• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Film
  • DVD
  • Editorial
  • About ScreenFish

ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • Reviews
  • Interviews
  • News
  • OtherFish
  • Podcast
  • Give

Jennifer Lawrence

SF Radio 8.13 Distracted from Devastation in DON’T LOOK UP

January 28, 2022 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

It’s the end of the world as we know it… and we feel fine. After all, who needs to worry about global destruction when we’ve got celebrity culture, political division and other things to distract us. This is the premise of Adam McKay’s DON’T LOOK UP which introduces us to two scientists (Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence) who discover that a massive comet is about to plummet towards the Earth… but no one seems to care. This week, the Dream Team of Jolie Featherstone (@TOFilmFiles) and ScreenFish’r Julie Levac reassembles to talk about the things that distract us, misunderstood evil and what we’d do on our last night on Earth.

You can watch the episode on YouTube and stream on podomatic, Alexa (via Stitcher), Spotify, iHeart Radio or Amazon Podcasts! Or, you can downoad the ep on Apple Podcasts!

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.

8.13-Dont-Look-Up

Filed Under: Featured, Film, Podcast Tagged With: Cate Blanchett, Don't Look Up, Jennifer Lawrence, Jonah Hill, Leonardo DiCaprio, Netflix, Tyler Perry

5.19 Unleashing our Inner DARK PHOENIX

June 16, 2019 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

With the release of Dark Phoenix, Fox officially wraps up its X-Men franchise by retconning one of their most famous storylines. After having been exposed to an other-worldly energy, Jean Grey finds herself battling unlimited power and her own inner demons. As Charles Xavier, Magneto and the rest of the X-Men attempt to help her contain her abilities, a mysterious new foe seeks to unleash its full destructive power upon the world. This week, ScreenFish Radio welcomes back returnees Miriam Ibrahim and Matthew Cimone to discuss the legacy of the franchise, what went right (and wrong) with the film and the power of emotion.

You can also stream the episode above on podomatic, Alexa (via Stitcher), Spotify or Soundcloud! Or, you can download the ep on Apple Podcasts or Google Play!

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.

5.19 Dark Phoenix

Filed Under: Film, Podcast Tagged With: Charles Xavier, Dark Phoenix, Game of Thrones, james mcavoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender, X-Men

mother!: A Metaphor for Creation

December 19, 2017 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

Directed by Darren Aronofsky, mother! brings us into the heart of the fractured marriage of Mother (Jennifer Lawrence) and Man (Javier Bardem).  A poet who suffers from writer’s block, Bardem is distant and cold as he sweats over his pages, praying for inspiration.  Meanwhile, as her husband focuses his energy on his work, Lawrence’s Mother invest her time meticulously rebuilding their home after a recent fire burnt it to the ground.  However, when a mysterious visitor arrives in the middle of the night, Bardem invites the stranger into their home (without consulting his bride).  As a result of the invitation, the presence of the visitor (and those that come after) begins to destroy their marriage and, potentially, their home as well.

In mother!, it should be no surprise that Lawrence provides the right mixture of stability and chaos while Bardem appears as menacingly as ever.  Nevertheless, the real visionary behind the narrative is writer/director Darren Aronofsky.  While the marketing would have you believe that the film is a straight up ‘home invasion’ thriller, that’s not entirely true.  As with previous Aronovsky pieces, such as Black Swan and Noah, the film begins using traditional genre tropes and undermines them as the film progresses.  As a result, mother! comes across as more of an art-house piece than blockbuster thriller.  Visually stunning and filled with metaphors from the films first frame to the last, mother! is the type of film that may leave the casual ticket buyer baffled, unless they’re really interested in exploring Aronovsky’s deeper messages.

In many ways, mother! is a natural follow-up to Noah, Aronovsky’s controversial Biblical epic.  Serving as a metaphor for environmental disaster, mother! also delves deeply into spiritual metaphor and man’s relationship with an arrogant God.  As the film unravels, the relationship between Lawrence and Bardem becomes increasingly visual as they explore the religious significance of the apparent priority that God places on humanity over his first love, Creation. While Lawrence obsesses over trying to build her home and keep it beautiful, Bardem’s unnamed character is disinterested in her passions (and personally) as he broods about his inability to create His way.  His love for his fans begins with a welcome of ‘the first family’ and becomes increasingly unreasonable as he constantly defends the actions of those who have come to worship him yet destroy the home in the process.  In other words, unlike the vengeful (and almost random) God of Noah, mother! portrays God as more self-absorbed, feeding off the worship of his followers regardless of their recklessness.  (In fact, in mother!, the viewer begs Bardem to hold the people accountable for their actions, an irony considered that Noah depicts God as unreasonably ruthless.)

