Life Sucks (Then a Guardian Angel Shows up to Tell You You're Wrong), Then you Die Happy.

     After viewing two movies, It's a Wonderful Life and The Family Man, I conclude that the two have many some similarities. Some of the similarities are told up-front and some are going to need explaining. Let us begin with The Family Man. (SPOILERS AHEAD!)

     In The Family Man, Jack Campbell is a stock broker at a big firm in NYC and has tons of money. He also has a Ferrari and a fancy apartment. Jack believes that he has everything, but it all changes when he has a run in with a mysterious man at a convenience store. The mysterious man, named Cash, questions Jack on his life views and Jack tells him he is wrong. When Jack falls asleep that same night, he wakes up in a whole other life. His new life has himself married to his college girlfriend Kate, living in a townhouse in New Jersey, working at his father-in-laws tire store, and with two kids. Jack is scared and demands his old life back which he knows Cash took from him, but has to deal with this "Glimpse" of what could have been until he learns his lesson. After awhile, Jack learns to love his new life and wishes it could stay, but Cash has to send him back and when Jack gets back to his old life, he immediately goes to find Kate. Jack and Kate then go out for coffee and begin to rekindle their old relationship.

     This movie teaches you that money isn't everything. Though that is a corny and typical lesson, this movie takes it farther. It says that money is good, but it isn't everything in life. You must also have love and friends and not obsess over your work. Jack told himself that he didn't need Kate and all was good. Wrong! Jack needed Kate because he still loved her. One other thing, Cash. He doesn't say this, but he was an angel. That sounds dumb, but how else do you explain the things he could do? This is the biggest similarity between these two movies and it's the angel that gives the main character's their life "Glimpses". Next film.

     In It's a Wonderful Life, George Baily leads a life of adventure. He plans to go around the world for The National Geographic Society and ends up canceling due to his Father's death. As a result of said death, George takes control of his father's savings & loan building for the local town. Everyone is happy with the work George does and so is George. The job grows and George and eventually he meets Mary. Mary is a girl from George's childhood and she has always loved him. After some rough moments (non-sexual) she and George fall in love and get married. The local Nazi, I mean business man Mr. Potter has been trying to take the savings & loan for years and steps up his game after George starts a family because of the wealth needs George suddenly has. George puts up a good fight but after having some kids, things don't look so good. It's George's Uncle Billy who ruins it all after losing the bank payments. George says to himself "FML" and contemplates suicide. Suddenly, George's guardian angel, Clarence, saves George and shows him what life would be like without him. George sees the error of his ways and goes home. Upon returning home, the town's people lend help with the financial problems of the Baily Family and evryone has a good time.

     This movie teaches you that no matter how bad life seems, you are important to all those who matter in your life in some way. A life without you would be a different place altogether and you are needed for some good reason. Obviously a more powerful message but a important one non the less. This movie is considered The Fmily Man's predecessor and I agree. Both have strong messages and teach you things. I prefer It's a wonderful Life. I prefer it because it has more to it and is deeper in meaning. Plus, it's the original and you can't fight that. I still like The Family Man though so don't get mad.



Merry Christmas and enjoy my picture!

Film and 9/11: Making Sense of it! (conspiracies not included)

     9/11 has always been a terrible tragedy. Many mourned and asked "Why?". Even after more than a decade, people still feel the aftermath (which confuses me because Pearl Harbor was worse and we don't mark that on our calendars every year, but I digress). Two movies that show the effects of 9/11 well are Reign Over Me and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Let's begin with the first one. Spoilers will be everywhere so read at your own risk.

     In Reign Over Me, Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle) is a dentist who tries to help his old collage friend Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler)overcome his unhealthy grief. The grief is caused by Charlie losing his whole family (Wife and 3 Daughters ages 5, 7 and 9) in 9/11. They were passengers on one of the planes that hit.

     Alan begins to rekindle his friendship with Charlie because he needs friends, but starts to see Charlie's problem. Afterwards, Alan does all he can to help him. Charlie's condition however is so bad that whenever you attempt (or Charlie thinks you attempted) to talk about his family or 9/11, he loses it. Charlie proceeds to yell and break things because he doesn't want to talk about his family. He claims to "not remember" in an attempt to push it away. Eventually, Alan's psychologist friend Angela Oakhurst(Liv Tyler)attempt to help Charlie and in time got Charlie to tell his story, to Alan.

     This movie shows a perfect representation of an average 9/11 victim who needs more help that you might think. It shows how outside sources attempt to get involved, and fail. It even gives an example of when they give up and want suicide. Next, another good 9/11 film.

     In Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn) goes on a quest to find the lock that fits a key he found in his father's old belongings. His father, Thomas Schell(Tom Hanks), died in the World Trade Center during 9/11 and Oskar never got over it. When the key was found, however, all that changed. Oskar felt closer to his father that ever after his death because he felt that when he found the matching lock, he will feel closure. Oskar has only the name "Black" to go on for his hunt.

     With the help of an old man known only to Oskar as "The Renter"(Max Von Sydow), who later turns out to be Oskar's Grandfather, Oskar goes on a quest for over 3 months to find the owner but fails. When Oskar does learn of the owner, who was William Black(Jeffrey Wright), Oskar gives him the key but is disappointed beyond relief due to there being no real closure at the end. Oskar does open up to William about some things that bothered him about his father's death (including how Oskar didn't answer the phone when his father called). When Oskar gets home, he is full of sadness over how pointless his quest seemed. Thanks to his mom, Linda Schell(Sandra Bullock), Oskar learned that his mom could do the same cool adventures that he did with his father and that his mom was secretly helping him the whole time.

