Kim Gentes

Life. Death. Joy. Pain.

Summary: Most films have a specific plot. They develop tension through the story, hoping to surprise you a bit with the conclusion and warm or thrill you along the way. Very few films try to approach a topic as broad as "the meaning of life" or as grand as "what happens when we die". The film "The Tree of Life" climbs into the ring with the epic Stanley Kubrick film "2001: A Space Odyssey" and tries to give us answers to what our universe is about. It is to be heralded for its attempt, though it will feel like its wash of ubiquitous meanderings may well leave viewers so unsure of what they just saw, they won't feel inspired to believe its premise. Some will get it, others simply won't stay interested long enough to wait out the proposals that the film makes.

Full Review: First, let me say that if my summary seems languishing and uncertain, you have just felt what most people will feel seeing the film. This creation of art is a truly breath-taking journey from no less than the beginnings of the universe until the virtual end of time (at least for our central family on which the story will finally rest).  If you are considering watching "The Tree of Life", you need to know that this film is not meant to give you a sharp, well defined 90 minutes of story. Rather, the movie is meant to draw a visual understanding of the entire history of the universe, how we fit into that, where it might all be going and how an individual families story might make sense in that continuum.

If you think that goal is lofty, you apparently haven't met Terrence Malick, the writer and director of this movie.  His vision of reality is certainly enthralling, though ultimately unsurprising. From a philosophical standpoint there is nothing new with his presentation. He is not breaking any new genres in origins theory or developing new ideas about life after death. What Malick does, though, is merge a good many of those ideas into a visual timeline that threads the viewer into a world that transgresses barriers of reality- from the ephemeral , physical here and now, to the eternal, other-worldly cosmic hereafter. 

The problem with the film is that you can lose site of what he is doing, primarily because he does nothing to prime the audience where he is starting, where he is going and where you might be stopping along the way. One has to construct that by watching. For example, there is one segment in which he travels to the origins of time and takes literally 15 or more minutes without a word being spoken. You travel in and out of earth "space" and only hear fleeting words from the narrator, who ends up being a boy who is found on both sides of the alive and eternal spectrum. 

What you eventually find out is that this boy has a story, and this film lands, finally, on his life and that of his family. The story arc progresses nicely then, with brief detours into cosmically other realities. The goal is for you to begin to see how everything is knit together, and yet how grand and important each person's life can be, if but for one proposition.

I won't give the point of the movie away, but it is certainly an insightful one. Not original, but certainly in agreement with many who have spoken on this topic of our grand purpose.

While the movie does have this vast self interest, it nonetheless does bring you poignantly into the world of a 50's reality in which a man and his family struggle with real life issues. Eventually, you come to the point of a death of one of the children. All this is beginning to make sense and gives context as you are occasionally flashed forward into a future time as well.  Actors Brad Pitt, Sean Penn and Jessica Chastain become the fully embodied examples of humanity, life, joy, struggle and pain that we can see both on the screen and in ourselves.  Pitt and Chastain are the best, and more prominent. Penn is cast as a brooding, lost man, still broken from some past event. He does well but remains too undeveloped to engage the audience other than perhaps feel as unsettled as his character does.

People who want a quick movie for a romantic date should avoid this film. People who want a heartwarming story with endearing clichés will also want to pass here. Creationists and evolutionists will each be enthralled and ultimately disappointed at a film that leaves room for literally a thousand interpretations. And that, I think, is the point. Malick attempts to draw such a grand vision that he leaves us asking far more questions just about his film than we had before we went into the theatre. I felt like this was good, and an inspiring journey along the way. There is a strong moral lesson at the end and I also think it is good (that helps when one agrees with it).

But there is something about the film that I also felt was contrived, especially where he looks to include symbols and metaphors from literally dozens of schools of thought from religion to science to philosophy to psychology. At times, it seems too much for a single film and loses potency with the over-reaching.

That said, it was one of the best films I have seen this year. I would recommend it to anyone wishing to see an engaging spectacle of thoughtful film with grand aspirations.  You may not agree with Malick's perspective, but that may actually be the point of the film.

Amazon DVD Link: http://amzn.to/pBFvPm

Review by Kim Gentes.

Heartache. Rage. Reconciliation.

Summary: Sadly, we don't get to determine most of the tragedies that enter our lives. Most times, all we have is our choice in how to responsd. This film is about the choices we make. Some to bring calamity on others. Some to respond to unthinkable tragedy brought upon us. This is a character film, reaching to the very depths of what drives and motivates us. It's not a fairy tale, but it is truly excellent.

