RICKER CHOI
MUSIC HEALS!
upcoming performances ...June 23, 2012 (Sat) - 7:30 pm - in support of United Wayclick for more info...
Matrix and Waking Life
Matrix and Waking Life
When I was in highschool, I became infatuated with questioning the nature of reality. Once at Wonderland, while waiting for our turn to a roller coaster ride, I had a long conversation with a friend. I questioned him how could I ever knew what I saw as the color red was the same as what he saw? Did the color red exist objectively, waiting for us to perceive? This started my interest in epistemology. Years later I saw the intriguing film Waking Life, in which the main character tried in vain to wake up from his dream. Every time he thought he has woken up, the reality was that he was still in his dream. He was in a persistent lucid dream-like state. He observed and participated in philosophical discussions that weave together issues such as reality, free will, the relationship of the subject with others, and the meaning of life. Along the way the film touches on other topics including existentialism, Situationist politics, posthumanity, the film theory of André Bazin, and on lucid dreaming itself. - from wikipediaHow then can I tell that whether my so called waking state is not simply a dream-state wrapped within another dream at a higher-dimension?The movie The Matrix explored this idea to a limited extent. As summarized by Wikipedia:The film describes a future in which reality as perceived by humans is actually the Matrix: a simulated reality created by sentient machines in order to pacify and subdue the human population, while their bodies heat and electrical activity are used as an energy source.I couldn't help while watching The Matrix to question whether the perceived reality of machines feeding on human bodies was yet another illusionary world created by yet another reality at a high-dimension. Disappointingly, the movie and its sequels had evolved into typical Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster.I recently read a short story by Argentine writer Borges called The Circular Ruins. What The Matrix had timidly tried but ultimately recoiled from, this short story by Borges had brilliantly explored to the fullest extent. Here is a quick summary of this amazing story:A wizard retreats from the world to a location that possesses strong mystical powers: the circular ruins. There, the wizard tries to create another human being from his own dreams After many sleepless nights, the wizard dreams of a heart; vaguely at first, but more and more clearly each night. Years pass and the wizard creates the boy piece by piece, in agonizing detail [through his dreams]. The wizard calls upon the god Fire to bring his creation to life. Fire agrees and that only Fire and the wizard will be able to tell the creation from a real human. His creation is sent to a distant temple of the god Fire, and becomes famous as, because it is not real, it can walk through fire unharmed. The wizard hears of this, but at length he awakes to find the ruins ablaze. As he ultimately walks into the flaming house of Fire, the wizards notices that his skin does not burn. With relief, with humiliation, with terror, he understood that he too was a mere appearance, dreamt by another. - from Wikipediaclick here to read full text of the story Descarte said "I think, therefore I am."But I can only say "I think", and nothing more.
Dark Knight and Judas
The Dark Knight and Judas
The blockbuster The Dark Knight is perhaps a contemporary twist on a short story by Borges called Three Versions of Judas. THE DARK KNIGHTThe Dark Knight tells the story of the people in evil-infested Gotham City: how they put all their false hopes in a knight in shining armour - who in reality is a incorruptible district attorney Harvey Dent. Batman, the true hero but who had to conceal his real identity, was the dark knight: he might be doing good but he was too much clouded in secrecy. The knight in shining armour (Harvey Dent ) was the preferred hero.The citizens of Gotham, however, were unaware that Harvey had turned to the evil side after a tragic event - his face was disfigured in an explosion and his fiancee was killed. Harvey started on a rampage to exact revenge.Harvey, at the end of the movie, tried to kill Batman and Lieutenant Gordon's family. Batman struggled with Harvey and killed him. The hope of Gotham City seemed to have died with Harvey's death. The Joker seemed to have won. But what followed haunted me deeply (below is a brief paraphrase):Gordon: The Joker had won. Whatever chance Gotham had of fixing itself dies with Harveys reputation. . . . People will lose all hope.Batman: No. They won't. They can never know what he did.Gordon: We can't sweep that under!Batman: No. But the Joker cannot win. . . . Gotham needs its true hero.Gordon (realizing Batman going to assume the burden of Harvey's sins): You? You can't!Batman: Yes, I can. . . . You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. I can do those things because I'm not a hero, like Harvey.Gordon: No! You can't! You're not!Batman: I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be.Gordon (voice over narration during Harveys funeral): A hero - not the hero we deserved, the hero we needed. Nothing less than a