ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

Dan Stevens

I’m Your Man: Digital Dating and Loving Lavishly

by Leave a Comment

You can’t buy love. But can you build it?

Set in the present day, I’m Your Man tells the story of Alma (Maren Eggert), a scientist who is offered a job evaluating a new line of humanoid companions. After her boss manages to convince her with some mild bribery, Alma agrees to bring the cybernetic Tom (Dan Stevens) into her home for a period of three weeks in order to ascertain their value as romantic mates and potentially the rights they deserve sociologically. Although she’s skeptical (and even resistant), Tom never wavers from his desire to make her happy, forcing Alma to re-examine what she believes to be the nature of love.

Co-written and directed by Maria Schrader, I’m Your Man is a fun and philosophical film that asks some big questions in surprising ways. While the film could potentially unravel due to its high concepts, the film manages to sell its premise and draw the audience in with genuine affection. Admittedly, much of the film’s effectiveness is largely due to the utter charisma of Stevens, who sells Tom with such adorable charisma that you never really question the fact that this woman in this robot seem to be falling in love. (In fact, in the film’s greatest achievement, you’re even rooting for them as a couple.)

At the same time, this is very much a film that wants to explore what love actually means. While the film acknowledges the social implications and dangers of becoming too obsessed with items which aren’t authentic, there is a charm that plays out in this relationship as well. Can a person love a thing as much as it does another human? In truth, this could be argued that this is already the case. If the act of love involves in our investment of time, than where we put our focus should be indicative of what we care most about. For example, rather than invest in our in-person relationships, we frequently spend our days connecting more deeply with our cell phones then we do with those around us. While it seems counter-intuitive, the nature of love has never necessitated that our hearts focus on another living person. (After all, didn’t one say that the ‘love of money is a root of all kinds of evil’?) If love is based on an emotional attachment (even an unhealthy one), I’m Your Man wants to investigate the boundaries of that argument.

What’s most interesting about Alma is that her relationship with Tom truly is beneficial to her soul. When she’s with him, she feels safer and she is more in touch with her own feelings. Because of his programming, Tom will always be affectionate, caring and instill emotional value into Alma. Starved for healthy friendships that encourage and empower, her time with Tom fills her with a security and joy that she is unable to find with others. In short, Tom makes Alma happy (“Isn’t being happy a good thing?” Tom asks repeatedly) As a result, the film makes a compelling argument for this type of connection, one without flaws or missteps.

However, as she grows closer to her robotic companion, Alma recognizes that loving an object has become a primarily selfish act. She’s not wrong in this conclusion. The type of love that has been programmed into Tom is one that allows its owner to focus entirely on being told how wonderful they are. Rather than challenge them towards personal growth, this romance becomes entirely self-validating and one-sided. The healthiest relationships ask both parties to offer grace to their spouse while, at the same time, accepting grace from them. There is an unconditional give and take to love that acknowledges imperfections in both partners and says that they are acceptable to them anyways. 

Last time I checked, my iPhone can’t do that. (Though maybe there’s an app for that.)

Surprisingly witty and compelling, I’m Your Man is a strange blend of sci-fi and romance that absolutely makes you fall in love with its charms. Thanks to a delightful performance by Stevens and some compelling conversations about the true nature of love, the film surprisingly manages to sweep you off your feet while also forcing you to re-examine your priorities.

Now, back to checking my notifications.

I’m Your Man premiered at TIFF ’21 on Monday, September 13th, 2021

TIFF ’21: I’m Your Man

by Leave a Comment

Set in the present day, I’m Your Man tells the story of Alma (Maren Eggert), a scientist who is offered a job evaluating a new line of humanoid companions. After her boss manages to convince her with some mild bribery, Alma agrees to bring the cybernetic Tom (Dan Stevens) into her home for a period of three weeks in order to ascertain their value as romantic mates and potentially the rights they deserve sociologically. Although she’s skeptical (and even resistant), Tom never wavers from his desire to make her happy, forcing Alma to re-examine what she believes to be the nature of love.

Co-written and directed by Maria Schrader, I’m Your Man is a fun and philosophical film that asks some big questions in surprising ways. While the film could potentially unravel due to its high concepts, the film manages to sell its premise and draw the audience in with genuine affection. Admittedly, much of the film’s effectiveness is largely due to the utter charisma of Stevens, who sells Tom with such adorable charisma that you never really question the fact that this woman in this robot seem to be falling in love. (In fact, in the film’s greatest achievement, you’re even rooting for them as a couple.)

