Archive for Uncategorized

Putting Away Childish Things

December 28, 2011 at 2:29 pm · Filed under Books, Fiction, Science & Spirituality, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Putting Away Childish Things

Putting Away Childish Things: a tale of modern faith

Marcus J Borg

Marcus J Borg; author of Reading the Bible for the First Time, Again and Meeting Jesus for the First Time, Again and a host of other works of popular theology has turned his hand to writing fiction.  This isn’t any old fiction, either; it is didactic fiction; a thinly-veiled attempt on the author’s part to promote his own theological perspective.

Not that there’s anything underhand or sleekit about this literary form.  The author is completely upfront and transparent about this.  He even provides suggestions for reading groups in an appendix which offers questions for readers to discuss among themselves.  That impressed me greatly, as the author has deftly managed to smuggle a lot of deep stuff into this compelling novel.

Professor Kate Riley is a popular religion teacher in a college somewhere in the American Midwest.  Her students love her classes. She loves her work, she is happy with both her personal and her spiritual life and she has had some success with a couple of her books; a scholarly look at the Epistle of James and a new one examining the differences between the two Christmas narratives in Matthew and Luke’s gospels.

It’s just in the middle of Advent that things start to go off the rails for Kate.  Her publisher has set up a number of interviews with radio stations up and around the country in order to promote her book.  These question and answer sessions introduce the reader to Kate’s liberal Christian perspective, but she falls foul of a husband and wife tag team on a Christian talk radio show, Rise and Shine, who accuse her of seeking to ‘debunk the truth about Jesus’.

Before long, she is named as Number One Un-American of the Week by an inflammatory pundit on a conservative network for ‘a secular humanist apology of a book’ that trashes ‘one of the most sacred parts of our country’s Christian heritage… at Christmas, of all times.’

Ironically at the same time Kate is beset with another problem.  One of her colleagues on the college faculty is a bit sniffy about her latest book. It’s too popular and too Christian.  He is one of those illiberal ‘liberals’ we all know; the kind who don’t want to see others doing things of which they disapprove.  This man notes that she attends church regularly and claims that this could be interfering with her teaching of religion in the college. She is condemned, not for what she actually does, but what she could do.  The reader gets to sit in on Kate’s classes and her one-to-one sessions with individual students, so we know that it ain’t so.

In the midst of all this, Kate receives an invitation to teach in a seminary as a visiting professor of New Testament Studies for a year. Conflicted and confused by the reaction of her colleagues and an organised campaign by some parent to deny her tenure at the college, Kate finds her faith coming under pressure as she wrestles with the possibilities in front of her.

As the story develops, we get to meet some other characters; Geoff,  her gay colleague on the faculty and her soulmate and confidant (every girl should have one); Frederika her minister; Martin, a professor at the seminary in question, her mentor and one-time lover (a long time ago) and Erin, a student who is a member of a conservative evangelical group on campus.

I rather suspect that any reader of this book will come with their own personal baggage, or to mix the metaphor, may read it through lenses tinted by the events and understandings of their own lives, I really identified with Erin in this story as she struggled with her faith when what she had been taught to believe came into conflict with the real world of flesh and blood human beings.

This is stirring stuff. Borg is didactic but it’s anything but preachy. I hope there’ll be a sequel. Borg introduces readers to some wonderful stuff too, as Kate goes through her daily devotions and her lectures. Not only are we treated to Matthew Arnold’s Dover Beach but to a moving poem by Denise Levertov called The Avowal.  This is so powerful that it reduced me to tears.  Here it is…

As swimmers dare

To lie face to the sky

And water bears them,

As hawks rest upon air

And air sustains them;

So I would learn to attain

Freefall, and float

Into Creator Spirit’s deep embrace,

Knowing no effort earns

That all-surrounding grace.

Leave a Comment

DEVIL IN THE DETAIL

August 11, 2011 at 10:38 am · Filed under Drama, Edinburgh Fringe Festival, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , ,

DEVIL IN THE DETAIL

Meta Morpho

Zoo Roxy, Venue 115, Roxburgh Place

WHAT on earth is going on here?  That was my reaction when this play opened.  This was a puppet show, for goodness sake.  I don’t like puppets, except maybe Captain Scarlet and Thunderbirds when I was a child.  However, any initial bafflement melted away as things began to make sense.

