ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

Sam Rockwell

Richard Jewell: The End of the Innocence

by Leave a Comment

They’re a common sight around malls, retail stores, and companies these days. They help make sure things go smoothly yet are often ignored or make fun of. Of course, I’m referring to the humble security guard.

Perhaps the most infamous of all security personnel in the past 25 years has to be Richard Jewell. For the younger generation, his name is not one that will likely register as important. Director Clint Eastwood wants to change that with his latest film Richard Jewell. It is a tale of heroism, woe, and frustration that will reward the patient filmgoer and serves as a reminder of life before the world’s innocence was shattered one fateful evening.

Richard Jewell (Paul Walter Hauser) was a rather portly individual who lived in the Atlanta area and had a dream of getting into law enforcement. He was good with guns, extremely good at remembering things, but absolutely lousy in people to people relationships. His track record wasn’t the best either, partially due to the people he was trying to protect making fun of or simply ignoring him.

At the opening of the film, Jewell’s trying to make ends meet as a supply clerk in a law firm. He encounters Watson Bryant (Sam Rockwell), a no-nonsense lawyer who doesn’t take anything from anyone, including elected officials. The two briefly get to know each other over candy bars and a discussion in a video arcade before Jewell takes another job, this time as security detail at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta. There, he helps protect a music venue inside Centennial Park, the hub of action outside the sporting venues.

All is well for the first few concerts until one fateful evening when Jewell spots a suspicious backpack under a bench near the sound and lighting tower. He calls the police over to check (this is an international event, after all) and begins getting people out of the way. Suddenly the backpack explodes, raining fire and shrapnel throughout the park. Two people were killed and over 100 injured, transforming the capital city of Georgia instantaneously. Jewell goes home that evening, content that he helped keep the situation from being significantly worse.

The next day, he discovers that his observation and quick thinking has won him fame in the eyes of the world. People want to talk to him on television, people cheer when they see him, and he becomes an instant celebrity. Meanwhile, the FBI begins to look into who planted the backpack and called 911 with a warning about the bomb. They don’t have any real leads, but after acquiring information from Jewell’s past, they suddenly begin to think he was the culprit, doing it for fame and notoriety. With that, Richard’s quiet lifestyle (he lives in an apartment building with his mother [played by the always excellent Kathy Bates]) is completely shattered as the FBI does everything possible to make him the world’s biggest enemy.

Usually such situations are kept fairly quiet. However, Kathy Scruggs, a rather arrogant and pushy reporter from the Atlanta Journal newspaper (played with realistic smarminess by Olivia Wilde) is able to coerce one of the FBI detectives to inform her who they’re going after. They have a paper to print, you know. When she finds out, she makes the FBI’s intentions known to the world. 

Cue circus music.

Jewell suddenly cannot move more than 15 feet without a reporter yelling questions at him or hearing the shutters of cameras go off. He doesn’t know what to do. At this point, he reaches for the one person who might be able to help him–the lawyer he stocked with candy bars a few months earlier. Since then, Watson Bryant has gone into his own practice and decides to help the poor guy out. The question is whether the mass of humanity descending on Jewell or the FBI will destroy him first. 

Richard Jewell is a film that, for me, hit very close to home. You see, I was at Centennial Park a few hours before the bomb exploded. I played in the fountains and snapped a few 35mm pictures before heading back to South Carolina. That night, my friends and I huddled around a television set, aghast at the video news outlets were showing of the aftermath and thankful to God that we left when we did. I also distinctly remember the media’s evisceration of Jewell and how he was made to look like had the whole bombing planned (in reality, Eric Rudolph confessed to it a few months later). I remember feeling sorry for the guy but had no idea how much his life changed as a result of the FBI and media. Of course, the film shows Jewell as an avid owner of guns and is extremely knowledgeable about security–things the FBI used against him. Bryant tells him to not say anything, but he keeps talking (since he’s so big into law enforcement), making things worse on everyone around him. It’s only after he realizes how the ordeal has hurt his mother that he finally gets the nerve to confront the FBI directly. 

As for the film itself, it’s very good and has some incredible acting. Bates was nominated for a Golden Globe recently for her role as Jewell’s mom Bobi. Hauser and Rockwell are great in their individual roles but magical when they share the screen. You see and feel their relationship build, change, and eventually transform each other. Munn seems to me to be the weak link, but after giving it some thought, she adds a necessary layer to transform the film from ho-hum to must-see. And this is a film that deserves to be seen and its voice heard for past, present, and future generations. 

That evening in Centennial Park, anyone off the street could walk in–there were police around, but no layer of security other than presence. One week later, I returned to Atlanta to see a handball match and found a completely different city. There was a feeling of nervousness everywhere. Security was beefed up considerably. In fact, in order to visit the park again, I had to go through two separate bag checks. The innocence was gone, never to be reclaimed again. 