While the film acknowledges the social implications and dangers of becoming too obsessed with items which are in real, there is a charm that plays out in the relationship as well. Can a person love a thing as much as it does another human? In truth, this could be argued that this is already the case. If the act of love involves in our investment of time, than where we put our focus should be indicative of what we care most about. If love is based on an emotional attachment (even an unhealthy one), I’m Your Man wants to investigate the boundaries of that argument.

I’m Your Man premiered at TIFF ’21 on Monday, September 13th, 2021

Lucy in the Sky: Failure to Launch

by Leave a Comment

Lucy in the Sky tells the story of Lucy Cola, an astronaut who returns home to Earth after a length mission. Although her life consists of a loving relationship with her husband, Drew (Dan Stevens), and a job that she loves, Lucy feels restless and struggles to reintegrate herself into her daily routine. Looking for the thrill that she has left behind, she becomes involved with roguish astronaut Mark Goodwin (Jon Hamm) and begins to lose touch with reality in a world that is quickly becoming too small for her.  

Written and directed by Noah Hawley (FX’s Fargo), Lucy in the Sky is an ambitious look at the tensions that can take place when our lives simply don’t measure up to our dreams. Based loosely on a true story of a female astronaut who suffered an emotional breakdown after returning to Earth, Lucy depicts its titular star as one who yearns for the rush of the heavens yet remains trapped by her everyday life. (After all, how can you compare unraveling the mysteries of the universe with ‘mundane’ moments like morning coffee and driving your kid to school?)

Unfortunately, while performances by Portman and Hamm are fine, a muddled script that loses its way prevents Lucy from ever really taking off. Though grand in its vision, Hawley’s film simply doesn’t stay on trajectory, proving unable to properly balance Lucy’s struggles with some over-the-top visuals. (For instance, one scene featuring a cover of The Beatle’s iconic Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds looks great but doesn’t match the pace of the film and simply feels out of place.)

Wearing its heart on its sleeve, Lucy in the Sky is very interested in exploring what happens when one loses sight of what’s truly important. Though a decorated astronaut, Lucy struggles to see the beauty of everyday life. Having witnessed the Earth from the perspective of the heavens, Lucy has lost all sense of wonder for anything on the ground.

Despite the fact that she is cared for and appreciated by those around her, she views her life as increasingly mundane, inviting reckless behavior as she attempts to fill the void of meaninglessness that has crept inside her soul. In doing so, Lucy demonstrates on a grand scale what happens when so many often lose sight of the importance of genuine love and relationships over accomplishments. Desperate to return to the heavens, she is willing to sacrifice everything—and everyone—around her in order to once again feel the rush of success and beauty. At the same time, Lucy gradually loses a piece of her soul as her passion gives way to obsession. 

For Lucy, the only thing left that can be good in the world is for her to feel all powerful again by returning to the heavens. However, as a result, the healing quality of loving relationships slowly becomes lost, leaving her without emotional grounding or hope.

Though ambitious in its scope, a confusing script hampers Lucy in the Sky from launching to the heights it could have reached. However, despite its glaring flaws, Lucy does features solid performances from an underused supporting cast that includes Ellen Burstyn, Nick Offerman, Zazie Beetz and Stevens. Even so, despite expectations that soar to the heavens, the finest of talent can’t help a script that is unable to get off the ground.

The Man Who Invented Christmas – Dickens Meets Scrooge

by Leave a Comment

Dickens’s A Christmas Carol is a well-loved story that has had various screen and stage versions and has become as much a part of Christmas as a crèche. The Man Who Invented Christmas is the story behind the story. It is a combination of a look at Dickens, his creative process, and enough of the retelling of the story that we feel we’ve heard it yet again.

In 1843, Charles Dickens (Dan Stevens) is struggling to make ends meet. He has had enormous success as a writer, even touring the U.S., but his last few books have been flops. His family has acquired a lavish lifestyle. He and his wife (Morfydd Clark) spend money as fast as Charles can borrow it. When he goes to pitch a Christmas book he has yet to even conceive, his publisher is uninterested. After all, hardly anyone still celebrated Christmas at that time. He vows to publish it himself and have it ready for Christmas. A pretty bold plan for a man with writers’ block.

At the same time, Dickens’s father John (Jonathan Pryce) comes to visit. The elder Dickens has been a bit of a scoundrel throughout Charles’s life. When John was taken to debtor’s prison, Charles had to work in a work house (cf., Oliver Twist). He has affection for his flamboyant father, but is also ashamed of him.