Devil in the Detail has live actors in huge masks, a bit like the Tweenies, but this story is not for children. There is no dialogue. Changes of mood. Changes of pace.  All the performances are led by the musical soundtrack.

The action unfolds like an old Brian Rix Whitehall farce -as adapted by Quentin Tarantino or the Coen Brothers, with opening and closing doors and characters just missing one-another.  Two tenants, a crooked accountant who is skimming money off a sexy gangster and a dozy night security man, both rent the same flat from a dodgy landlady and her shopaholic daughter. Neither one knows about the other. It’s great knockabout stuff.  Look out for a runaway snake, a barking dog, murder and mayhem in this riot of fun.

Reviewed by David Kerr

**** Four Stars

www.metamorpho.co.uk

Leave a Comment

GUTTER JUNKY

August 11, 2011 at 10:24 am · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , , ,

GUTTER JUNKY

Presented by Dream Epic and Salida Productions

 

GOD alone knows what the title means, It’s not important. This fast-moving, hard-hitting play has much to say about the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

Harry, an enthusiastic young, naïve writer bunks up with  Bill, a jaded, washed out old hand – a friend of a friend in the chief city of a strategic South American city on the verge of revolution.  Within a few weeks, however, he has become single-minded enough in pursuit of his story to go into the south of the country and ‘rescue’a girl from the unfolding chaos.

Within a decade, his book has become a bestselling advocate for war against the new South American ideology.  He realises his role as a prophet of fear and paranoia and tries, claims he was sick at the time, and tries to enlist Bill to help,

James Cunningham plays Bill with unrelenting world-weary cynicism.  James Maxted carries off Harry’s early-years Tony Blair-style ‘Bambi’to perfection.  Andrea Pelaez combines fear, uncertainty and indignation in a perfect mix.

 

**** Four Stars

 

www.salidaproductions.com

www.assemblyfestival.com

 

Leave a Comment

Call off the threats

July 31, 2011 at 7:20 pm · Filed under Culture, TV Shows, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The BBC has succeeded in gaining an impressive reputation: it’s respected around the world for its impartiality.  While other broadcasters like Rupert Murdoch’s Sky and Fox channels and Silvio Berlusconi are universally despised for their undoubted political biases, the BBC usually manages to get away with its claim o be a balanced and impartial broadcaster. This claim is not sustained by the facts as revealed by a former Director General of the BBC itself, Greg Dyke, in a speech to a fringe meeting at the Liberal Democrats’ annual conference, only reported by the Belfast Telegraph, the Glasgow Herald and the Guardian media correspondent Roy Greenslade.

In his speech, about MPs’expenses, Dyke called for a commission to look into the “whole political system”, adding: “I fear it will never happen because I fear the political class will stop it.”

Dyke claimed that he had wanted to make big changes to the BBC’s political coverage but that these had been blocked..

“The evidence that our democracy is failing is overwhelming and yet those with the biggest interest in sustaining the current system – the Westminster village, the media and particularly the political parties, including this one – are the groups most in denial about what is really happening to our democracy…

  “I tried and failed to get the problem properly discussed when I was at the BBC and I was stopped, interestingly, by a combination of the politicos on the board of governors, one of whom [Sara Hogg] was married to the man who claimed for cleaning his moat, the cabinet interestingly – the Labour cabinet – who decided to have a meeting, only about what we were trying to discuss, and the political journalists at the BBC.

  “Why? Because, collectively, they are all part of the problem. They are part of one Westminster conspiracy. They don’t want anything to change. It’s not in their interests.”

He went on to claim that at the BBC,  “In the end, political journalists live in the  same narrow world as politicians do and they don’t see a need to change because they think it’s the world. They just don’t understand that out there it’s very different.”

That’s the hub of the problem.  The bias at the BBC is so ingrained, that it has become as natural as breathing to most of the journalists who work there. This was borne out by an impartiality seminar of BBC journalists hosted by former Desert Island Discs presenter Sue Lawley in 2006.  Andrew Marr admitted to the London Evening Standard that the BBC did not represent majority British opinion, saying, “The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly-funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people.