knight. Shining.Batman (voice over narration): You'll condemn me, set the dogs on me . . . because it's what needs to happen.Gordon (voice over narration in private - now referring to Batman): He's the hero Gotham deserves . . . but not the one it needs right now. So hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight. You can watch the full ending here in the video clip aboveThe ambiguity of good and evil, and the naive and blind acceptance of falseness as truth - sadly resonates throughout human history. Looking back at the Crusades, Inquisitions, Witch Hunt, and today's many false Faith Healers and Catholic priests' sex scandals (plus many more that I dare not name) - are these not the doings of Harvey Dent? People living at these times blindly obey and worship the knight in shining armor, without the ability or freedom to think their own thoughts. The scary question is: how can I tell if I am not one of these blind faithfuls?Who does Batman symbolize? To answer this, let's turn to Borges' short story Three Versions of Judas.THREE VERSIONS OF JUDASIt is story by Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. In the story, a fictitious writer Nils Runeberg wrote three versions of Judas Iscariot - the disciple who betrayed Jesus Christ. The three versions are really three interpretations of Judas' betrayal:(below summary is from wikipedia)Version 1: Judas as the human counterpart of Jesus: it was Judas who was the reflection of Jesus in the human world, and as Jesus was our saviour sent from heavens, Judas took up the onus of being the human who led Jesus down the path of redemption.Version 2: Judas as the extreme ascetic : The ascetic, for the greater glory of God, degrades and mortifies the flesh; Judas did the same with the spirit. He renounced honour, good, peace, the Kingdom of Heaven, as others, less heroically, renounced pleasure.Version 3: Judas as God and the real Savior: God incarnated in a human shape that would be made totally man, but man to the point of iniquity. Committing a sin would also not be beyond Him. Thereby, He chose Judas as his incarnation.Yes these are heretical indeed! I dare not expand further, but can only hint that perhaps Batman is Judas - they both assumed the burden of sins so that the knight in shining armour can keep on shining the world for eternity despite the ugly truth. click here to read the full English translation of the short story GOSPEL OF JUDASI recently watched an intriguing documentary: National Geographic: The Gospel of Judas. The Gnostic followers of Jesus wrote the Gospel of Judas, presumably between 2nd to 4th century AD. As summarized by Wikipedia:The Gospel of Judas asserts that the other eleven disciples had not learned the true Gospel, which Jesus taught only to Judas Iscariot. The Gospel of Judas interprets Judas' act not as betrayal, but rather as an act of obedience to Jesus. Jesus required a second agent to set in motion a course of events which He had planned. Judas acted as a catalyst.The ending of Borges' story claimed that such interpretation of Judas was the secret truth. If such secret were to be known, then the meaning of the Messiah's sacrifices would become meaningless. The world would have lost its hope and its Redeemer. Therefore, this interpretation had been deemed heretical.What then is the truth of the historic sacrifice two thousand years ago?
Dead Poets Society
Dead Poets Society
I remember at a master class of Marietta Orlov, she emphasized that for pianist, the utmost important sense is hearing, followed by tactile (touch), and the last is eyesight. Following lines from the film Dead Poets Society illustrates how creativity can be unleashed when not chained by eye-sight:John Keating: Close your eyes, close your eyes! Close'em! Now, describe what you see.Todd Anderson: Uh, I-I close my eyes.John Keating: Yes.Todd Anderson: Uh, and this image floats beside me.John Keating: A sweaty-toothed madman.Todd Anderson: A sweaty-toothed madman with a stare that pounds my brain.John Keating: Oh, thats *excellent*! Now, give him action - make him do something!Todd Anderson: H-His hands reach out and choke me.John Keating: That's it! Wonderful, wonderful!Todd Anderson: And all the time he's mumbling.John Keating: Whats he mumbling?Todd Anderson: Mumbling truth.John Keating: Yeah, yes.Todd Anderson: Truth like-like a blanket that always leaves your feet cold.John Keating: [some of the class start to laugh] Forget them, forget them! Stay with the blanket. Tell me about that blanket!Todd Anderson: Y-Y-You push it, stretch it, it'll never be enough. You kick at it, beat it, it'll never cover any of us. From the moment we enter crying to-to the moment we leave dying, it'll just cover your face as you wail and cry and scream.