At one point on this planet, there was innocence and no need for protection. Adam and Eve were sinless at first, having their pick of whatever they wanted to do and to eat. Sure, God warned them not to eat from one specific tree, but there was no security guard around for enforcement. When they finally gave in and tasted of the forbidden fruit, things changed. The innocence was lost. God, after a stern lecture, kicked them out of Eden–and added security detail in the form of a flaming sword so they could never get in again. Sin is costly, but it doesn’t have to rule in us thanks to Jesus and his birth, life, death, and return to life once more. He’s ready to forgive all those who call on him to do so.

Make sure you put Richard Jewell on your must-see list this year. It’s thrilling, harrowing, and a sobering reminder of innocence lost–both individually and as a society.

Special features include both “The Real Story of Richard Jewell” and “The Making of Richard Jewell” with many of the principles (Eastwood, Hamm, Rockwell, Bates, etc.) included.

6.06 Laughing at History in JOJO RABBIT

by Leave a Comment

This week, Paul and Julie Levac gather to take on JOJO RABBIT, a film which allows director Taika Waititi to bring his brilliant art to the big screen in a stunning satire that will have you howling and shedding a tear in the same sitting.

Jojo Betzler is determined to fight for his country, confident in the support of his imaginary friend, Adolf Hitler. When he discovers a Jewish girl hiding is his house, he is faced with a dillema. As he slowly builds a tolerance for the girl, and together with the lessons of an exceptional matriarch, Jojo begins to realize that perhaps his fanatical views of the Fuehrer and Nazis are not what they used to be.

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!

Best of Enemies- A Conversion Story

by Leave a Comment

“Non silba sed anthar (not for self, but for others)” [Ku Klux Klan motto]

Based on a true story, Best of Enemies tells the story of Durham, NC, in 1971. When a school for blacks has a fire, the students need to be moved. But where, to a white school? That certainly gets everyone’s attention. To stall, a judge begins a charrette process to determine the community’s desires. The man brought in to oversee the process asks black community organizer Ann Atwater (Taraji P. Henson) and C.P. Ellis (Sam Rockwell), the head of the local KKK, to serve as co-chairs of the group. The only thing they hold in common is animosity towards each other.

Civil rights and school desegregation are the backdrop for this story of a conversion experience. It is clear throughout the story (because we know the history) what the right answers will be for this civic process. And we know throughout that the only way it will turn out right is for C.P. to have a change of heart along the way. But the story is told in such a way to make that change of heart more understandable than we might think.

One aspect of the story is how the KKK is portrayed. Granted, it is made up of racists who will do whatever they can to stand in the way of equality between the races. In fact, one of the key arguments given to C.P. for accepting the co-chair position is “He’s about to hand you the keys to school integration, and you’re going to lock the door.” And the film does acknowledge the Klan’s violence. But most of what we see of the Klan is not that far off from any other civic club. They have meetings, give awards, pray. And there is that motto: Not for self, but for others. The men of the KKK in this film believe they are acting for the good of their community. It may be that they have a severely flawed understanding of the good, but that is their motivation.

For C.P., as we hear in a voiceover as the film opens, he found his true home in the KKK. It forms his self-identity. He firmly holds that the mixing of races will only destroy society. How can such a man make the kind of shift that this plot requires? The words used often in Christian history are “conversion” and “repentance”. And it is C.P.’s journey on that road that makes up this story. Of course, he has help along the way. That help falls into the category of Magical Negro. And although Ann serves a bit of that role, we should really see the entire African-American community as taking on that role for this film. I should say I’m always a bit suspicious of Magical Negro films, because they have a tendency to fit people into race specific roles that do not always serve as anti-racist. This film moderates that somewhat, but not entirely.

Given the current resurgence in racism worldwide, and especially the increase in visibility of the Klan and other white supremacist groups in the U.S., This film serves as a reminder of our past racist society and allows us to reflect on just how much of that racism continues to permeate and pollute the society we could become. It could also serve, for “those who have an ear to hear”, as a call to repentance and encouragement towards conversion and finding a new, more inclusive life and world.

Photos courtesy of STX Entertainment

Vice – Humble Servant to Power

by Leave a Comment

John Nance Garner (one of FDR’s Vice Presidents) observed that the Vice Presidency “is not worth a bucket of warm spit.” But that was different when Dick Cheney became Vice President. Cheney seemed to many to be the real power during George W. Bush’s presidency (at least the early years). Adam McKay’s Vice is a wide-ranging, sometimes satirical, sometimes cynical, sometimes funny, sometimes deadly serious, sometimes factual, sometimes imagined biopic of Cheney. It is by no means free of prejudice (many might call it ‘liberal spin’), but even with that understanding, it raises important questions for us to consider about how power is used by some.