  “It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.”  Business presenter Jeff Randall told the same paper that he had  complained to a senior executive at the BBC about the corporation’s pro-multiculturalism stance. He claimed he was told: “The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism, it believes in it and it promotes it.”

There is evidence that the prevailing ethos at the BBC at best disdains Christianity and seems to want to drive it from the public arena to the private sphere. According to the Evening Standard, Lawley’s seminar discussed a proposed episode of Room 101 in which Ali G would dump a copy of the Bible and the Quran. BBC executives were willing to dump one of these books but not the other.  Can you guess which one?

Former BBC newsreader Peter Sissons, blows the whistle on this in his recent book When One Door Closes. Sissons says, “What the BBC wants you, the public, to believe is that it has ‘independence’ woven into its fabric, running through its veins and concreted into its foundations. The reality, I discovered, was that for the BBC, independence is not a banner it carries ­principally on behalf of the listener or viewer.
“Rather, it is the name it gives to its ability to act at all times in its own best interests.”

You might ask, so what?  After all, we have the option of turning our television sets and radios off if we don’t like what we hear.  What does it matter if the BBC reflects the concerns of a self-affirming political liberal-leftist elite? We can watch other TV channels, tune in to other radio stations or access other news sources online.

That’s true, but the big difference is that we are required to pay for this source of biased news on pain of criminal prosecution. When I pay for a copy of The Guardian, I know what to expect; thoughtful left-liberal political analysis. I expect the Irish News to promote an Irish nationalist agenda, the News Letter to promote unionism and the Daily Express to come up with something new or bizarre about Princess Diana every couple of months. I expect pugnacious conservative populism in the Daily Mail and The Sun and unrepentant Stalinism in the Morning Star.  I pay my money and I take my choice.

No-one is going to send me a series of threatening letters saying that they have no record of me taking The Times and threatening me with court action if I don’t immediately go out and pay for the privilege of reading it whether I actually do so or not. I can choose to subscribe to newspapers, internet and cable or satellite television channels that reflect or challenge my political or religious opinions, prejudices and biases.  I cannot choose not to pay for the BBC and use a television set without risking being taken to court and fined or sent to prison.

We have become so used to this extraordinary state of affairs because we have grown up with it, but in fact it’s a crazy system. A private company acts as if it was some kind of public authority to demand payment with menaces for another private corporation; one that holds the view that the masses who do not share its left-liberal metropolitan views are to be treated with disdain or contempt.  Try ignoring letters from the TVLA and see how it ratchets up the threats and menacing language. Even better, if you have no television set, write and tell them so.  It makes no difference. The threatening letters soon resume.

It’s time for the BBC to put its money where its mouth is. I suspect that the Corporation might have to change its ways were it forced to rejoin the real world and pay its way like any other business.  The smug ‘we know best, so clear off’ response to viewers’ and listeners’ complaints might change if people were not treated as criminals should they decide to withhold payment of their TV licence fee.

Abolish the compulsion element in the licence and replace it with a voluntary subscription and quarterly fund-raising appeals and see what happens. That’s what happens in theUSwith American Public Radio and National Public Radio. Those who agree with the BBC’s political line or who like to be challenged by it will pay to receive BBC radio and television as their counterparts do inAmerica.  Those alienated or offended by it or the indifferent will probably walk away.

 

David Kerr

Leave a Comment

Film & DVD Review: What Dreams May Come

June 12, 2011 at 10:09 am · Filed under Film & DVD Reviews, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , ,

What Dreams May Come

Click on image to buy DVD

What Dreams May Come [DVD] [1998]
Robin Williams (Actor), Cuba Gooding Jr. (Actor), Vincent Ward (Director) | Rated: Suitable for 15 years and over 113 mins