As a pastor, I recognize that Aronofsky is addressing some key spiritual questions in the midst of the carnage. Does God care about his creation at all, given that his people do not?  Is his view of worship (which the church acknowledges is to give Him glory) about merely feeding his own ego or something more profound? While Aronofsky speaks of the things of God, he often seems to fall on the more negative side of the conversation (again, see Noah), however, he also shows his interest in exploring the significance of meaning of the Biblical narrative.

But be warned.  mother! is a fierce and unrelenting beast of a Creation metaphor that not only wants you to feel uncomfortable.  It wants you to live there.

Special features include behind-the-scenes looks at the making of the film and the special effects of the makeup.

Filed Under: Film, Film Festivals, Reviews, TIFF Tagged With: Creation, Darren Aronovsky, Ed Harris, environmentalism, Javier Bardem, Jennifer Lawrence, Michelle Pfeiffer, mother!

4.02 The Heart of the mother!

October 22, 2017 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

http://screenfish.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/4.03-mother.mp3

When director Darren Aronofsky releases a film, it’s often bound to court controversy.  Blending an environmental message and Biblical metaphor, mother! instantly divided audiences between those that loathed its excessiveness and those that loved and respected its ambition.  This week, Steve welcomes ScreenFish guppies Ben Dower and Andrew Eaton as they tackle Aronofsky’s complicated vision by discussing its portrayal of God, the meaning of love and… um… Taylor Swift.

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.

4.04 mother!

Thanks Ben and Andrew for coming on the show!

Filed Under: Film, Film Festivals, Podcast, TIFF Tagged With: biblical epic, Darren Aronofsky, Ed Harris, environment, environmentalism, horror, Javier Bardem, Jennifer Lawrence, Michelle Pfeiffer, mother!

Podcast: Surviving the [X-MEN] APOCALYPSE

June 13, 2016 by Steve Norton 1 Comment

xmen-apocalypse-gallery-01

http://screenfish.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2.18-X-Men-Apocalypse.mp3

This week on the show, ScreamFish auteur Jason Norton and newbie Sue Banik join Steve to take on X-MEN: APOCALYPSE! Plus, they face off in the ultimate trivia challenge: the X-Off!

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.

2.17 X-Men Apocalypse

Filed Under: Film, Podcast Tagged With: Apocalypse, james mcavoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender, X-Men

X-Men Apocalypse: Just Let Go

May 30, 2016 by Arnaldo Reyes Leave a Comment

X-MEN-APOCALYPSEThe year of blockbusters continues as FOX offers it’s latest franchise entry into the mix. Although technically a “Marvel” film, the X-Men have long been under the FOX umbrella (thus the reason no crossover with Avengers… yet). After 15 years of the X-men franchise–and depending on whether or not you count Deadpool—X-Men: Apocalypse is either the 8th or 9th film entry into the Fox canon. Over the years, the films have been both up and down in terms of quality. Still, the modern day superhero films owe X-Men (2000) a great deal of thanks in laying the groundwork for today’s films. (Of course, we can all pretend that X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine  don’t exist, can’t we?  After all, Bryan Singer certainly does…)

Even though they’d likely deny it, X-Men: First Class was definitely a reboot to the franchise. Even with its flaws, it was very much welcomed after the two aforementioned disasters. After Days of Future Past (DOFP) scored high praise with both fans and critics, we have received X-Men: Apocalypse, the third film for this particular cast. The films has received mix reviews, ranging from ‘horrible’ to ‘amazing’ but I, however, fall in-between. The film has an interesting story with amazing visuals, but it lacks any depth or character growth. However, if they had taken a little more time in fleshing out the characters (especially the villains), the film could have been really great. Unfortunately, the film ends up being only entertaining with nothing really memorable (outside of their sad attempt to poke fun at their two weakest entries).