[long pause then class applauds]John Keating: Dont you forget this.A game I enjoyed when I was a child was at night, when in bed, I closed my eyes and visualized seeing light! I read this from some book on how to gain the ability to predict the future. The book taught that in order to gain such power, all you need to do was practise closing your eyes and visualizing lights, and soon you would start seeing the future! But it failed to work for me as I was sound asleep before the light appeared.Closing my eyes when I play the piano transports me to another realm of existence. I can leave my ego behind and be one with the music.PARADISE LOSTMilton the poet was blind when he composed Paradise Lost. His blindness prevented him from seeing any light except God's light. God's light continued to illuminate his mind and was the inspiration behind Paradise Lost. Homer, the great classical epic poet, according to tradition, was also blind. Only when one sees inward can he truly sees the beauty of arts.Below is a quotation from the Prologue to Book 3 of Paradise Lost, which to me is a powerful image of one descending into his inner soul:Thee I re-visit now with bolder wing,Escapt the Stygian Pool, though long detaindIn that obscure sojourn, while in my flight [ 15 ]Through utter and through middle darkness borneWith other notes then to th Orphean LyreI sung of Chaos and Eternal Night,Taught by the heavnly Muse to venture downThe dark descent, and up to reascend, [ 20 ]Though hard and rare: thee I revisit safe,And feel thy sovran vital Lamp; but thouRevisitst not these eyes, that rowle in vainTo find thy piercing ray, and find no dawn;So thick a drop serene hath quencht thir Orbs, [ 25 ]Or dim suffusion veild. Yet not the moreCease I to wander where the Muses hauntCleer Spring, or shadie Grove, or Sunnie Hill,Smit with the love of sacred Song; but chiefThee Sion and the flowrie Brooks beneath [ 30 ]That wash thy hallowd feet, and warbling flow,Nightly I visit: nor somtimes forgetThose other two equald with me in Fate,So were I equald with them in renown,Blind Thamyris and blind Mæonides, [ 35 ]And Tiresias and Phineus Prophets old.Then feed on thoughts, that voluntarie moveHarmonious numbers; as the wakeful BirdSings darkling, and in shadiest Covert hidTunes her nocturnal Note.
Persona
Persona
Persona, a film by Ingmar Bergman, is about a married woman who one day suddenly stops speaking. The movie captures the interaction between she and Alma, her nurse, in an isolated retreat. The film reminds me of Mulholland Drive by David Lynch. You never know what is real and what is dream. The two female leads in both films appear switching roles through the course of the film, taking on each other's persona. The dominant one becomes submissive, the caretaker becomes the sick.While Mulholland Drive stays within the realm of dream and psychoanalysis, Persona takes it one step further - making the film a philosophical question on human's existence and our quest for meanings. Are we free to choose the persona we take on? Elisabeth appears to have made a choice of not playing any of these roles - simply by refusing to speak and do anything.THE OPENINGThe movie opens with a sequence of surreal imageries: a spider, cartoon, nail hammered through a palm, surreal images of a boy (perhaps Elisabeth's son)? To me personally, this opening sequence has the same effect as the Silencio sequences of Muholland Drive - when the director drives the viewer into the realm of fantasy. Muholland Drive starts off with the appearances of reality, which later turns into a nightmarish dream (ironically that dream may be the true reality). Persona, on the other hand, starts off immediately with a nightmare. Even when the film properly opens, the dialogs and monologues of the speaking characters appear to me too surreal to be of reality.EXISTENTIALISMAlma, the nurse who is charged with taking care of ill Elisabeth, near opening of film said in a monologue:It's funny. you [referring to Elisabeth] can go about as you please do almost anything. I'll marry Karl-Henrik and have a couple of children, which I'll have to raise. All of this is predestined. Its inside me. It's nothing to think about. It's a safe feeling. I have a job that I like and enjoy. That's good, too but in another way. But it's good. Good. I wonder what is really wrong with her [i.e. what is wrong with Elisabeth].What is really wrong with Elisabeth? Or should the question be turned around: what is wrong with the rest of us living a predestined life, living merely the roles we think are ours?We later see Elisabeth reacting in horror to the photo of her son whom she wants to forget, then later to the image of a burning monk, and also to the picture of a small Jewish boy being surrounded in a ghetto. Elisabeth appears trapped. She can never escape from what she is: a human being. This reminds me of No Exit, a 1944 existentialist play by Jean-Paul Sartre, in which hell is in the form of a room where three human beings are trapped inside, probing each other's past sins. Alma and Elisabeth are trapped in a specific time and place. They are trapped by TV, music on radio, mails, photos. Can they ever detach themselves and be free?