The books I was reading and the books ordered for future reviews tied in perfectly with the film What Dreams May Come – so I was anxious to watch. Despite the warnings (mainly about themes) I decided to view with my 12-year-old son (who when we talked about the film afterwards thought it had been made for children and was surprised about these warnings!). The film won an Academy Award for its visual effects and it was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Art Direction. It also won the Art Directors Guild Award for Excellence in Production Design.
Perhaps the first thing to consider is that the book the film is taken from is probably one of ideas – and ideas don’t translate well to the screen – in fact the book’s author, Richard Matheson claims in its introductory note that only the characters are fictional, and that almost everything else is based on research. The screen (and the BIG SCREEN particularly) wants action and – naturally – visual power. The latter is there…hence the awards – but somehow I found the whole experience lacking. The ideas are so profound how can they be espoused in under two hours. Matheson’s research appears to dissolve into cringing sentimentality – is this slushiness from the book or straight from the ‘depths’ of Hollywood?
The character Christy ‘Christian’ (played by actor Robin Williams) falls in love with Annie (they meet while boating on a lake in Switzerland) and subsequently marry and have two children…Annie’s an artist he’s a doctor – life seems pretty damn good for them (a few problems with communication with the children) but they seem to spend their whole lives together giggling – and getting on well. Then the children get killed in a car crash – for which Annie holds herself responsible, as she wasn’t driving… And there is a very moving scene at their children’s funeral (some of this action is viewed through flashback). Then Christy gets killed while helping someone in a car crash – and he goes to Heaven. This is a Heaven his thoughts have created. And his Heaven begins (because it’s ‘safe’) as a reflection of one of his wife’s paintings – visually this is very beautiful if not highly viscous – wading through painted water in one scene.
Heaven seems to be without time (yet there is movement) and explained as a dream (dreams have no or little time yet also appear – when dreaming – to be perfectly normal); indeed it is a Heaven composed of thoughts. Often seemingly anarchic and pointless (but are we seeing ‘true’ Heaven or differing people’s thought-ideas – or only Christy’s?) there are some nice touches; ‘souls’ often seem to take on different guises of age/race/sex so as to make the meetings of people who knew each other – perhaps were related to each other – equal and without the usual baggage and preconceptions.
So Christy begins to get used to Heaven but then finds out that his wife has committed suicide. This means she will go to Hell (though Hell is explained as being not quite as we imagine) and there is nothing Christy can do about this. He refuses to believe he can do nothing and decides to find his wife and bring her back with him to Heaven. (They are explained as soul mates as a tree has appeared in Christy’s Heaven, which has been painted by his wife when on earth, an apparently  ‘remarkable’ occurrence.) His guide – whom he calls ‘Doc’ – is not actually the Black doctor he thought but rather his son – and their relationship (with notions of the father expecting more than the son could or wanted to achieve) partially explained in flashback. The psychiatrist helper/guide ‘Sigmund Freud’! turns out to be the Black doctor…More flashback shows that his wife has had a nervous breakdown and how Christy tries to help her and how there is a significant conversation at the hospital where she vows to carry on (and not give in to either madness or death).
The journey to Hell is impressive visually – though it could have been more so – it made me recall Dante’s Inferno at times but Christy’s reaching of Annie is too quick (unless of course this all takes place in his thoughts and is his illusion). During this journey we find out his guides are his son as well as his former doctor/mentor. If all this is his illusion (his dream) then everything is excusable – but finding Annie amongst a sea of faces (seemingly trapped in thick mud) stretches credibility to the limit. He then attempts to enter ‘her’ illusion (his, hers or both?!) and mustn’t be caught by her (therefore remaining there within ‘her’ illusion) – this mirrors a conversation he has had with Annie in the grounds of the mental hospital. The dialogue is clever but not wholly convincing – he decides to stay there with her and by doing so (sacrifice?) manages to persuade her to leave with him and it’s all – considering – much too easy. As my son pointed
out – if people are in Hell for a punishment or through judgement how can they travel to Heaven so easily? Wouldn’t that interfere with some higher judgment?! Also – it seems the age-old notion of a suicide being condemned for taking away God’s gift is brushed aside and it’s rather a matter of self-worth/self belief. I’m not passing judgement here – but balancing it against religious teaching (Oh and God is referred to as being ‘up there’ somewhere! A Heaven in Heaven?)…
It also seems that despite the whole of humanity (to that point) dying and going to Heaven or Hell – and all the noble figures; all those who have lead strict and difficult lives; all those who have loved through UTMOST difficulty – it seems only ‘now’ that ANYONE has got someone out of Hell  – it’s taken a couple of giggling Americans to do what none other has EVER done.
Everyone gets reunited – father, mother, two children and the dog (of course)…now, dogs in Heaven? Okay as part of an illusion but if dogs really get to Heaven where are all the animals people have eaten? And the amoebas – wouldn’t there be all forms of life there? Where would this line of life be drawn? (And umm…how about the dinosaurs?)…
Again – and it really boils down to this – if we are witnessing everything as Christy’s illusion ONLY – then anything goes…it’s his dream and his rules…the fact that we are TOLD or apparently shown others ‘realities’ or dream-states or Heaven Experiences could simply be Christy’s illusion. So now then…what to do in Heaven for an eternity eh?
Well Christy persuades Annie to get reborn (a ‘Christian’ goes Buddhist?) so they can find each other again and fall in love – for what purpose? – hey, and guess what – the last sickeningly sentimental shots are of a little boy and girl meeting and you know it’s them finding each other (not a lake this time more a large pond with toy boats not real ones!)…A near ‘perfect’ reduction of some of the greatest and most profound questions on (Heaven and) earth to simpering Hollywood schmuck!!!
I’ll leave you with this reported quote from the film’s Wikipedia entry:
When asked his thoughts on the film adaptation of his story, Richard Matheson said, “I will not comment on What Dreams May Come except to say that a major producer in Hollywood said to me, ‘They should have shot your book.’ Amen.”

