Contour At The Movies

Overall Impression – An illuminating look at the tensions present amongst a totally displaced people.    

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s your main character? – Tuvia Bielski.

What’s he trying to accomplish? – Professional: lead the Jewish survivors to safety.  Personal: keep his brothers together, as a family.  Private: hold onto the will to fight.

Who’s trying to stop him? – The Nazis, Tuvia’s brother by questioning his leadership, Tuvia’s own self-doubts, and conflicts amongst the survivors.

What happens if he fails? – Tuvia and the survivors will die.

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan – When the Nazis begin their persecution of the Jews, Tuvia and his two brothers lose not only their parents and homes, but their place in society.   They flee into the wilderness to avoid being caught and killed.

Wanderer – When the brothers encounter other Jewish survivors, they agree to take them under their protection, necessitating raids on local farms for food and supplies.  Before long, Tuvia avenges his parents by murdering the local police chief responsible for their deaths, and the brothers begin attacking the Nazis in earnest.  However, resulting Jewish casualties cause Tuvia to reconsider this approach, which opens up a conflict between him and his brother, Zus: do they defy the Nazis by killing them, or by surviving in the forest? 

Warrior – Everyone becomes a warrior of some form: Zus joins a company of Soviet partisans to take the fight to the Nazis.  Tuvia becomes the true leader of the survivors and they start rebuilding their lives, taking on new roles for the survival of the group and training to fight.  All of this is done in the face of sickness, a deadly winter and an ever-nearing enemy.  When the Nazis finally discover their position, everybody puts their skills to the test in the final fight for survival.

Martyr – During their escape from the Nazis, Tuvia loses hope when they encounter a seemingly impassable marsh.  Tuvia’s youngest brother, Asael, inspires hope by being willing to risk almost certain death to cross it, believing that they can overcome anything if they work together.

AND, IN THE END…

I enjoyed the movie, but felt the third act wasn’t as powerful as it could have been.  That isn’t to say the final fight against the Nazis wasn’t awesome, or that the action was lacking in any way.  For me, it’s that the crossing of the marsh made for a weak MARTYR element, which diminished what followed.  

First – the marsh just didn’t seem hard enough as an obstacle, and it felt less insurmountable than some of the challenges they’d already faced.

Second – was there really a choice here?  In the circumstances, who wouldn’t choose a marsh over a squad of murderous Nazis?  I was unconvinced that this moment was powerful enough to restore Tuvia’s will to fight and survive.

Third – during the final fight, Tuvia and one of his men are pinned under fire behind some trees.  Tuvia’s man finds a grenade and runs at a firing squad, getting shot two steps into his attack.  Clearly he was willing to die fighting rather than be hunted down, but if that mentality and determination is present, was crossing the marsh really something to lose faith about?

I suppose the biggest point this raises for me is the ordering of obstacles in terms of difficulty, and how these obstacles operate.  I took away more from the failed grenade run than the marsh crossing, which I don’t think was the intent.

                                                                                           - Dan Pilditch

Overall Impression – In my eyes, a beautiful movie that gets me every time I watch it. Especially those two scenes in which Samuel watches the ultra sound tape and when he asks Rebecca to marry him in the hospital. Or is it the music that does it?

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s your main character? — Samuel

What’s he trying to accomplish? – Professional: Figure out how to be both good in a relationship and a good (potential) father.  Personal: Samuel doesn’t want to change his stable life and doesn’t want to get married and have children.  Private: Not be someone his child will hate when he or she grows up.

Who’s trying to stop him? – Rebecca

What happens if he fails? — Samuel will stuck in an unstable, child-like likfe and lose the one woman who really loves him…as well as his unborn child..

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan –  Samuel is in a five-year relationship with Rebecca. She lets him know that she would like to get married and have children. He, however, says that he prefers having a stable life. They have everything they want: a good job, a good house and a nice sport car, why risk that? Samuel shows here that he is an emotional orphan.

Wanderer — Rebecca tells Samuel that she is pregnant. He is shocked. It becomes clear that they have to make changes in their life.  He he has to sell the sports car, something he doesn’t want to do.  Also, his cat will have to go, something else he doesn’t want to do.  Samuel tries to learn the rules of how to leave his old life behind.  When Samule forgets an ultrasound appointment, Rebecca leaves him. 