(Coincidentally I just seen Die Walkure last night at Cineplex's NY Met Broadcast - in which Wotan's anguish originated primarily from not being 'free' - he is bound by laws.)I really enjoy the poetry of the following three monologues:[As Elisabeth's husband wrote to her]: You have taught me that we have to see each other as two anxious children, filled with good will and the best intentions, but ruled by powers that we can only partially control. The doctor said to Elisabeth:The hopeless dream of being. Not seeming, but being. [reminds me of Sartre's "Being and Nothingness"] In every waking moment aware, alert. The tug of war - what you are with others and who you really are. A feeling of vertigo and constant hunger to be finally exposed. To be seen through, cut down, even obliterated, commit suicide? That's unthinkable. You don't do things like that. But you can refuse to move and be silent. Then at least you are not lying. Then you don't have to play any roles, show any faces, make false gestures. You'd think so. but reality is diabolical. Your hiding-place is not watertight. Life trickles in everywhere.Alma read from her book to Elisabeth:The anxiety we carry with us, all our broken dreams, the inexplicable cruelty, the fear of death, the painful insight into our earthly condition have worn out our hope of a divine salvation. The cries of our faith and doubt against the darkness and the silence are terrible proof of our loneliness and fear.Then Alma adds:Believe in something and do something. To think your life has meaning. I like it. Sticking to it whatever happens.The contradiction is that even though Alma claims that she is devoted to her fiancée - playing a predestined role of a devoted wife - she soon reveals that she had an improvised orgy on a beach with two young boys. She became pregnant and had an abortion. She cried and saidIt doesn't make sense.You feel guilty for little things. [After her sexual encounter, a child grows in her womb without her choice. She is 'trapped' by her womb.]Notice how Alma later dresses exactly as Elisabeth - in all black, with a black cap - as if devoid of an identity. In the critical scene Alma denies her likeness to Elisabeth and tries to reassert her own identity:No, no I'm not you. I'm myself.Suddenly the scene shifted, and we see Alma now dressed in her regular nurse uniform. But she collapses very soon, exclaiming in pain:Warning and timeless. unforeseen when it had to happen, it didn't, so failure I take yes, but what is the closest.. us, we, me, I, many words and disgust unbearable pain, the nausea. Alma continuously slaps Elisabeth - her final desperate struggle against her doomed existence.DID ELISABETH SPOKE?See how the director teases the audience with the supposedly speechless Elisabeth seemingly speaks.Alma said after drinkingI came home and looked into the mirror, I thought, but we look alike. I think I could change myself into you if I tried. I mean, inside. Alma then dropped onto the desk, drunk. We then hear a voiceGo to bed. Otherwise, youll fall asleep at the table. But we don't actually see who spoke! Alma herself appears not hearing Elisabeth's voice. Then suddenly, Alma starts up and says exactly same thingI have to go to bed now, or I'll fall asleep at the table. Next day, Alma question Elisabeth if she spoke last night, and if she was in Alma's room, which Elisabeth denies.Later, in maddening rage, Alma almost throws a pot of boiling water onto Elisabeth. At that critical moment, we hear a voice "Don't do it", and yet again we are not exactly sure if Elisabeth did say the words. Alma stops and Elisabeth laughs.When Elisabeth clearly speaks in the very end of the movie, it certainly is the most eerie moments on film.
Spirit of the Beehive
The Spirit of the Beehive
Victor Erices spellbinding The Spirit of the Beehive (El espíritu de la colmena) is one of the greatest films I have ever seen. The film is enigmatic, sublime, and mesmerizing - but hard to understand on first viewing due to its sparse spoken words and heavy reliance on visual and aural imageries. But I am sure the patient viewer will enjoy this film immensely on subsequent viewings, when its symbolic meanings are revealed.The film opens with a traveling movie show of Frankenstein. Anna, younger of the two sisters, becomes curious of the horrifying monster. Just like the little girl in the Frankenstein movie, Anna is not afraid of the monster. Instead, she questions her elder sister, Isabel, why the monster killed the girl, and why others had to kill the monster in turn. The remainder of the film is Anna's quest for an answer.THEMESSince the movie has so little spoken words, it is no surprise that the meaning of the movie can be found from the few extended spoken monologue. However, the themes are merely vaguely conveyed. Ideas such as pre-destination vs free will, the reason for being, existence of evil are beautifully stringed together, and it is up to the viewer to determine how they fit together.Below are the 3 major monologues that convey these themes:[The father wrote in his notebook]: Someone to whom I recently showed my glass beehive, with its movement like the main gear wheel of a clock [hence the frequent display of the clock pendulum - are we human pre-programmed like a clock? Or do we have free will?], someone who saw the constant agitation of the honeycomb [note the honeycomb-colored and -patterned glass window], the mysterious, maddened commotion of the nurse bees over the nests, the teeming bridges and stairways of wax, the invading spirals of the queen, the endless varied and repetitive labors of the swarm, the relentless yet ineffectual toil, the fevered comings and goings the call to sleep always ignored [camera showing Anna and Isabel sleeping], undermining the next day's work, the repose to death far from a place that tolerates neither sickness nor tombs. Someone who observed these things, after