Review by Tim Bragg

Leave a Comment

Film: The King’s Speech

February 13, 2011 at 9:49 pm · Filed under Film & DVD Reviews, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

  • Certificate: 12A
  • Runtime : 118 minutes
  • Director: Tom Hooper

When a film receives the amount of hype surrounding The King’s Speech; nominated for 14 BAFTA awards. 12 Academy Awards and already having given leading man Colin Firth a Golden Globe for Best Actor; it’s understandable that some folk might be determined to resist the tide. Peter Hitchens in the Daily Mail had a go, excoriating the film as historically inaccurate and another symptom of why Britain is going to hell in a handcart.

This time, however, the hyperbole is justified. The King’s Speech is an impressive piece of work. Colin Firth excels as a man who finds himself thrust unwillingly into a role he had never expected to fill. After his ne’er-do-well brother, David the Prince of Wales, abdicates the Throne in order to marry an American divorcee, Bertie the Duke of York becomes King George VI.

Bertie’s big problem is that to the despair of his ailing father, King George V (Michael Gambon in a cameo role) he suffers from a dreadful nervous speech impediment. He is unable to even begin to overcome this problem until he meets up with Lionel Logue, an unconventional Australian speech therapist (Geoffrey Rush).

The King’s Speech derives from the point of view of the then Duchess of York, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon who later became the Queen Mother, played here by Helena Bonham-Carter. This is fascinating as I had always been brought up with the romantic story of Edward VIII; the king who gave up everything in order to marry the woman he loved. As the Duke and Duchess of Windsor the former king and his wife Wallis Simpson always seemed to be ostracised from the rest of the Royal family who never disguised their hostility towards them. In this film, the romantic Prince of Wales comes across as a blustering bully with no sense of duty or propriety.

This is a snapshot of a class-ridden Britain that has long disappeared along with the infamous London fogs. It’s not to be missed.

David Kerr

Leave a Comment

Film Review: Clash of the Titans

May 5, 2010 at 8:48 pm · Filed under Film & DVD Reviews, Uncategorized ·Tagged , , , , , , ,

Remakes of well-loved films are often misguided, pointless or unnecessary. Nobody, for example could improve on the original Wizard of Oz, Casablanca or High Noon. That’s not always, true, however. Some remakes build on the original work and bring it to a whole new audience.

I think that’s true of the new version of Clash of the Titans, currently doing the rounds in the cinemas. The story is simple. Mankind has annoyed the gods. Statues of Zeus have been overturned by these ancient Greek versions of Richard Dawkins. Hades is contracted to punish the humans who have dared to defy the gods, although he has an ulterior motive; he wants to supplant Zeus. It’s a bit like the relationship between Yahweh and Satan in the Old Testament book of Job.