 Warrior –  Samuel watches the video recording of the ultrasound of the baby and finally gets it: he is in love with the baby and feels ready to be fully committed to change. Samuel tries to convince Rebecca that he is ready to be a father. She doesn’t want to believe him. He asks his friend to arrange a meeting with her in the park but then hears that Rebecca had to go to the hospital.

Martyr — In the hospital, Samuel tells her that he is sorry for his behavior and that he is a changed man. He tells her that he sold his sport car for a family car. He even says. “I don’t care about myself anymore, I only care about the baby.”

AND, IN THE END…

This is a movie about change. What Samuel really wants in the beginning of the movie is his current life. What he wants at the end of the movie is to be a father and having a family. He gets what he really needed and not what he wanted: he gives up his playful youthful life and becomes an adult.

This fits very well into the idea of “what is your main character WRONG about at the start of the movie.”  The rest of the movie sets about answering this question.  In NINE MONTHS, Samuel is wrong about thinking that he can be a child forever.  Sooner or later, everyone has to grow up.

–  André van Haren

As of today, the downloadable version of Contour is the fifth most popular product being sold by The Writers Store in LA!  Whoo-hoo!  

Now, if only we could do something about those damn brass fasteners…

Overall Impression – Fun, but it felt like something was missing.

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s your main character? – Carl Allen.

What’s he trying to accomplish? – Professional: become a ‘Yes Man’.  Personal: win over Allison.  Private: not spend his life alone.

Who’s trying to stop him? – Minor obstacles along the way… mostly his own cynical self, but there’s no real antagonist. 

What happens if he fails? – He remains alone.

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan – After being spurned by his wife, Carl lives alone, brushes off his friends and takes no joy in life.  He’s the ultimate cynic, saying “no” to every opportunity that comes his way.

Wanderer – When Carl attends a ‘Yes Man’ seminar, he’s convinced to change his life around by saying “YES!” to every opportunity.  Carl’s skepticism is well founded.  Every time he says “yes”, something bad happens, but when he decides he’s done with the program, a dog nearly mauls him, so Carl now believes in the ‘covenant’: that bad things happen to those who say “no”!  So, he continues saying “yes” and remains a skeptic… until he meets Allison.

Warrior – Encouraged, Carl starts saying “yes” to every opportunity – and it works!  He gets promoted, he and Allison begin dating… until Allison learns about the ‘Yes Man’ program and thinks Carl only agreed to their whirlwind romance because he felt he had to, not because he wanted to.

Martyr – Carl risks everything to win Allison back, going so far as to cause a car crash to get Terrance Stamp to remove the ‘covenant’ – even though there isn’t one.

AND, IN THE END…

This was a fun movie, but the something that I felt was missing lies in the concept.

YES MAN follows the ultimate cynic who starts saying “yes” to every opportunity that comes his way.  The obvious comedic potential lies in saying “yes” to weird opportunities (which he does), and then we have Jim Carrey, who acts funny wherever he is (which he does). 

Many people likened YES MAN to LIAR LIAR, and found the latter to be superior.  I agree, because the concept for LIAR LIAR elevated everything comedically, instead of merely facilitating it.  Carrey plays a lawyer who doesn’t want to tell the truth, but has to, and there’s absolutely nothing he can do about it.  Fletcher has to deal with his worst nightmare (and ours): telling the truth all the time.

In YES MAN, Carl throws himself into a bunch of outlandish situations.  Why?  Because he has to say “yes”.  Why must he say “yes?”  Because of that covenant thing… which doesn’t really exist.  Then why’s he really doing it?  Maybe it’s because he wants to change.  Would LIAR LIAR be funny if Fletcher wanted to tell the truth?    

In my mind, this kind of comedy has to have a hero who absolutely doesn’t want to change, but doesn’t have a choice.  That’s the “something”.  LIAR LIAR had it.  I’m not sure YES MAN did.

                                                                                                                                                                                                – Dan Pilditch

Overall Impression – A mostly solid tale about personal sacrifice… if you can forgive Germans speaking in American and English accents.

