At 23-2 the 08-09 Celtics have accomplished something that not even the sentimentally regarded demi-gods Larry Bird, Robert Parrish, Kevin McHale, Danny Ainge, and Dennis Johnson managed to accomplish... ever.
(R) - For Profanity, Some Violence, Sexual Content/Nudity, and the Charlie Kaufman element.
Starring: Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Emily Watson, Michelle Williams, Cathrine Keener, Jennifer Jason Leigh
Written & Directed by: Charlie Kaufman
I want to say, first, that it is rare to find a film (or novel) that has something real and genuine to say. It is uncommon to find something that speaks with intelligence, sincerity, or potency. But it is almost impossible (and certainly unrealistic) to find a story that exemplifies all that is best about story-telling: intelligent, sincere, potent, and a brutally honest description of how we as a species view our lives.
Synecdoche, New York is an important movie for young people to watch. It illustrates what happens when a life is wasted on hedonism and escaping pain and responsibility.
******Synecdoche - a figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole or the whole for a part, the special for the general or the general for the special, as in ten sail for ten ships or a Croesus for a rich man.******
Everything is symbolic.
For a good part of the film it seems as though it has no real flow or as though it is inconsistent in technical execution, possibly suffering from a rookie directors inexperience. This would be a hideously fallacious conclusion. It would also be wrong to conclude that this is some lame solipsistic endeavor on the part of Kaufman as some critics have assessed. This film is an assault on such philosophies. It is every reason why thinking of others and how they feel and what they see is so important. The main characters are all narcissistic, solipsistic, and otherwise completely self-involved. The result is an exposition of disregard and its effect on the individual and those around them.
As I was saying, everything is symbolic. Everything is a snapshot of reality used in place of the sequence. It is the subjective for the objective... no matter how hard the main character tries to reproduce the objective it always ends up as the "objective" ...from his perspective, which ends with him telling his own story each time only with more players in each iteration. I know this doesn't really make sense. It's not really supposed to. Maybe some of you sharper ones will be able to understand more of this and unravel the madness without me actually spoiling anything. Synecdoche, New York greatness in the tradition of Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine (of the spotless mind). It carries the audience along with same moral current as his previously mentioned successes. If you can keep up with Kaufman's narrative (try Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine first) you won't walk away from this dissatisfied, disappointed, or unfulfilled. You will in fact find that you are more like the main character than you would have thought initially, but it will have you thinking of ways to NOT be like him. Yet as the story is winding down you can't help but feel sympathy and pity. In part because I believe that Kaufman has managed to do what only a select few films (The Talented Mr. Ripley, The Shield) have accomplished: emotionally involving the audience with a terrible person.
This movie is worth the price you'll pay in time and money. However, it is sadly going to be passed up or smeared by people who don't understand or believe that their moral scruples place them in a position to condemn the film instead of allowing the film to reveal their own narcissism and solipsism. It's not told in a sterile and dishonest fashion. It is brutal and heart-breaking. But it will leave you with something substantial, stimulate your intellect, and impress you visually. Give it a try. You won't be disappointed.
i want to see this, but will probably have to wait till it comes out on dvd because non of the theaters near us are playing it. Stupid "Day the earth stood still" sure, but not this one.
but c'mon, The Day the Earth Stood Still has Keaneu Reeves. He should team up with Matthew McConaughey and Uwe Boll. That would be the greatest movie ever especially if they remade a classic like Citizen Kane or (if Uwe had his choice) Pong: Pixel of Death.
It beckons me. I cannot resist. Kaufman snagged the intellectual snob within me with Adaptaion. I must go. I will return with a full review. So I will forgo Quantum of Solace for the film I have been waiting for since I first left theater following Eternal Sunshine. I am SO EXCITED!!! Also, Wanted hits DVD and Blu-Ray a week from today. For all of you who have not yet watched this film go to your nearest RedBox, pay$1 and take it home and watch it. Very, very good film. It has its problems but the over-all story, action, and acting aren't involved. As far as action is concerned, it grabs the Matrix by collar smashes its nose, grabs it by the collar, lifts it into the air and hurls in into the distant past leaving it to console itself with other visually antiquated films such as King Kong(1933), Jaws, Star Wars, Nightmare on Elm St, & The Matrix. the Matrix sequences just look kind of old and slow compared to the ones in Wanted. Just watch it, ok?
Turn around
face the mourning light
That sound
is loss of sight
My son's gone blind
and his mother's weeping fright
surrounds the mighty shroud despite
the growing need for flight
Find
a safer place
than the beginning of the day.
