are coming up, and I want to see at least one or two of the pix that are nominated. Have you seen it?

Joe: Sure have. Surprised you haven't, since you like movies like this. I'd say go and see it. It's really good.

Moe: OK. Give me some details. Isn't it about the hostages in Iran back in the 80s?

Joe: Yeah, it is. Actually,1979 and 1980. The gist of it is that when the Iranian protestors overpowered the guards at the U. S. Embassy in Tehran in '79, they captured most of the embassy workers and put them in prison. What they didn't know was that six of the embassy employees escaped out a side door and quickly made their way to the Canadian Embassy. The Canadian ambassador to Iran hid them in his own house for several months, and it was a pretty tense situation, let me tell you. Eventually they had to get them out of Iran. The movie is mainly about how they did it.

Moe: So tell me more.

Joe: Well, the main character is a CIA "extract" specialist named Tony Mendez – I guess that means his job is to "extract" Americans out of difficult situations and get them back to the U.S. He concocts an outlandish plan to do this, and he realizes it's probably a cockamamie idea, but it's the only real chance.

Moe: What's the plan?

Joe: He creates a fictitious movie script partly based on Persian legendary characters. The idea is that he has a movie crew who are supposedly in Iran to make an action-adventure film of the script. The film will be named Argo. Of course the refugees hiding in the Canadian ambassador's house are going to pretend to be the members of the crew. Mendez enlists the help of an Oscar-winning makeup artist named John Chambers and a well-known producer named Leslie Siegel to give the whole idea credibility. The big task is to carry this charade on for a couple of days and then get the refugees to the airport before the Iranian authorities figure out what's going on.

Moe: So how does it turn out? This is just a story, isn't it?

Joe: No, it's not just a story. This really happened – maybe not in exactly the way the movie shows it, but it's basically true. So we know that this preposterous idea really worked; the refugees got out – in the nick of time, the way it happens in the movie.

Moe: Well, if we know the outcome, doesn't that make the story less exciting?

Joe: No, it doesn't. If anything, it makes it more exciting, even though I can't explain why, exactly. Tony Mendez knows that if he fouls up, he'll probably be a dead duck, and so will the refugees he's trying to rescue. It's pretty tense all the way through, let me tell you.

Moe: Is there anything Christian about the movie? Or any good values?

Joe: Well, yes. We see Tony praying at one point. And there's a whole kind of subplot about Tony and his wife; at the beginning of the movie they seem to be on the outs – they're supposedly taking a break from each other. But Tony loves his son and keeps in close contact with him by phone and Internet. And when the whole thing is over with, Tony and his wife get back together. But the most important thing about the whole story is the risk that Tony takes to pull this off. It's for a great cause – saving six lives. But it's also a risk for the six Americans hiding out in the ambassador's house; they have no choice but to trust Tony Mendez with their lives -- and they do. Tony and the Canadian ambassador and several others who help out are heroes.

Moe: Anything objectionable in it? Can I take my kids?

Joe: I'd be really careful about that, but I don't think I would. The movie is rated R, partly for violence but probably mainly for language. There's an incredible amount of foul language and profanity. The f-word and s-word are used so much it almost seems like there's some sort of requirement for those words to be in every sentence. And it was completely unnecessary – the filmmakers didn't have to do that.

Moe: Anything else you can tell me?

Joe: Yeah – the acting is great. Ben Affleck plays the main role of Tony Mendez, and he does a terrific job. John Goodman and Alan Alda play the roles of the makeup artist and the Hollywood producer, and they're really good too. And Ben Affleck directed the movie. Most of the other actors are relatively unknown, but they do well.

Moe: What kind of rating would you give it?

Joe: Well, I think I'd give it 3 ½ stars. It's one of the best movies of the year if you can ignore the foul language.

Moe: Thanks. Maybe just my wife and I will go.

Joe: Good idea.

Chicago -- March 2003

RAZZLE DAZZLE 'EM

Well, folks, it’s Academy Award time again. Don’t know if that’s of any importance to you or not, but since movies nominated for Oscars are generally “big movies” and are talked about a good deal, it might be worthwhile to review one of those biggies. So let’s talk about Chicago.

Set in the 1920s, Chicago is a musical about Windy City women who are said to have murdered their husbands or boyfriends and are waiting on death row. Not many of them will swing, though — at least not if they have the right lawyer to get them off. Renée Zellweger plays Roxie Hart, a young married woman who shoots the man she’s having an affair with because he wants to leave her. Catherine Zeta-Jones plays Velma Kelly, a woman who has killed her husband. Richard Gere plays Billy Flynn, the Johnny Cochrane-type lawyer who gets them off with his razzle dazzle courtroom tricks.

On the positive side: The movie is colorful and lively and full of strong performances. Catherine Zeta-Jones dances and sings her socks off and does a great American accent (She’s British.). Renée Zellweger does a creditable job with the role of Roxie. John C. Reilly does well as Roxie’s wimp husband, especially in his musical number Mr. Cellophane, about a man so unimpressive you can see right through him. And who would have thought that Richard Gere could sing and dance?

On the negative side: Besides a lot of four-letter words and the glamorizing of immoral behavior, there’s an emptiness at Chicago’s core. Most of the great movie musicals have a point of view and show some kind of moral transformation of a character. Con-man Harold Hill in The Music Man is redeemed by love. Prideful and arrogant Professor Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady is ultimately humbled by the poor flower girl he’s made a lady. The gang members in West Side Story learn about the destructiveness of their hate. Here, however, there’s no clear moral center and thus nothing really uplifting. Roxie and Velma’s murderous exploits qualify them to leave death row and go on to star in a successful song and dance act. We might be tempted to say, “How far the musical has sunk!”