the initial astonishment has passed, quickly looked away with an expression of indescribable sadness and horror.A girl reads at school [we see Anna reading the same words silently to herself]: Now neither malice nor hatred, nor even fear of change, I only feel thirst, a thirst for I know not what. Rivers of live, where have you gone? Air, I need air! What do you see in the darkness that makes you silently tremble? [we see Anna near the end of the film trembling at the sight of the monster, before closing her eyes in total acceptance] I see not but only stare like a blind man facing straight into the sun [later we see Anna staring up into the sun, covered by clouds, then closes her eyes]. I shall fall where the fallen never rise. [Anna seems to be looking for something in the well at the abandoned farm house - is she expecting something / someone to rise from it?][Isabel explains to Anna]: Everything in the movie is fake. Besides, I've seen him alive. People can't see him. He only comes out at night. He's a spirit that doesn't have body. You can't kill him [hatred can never be exterminated completely - they always rise up again in a different form!]. Body you see is a disguise put on when they go outside. If you be his friend, you can talk to him anytime. Close your eyes and calling him "I'ts me, Anna!" [we hear floor creaking, as if the monster is appearing. Turns out it is the father upstairs. So is the father a monster too?]--- the following will make sense only if you have seen the film ---I have compiled together imageries for you to come up with your own conclusions of the film's meaning. To be frank, I myself know each time I see the film, I will have different ideas about the film. VISUAL IMAGERYEye: Eye of the paper-mannequin; large dark pupils of Anna; two doors of abandoned farm house leading into total blackness. What is the soul that lies behind the eyes? A monster? A childs innocence?Bees and Beehive: We see bees and beehive both outdoor and indoor; we also see beehive-patterned, honey-colored stained glass window: is then the house a beehive?Worn and Barren Landscape: barren isolated landscape where the abandoned farm house locates; the beehive farm where the father works, alone; the family home that looks barren, worn and tiredDark: Isabel (Anna's sister) is darkness (her choking of cat and smearing of blood on her lips); two dark doors of abandoned farm house; shadow puppets; shadow of moving branches that makes Isabel fearful; climatic Anna's meeting with the monster occur in darkness; bad poisonous mushrooms; notice often the shots of the characters are in front of a dark backgroundLight: Anna is light (her acceptance of the monster and unfear of darkness); candle light; fire (warmth of fireplace; girls jumping over fire; later Anna tries to keep the dying fire alive by throwing in branches); good mushrooms; sometimes the visual open up e.g. mushroom hunt in forest; shots showing setting sun afarGray / Moral Ambiguity: image of the sun screened behind clouds, while Anna gazes up and closes her eyes. Anna finds the bad poisonous mushroom smells sweetly; the ambiguity of reality (of war and death) and dream (of monster and spirits)Sleep: recall the quote about "the fevered comings and goings the call to sleep always ignored"? Not surprisingly, sleep, or deprivation of sleep is a constant motif in the film. We see the father labors deep into the night; the mother faking sleep; Anna lies in bed turning away from Isabel; the sleeping freedom fighter; the father sleeping in this study near the end of the film - as if all the fevered comings and goings are finally dissolved.MONSTERSFirst Monster: Anna meets two monsters before the climatic meeting with the real one near the end. First is at school: the paper-mannequin monster is piece by piece put together by the students - first heart, then lung, stomach, and lastly, the eyes by Anna (I recall in Chinese New Year, Dragon Dance always starts with the symbolic drawing of the eye onto the dragon to give it life).Second Monster: Next encounter is with the freedom fighter in the abandoned farmhouse. Note that both scenes happen in day-time.Third Monster: The climatic scene with the real monster is at night. And who is this real-monster? It's Anna herself! (symbolized by how the reflection of Anna morphed into the monster; and her total submission to him despite trembling fear). Anna is the only character in the movie who has fully come to terms with the inner-monster in her. Perhaps suggesting that others are hypocritical and only seek and kill the monster in others, but never the one in himself.Note that the scene where the villagers seek Anna is in direct parallel to the scene in the Frankenstein movie where the villagers seek the monster [but this scene is not shown in Spirit of the Beehive]. Notice also that the invocation of the monster is by calling "It's me, Anna!". It is as if the monster itself is Anna!AURAL IMAGERYDog Barking outside the beehive-patterned stained glass window: if the house is a protective beehive, what is the sound of dog barking outside a symbol of? Perhaps then the protection is only an illusion. Danger is just a door away.Train: isn't it a reminder to the villagers of their connection to the horror of wars and death? It is the train