Full Review: Watching movies is often an escape from the real world- an attempt to see heros and heroines succeed, lift our spirits and make us laugh.  A way for us to remove ourselves from the drudgery of "real life" to enjoy the "good life". This film, "Five Minutes of Heaven", is none of those things. Rather than escaping from the painful reality of life, it plunges into the deep end of dispair that is a literal hell on earth for the very real people who live in the blunt force world of criminal acts, lifelong grief and unescapable loss.

The film, directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, is meant to be a pseudo documentary of "reality show" in which Liam Neeson's character, Alistair, prepares and meets James Nesbitt's character, Joe, after many years separated a cold-blooded assasination perptrated by the former and witnessed by the latter.  This film is actually "inspired by true events", which seems believable enough. The setting is Northern Ireland, amidst the death and terror of sectarian violence brought on by murderous factions of Catholics and Protestants. In that context, Alistair plots and executes a plan to kill Joe's brother, for no real reason other than they lived as two people in the opposite camp of the world of the tinderbox that was Northern Ireland's violent 1970s.

Joe witnesses the act and is left not only traumatised, but shamed by his remaining family who can do nothing with their grief but pile accusations on the 10 year old Joe. Alistair, however, finds his life eventually turning 180 degrees away from the violence of his past. Eventually, he not only rejects the violence he once perpetrated, he works for years to bring a message of reconciliation and call for families and communities to reach out to young people who might be tempted to turn to violence in similar situations.

All this comes to a head when a peacemaking, reconciliation group asks to film a meeting between the two people. What happens is not only unexpected but gritty. In the end, the movie is about reality, not pie-in-the-sky reconciliation. But it gets to the truth about why people do things at such base levels, and what possible hope there is for lives torn by such tragedy.

I would say that Liam Neeson was stellar and deserves awards for his acting- and I'd be right. He is truly in command of his character and never faulters. But it really ends up being James Nesbitt's film. Not just in time of screen minutes, but in power of his performance. Nesbitt becomes the horrific, sad, lost, angry and even hopeful boy and man that we all fear and believe he must become. All the while, we hope for better. He makes us hope. Nesbitt makes this film have such power and honesty, he really stands above Neeson- which is an almost impossible task.  Because both do such an amazing job, the plot, timing, emotions and characters all fit into the realm of perfection.

This is a film which is laden with cursing and overwhelming emotional scenes. It is for no child under 15, in my opinion. Even older children will be shaken by this film internally, as will adults.

If you have a chance to watch this film, do not hesitate. It is one of the best films in the last 5 years. Really, it's that good.

Amazon DVD Link: http://amzn.to/Q8xx4t

Review by Kim Gentes.

Perfect story telling of the perfect story

Mel Gibson's version of the last 12 hours of Jesus on earth is a mesmerizing and detailed vision of Christ's trail, crucifixion and death. While Gibson retains his clearly Catholic heritage in telling the passion story, by drawing from the extra-biblical sources he used as plot line details, his rendering is widely held as embracing of most Christian denominations.

The power of this film cannot be overstated. It is truly a violent film, which matches precisely the topic- a crucifixion of a man. No one could honestly believe that a proper rendering would ignore the brutality of the main event itself. Gibson doesn't make the mistake of avoiding this reality, and serves the film and the viewers with the treatment due the story. No child under 13 should see this film due to its intensely violent and graphic scenes. But when a person is old enough to see this, it will surely bring a level of reality and vulnerability to the topic that could scarcely be imagined without this kind of honesty on film.

The sub plots presented are appropriate and flow swiftly, as the movie does, despite its 2 hour, 6 min length. The uncanny performances of James Caviezel (Jesus), Maia Morgenstern (Mary), and Monica Belluci (Mary Magdalene) make the synthesis of characters seem very human, very real, and very accessible. No contrivance or hint of whimsical attitude, the acting here towers high above the need for the dialog to be rendered in the language of the viewer. While it may have disappointed the casual movie-goer to be required to see this film in Aramaic, with English sub-titles, I think its impact clearly solidifies the power of the story and its universal acceptance and clarity.

You may not convert to Christianity simply by watching this film, but make no mistake about it- this is the real story of what the Christian faith is about: the sin of mankind (from past to present) being placed on the shoulders of the Son of God. The picture clearly articulates the Bible story, and conveys the depth of blame for Christ's death profoundly accurately to the Biblical record. This is a burden on all humanity, for sure. But the extrapolation of the story does not shy away from saying what the New Testament says about the Jewish and Roman leaders who are forging forward in killing Jesus.

Exceptional direction, acting and visuals, this is a powerfully violent film that narrates with excellence from the most revered chronicle in human history.

If you haven't seen this film, you can watch it digitally via Amazon or get the DVD:

Amazon Instant Video: http://amzn.to/YJyM3z

Amazon DVD: http://amzn.to/YGZlU2

Review by Kim Gentes