Ray Harryhausen’s much loved original was a staple of Sunday afternoon television for many years. It was famous for it’s stop-go models as Perseus took on Medusa the gorgon and a whole host of fabulous creatures in order to save a Greek maiden from a fearsome sea monster.

Today we have computer general images to bring more terrifying monsters to the big screen. The modern Clash of the Titans even comes in 3D bringing a whole new dimension to Perseus’s attempts to kill Medusa without being turned to stone by her gaze. This Medusa really is scary. She caused quite a few cinema patrons to jump in their seats and spill their popcorn.

Full marks, then for this remake but I’m still not sure whether 3D is the next big thing or a passing gimmick. It’s certainly not worth a £2.50 premium. Time will tell.

David Kerr

Dircetor: Louis Leterrier

Run time: 106 minutes

Certificate: 12A

Leave a Comment

Film & DVD Review: Gabbeh

December 30, 2009 at 10:55 am · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged , ,

Reviewed by Pat Harrington

Gabbeh DVD cover

Click on image to buy this DVD

A Gabbeh is a type of Persian carpet. The pattern of the carpets are drawn from the experiences of the nomadic Gashgai tribe in southeast Iran who weave them. As Mohsen Makhmalbaf explains:–

Should they go across a desert, yellow will appear; should somebody be born a baby will appear and as for a love story, bright merry colours will be used.

The film uses the device of an image of a young girl who appears from the pattern of such a carpet. She tells her love story to the old woman washing the carpet. By her side her husband listens, and sometimes interjects.

Parallel to Gabbeh’s story is that of her uncle Sahayi who has returned to the countryside from the city where he worked as a schoolmaster. Back home he teaches the children of the tribe how to obtain from the flowers the wonderful colours which will help dye the wool of the gabbeh. This produces some of the most beautiful imagery in the film. When Sahayi points to the poppies in the field and draws back his hand it is a vivid red. When he points to the Sky, blue. The underlying ethos of the film is one of a people living in harmony with nature and drawing inspiration from it.

Reading the description of the film and noting the fact that it was in Persian I must confess I was a little daunted. But Gabbeh is not “arty” or boring, it is an unusual and thought-provoking film. Mohsen Makhmalbaf has tried to explain why Iranian films should draw audiences here in the West:–

These audiences are flooded with violent, tough films and are confronted with the same violence throughout their highly mechanical daily lives. That’s why the simplicity and the quietness one finds about these closely linked-with-nature Iranian films attract such audiences.

Leave a Comment

Film & DVD Review: Taking Lives

December 26, 2009 at 8:35 am · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged

1 hour 43 Minutes.
Reviewed by Jacqueline

The great opening scene sets the whole movie up to develop and unfold. This start should not merely be glanced at as the movie refers to it several times throughout. We see a goofy young man on a journey, (although he probably doesn’t even know himself where his journey will take him). He befriends another young man who appears to come from a troubled background with the same need to escape from the reality of life. The men drink beer and chit chat. Their bus breaks down and they hire a car, although it soon becomes clear that the driver of the car seems to have fooled his new friend, he is beginning to look ominous. The story breaks out into something quite ugly, but interesting at the same time.

Montreal, Canada present day and a digger finds a body. French-speaking policemen gather round to discuss the unsolved murder. The Director Caruso thought that having predominantly French-speaking policemen would give the movie a “European feel”. Joseph Paquette, (Olivier Martinez) and Surete Du Quebec (Tcheky Karyo), both policemen, recruit the services of Special FBI Agent Illeana Scott, (Angelina Jolie).

The director plays on Illeana’s loneliness. She dines alone, with nothing other than the photos of the crime scenes placed on a seat opposite her. She has also plastered photos on her bedroom ceiling as well as the bathroom walls, so that she could get into the world of the killer. Illeana reported to her colleagues that the murder had been premeditated and that the killer had been stalking his victim for weeks, following a pattern.

James Costa, (Ethan Hawke) unexpectedly turns up as a witness to the murder and persuades Illeana that he is innocent, he helps the police by drawing a sketch of the killer.