that brings the second monster to Anna (the freedom fighter)OTHER THEMESAnna's confusion of Dream vs Reality: Anna plays shaving; Isabel plays dead to scare Anna; Anna believes the monster is real; Annas meeting with the monsterIsolation:I dont recall seeing the mother and father speaking directly to each other. There is a powerful scene where the mother fakes sleep when she hears the father is entering the bedroom. We see shadows and shuffling sound the father makes, but never sees father actually joining the mothers bed.As we get closer to the film's end, we see Anna is getting more and more isolated from Isabel (Anna turns away from Isabel when sleeping - just like the mother turning away when hearing the father approaches; at the end Anna is so isolated that she stops responding to anyone, except her call for the monster)Gesture of Hope and Love:Amidst the barrenness and loneliness, there are two scenes of intense sweetness: 1) when the father leaves the house and forgets his hat, the mother throws his hat from the balcony 2) when the mother burns the letter, realizing her dream is dashed, she finally reconciles with reality and has a gesture of love towards her husbandFascination with Death:Anna stood transfixed at the train track upon approaching train - woke up from her revelry only by Isabel's call of Anna's name. Perhaps she feels that the train will bring her to her monster?Isabel's choking of cat and smearing / tasting of blood on her lips, while watching herself in a mirrorFather squashing a bad poisonous mushroomYearning and Obsession:The film is also about human's obsession with the unknown - Anna's obsession with the monster; Isabel's with death; mother's with an unknown man; Father's with mysteries of bees. Recall the quote a school girl reads during class: "I only feel thirst, a thirst for I know not what"SCENE SEQUENCINGThe movie is very sparse with spoken words, and yet its poetry and meaning comes from how the scenes are sequenced.Example 1(A) scene showing mother faking sleep, while we see shadows of her husband hovering the bed making shuffling sounds [feeling of alienation] .. this sudden shifts to -> (B) lively music showing children going to class, while at the end of this scene we see Anna placing the eye onto the paper-mannequin (symbolic of the monster given life) logically leading to -> (C) the abandoned farm house in open field where Anna will meet the next monster - freedom fighterExample 2(A) Anna looked up into the sun leading to -> (B) Anna sleeping, turned away from Isabel leading to -> (C) freedom fighter sleeping in same position as Anna[symbolic of Annas alienation from her sister, and her gradual move towards the monster]Example 3And look at how the scene where Isabel fakes death is built up to:(A) when Anna was flipping the photo album, she saw the words misanthrope, accompanied by sound of an out of tune piano -> (B) Anna blowing into bees, and we see some bees keep falling (Anna fascination with death?) -> (C) Isabel chokes the cat, smear blood on her lips and licking the blood -> (D) Isabel plays dead to scare AnnaCONCLUSIONThe Spirit of the Beehive is not a film to be understood, but to be experienced. At the end of the movie, the doctor explains to the mother: She [Anna] is under the effect of a powerful experience, but bit by bit she will learn to forget. The doctor perhaps means the powerful experience as having eaten a poisonous mushroom, but we all know it is more than that. Watching the film to me is a powerful expereince that I will not learn to forget.
Moon
Moon
Moon, a film by Duncan Jones, is about a man who goes through a personal crisis as he finishes a three-year solitary assignment on the moon.--- spoilers ahead ---Seeing Moon triggers my imagination: What if I have a fatal car accident, and before I expire, I am given a choice to clone myself and have the clone injected with all my memory up till now. The clone`s growth is fast forwarded to reach same age as I am now. Will I be able to fully resign to death and accept the clone's continual existence as my very own? Christopher Nolan's Prestige and Andrew Niccol's Gattaca answer this with a YES - an identity can be owned by another being, accepted as a continuance of the original.Moon's answer (and mine too) is a definite No! Each human, be it the original or a clone, is a separate unique irreplaceable individual.Moon explores this question in a thought provoking way. In Moon, we see Sam appears to be a regular human being, working on the lunar surface to harvest energy for people on Earth. He has two more weeks before his contract expires, when he will be supposedly reuniting with his family back home on Earth. The irony is when his contract expires, his life expires too - but Sam does not know this. Turns out Sam is one of many cloned out of the original Sam, who is living a comfortable life on Earth. This original Sam allows himself to be cloned to produce dispensable labors who work on the lunar surface, doing a dangerous job that probably no one on Earth will want to do. However, a freak accident causes two cloned Sams to meet each other face-to-face, thereby exposing this inhumane and evil plan.Moon is a study of the relationship between two clones, which starts from mutual mistrust and disbelief as they never