X-Men Apocalypse takes place ten years after DOFP and begins with Xavier’s school thriving, Mystique having become a mutant liberating hero and Magneto trying on the life of a family man. Although the world knows about mutants, it is still weary of their power. Some treat them horribly wrong, while others attempt to live in harmony with them. However, an ancient evil arises and begins to leave destruction in his wake . His goal is to rid the world of the weak (mainly humans) and create a new world ruled by him. He recruits four mutants to be his horsemen (think the four horsemen of the Apocalypse) with the most powerful of them being Magneto. From there, the X-Men band together to stop him before he destroys the whole world.

xmen-apocalypse-gallery-06

The Good

As I said, the story is interesting, even if it does carry with it elements of stories done before. Apocalypse is mysterious and powerful. Furthermore, his plan to purge the world because man seems hopeless and needs a savior is parallel with many other stories (most recently Avengers: Age of Ultron). It carries similarities to the Bible where as man is truly hopeless and in need of Jesus to be our Saviour. However, in Scripture, the difference is that God has mercy and grace and died on our behalf so that we could be saved.

weapon x

The visuals again are great, and the slow motion Quicksilver scenes are the highlight of the film (as with DOFP). There is even a Wolverine scene that (almost) fixes what went so horribly wrong in Origins. To finally see the REAL Wolverine on screen and not the watered-down version that has always been done (insert my Wolverine fan bias here, of course) was a sight for sore eyes.

The Bad

Although the movie was interesting with some parts, you still leave the theater without caring about anything that has just happened. If Apocalypse is so strong, why does he need horsemen? There is nothing explained as to why he needs them, nor is his true origin really touched upon or fleshed out. In the comics, Apocalypse is one of the most intimidating foes and, even though he is shown to be powerful, he wasn’t intimidating. Sure, his power was like no other, but his presence was merely… well… ‘meh’. I don’t just want to see him do powerful things, I want to tremble at his sight and fear him. Unfortunately, they really missed the mark in bringing such a powerful foe to life.

jennifer-lawrence-image-x-men-apocalypse

Going back to character growth, there really isn’t any in this film. As a huge X-Men fan, I know my opinion can be biased at times. I love Jennifer Lawrence as an actress, but I am sick and tired of them trying to make Mystique and Magneto good. Let them be fully bad, not just bad when it is convenient to them. She was the focal point of the film in a leadership role and, to be honest, she really sucked at it. She was there, she had the “role”, but that was about it. Personally, I prefer to see the bad Mystique all the way through, not one who is part of the X-Men.

The Ugly

XMen_FourHorsemen_Thumb

I guess Apocalypse could fit here as well but, ultimately, the ugly consists of all the surrounding characters. The Horsemen, Cyclops, Jean, and Nightcrawler were all bad. Their action sequences were  good visually but, as far as fight scenes go, one of the worst I’ve ever seen. The characters themselves were one dimensional and underdeveloped. I ask above why Apocalypse needs horsemen, and with three out of the four he chose, I’m left wondering why. The choice of Magneto makes sense, but what made the others so worthy? They showed nothing that really stood out and screamed “powerful” and, they were weak and outmatched by mere students that had no training whatsover. Again, why do I care about them?

xmen

Speaking of students, Cyclops went from being picked on, to all of a sudden being a rebel, to now being part of the team to stop Apocalypse? Meanwhile, Jean was timid and unsure of herself as she tries to keep her deeper powers (Phoenix) under control and Nightcrawler seems to have been included only to add more CGI. None of these characters actually showed any kind of development, unless you count Jean (by direction of Professor Xavier) finally “letting go”. Is it because she needed to so we can see what scares her, or because we needed to again hint at the failure that was X-Men: The Last Stand? I say the latter.

Just Let Go

Speaking of The Last Stand, where poking fun worked with Deadpool, it seemed out of place in this film. In an attempt to give Hugh Jackman more money, the bad thing about his Weapon X scene is that it served no purpose in the film. The whole idea of Stryker and Weapon X being in the film was absolutely pointless and that time could have been spent in actually developing the key characters of the film. So as I appreciate the attempt, what was the point? And continuing to hammer throughout the film the failure of these two films just leaves one thinking, just let go. This likely was Singer’s last stand, so he left it all out and took his shots on what he was not involved with. But ultimately, FOX needs to come to the same realization that Sony did regarding the Spiderman franchise, just let go. Find a common ground with Marvel Studios and allow them to bring the future X-Men to life within the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

This will benefit all involved, and more importantly, the fans.