Naively Illeana falls for James, as he seems to be a “nice guy”. Is James what he seems or is he fooling everyone with his charming manner? Illeana is attracted to him. James is artistic and seems to be a caring person, but the real truth is that appearances can be deceptive. She ends up feeling used and disappointed. Her thoughts turn to revenge.

This film makes one think about how people who appear ‘normal’can deceive and manipulate us. Should we be wary and on our guard at all times?

Angelina Jolie and Ethan Hawke are great in their roles, but Kiefer Sutherland and Olivier Martinez are overshadowed.Perhaps the supporting characters could have been developed more through meatier parts.

This is a great suspense thriller which hooks you to the very end with its twists and turns.

CAST

  • Angelina Jolie, (Special FBI Agent Illeana Scott)
  • Ethan Hawke, (James Costa)
  • Kiefer Sutherland, (deadly fugitive & drug dealer)
  • Olivier Martinez, (Joseph Paquette)
  • Jean-Hugues Anglade, (Emil Duval)
  • Tcheky Karyo, (Surete Du Quebec, Director Hugo Lec)
  • Gena Rowlands, (Rebecca Asher)CREW
  • Director: DJ Caruso
  • Written By: Jon Bokenkamp
  • Based on the Novel By: Michael Pye
  • Producers: Mark Canton and Bernie Goldmann
  • Executive Producers: Bruce Berman, Dana Goldberg and David Heyman

    • Leave a Comment

    Film & DVD Review: Persepolis

    December 23, 2009 at 4:49 pm · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged

  • Directors – Vincent Paronnaud & Marjane Satrapi
  • France / USA,
  • 2007
  • 95 minsSweden:7 / Switzerland:10 (canton of Geneva) / Germany:12 / Finland:K-11 / Ireland:12A / Netherlands:6 / France:U / Brazil:12 / UK: 12A / Switzerland:10 (canton of Vaud) / Singapore:PG / Taiwan:R-12 / Canada:14A / USA:PG-13 / Argentina:Atp

    Reviewed by Anna Erickson

    Told through flashback the story begins with the 9 year old Marjane growing up in a politically changing Iran. She resembles teenagers everywhere with her love of western culture which includes music (Iron Maiden – much cooler then her once favourite, now ‘lame’, Bee Gees), Nike trainers and Bruce Lee.

    Her parents, intelligent and themselves westernised, although politically minded, try to stay under the radar as much as possible. With war as a backdrop involving people she knows being arrested and murdered, however, Marjane finds a dictatorial life difficult. She takes pleasure in defying her teachers. This eventually leads to her parents sending her to a school in Austria where they think she will be safer.

    Over the next few years Marjane constantly changes address due to various problems, gets in with the ‘rebel’crowd at school and goes through the trials of love. This leads to her becoming homeless and almost dying through the effects of living on the streets. She decides to return to Iran thinking it will solve all her problems only to find that she once again feels like she doesn’t belong and becomes deeply depressed. This depression only ends when she attempts to kill herself and is told that it isn’t her time to die yet. When she wakes is my personal favourite moment of the film. She sings a rendition of Eye of the Tiger as she effectively sorts out her life and enrols in Art School. There she falls in love again and through the oppressed state marries only to divorce three years later. She makes the heartbreaking decision to leave Iran for France.

    Persepolis is based on the autobiographical graphic novels by Marjane Satrapi. First published in France in 2000 they where then made into this charming film and previewed at the Sundance film festival in 2007. The animated film is drawn simply in black and white reminiscient of the graphic novels, conveying a naivety which is in strong juxtaposition with the often harsh realities of war, or quite simply growing up. You can understand why the Iranian government disapproved of the film but the history of Iran is simply explained (I felt like I learned something) and the humour in the film lightens the mood and makes you warm to the heroine considerably. The Grandmother is often her helping hand throughout her journey and her honest and humorous remarks are some of the best throughout the film. She also teaches Marjane some important lessons, lessons we could all be reminded of occasionally.

    Honestly, I went into the theatre expecting to be bored but I was surprised at how human the story was and how much I could relate to it. Definitely a must see.

    • Leave a Comment

    Older Posts »
    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.