ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

morality

Recon – Moral Questions of War

by Leave a Comment

“I have had enough.”

How should we think of war? Is it a romantic, idealized story of heroics? Is it hell, as General Sherman said? Do we accept that “all’s fair” in war? Are there rules of morality that we must follow to maintain our humanity? Recon, written and directed by Rob Port, uses a real event in World War II to ask some of these questions. It is interesting that the film is being brought out for Veterans Day, a day we celebrate the military. While the film is not anti-military, is certainly has a perspective that war is a morally troublesome experience.

The film follows four soldiers as they climb an Italian mountain in search of German soldiers. They are being led by an Italian man who claims to be a partisan, but they are never sure of his real loyalties. The four are haunted, to varying degrees, by having seen their sergeant murder a civilian woman. As they make their way up the mountain with the dangers of landmines and snipers, they speak of life and death, of war and justice, of right and wrong.

They are a diverse group—liberal, racist, Jewish, Catholic, different educational levels, different backgrounds. Their perspectives on the murder range widely as well. At times, their differences threaten to bring them to violence. Only their taciturn leader, Corporal Marson, manages to keep them on focus and working together. The constant danger the squad faces as it seeks the enemy and then must find its way back home give the film a familiar war film tension.

This is not just a celebration of bravery—although there is that aspect as we see these soldiers carry out their mission. It also dives into the questions about the nature of war. It is not just the murder of a civilian that is at issue. These soldiers must also make decisions of life and death. They cannot just turn off their morality or their spiritual life. To kill another human is not an inconsequential occurrence. It leaves a spiritual mark. Perhaps some people can live with that, but not everyone. This film highlights the spiritual and emotional injuries that war brings as well as the physical costs.

As the story plays out, eventually Marson will have to decide just what kind of person he is. Can he kill just because it is war, or must he respond as a human—and as a Christian. That choice will have an almost karmic effect when we read the title card post script to the film.

From the times of the early church, war was seen as problematic. Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas both spoke of Just War—a recognition that war is inherently evil, but at times necessary. There may be questions whether modern weapons and technology make Just War possible. Part of Just War theory is not only the justice of the cause, but also the justice and morality of how war is carried out. Recon taps into that tradition of thinking of war.

Recon show through Fathom Events on November 10 and releases in limited theaters November 13.

Photos courtesy of Brainstorm Media.

Get Re-Enchanted: Stranger Things 2, Pop Culture & God

by Leave a Comment


i am
*so* psyched
for Stranger Things 2

like, *psyched* psyched

i want more mystery,
more stylish 80s homage,
more dope soundtrack,
way more Eleven;
i want #justiceforbarb,
Eggos ate raw,
Winona Ryder everything,
coffee and contemplation

honestly, who can deny
that the whole
Stranger Things thing –
like much of what
it lovingly calls back to –
is one of those
oh so pleasant
serendipitous revelations;
one of those things where,
now that it’s happened,
you can no longer imagine
the pop landscape
without it

however,
(serendipity be damned),
why?

why such a strong reaction
to Stranger Things,
by so many,
seemingly
“out of nowhere”
?

i thought
Alissa Wilkinson
(in a Christianity Today
article called
“How ‘Stranger Things’
Re-Enchants the World”)
was onto an answer:

In a modern world—where science can explain everything from depression to deja vu to the Aurora Borealis… even religious folk yearn for a re-enchanted world, one where fairies, or demons, or other intelligences exist just beyond what we can see.

What we’re after is joy—the serendipity of discovery, the thrill of mystery, the feeling of excitement lurking around the corner…

Our desire for magic doesn’t let up… art still seems best poised to capture that magic. Stranger Things is just the latest version of this yearning…

agreed for sure:
part of the draw,
the allure
of Stranger Things,
is that it sort of
re-imbues the world
with a magic,
a mystery,
an enchantment;
Stranger Things
takes the “regular world”
and adds the “upside down” –
takes plain old “things”
and makes them “stranger”
(again)

so is that it?
Stranger Things
speaks to us so
cuz it’s a reminder that
“there’s more to things
than meets the eye”
?
and cuz the experience
of that is… fun?

no, that’s not (just) it

as Wilkinson notes,
the show is
“the latest version
of this yearning
[for magic];”
Stranger Things is also
powerful precisely
because it participates
in this long line of
pop culture manifestations
of a specific
human yearning

what yearning,
specifically?