Filed Under: Film, Reviews Tagged With: Apocalypse, Bryan Singer, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender, Mystique, X-Men

And the Nominees are… Important?

January 14, 2016 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

The 85th Academy Awards® will air live on Oscar® Sunday, February 24, 2013.
The 85th Academy Awards® will air live on Oscar® Sunday, February 24, 2013.

The announcement of this year’s Academy Awards nominations always brings with it the usual debates.  Who surprised?  (Straight Outta Compton!)  Who got snubbed?  (Ridley Scott!)

Momentum.  Controversy.  Favourite.  Underdog.  Every year, all of these words are used to argue about the Academy’s picks.  In fact, I’m even sure that I’ll address these issues as time draws nearer to the eventual opening of the envelopes.

Though really, the question for the Church today is something different…

“Should we care?”

revenant2

Most people give a resounding ‘No!’ to this issue.  After all, the Oscars is really nothing more than an opportunity for Leonardo DiCaprio, Jennifer Lawrence and Brie Larson to gear up in Versace and Prada and walk the red carpet.  It seems to be frivolous fluff.  (See Globes, Golden) Besides, they haven’t seen the other movies anyways.

As a church, however, I don’t think we should be so quick to tune out.

Although the Academy has always been accused of being ‘out of touch’, the films that win (and are even nominated) demonstrate themselves to be cultural touch points.  Because everything is always a product of its own time, we learn a lot about the worldview and values of our culture from the stories it feels the need to tell.  Films like The Big Short, Mad Max: Fury Road, and The Revenant are films which speak our moment in time (even if they’re not set in it).  For the Church at large to ignore this fact is to miss an opportunity to engage Hollywood on their turf.

Christian Bale plays Michael Burry in The Big Short from Paramount Pictures and Regency Enterprises
Christian Bale plays Michael Burry in The Big Short from Paramount Pictures and Regency Enterprises

Art is a doorway to a culture.  The Apostle Paul knew that and would study the poetry and art of a city upon his arrival.  (Lest we forget the statue to the ‘Unknown god’ in Acts 17)  As Christians, we have been called into our world to speak hope in a relevant manner with humble hearts.  We don’t always like the messages we hear from the cinema–but that doesn’t make them less important.  How can we truly speak the Kingdom of God into a culture if we aren’t willing to listen to them first?  (After all, Karl Barth once said that the best theologians are the ones that “have a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other.”)

At the same time, I also think that the answer to our question about the Oscars can also be ‘No’ as well.  (Though maybe not for the reason you’d expect.)  The truth is that, as important as it is to engage the stories of our dominant culture, it doesn’t hold a candle to the truth of the stories of those in our nearest proximity and community.  In other words, although understanding the theological values inherent within The Martian and Room is a healthy exercise of the mind, the stories that matter most are the ones from the people we know.  To contemporize the Gospel, we must first engage our own world.  The values in our area may be entirely different than those that are revealed in this year’s Oscar race.

room1

Wrestling with the texts of those worthy of even being mentioned with the phrase “Best Picture Nominee” needs to be vital exercise within the church if it is to stay relevant.  Still, we also can’t assume they reflect the views of everyone we know.

And seriously, what does Ridley Scott have to do to get a win for directing?  Not even for Gladiator?  Throw him a bone, people…

martian-gallery3-gallery-image

Filed Under: Current Events, Editorial, News Tagged With: Brie Larson, Jennifer Lawrence, Leonardo DiCaprio, Oscars, Ridley Scott, Room, Straight Outta Compton, The Martian

Trotting on the (Golden) Globes

January 11, 2016 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

golden-globes-2016-ricky-essentiel-series-702x336

Upon the conclusion of last night’s Golden Globes, Oscar season has officially begun.

Run by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (or HFPA), the Globes have become one of Hollywood’s biggest parties. Alcohol flows freely. A-Listers hang out and have some laughs. Big name hosts like Ricky Gervais or Fey and Poehler run an evening more akin to a celebrity roast than an awards ceremony.

It’s got all the glitz and glamour you’d expect from Hollywood.

While stars like Leonardo DiCaprio (!) and Sly Stallone (!!) make room in their trophy case, and The Revenant and The (please don’t call me a comedy) Martian score big wins, suddenly we’re going to be told that these have immediately jumped to the forefront of Best Picture race when the Oscars roll around in a few weeks.