As he struggles to write the book, he conceives of Scrooge (Christopher Plummer), who comes to life for him, and the two have discussions about the “humbug” of Christmas. Scrooge, you’ll remember is a miserly, self-contained misanthrope. He is not at all like Dickens, which make the two of them struggle over the meaning of the book, and hence Christmas. Many of the things that end up in the book have a genesis in Charles’s day to day life. As such, all of the main beats of A Christmas Carol show up as lines or images at some point in the film so that we come away feeling as if we’ve experienced the story in a new way.

The structure of A Christmas Carol is built around a series of visits from ghosts that show the past, present, and future. As Dickens develops the story around those points of time, the story we watch takes us back to Dickens’s past, the troubles of his present, and the unknown possibilities that rely on the success of this book.

The Man Who Invented Christmas also carries the same message as A Christmas Carol: that the message of Christmas is about loving and sharing with others. For Scrooge, that discovery comes with an understanding of mortality. He becomes aware that all his wealth will mean nothing in the grave. He lives a miserable life when all he cares about is money, but is reborn when he learns to share what he has. Likewise, Dickens must learn that his fame is just as empty as Scrooge’s miserliness. His past—especially in regard to his father—has hardened him within his own family. He must escape the resentments that have consumed his life if he is to find the joy of Christmas that he has been writing about.

Photos courtesy of Bleecker Street

3.15 Retelling BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

by 17 Comments

This week, Steve welcomes ScreenFish newbie Derek Wong to delve into the tale as old as time when they chat about Disney’s remake of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. Can the 2017 version live up to the legacy of the original? What does it mean to be timeless?Has true beauty changed? All this and more, only on ScreenFish.

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

3.15 Beauty and the Beast

A special thanks to Derek for coming on the show!

Beauty and the Beast: A Mixed Transformation

by 4 Comments

Unless you’ve been on a remote island for the last year or so, you know Disney has been working on a live-action version of its beloved, animated hit Beauty and the Beast.  After much teasing and considerable hype, the finished product has finally been released to theaters around the world.  People are flocking to theaters in droves, along with their kids (at least two girls were dressed in Belle’s signature yellow dress at the screening I attended). What they will see on the screen is a good film that doesn’t quite reach the bar set by its predecessor.

The film, for the most part, tells the story known the world over—a prince isn’t very nice to an old lady stopping by his opulent castle for shelter.  She puts a spell on him and his servants, transforming him into a horned beast (Dan Stevens) and them into various household objects.  The castle becomes frozen in a perpetual winter to boot. If the Beast finds true love before the magical rose in his room loses its petals, he can become human again. If not, he remains a beast forever and his servants become permanently inanimate.

In a nearby village, Belle (Emma Watson) is groaning about wanting more from life, all while helping her father Maurice (Kevin Kline) and avoiding the romantic passes of certifiable egomaniac and Narcissus wannabe Gaston (Luke Evans). When Maurice takes a wrong turn one day and lands at the castle, he picks a rose for Belle and is imprisoned by the Beast for it. Belle eventually comes to take her father’s punishment, but the Beast’s gaggle of talking appliances, led by Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) and Lumière (Ewan McGregor), keep her around—for a while.  When she escapes, wolves surround her, but the Beast saves the day, suffering injury in the process. That’s when Stockholm Syndrome befalls Belle.  Gaston learns of this and eventually leads a charge to kill the Beast (but fails), and the ending is all fairytale happiness.

In this adaptation, Beauty and the Beast succeeds in many areas–yet falls short in a few.  The sets and costumes are exquisitely designed—there could be an Oscar nomination coming Disney’s way next year. There were some issues with the CGI—especially with the wolves and a few of the backgrounds. As for the cast, Stevens’ Beast doesn’t seem quite as angry as his animated counterpart, coming across as more of a tortured soul (he also has a solo that is fantastic). Watson does admirably as Belle, but you can tell from the first song that she can’t quite hit the high notes. To her credit, she does get stronger in her singing as the film progresses. McKellen, McGregor, and Emma Thompson (as Mrs. Potts) are fabulous; Thompson is probably the only person that could give Angela Lansbury a run with her rendition of the theme song. I didn’t quite find Evans’ Gaston to be as convincing–his change from vain leader to exactor of vengeance was too abrupt. There are a few new additions to the film, including the rose Maurice picks at the Beast’s castle, a magic book that acts as a corollary to the magic mirror, a look at Belle’s childhood, and Agathe (I won’t say any more about her).  This adds almost forty-five minutes to director Bill Congdon’s film (it runs 2:09), but I didn’t find myself checking the time as a result.