Redeeming values? A friend pointed out that Chicago makes a comment about our legal system and the issue of justice (to say nothing about the excessive power of the media). After all, one of the main songs is called Razzle Dazzle ‘Em. Do juries seek the truth, or are they just swayed by the better performance? What does it take to convince a jury? A good lawyer, basically. Maybe Clarence Darrow won the verdict in the Scopes trial because he razzle dazzled the jury better than William Jennings Bryan did. Maybe O. J. got off because of Johnny Cochrane’s razzle dazzle courtroom work. Chicago seems to say, satirically, that in America whatever you do is fine, so long as you can escape the consequences and perform well while doing so. That theme might make this movie worthwhile, but I’m not necessarily convinced. You can enjoy and admire Chicago, but can you be uplifted by it? I’ll leave that up to you.

Film Rating: PG-13                   
My Rating: 3 ½ stars

Les Miserables -- December 2012

SOLACE FOR THE WRETCHED, MISERABLE ONES


Time: 1815. Location: Digne, France. Situation: Peasant Jean Valjean has just been released from a 19-year prison term. His offense? He stole a loaf of bread to help feed his sister and her starving family. That crime got him five years; several attempts to escape from prison got him another 14. On his release, Valjean goes to a church where he is befriended by a kindly priest, given a meal, and allowed a place to spend the night. His response is to steal some of the priest's silver and abscond with it. The police capture Valjean rather quickly and bring him back to face the priest, but then a fortuitous event occurs: The priest tells the police that he had freely given the silver to Valjean and then informs Valjean that he had left behind the best silver of all. The police accept the priest's story and leave. Then the kindly priest talks with Valjean in earnest, invoking Romans 12:20: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." The priest encourages Valjean to take the silver but also says, "You must use this silver to become an honest man." As we will see, this lesson is not lost on Valjean.

Thus the scene is set for the events of Victor Hugo's 1862 colossal novel Les Miserables, called by author Upton Sinclair "one of the half-dozen greatest novels of all time." It is also one of the longest novels ever written. As to its theme, Hugo himself described it as showing a progression "from evil to good."  In the 1980s French dramatists Alain Boublil, Claude-Michel Schoenberg, and Jean-Marc Natal created a musical version of Les Miserables and opened it in Paris. It soon opened in London and then in New York, where it ran from 1987 to 2003; with its 6,680 performances it is the fourth-longest-running Broadway play of all time. Now film director Tom Hooper (helmsman of The King's Speech) has created a movie based on the musical stage play. Les Miserables opened on Christmas Day 2012, in time for consideration for the 2013 Academy Awards. The film is nominated for eight Oscars, including Best Picture.

If you aren't familiar with the story, let me add some additional details to clarify the action of the plot. Jean Valjean, having been sent on his way by the kindly priest, turns over an entirely new leaf, tearing up his parole papers and moving to the town of Montreuil, where he uses the money from the silver to start a new business that employs the poor – i.e., the miserable ones. He even takes on a new name, Monsieur Madeleine, and in time assumes the position of mayor of the town and becomes well off financially. One day as he is walking through the town, he sees a man who has been pinned under a cart on the street. No one is able to lift it, so Valjean picks it up himself and saves the man underneath. However, he just happens to be seen by Mr. Javert, the police inspector of the town, who had been at the prison where Valjean was incarcerated. Inspector Javert had never seen anyone capable of exerting such a great amount of strength – except for Jean Valjean. His suspicions are immediately aroused, and while there are numerous plot twists ahead, we see that a significant portion of the film's (and novel's) action will be occupied by antagonist Javert's pursuit of protagonist Valjean. 

Meanwhile, Valjean, aka Madeleine, befriends a former employee of his, a single woman named Fantine who has been forced into prostitution in order to care for her young daughter Cosette. Fantine is dying, but Valjean goes to the small town where her daughter is being abusively kept by an unscrupulous married couple and manages to wring Cosette from their clutches. He takes Cosette to Paris and manages to start a new life as he assumes the role of the girl's father – all the while evading the pursuit of Inspector Javert, who resembles nothing so much as a dog frantically worrying a bone. The action culminates in the events of the Paris Rebellion of 1832, in which Valjean, the grown-up Cosette, and Marius, Cosette's future husband, become intimately involved. Many other happenings of course occur, but these details should be sufficient to help you to understand the basic action of the story.

With its beautiful score and compelling storyline, Les Miserables is an impressive film overall; director Hooper does an admirable job of fashioning the stage play into a musical picture. Australian actor Hugh Jackman does a praiseworthy job of playing the lead role of Jean Valjean, both dramatically and musically. Anne Hathaway performs well in the role of the doomed Fantine. British actor Eddie Redmayne excels in the role of Marius. Perhaps most impressive of all are the ensemble singers and actors. I have only one rather small reservation, in regard to the singing. We have heard a good deal of commentary about director Hooper's decision to film all the singing live – with no studio recording and polishing as is customary with movie musicals. The result is that the level of vocal performance shows a rather wide range from highly accomplished on the parts of Jackman and Redmayne to just satisfactory on the part of Russell Crowe in the role of Inspector Javert. On the one hand the live singing gives spontaneity, but on the other we could wish for greater vocal accomplishment.

Les Miserables is characterized by its strong theme and its underlying Christian message. The film embodies the virtues of mercy, kind treatment of the poor, and forgiveness. The Lord's name and provision are invoked often, nowhere more poignantly than in the lyric of one of the final songs: "To love another person is to see the face of God."

Bottom line: Well worth your time, money, and effort. However, parts of the picture might offend some individuals. There are a few language issues, and there is rawness in the dramatization of prostitution among the poor. Some violence occurs in the rebellion scenes. Not for children.

Film Rating: PG-13
My Rating: 3 ½ stars