Don’t believe them.

That’s not to say that either of these pictures aren’t a worthy winner – or even a front-runner – but the Golden Globes aren’t necessarily the sure thing that they want you to believe. Even though they draw a substantial television audience and garner attention from some of Hollywood’s biggest and brightest, the HFPA is most guilty of their own sense of self-importance in the awards season shuffle.  (Ricky Gervais even remarked in his opening monologue that the awards were worthless, telling the celebs in attendance that “It’s a little piece of metal that some journalist made so they could take a selfie with you.”)

1895

How do we know?

For starters, the HFPA is a notoriously private non-profit organization whose membership consists only ninety journalists. Yes, you read that correctly: ninety members. That’s less than the average university film class. Or half the available seating at a standard movie theatre. When you compare this number to fact that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences consists of over six thousand members, you get the feeling that the HFPA is not nearly as accurate a gauge on what the arts community believes to be the ‘Best’ of the year.

Furthermore, the strange categorizations of films and actors/actresses doesn’t necessarily indicate that they’ll be loved by the Academy either. Remember when Madonna won Best Actress at the Globes and didn’t even receive an Oscar nod? Or when David Fincher was a lock for The Social Network? Brokeback Mountain, Boyhood, Dreamgirls, Avatar and, yes, The Hangover – all Golden Globe winners of Best Picture that failed to make Oscar’s historical list of winners. (To be fair, the Globes actually have a relatively solid record of picking the eventual Oscar winners in the acting categories but they are far from a guarantee.)

golden-globes-2016-leonardo-dicaprio

While I am actually a full supporter of the Awards season shuffle (look for my editorial on Thursday after this years nominees are announced for my reasons why), the Globes just don’t convince me. They know how to throw a great party and garner attention but, when you get beyond the sizzle, there’s simply no steak. (A great example of this came in 2008 when, as a result of the Writers Guild strike, they opted to strip down the ceremony. Without celebrities or pageantry, their awards were announced from behind a desk—and people barely noticed.)

While it would be completely fair to make this same accusation about other awards ceremonies, the Globes just strike me as particularly empty. Call them what you will but the HFPA appear to carry an overly-inflated view of themselves.

Still, I can’t put too much blame on them.

In truth, the Globes are a product of our own culture and it’s obsession with glamour. In essence, the primary reason they remain prominent in the ratings is because they put on a show of excess. We love to create an idol culture where celebrities maintain importance simply because they’re famous. Memes of Leonardo DiCaprio wincing at Lady Gaga or fashion-shaming the dresses on the red carpet remind us that we think we’re better than they are. Our own pride and sinfulness drives us, not only to create idols, but also place ourselves above them.

So, you see, the problem really isn’t the Globes.

Although I believe it’s fair to celebrate quality art, our natural—read: sinful—tendency is to view ourselves with attitudes as falsely as the Globes themselves. When we humbly acknowledge our own brokenness, it reminds us of the emptiness of a culture of celebrity and allows us to celebrate what is good. Ultimately, that’s what matters most—and what the Globes most lack.

Regardless of who’s hosting.

golden-globes

Filed Under: Current Events, Film, News Tagged With: awards ceremony, Golden Globes, HFPA, Jennifer Lawrence, Leonardo DiCaprio, Oscars, Ricky Gervais, Sylvester Stallone

Primary Sidebar

THE SF NEWS

Get a special look, just for you.

sf podcast

Hot Off the Press

  • 80 for Brady: Silly & Sweet and an Absolute Score
  • Erin’s Guide to Kissing Girls: Fresh Take, Same Quest
  • Knock at the Cabin: Knocking on Heaven’s Door
  • Sundance 2023 – A Still Small Voice
  • Alice, Darling: Toxic Attraction
Find tickets and showtimes on Fandango.

where faith and film are intertwined

film and television carry stories which remind us of the stories God has woven since the beginning of time. come with us on a journey to see where faith and film are intertwined.

Footer

ScreenFish Articles

80 for Brady: Silly & Sweet and an Absolute Score

Erin’s Guide to Kissing Girls: Fresh Take, Same Quest

  • About ScreenFish
  • Privacy Policy

© 2023 · ScreenFish.net · Built by Aaron Lee

 

Loading Comments...