So as I was preparing for the election last week I had an epiphany: Christianity has been defined by conservative republican rhetoric and not the other way around.
See, I was listening to CNN and various other LIBERAL sources talk about how the Republican party has allowed its conservative evangelical members to define the partisan position. But this is backwards. With the rise of communism in the early 20th century, the leaders of the conservative evangelicals had to distinguish themselves from the world going to hell in a Marxist basket. So as the threat became more powerful and impending their opposition became more passionate and religious until it became indistinguishable from the original rhetoric of the religion. Heather wrote a blog involving this phenomenon not too long ago.
"Basically the message is: America is falling apart and only the church can save it. With threats at home and abroad, America's moral climate will determine the nations preservation. But with protestant evangelical churches adopting European theology that undercuts doctrinal truths and the authority of scripture, and the overall lack of real discipleship in churches that function more like social clubs than devoted agents of Christ, what's a believer to do?
Answers vary, but here are a few: Fight for conservative doctrine, train leaders to cut to the heart of social and spiritual issues proactively, don't be a communist, march with the civil rights leaders, be hands off towards the civil rights leaders, condemn civil rights leaders, be friendly toward the Vatican and its mission work, warn against the Vatican and its mission work, don't be a communist."
Our spiritual leaders took it upon themselves to fix the worlds problems by teaching their political views as theology. I began sifting through some of the rhetoric that I was force fed and the one that spurred this whole chain of thought was the anti-institutionalism doctrine. This is probably the most blatant example of doctrines influenced by anti-Red politics. Because there is nothing in scripture to define how money is spent... unless you are thinking like an Anti-Marxist, conservative, Republican Capitalist. Then you start reading the Bible like it is the Constitution, defining the regulation of property, rights and responsibilities of the citizens (members) and so on.
But there are fundamental differences between the US Constitution and the New Testament. Primarily (and most importantly) the Constitution is a legal document written by lawyers to define law and government. The New Testament is personal and public letters of admonition and personal memoirs to chronicle the life of an historical and influential figure. Nowhere in any of the canon is there a document like the constitution that outlines how the church conducts services, finances, specific doctrinal creed dictating acceptable practices. There are suggestions and outlines (Jesus is the Son of God, the way the truth and the life, no one approaches the Father except through Jesus, love and help each other, love your enemy, sacrifice your privileges for others if need be, etc.), but nothing that says, 'do this this way or else' and not all together in one document. The suggestion and admonitions are scattered across 27 separate documents.
I could go on, but the point is that we cannot keep trying to read the words of Jesus and the apostles like the words of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and George Washington. Those men were defining meticulous law based on Principle and Morality. The authors of the New Testament were penning Principle and Morality, the governing ideas that law and politics can then be derived from and the standard by which the law draws its potency. Our faith should never be influenced by our politics, it just makes a mess of everything. Rather law and politics should be influenced by ones faith, because it is the foundation that the law is laid upon. Faith is the greater thing and should influence the lesser. If it tries to go the other direction the standard becomes worthless because it loses objectivity and becomes manipulable and biased. Truth has no alignment or obligation to a partisan group. Its only production is Objectivity and Principle. It simply IS. So to try to define Truth with ones own political views makes one sound like a imbecile. Because in doing so you are actually saying that what you call "truth" you don't really believe to be "truth" since you feel that you can influence it. This is in fact what the conservative right has been doing with their religion for some time now. The irony is, of course, that in doing so they actually become LIBERALS!
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry. On one hand it's amusing because of its absurdity and aberrant nature; on the other hand, it hurts to see such absurdity and aberrations so widely accepted and thought of as Truth. We need to stop worshiping our politics, it is a derivative of a derivative of thing that was created by the One we should worship.
It was interesting to read the reader opinions of the Christianity Today mag from 1964 that prompted that post. Most of the contributers were arguing that you couldn't have "conservative" politics because the "conservative" label referred to conserving divinely given truth. And many commented that social programs, or civil rights movements were a sign of a society growing as all healthy cultures should expect and that there should be no conflict in a conservative christians who wants to push for social betterment.
although i agree with the primary point of your post, i have to say that "no one approaches the Father except through Jesus" is more than a suggestion.
You're right it's a foundational outline. It is one of a very numbered few things that is specified. All of those things I listed in parentheses are thigns that are vital and unavoidable, but there is nothing more specific detailing how to implement them. It is left up to us to discover that these things should pervade every aspect of our life, not just giving to the poor or loving our wives, neighbors, and enemies.