The story follows Cheney (Christian Bale, in a superb performance) and his wife Lynne (Amy Adams, also great here) from his “ne’er-do-well” or “dirtbag” days after flunking out of Yale to being perhaps the most powerful man in the world. The terms “power” and “opportunity” come up frequently in the first part of the film.  It should be noted that if we think of Cheney as the power behind the throne, this film portrays Lynne as the power behind the power. As a woman, she knew that the road to power was not open to her at that time. Instead, she formed Dick into the one through whom she would access power.

Christian Bale (left) stars as Dick Cheney and Amy Adams (right) stars as Lynne Cheney in Adam McKay’s VICE, an Annapurna Pictures release. Credit : Matt Kennedy / Annapurna Pictures.2018 © Annapurna Pictures, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

As Cheney progresses up the ladder of success, there are many of those moments that he sees as a key opportunity to enhance his power, beginning with interning with then Congressman Donald Rumsfeld (Steve Carrell), who becomes a mentor. It moves through his own congressional career and into his time in the White House and Defense Department, before heading to the private sector before he found his way to become George W. Bush’s (Sam Rockwell) Vice President. It also shows how Cheney took the opportunity (there that is again) to fill the Bush White House with his people.

Christian Bale (left) as Dick Cheney and Steve Carell (right) as Donald Rumsfeld in Adam McKay’s VICE, an Annapurna Pictures release. Credit : Annapurna Pictures 2018 © Annapurna Pictures, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

McKay has put together a film that constantly surprises us. While much of the film follows the basic plot, there are some twists in the way that the story is told. For example, in one scene the Cheneys have an iambic pentameter pillow-talk discussion of the possibilities of power that would have made Shakespeare jealous. And there are times when a narrator (Jesse Plemons) breaks the fourth wall to speak directly to the audience to add some commentary or teach us about certain concepts such as Unitary Executive Theory. (The narrator’s relationship to the story is kept secret until near the end.) At one point, McKay creates a happy ending and starts rolling credits, but the film is only half done at that point. Through all this there are edited in some scenes of fly fishing (Cheney is an avid fisherman), which seem to symbolize the way he would lure people into a situation and then reel in the power. (And be sure to check out the flies that accompany the credits at the film’s end.)

So what kind of picture does this paint of Cheney (and others in the story)? Is it a political hatchet job? My thought is that for the most part the film portrays Cheney as a generally sympathetic person. He is a good family man. When his daughter comes out as gay, his response is to affirm his love for her. And before accepting to run for Veep, he makes it clear that he won’t run against LGBT rights. (Although later, when his other daughter is running for Congress, that position is set aside in the struggle to win.)

Jesse Plemons as Kurt in Adam McKay’s VICE, an Annapurna Pictures release. Credit : Annapurna Pictures 2018 © Annapurna Pictures, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

But even though he is treated sympathetically, we also see him as willing to do what is needed to achieve more power. Early on, he makes the statement that he would be a “humble servant to power”. We never see any evidence that he serves anyone or anything other than that. (The story of the temptation of Jesus may be applicable here.)

Christian Bale as Dick Cheney in Adam McKay’s VICE, an Annapurna Pictures release. Credit : Annapurna Pictures 2018 © Annapurna Pictures, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

And when we consider some of the policies that Cheney advanced, we may find that the film serves as a shibboleth that defines orthodoxy of either the right or the left, giving insight into our own understanding of what we want from our leaders. Do we want a strong leader who will never apologize for what they have done? Do we support the kinds of things done in the aftermath of 9/11? We continue to be divided on such issues. I suspect that some who watch this film will have a very different take on it than I did. I think that is especially true when we consider the final scene, as Cheney is doing a TV interview and himself breaks the fourth wall to turn to us and deliver a final aside.

As to the idea that this is a liberal political hatchet job, the film itself addresses that in a coda (another reason to stay for the credits) that explicitly makes that charge. Here too I think there is a bit of a chance for each viewer to think of their own reaction to the film and to the political situation it speaks to.

4.10 Anger, Loss and Grace in THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI

by Leave a Comment

With the release of this week’s Oscar nominations, THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI cemented itself as an Oscar favourite with multiple nominations. Starring Francis McDormand and Sam Rockwell, BILLBOARDS is an intense drama (or is it a comedy?) and Steve welcomes back Shelley McVea to discuss the film’s interest in loss, anger and the power of grace. PLUS, they give their thoughts on the snubs and surprises of this year’s Oscars!

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.

4.10 Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Thanks Shelley for joining us!

For those of you in Canada who are interested, you can donate to ScreenFish by clicking the link below and simply selecting ‘ScreenFish’ from the ‘Apply Your Donation…’ area. 

https://www.canadahelps.org/en/charities/connect-city/

Mr. Right: Looking Too Hard

by Leave a Comment

_V0A7083.dng

Written by Max Landis (Chronicle, American Ultra), Mr. Right takes audiences places that films like Killers or Grosse Point Blank went before: into the heart of the rom-com, only this time, there are assassins.