suspect themselves to be clones. Once they realize the truth, each is willing to sacrifice himself so the other clone can travel back to Earth and confront the original Sam.An interesting twist is that the two clones have very different personalities. Counting the original Sam, this film has three very distinct human being who may look the same but hardly resemble each other inside:1) Sam Original - we hardly know anything of the original Sam, but since he agrees to have his clones be used as dispensable labor that lasts only three years, he probably lacks ethical morals.2) Sam 1 - gentle (taking care of plants), attention to detail (obsession with model making).3) Sam 2 - athletic, impatient, volatile temperSam 1 and Sam 2 are each a unique human being, despite being replicas and are imperfect (can live up to only 3 years). Interestingly, we never see the original Sam, nor any real human being - I am certain it is a conscious decision by the director to emphasize the humanity of the clones, and the inhumane morals of so called real human.GATTACAMoon reminds me of another great Sci-Fi film: Gattaca. In Gattaca, a paralyzed Jerome who has the right gene wants to go into space to make a name for himself. But his paralysis has doomed his dream. He then enters a deal with Vincent, who has deficient gene and would have never qualified for space travel. Jerome provides Vincent with blood, urine samples and his very own identity. The plan is for Vincent to fly into space in the name of Jerome. Sadly, when Vincent achieves Jerome's dream, Jerome commits suicide. Jerome is willing to accept death when his identity will continue its existence in fame, even though it is in someone else's physical body. The ending scene from Gattaca is eerily similar to that of Moon, except in Gattaca Vincent is leaving Earth, while in Moon Sam 2 is flying towards Earth.BLADE RUNNERBlade Runner also explores similar questions on human identify. Artificial humans, built through genetic engineering, are infused with artificial memory and are built to live only four years. These artificial humans often don't even know they are non-human (much like the clones in Moon are unaware of their origin). HAL and GERTYGerty is the computer program running the spaceship in Moon. Gerty's sinister and emotionless voice reminds me of the cold-blooded HAL from 2001 Space Odyssey. Anyone who has seen 2001 Space Odyssey will have a negative prejudice against poor gentle Gerty! HAL was the computer program that runs the spaceship in 2001 Space Odyssey. HAL turns against human, attempts to kill the entire crew. I recall the scene in Moon when Sam fails to enter the right password after many tries. Gerty's mechanical arm appears in the background approaching Sam's back: is Gerty going to harm Sam?! No! Turns out Gerty comes to enter the right password for Sam so he can see video clips of past clones' last moments. Gerty is not only harmless, but it is even trying to help Sam to discover the truth that he is a clone!There are a few more shocking moments relating to Gerty:a) when Sam 1 was confronting Gerty about Sam 2 being a clone, Gerty explains as-a-matter-of-fact to Sam 1 that he himself is a clone!b) When Sam 2 requests Gerty to wake up a third clone, Gerty agrees without arguing!Having worked in the software industry for many years, I often encounter software behaviors that are not planned, but turns out they provide new usage scenarios that are value-added. Perhaps Gerty is like that - he is programmed to keep Sam safe, which taken to the extreme overrides any consideration for its higher-goal of servicing real humans on Earth. The irony is that Gerty's programmed behavior is morally superior to real humans who are using the clones.PLOT GAPS?Here are some plot gaps that are not that serious, but nevertheless makes it less than a perfect film for me:1) why would Gerty the computer be videoconferencing with senior executives on planet Earth, thereby exposing itself to Sam that live feed is indeed working? A computer can easily communicate behind the scene just by sending signals (be it voice, visual, or both).2) if the goal of the corporation is to disallow any live feed communication with Earth, why do they have to first install working live feed machinery, then build sophisticated stations around the area to disable the live feed? They could have installed a fake system that never works in the first place!3) Sam asked Gerty to wake up a 3rd clone, intending to kill the clone and put him back into the wrecked vehicle before the rescue team from Earth arrives. If this is the plan, why bother waking up the 3rd clone? Why not just kill him while he is still asleep?CONCLUSIONThis is an entertaining and at times thought provoking film. It's introspectiveness reminds me also of Steven Soderbergh's Solaris (2002). However, it lacks the strong emotional impact that the aforementioned sci-fi films have on me. Perhaps it's meditative pace is disappointingly disrupted in the end by the sudden manipulative excitement of seeing Sam 2 jumping out of the pod seconds before the rescue team arrives to reprogram the route of the lunar mining vehicles? The ending perhaps could have been better crafted, instead of relying on cheap hollywood tricks for conjuring artificial excitement.