There’s been a ton of discussion on the Internet and in real life about Josh Gad’s portrayal of LeFou as gay.  As with many other things, speculation is just that—speculation.  In the film, LeFou wants to be on Gaston’s good side, but does act a bit odd at times.  It’s only at the ending battle where anything resembling gay comes into play, thanks to Madame Garderobe (Audra McDonald).  This comes into play (if you want to call it that) as LeFou, in the final dance, spins off from his female partner to a guy.  It’s a blink-and-you-miss-it sequence and really has nothing to do with the overall story.

The themes of sacrifice, love, and restoration come into play quite prominently. However, one early sequence is worth mentioning. Belle asks Maurice about her mom, who describes her as “fearless.” To a large extent, that’s exactly what Belle becomes—both in her determination to protect her father and her belief that something good exists in a hideous horned creature.  In our lives, fear is an attribute that can render the strongest person powerless.  But true love can vanquish fear—the Bible notes this when it says, “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love (1 John 4:18 NIV).”  Obviously, Belle grew up a lot by the time the credits rolled.

Beauty and the Beast has its ups and downs and is definitely worth a visit to the theater with kids in tow. Just don’t expect to have it replace the animated version sitting on your shelf at home.

Beauty and the Beast – Now the Live Action Version

by 1 Comment

“Tale as old as time/ Tune as old as song”

Yes, this is a story that has been told before. Beauty and the Beast is a live action remake of Disney’s 1991 animated (and much beloved) version of the French fairy tale that dates back to at least the 18th Century La Belle et Le Bête. Disney has also presented this as a stage musical. Is it time to tell it again? Does the new format make it a better telling of the story?

In case this oft told story has eluded you, it is a story of discovering the beauty where others only see ugliness. The Prince (Dan Stevens) leads an extravagant life full of parties and expensive trappings, One night an old woman shows up during a party asking for shelter and food, offering only a rose as payment. He ridicules her and turns her out, not knowing she is really an enchantress who places a curse on him and his castle. He is transformed into a hideous beast and his servants transformed into household objects. Unless he can give and receive love before the final petal falls from the enchanted rose, they will stay like this forever.

In town Belle (Emma Watson) has grown up with her widowed father (Kevin Kline). She longs for something more than can be found in her village. She is wooed (in spite of her clear rejection) by the vain and pompous Gaston (Luke Evans). When her father gets lost in the woods and comes across the Beast’s castle, he makes the mistake of picking a single rose to take to Beauty. The Beast locks him up as a thief. When Belle finds him, she takes his place in the cell. The Beast is rude and angry, but over time (and with the help of the talking household objects), the two discover in each other something more than either expected.

This is a film that showcases Disney’s strengths—wonderful production design and CGI effects, plus the music that has served the story well in the previous incarnations (plus three new songs by Alan Menken and Tim Rice). The humor is right for young viewers with just enough more mature comedy for adults to enjoy. The production numbers often involve crowds of people all singing and dancing. This is clearly designed to move to a new level from the stage version. Director Bill Condon wanted to create a musical worthy of the Golden Age of musicals, and also tell the well-loved story with a bit more depth to the characters.

The film’s key message is found in the love story between Belle and the Beast. It teaches that love is found when we are open to one another as Belle and the Beast eventually open themselves to know and be known. But there is also the whole theme of how do we welcome those who are different from us. Failure to do so is what led to the Prince being transformed into the Beast in the first place. For the Prince at the beginning of the film and for Gaston throughout, self-centeredness and failure to see others as something other than to be possessed is the root of the ills of the world. In that, this story could speak to us of how we relate to the world around us that is filled with people who are different from us. Do you judge their value by what that can provide to make us happy—or by the inherent value that all people have in their diversity?

Given that this story is so similar to the earlier film and the stage version, it is worth asking if this really adds to the story. I suspect that is going to be a matter of taste. Some will like all the production values of this version. They’ll love the sets and costumes. They’ll like the CGI characters. But it is also a bit darker and heavier at several places than the animation version. Others may think that this story is much better dealt with through animation. It should be noted that the animated version was seen as ground breaking at the time. It was the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture. Personally, for all the beauty and splendor of this version, the darker tone that comes into play seems a bit much. I think the animated version is the better approach to this story.

Photos courtesy of Walt Disney Studios