Playing on Anna Kendrick’s good girl persona, the film follows Martha, as she rebounds from an unfaithful boyfriend into the arms of Francis (Rockwell). Somehow, Francis had a mental break, left the assassination business and ended up killing off those who hire him to kill other people … because killing isn’t right. Now, on the run from the government and various baddies, the two star-crossed lovers attempt to figure out how to make their relationship work while not ending up dead first.

Rockwell and Kendrick have chemistry, and Tim Roth is funny as a CIA agent who is on Francis’ trail. But outside of the relationship that seems doomed and some witty one-liners, the rest of Landis’ script suffers. We kinda sorta want the relationship to work, but Martha hasn’t proved to be that lovable, and we simply don’t know much about Francis other than that he kills people! Our protagonists simply don’t have enough substance to keep a rote plot moving forward.

In the end, it’s a nature versus nurture showdown. Will Francis be able to save them? Will love win? Or will Martha and Francis’ relationship be more cannon fodder on the altar of puppy love?

 

 

Don Verdean: A Spoof of Biblical Proportions

by Leave a Comment

Don Verdean_1.186.1.T

“From the minds who brought you Napoleon Dynamite and Nacho Libre…”

That should tell you enough as you watch a film about what happens when an archaeologist runs out of real Biblical artifacts to hunt for and starts making them up. Sam Rockwell stars as the digger-turned-gravedigger Don Verdean, while Flight of the Concords’ Jemaine Clement serves as his Israeli partner-in-crime Boaz. With a host of quirky characters, Don Verdean tries to shine a light on the way that we allow ourselves to be misguided and misused by false beliefs.

Verdean feels pressure when Danny McBride’s (Eastbound and Down) Tony Lazarus wants to pay big bucks for Verdean to find impossible artifacts; when Verdean and Boaz turn to the offered finances of Asian billionaire Poon-Yen (Steve Park), it takes their faith and works in a way they never intended to go when they started, highlighting the slippery slope of “pay for pray.” But Verdean’s secretary, Carol (Amy Ryan), provides some balance in this world of quirkiness – she believes Verdean is better than he really is.

Don Verdean isn’t great, but it does highlight a problem in the way that church and archaeology work together. How do we link ourselves to believing in certain pieces of dirt and clay to prove (or disprove) something about our faith? I’ll always remember being asked in seminary what it would do to my faith if they discovered the bones of Jesus. I ultimately decided my answer was “nothing,” for several reasons, but not everyone can answer the question in the same way.

The truth is that Don Verdean raises several questions without providing any answers, but that’s not its intent. It will still make you consider the possibilities. You just have to decide if this is closer to Saved or The Apostle…

 

Don Verdean: Digging Satire

by Leave a Comment

Don Verdean_1.186.1.T“I just wanted to give people a reason to believe.”

In Don Verdean an archaeologist and dueling pastors seem to be trying to find ways to bolster people’s faith, but it all finally boils down to feeding their own egos. We have to keep in mind this is very broad satire from Jared and Jerusha Hess, the creative team behind Napoleon Dynamite and Nacho Libre. Here, the satire centers on that facet of religion that is so open to criticism because they focus not so much on the message as they do on trying to prove themselves.

2D4A4832

Don Verdean (Sam Rockwell) is an itinerant, and for the most part untrained archaeologist who goes around to churches with his admiring assistant Carol (Amy Ryan) showing his discoveries and selling his book. He connects with flashy pastor Tony Lazarus (Danny McBride) who commissions him to find Goliath’s skull. Don fabricates the discovery, but Tony is pleased to have something that will bring people flocking to his church. Tony’s rival, Pastor Fontaine (Will Forte), begins to create doubt in the discovery, but by then Don is after “the Holy Grail of biblical artifacts”—which is, of course, the Holy Grail. When a Chinese billionaire gets involved, Don again begins making things up.

2D4A4927

The character Don Verdean doesn’t seem quite fleshed out. His goal really does seem to offer people something to believe in, yet he is so morally weak that he really only gives us more reason to doubt the truth he wants us to believe. Don’s weakness is a terrible flaw, but we may be willing to forgive that weakness when we compare him to the two pastors in the story who for all their religious platitudes are really all about self-aggrandizement. It is this that the filmmakers use for the basis of the satire in the film.

While I agree that there are many charlatans in the religious world, these are just a bit too easy to make fun of. Those who seek to bring others to faith, whether pastors or lay, have their own sets of frailties. While those flaws may seem to negate the very message they bring, sometimes they may become examples of grace. There is a sense in which the film tries to do that with Don’s shortcomings, but it doesn’t quite get there.