Atonement
Atonement
Atonement, directed by Joe Wright, is one of the greatest films I have seen in last decade. It is based on the novel of the same name by Ian McEwan. At one level, it appears to be about the love between Cecilia from a wealthy family and a housekeeper's son Robbie, and how their love (and lives) is tragically destroyed by Cecilia`s jealous sister Briony due to a misunderstanding.----- spoilers ahead!!! ------At another level, the film is about the need of Briony to atone for her sins in destroying the lives of Robbie and Cecilia. We see at the end of the film Briony at an old age, after living a lifetime of guilt, trying to atone her sins by writing a book called Atonement (significantly this is the name of this film itself!). The book (and the film) is now finally revealed as an imagined fairy-tale happy ending for Robbie and Cecilia that in reality has never occurred. The truth is Robbie and Cecilia were killed during the war. Briony tries to keep Robbie and Cecilia alive through fiction, as some sort of therapy for her guilt, before her memory fades away due to old age.WHY NEED HAPPY ENDINGS?At the end of the film, we realize that the whole film we have seen is entirely Briony`s creation. We can no longer know what is real and what is merely imagined. During the opening of the film, the soundtrack appears to weave in and out of the sound of a typewriter, which comes from Briony's typing. Watching this film the second time, I now realize that this perhaps is an aural symbol that the entire film is actually authored by Briony. The opening shot shows a model of the house that Briony and Cecilia live in - another hint that what we are about to see is based on Briony`s imagination. Does this mean not only Briony's viewpoint at the fountain scene, but also the supposed viewpoints of Robbie and Cecilia when the scene is repeated are all Briony's creative mind at work? During the 3rd act of the movie, we see the teenage Briony writing her book Atonement - a chapter called Two Figures at a Fountain, which is the fountain scene we saw earlier!At a deeper level then, this film is about the nature of reality and how we human needs a happy ending even if it means distorting it. We have military burial ceremonies to honor fallen soldiers, and we hear speeches proclaiming how their sacrifices are not in vain - that the world is a better place because of their bravery. Are we not trying to turn a tragic death into something more sublime?YOU CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE TRUTHTaking this one step further, Briony herself is the creation of the director, screen writer, and author. Perhaps these three creators themselves are having their own personal atonement of some sort? When we watch any film, even if it is a documentary, are we not always shown things from the perspective of a mastermind that is hidden from view? And we as audience, are we not like Briony interpreting what we see in our own personal ways? If this is the case, is there truth at all? Do we not always inject our own subjective interpretation to any observed event? This reminds me of two other great films: Akira Kurosawa's Rashmon and Christopher Nolan's Memento. Both films question the reliability of memory and how the human mind creates a subjective truth. Just like the poster at the top says: "you can only imagine the truth".SIGNT AND SOUNDUnique to this film is how the visuals bleed into the accompanying soundtrack. The perfect example is in the opening: you see and hear Briony typing, of which the sound becomes part of the percussion background of the soundtrack, as if Briony is still obsessively typing. Perhaps this is a symbol that the entire film / book is authored by Briony.Another memorable scene is during the 5 minute continuously shot Dunkirk scene: as we zoom in and see a choir of soldiers singing a song about peace, the lush background soundtrack gradually becomes a poignant harmonization of the song. As the choir gradually is zoomed out, the soundtrack continues while the soldiers' voices fade out, creating an eerily haunting effect.FEW MORE THOUGHTSHere are just a few more poetic things I find in the film:the library scene where Robbie and Cecilia have their first open declaration of love and their first (and probably last) sexual intercourse: appropriately the way their bodies are positioned during sex is strange and grotesque, as seen through the eyes of an innocent 13 year old Briony. (Don't forget that this scene is narrated to us by Briony, filtered through her eyes.)the scene when Briony consoles a dying soldier at the hospital: we see Briony entering through a red curtain to find the dying solder, as if it is Briony's entrance to a stage performance. Turns out the soldier mistakes Briony as someone he loves, and Briony play-acts along.I particularly love the way the film uses water as a recurring motif. First we see Cecilia going under water at the fountain - awakening of their love. Later we see Briony tests Robbie by throwing herself under water - realization of rejected love. Finally Cecilia dies drowning - reuniting with her love.At the end of the film, old Briony is dying of a disease that will cause her to lose her memory. Throughout her life she is haunted by the memory of her sins, and now when she can finally be freed of it, she has decided to complete a book to safe-guard her memory. Isn't this ironic, and yet very human?
Matrix and Waking Life
Dark Knight and Judas
Dead Poets Society
Persona
Spirit of the Beehive
Moon
Atonement
BACK TO MAIN MENU ...
HOME
CONCERT SCHEDULE
PHOTO
MUSIC BLOGS
