ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

Kevin Spacey

Three Reasons Style Matters, According to Baby Driver

by Leave a Comment

you know what matters?

style.

whyzzat?

well, i could tell you
why i think so,
but instead
let me give you
three reasons style matters,
according to the
sleekly-stylish-
yet-(ironically)-
ever-so-serviceable
Baby Driver

ONE – style’s stylish

check out this story:
a bunch of robbers
rob some stuff
and almost get away with it,
but they end up
turning on each other –
as robbers do –
and then one of them
makes it out in the end (kinda)

sounds good, right?

now picture all that again, but
hear:
supercool throwback soundtrack,
see:
sexies like Jon Hamm,
wear:
shades, always shades

(i could go on)

get the point?

same story,
but do it with style –
that elusive,
hard-to-define-
but-you-know-it-
when-you-see-it
*it,*
which Baby Driver
simply ooooozes with –
and everything is
just so much more
. . . stylish . . .
so much more . . .
. . . better

TWO – everything is style

go back to the story above

it’s pretty basic, right?

looking back at some other
Edgar Wright movies,
they’re all kinda that way, right?
Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz,
The World’s End,
all awesome, imo,
(in a lot of people’s o, tbh),
but all generally
formulaic,
got plots you’d see coming,
“work out in the end,” etc. –
all basically basic, yeah?

but this isn’t a negative,
no, this is the point:
at the bottom,
everything is this way –
especially stories –
and there is something
essential and ancient and
meaningful and
not-to-be-missed
about that fact
(i.e. we need to ask
why is it this way?)

well then, what makes
different stories different?
(cuz they do be different)

style.

style:
the different clothes
you put on the
different iterations of the
same body

all these Edgar Wright films
are very different, sure,
but it’s their styles, really,
that make them so –
a zombie flick,
a buddy cop flick,
an apocalypse flick,
a heist flick,
etc. –
while the basicality
of the stories themselves,
of story itself,
remains basically constant

so: everything is the same,
yet,
everything is different,
cuz style;
therefore,
everything is style
(and style is everything)

whoa.

THREE – (good) style wins

so, for the scorekeepers,
so far we’ve meant
“style” as in
that indefinable cool,
and “style” as in
type or kind,
but for this third thing,
we mean “style” as in
the way a person is –
his/her character
or even lifestyle  –
as in “that’s my style”
or “that’s not my style”

in Baby Driver,
it’s not Baby’s style
to kill people;
it’s really not even Baby’s style
to rob people –
he does that cuz
he’s gotta

in other words,
in Baby Driver,
Baby is a good person,
a moral person,
a just person who
tries doing what’s right,
even tho
he sometimes don’t

and this fact allows
Wright to say:
(good) style wins

bad guys get theirs and
good guys get theirs
(though they may need some
lesson learning along the way –
though they might could use some
r   e   d   e   m   p   t   i   o   n
(might couldn’t we all))

(good) style wins

one reaps what
one sows,
(ultimately, eventually)
justice prevails,
yada yada

(good) style wins

cuz good > evil

you know,
(good) style wins – 
that same basic story,
again
(surprise)
(but, again, why?)

so, to sum and say goodbye,
you should do a few things:

  1. check out “Cruising with BABY DRIVER” 
    for even more analytic goodness
  2. stream that supersweet
    Baby Driver soundtrack
  3. see the movie, obv,
    which is excellent,
    so’s you can
    see all these style insights
    in person, yourself, and
    ask those couple “why?” questions
    from above,
    plus other interrelated ones
    that might come
    (like “am i stylish?”
    “what style of the story
    do i be in?”
    “what’s my style
    and do it win?”
    and so on
    and on

3.24 Cruising with BABY DRIVER

by 2 Comments

This week, author Jeffrey Overstreet rolls in to talk with Steve about BABY DRIVER, Edgar Wright’s hit heist film!  This film has it all — action, romance and a fantastic playlist — but is there more to the story?  In a fun conversation, they talk about defining ourselves and what it means to be ‘good’.  Plus, the guys give their surprises of the year (so far) and most anticipated titles to come!

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.

3.24 Baby Driver

A special thanks to Jeffrey for coming on the show!

Toppling the HOUSE OF CARDS

by Leave a Comment

1441974056-house-ofcards

“Look like the innocent flower; but be the serpent under’t” – Lady Macbeth

If you’re late to the game, House of Cards follows the political scandals of Frank Underwood (Kevin Spacey), a presidential WHIP with an incredible lust for power. Dissatisfied with his place in the government structure, Frank and his ferocious wife, Claire (Robin Wright) begin to unravel their elaborate plans to secure their legacy in American history. As each season unfolds, we watch as they willingly manipulate the law (and law makers) and usurp global powers as they attempt to grow and maintain their grip on the US presidency.

In many ways, House of Cards sets itself apart from other White House dramas in it’s tone. Rather than establishing itself as merely sensationalistic or a morality play, Cards usually takes its time to position its players on the chessboard before making their big move. Many have made comparisons to the show feeling more like Shakespeare than Shonda Rhimes, an appraisal that makes the showrunners proud. In many ways, Frank Underwood feels like a modern embodiment of Richard III with Claire often stealing scenes as his Lady Macbeth.

Herein lies the magic of the show. While following the career of a morally corrupt politician is hardly a new concept, there is something unique about Frank that makes him not only likeable but, arguably, even sympathetic (at times). Watching Frank and Claire orchestrate the judicial system as puppet masters becomes almost hypnotic as we are mesmerized by their cunning yet, somehow, even root for their success. (To be honest, I haven’t been so morally conflicted on a series since Breaking Bad as, in both cases, I found myself cheering for the main characters to perform actions that I’d otherwise find reprehensible in reality.)

20140224-cards

This, to me, is the most interesting tension about the show. Like other recent hits like Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones, Cards glorifies the actions of those who do evil and even punishes those who seek to bring them to justice. We want the Underwoods to succeed. The appeal of the darkness is undeniable, because the deeds are evil. It’s the ultimate demonstration of the idea that the ends justify the means (although the ends usually only benefit Frank and Claire). Oh, there is definitely “something rotten in the state of [Washington]” but, every time Frank addresses the audience (a staple of the show), we become more like his accomplices than judges.

Meanwhile, however, there is also a very clear real sense of inevitability within Cards that suggests the question isn’t ‘Can Frank be stopped?’ but rather, ‘When will it happen?’ We have no doubt that Frank’s ‘sins will find [him] out’—and that the fall will be spectacular.

We revel in their rise to power—but anxiously await their destruction.

Watching the Underwoods, I find myself confronted with the resolve of my own moral compass. While we clearly know the right actions to do, how often do we allow ourselves the freedom to bend the rules, simply because it benefits us. No, we’re not Frank or Claire… but somehow, their actions expose something deeply rooted within ourselves. Despite our public façades, we all battle our own darkness and self-interest as we seek to cement our own legacies.

And I’m sure that Shakespeare would agree that that is the greatest tragedy of all.

A_%E2%80%98House_of_Cards%E2%80%99_actor-b6f0f33bd77aa8cf4d13f3818943365b

Season 4 of House of Cards was released on Netflix on March 4th.