     In my opinion, both movies were amazing. Both showed great and strong sides of 9/11 and how victims coped with their losses. I liked Reign Over Me more due to it being a little more accurate in showing the typical 9/11 victim and having a slightly more powerful story. Again, my opinion so don't hate. I suggest that you watch both films though. Goodnight Everybody!

WWII and Steven Spielberg: The Points and Meanings from a Great Dude!

     Two of Spielberg's World War Two films, 1941 and Saving Private Ryan, are renowned and convey interesting points with each of them. However, both have totally different points because they are completely different movies but each does a great job of carrying them out. I'll start with 1941 because it is the most out there in terms of Spielberg WWII films and Spielberg film in general. Oh yeah, no Schindler's List today. Sorry!

     In the movie 1941, Spielberg exposes people to the Japanese scare in California during 1941 following the Pearl Harbor attack. Although the scare was real, Spielberg takes a comedic turn with his movie. But, did that make the message muddied and inaccurate? I don't believe it did! I think it exaggerates it to make the message clearer for the viewer. Spielberg exaggerates how Americans acted during that time to show us how we actually damage ourselves during times of fear and crisis almost more than those we are afraid of probably ever could. In real life, people were afraid and were worried that they would be attacked at any moment by Japan when Japan wasn't anywhere near California. In 1941, people feel the same but are represented as freaking out at every little thing and over reacting to all "possible" scenarios. One man turned his family car into a make-shift tank which his wife yells at him for. At a clothing store, two guys play an air raid siren in the bathroom and convince the customers at the store that the Japanese are attacking. Though people didn't do these things in the real life scare, it just goes to show that Spielberg's 1941 can give us a good idea of what we look like when fear takes control.

     (SPOILERS EVERYWHERE!!)In the movie Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg exposes people to an incredibly accurate WW2 Europe experience, starting with D-Day. Spielberg's message with this movie is more heart wrenching and easier to notice. Eight US Army Rangers embark on a priority mission to rescue a lone paratrooper named Pvt. James Francis Ryan. Ryan lost all three of his brothers(two of them in D-Day, one a few weeks before in the Pacific) and has been given a ticket home. (SPOILER!)The Rangers are mad that they have to risk their lives for one man but their Captain assures them that if saving Ryan and sending him home gets he himself[Captain Miller] one step closer to going home then that's his mission. And when they find Ryan(SPOILER!)after the Rangers had lost 2 men, Ryan chooses to stay saying that even though he lost his three brothers he isn't ready to abandon the brothers he has left. That moment is when Spielberg tells you about the strong brotherhood and devotion that came with soldiers in WW2 and how no matter what they didn't ever abandon each other.(SPOILER!) One more thing, as Miller is dying, he tells Ryan "earn this". When Ryan is at the age of about 70, he visits Miller's grave in Arlington and tells him all he has done and shows him his family. (SPOILER!) Ryan's wife asks him about Miller and Ryan responds with a question. He asks if he lived a great life and if he is a good man. His wife responds yes giving Ryan satisfaction that he achieved Miller's final order. Spielberg literally created a meaningful tear jerker with this scene. Ryan fulfilled devoted his life to ensuring that those Rangers didn't die in vain and towards his end, he earned it. The message of this film is that every life counts and another point, which was once said by Private Upham, "Theirs is not to reason why, theirs is but to do or die" (your duty as a soldier).

     Well, that's that. Goodnight everybody, my fingers are a little tired. Not really I am just tired. If I bored you then look at this...

               

Black Directors and White Directors: Same Intention, Different Outcome!

     Movies about race are highly detailed and intended to get the viewer to be moved. Common sense would say, "A movie about African Americans had to have been made by an African Director". That is not true.

     For example, let's look at the movie Glory by Edward Zwick. Zwick is white and the movie is about an all black army regiment, the 54th Massachusetts. The colonel of the regiment is white and it is told through his point of view. The movie touched well on the treatment of blacks in the army and how well of fighters they turned out to be. But would it be a better story if told by a black director?

     In my opinion, it would be different, to an extent. The central focus would likely change depending on the directors ethnicity but the general idea would be the same. It's all about why the movie is being made that sets up how the movie will play out. If you look at Spike Lee's film Do the Right Thing, It looks at the life of a Brooklyn street corner and the people living there. There are racial issues, culture aspects, the lifestyle of the lower class and many other things in the movie. Would it be the same if done by a white director? Possibly, if that director was from Brooklyn. Lee is from Brooklyn and I think that is what made the movie so powerful, not race.

     Race isn't the only thing that determines how a movie can turn out. Where they are from, how were they raised, political views, even gender can play a role on how a movie turns out.

     Anyway the point is this, race can play a role in this area and so can other little details. But, as long as the director has good intentions and motivation to get things right, then the movie will be greatly accurate and just as good at representing whatever it is that is being represented if the other guy had made it.

     Sadly that isn't the case with most Hollywood directors because things end up twisted and inaccurate just for the sake of $money$. I hate people sometimes...