a yearning not only for magic –
read: the supernatural –
but for a universe
*built* with and on magic;
a magical universe
that not only
brings “joy,”
but makes possible
an explanatory
and existential
completeness
that an un-strange,
mundane,
materialistic,
naturalistic universe of
pure scientism
actually *cannot*

a yearning, in other words,
for a universe of meaning

what meaning?

literally *any* meaning

for in an un-strange,
mundane,
materialistic,
naturalistic universe of
pure scientism,
science is the only
game in town;
but though science excels
at explaining the “how”
of things,
it is exceedingly bad
at explaining the “why;”
in fact, science
does not,
*cannot*
speak the language of “why”
at all, and therefore
cannot lend meaning
in the sense we mean

you need things to be a bit…
stranger…
for that kind of meaning;
you need a magic universe
of possibilities
for that kind of meaning;
for that kind of meaning,
you need
a universe with a God

once you have that,
magic and the
possibility of
knowing the
“why” of things
reappear,
along with all
our dearest, deepest meanings –
good is better than evil,
love defeats hate,
sacrifice overcomes greed –
the narratives
we inescapably spin
to demonstrate
those meanings,
and the pop avatars
we create to animate
those narratives…
Stranger Things,
thankfully,
awesomely,
 among them

(for some related
ideas about narratives,
see “What IT Means
(and How *Any* Good Story ‘Means’)”)

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

Censored Voices: In the Fog of the Six Day War

by Leave a Comment

“We may not do the best service to what’s called ‘national morale,’ but we’ll do a small service to the truth.”

In 1967 Egypt, Jordan, and Syria made plans to annihilate Israel. When the dust cleared, Israel not only successfully defended itself, it captured the Sinai Peninsula, the Golan Heights, and what are now the occupied territories of the West Bank. The Six Day War continues to have impact on Israel and the Middle East. But what did it mean for the soldiers who fought the war? Censored Voices lets us hear the stories and voices of some of those soldiers.

CV_5

Just a week after the war ended, Amos Oz and Avraham Shapira began interviewing some of those soldiers. They wanted to know, “not what they did, but what they felt.” They traveled to various kibbutzim with a tape recorder. The soldiers were very open with their memories and their emotions. The Israeli Defense Forces censored most of the tapes for many years, but this film allows us to hear them and reflect ourselves on what happens in wars and to the people who must fight them. The words of the soldiers play while various bits of archival footage serve as background. At times we see the now much older men who related their stories listening to the tapes and hearing them tell their stories again.

CV_8

While the film is focused on the Six Day War, this is film is universal. Many of the things the soldiers talk about are not specific to that war or that nation. These are the kinds of issues that are intrinsic to war in all its violence and ugliness. It is important to note how soon after the fighting these tapes were made. Memories soften and change over time. Here we hear the voices of those whose emotional and spiritual wounds have not yet healed.

While there are many issues that come up in these interviews, a few I found especially interesting. The first is how, for one soldier, a shift took place. He had always viewed Israel as a David or like the Maccabees, small and overwhelmed, but righteous. By the end of the war, he understood that Israel was the true power in the region. That brings a whole new worldview.

The moral disconnect the soldiers experienced is one of the universal aspects for soldiers in war. Even when a war is justified, soldiers must do terrible things—and often do them even when it is not needed. One of the soldiers tells us, “All of us . . ., we’re not murderers. In the war we became murderers.” He is referring not just to killing in battle, but to killings involving prisoners and civilians. Even those who faced no physical injuries suffered important moral injuries.

CV_2

As one soldier recounts emptying out Palestinian villages and forcing people into refugee camps, he equated what was happening with the Shoah. For a Jewish soldier to view what he is doing in light of the Holocaust is a very powerful concept that must be heard.

This is a much different history than many of us have heard of the Six Day War and Israel’s place in the region. They continue to hold the West Bank and have expanded into it. They continue to be an occupying army (that is the term the soldiers used even right after the war). The legacy of that war lives in the geopolitics of the 21st Century. These voices of soldiers from decades ago also serve as an important legacy to their nation and to the world. Censored Voices reminds us of the moral and spiritual costs of war—especially on those who must take part in them.

Photos courtesy Music Box Films