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s your main character? – Claus von Stauffenberg.

What’s he trying to accomplish? – Professional: assassinate the Nazi power players and stage a government coup.  Personal: free Germany from its real enemy – the Nazis.  Private: fight for a cause that’s worth risking his and his family’s lives for.

Who’s trying to stop him? – The Nazis and some members within Stauffenberg’s own coalition.

What happens if he fails? – Stauffenberg and everyone he knows will be executed, including his family.  Germany will remain under the control of the Nazis, and any hope of a peaceful end to the war will be lost.

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan – While Stauffenberg is a solder thrust into bureaucracy, he’s alone because he questions the very cause he’s fighting for, while everyone around him is dangerously loyal.

Wanderer – Stauffenberg is brought to a secret society that plans to assassinate Hitler.  They flesh out an amended operation “Valkyrie”, but to make it official Stauffenberg needs Hitler’s signature.  If that weren’t daunting enough, they must convince certain high-ranking Nazis to join their cause in order to succeed.

Warrior – The plan is put into action, but when it fails (nothing ever goes according to plan), they’ve got to come up with another before they lose their opportunity.  After the deed is carried out, Stauffenberg and his men launch the coup, gradually assuming control from the Nazis.

Martyr – After that plan fails (nothing ever goes according to plan), Stauffenberg and his men fight to the bitter end as the Nazis wrench back the control they momentarily lost.  

AND, IN THE END…

Valkyrie is about sacrifice.  What drives a person to become a martyr?  What does it mean to be a martyr?  These are all questions that should be asked about the heroes of the past if we’re to understand what they did, and why they did it.

Did Valkyrie ask these questions?  Arguably, yes.

I say ‘arguably’ because it’s a matter of opinion (and of historical knowledge).  We know that Stauffenberg and his team are doomed to failure before we see the movie, and one could argue that this robs it of any real dramatic tension: there’s no ‘will they/won’t they succeed’ dynamic. 

One could also argue (as I’m more inclined) that this worked in the movie’s favor.  Since we know they’re going to fail, we can better identify with Stauffenberg because deep down, he knows that they’re going to fail too.  I would argue that Stauffenberg understood he was making the ultimate sacrifice before he even decided to fight the Nazis, and everything after that point is a window into the mind of a martyr.  

– Dan Pilditch

Overall Impression – An impressive film, can’t get enough of it. One of the best movies of the famous composer, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, ever made… in my opinion.

THE FOUR QUESTIONS

Who’s your main character? — Salieri

What’s he trying to accomplish? – Professional: Prove that he’s a superior musician to Mozart.  Personal: Destroy Mozart’s and prevent him from getting a job at the court. Private: Punish God by destroying His creation, Mozart.

Who’s trying to stop him? – God (according to Salieri)

What happens if he fails? — Salieri will be a frustrated composer who will always feel that he’s a mediocre failure.

THE FOUR ARCHETYPES

Orphan — Salieri is an unhappy child. He wants to be a great composer. His father, however, doesn’t allow him to study music and so, Salieri prays to God to make him a great composer.

Wanderer — Salieri’s wish is granted, according to himself. His father dies and Salieri travels to Vienna to study music. Some years later, he becomes the court composer of Emperor Joseph of Austria. Salieri is happy being a famous composer, until he meets Mozart.  He recognizes in Mozart real genius, and tries to figure out how channel and control Mozart without letting on to the rest of the court that Mozart’s music is superior to his own. 

 Warrior – Salieri is angry at God because He gave not him, but “a monkey”, the bigger musical gift.  It is as if God is laughing at him!  From now on, he and God are enemies. He decides to destroy God’s creation by first ordering a beautiful requiem from Mozart and then kill him. During Mozart’s funeral he then will perform this requiem under his own name so the whole world will know that he, Salieri, is the greatest composer that ever lived!

Martyr — As Mozart lies dying, Salieri helps him work on his Requiem, seemingly softening on and almost willing to give up his vengeance (the martyr moment), showing a real tenderness and appreciation to the man and his talent that he’s destroying.  Still, it’s not enough and Mozart dies.  Many years later, now an old man, Salieri tries to kill himself, asking Mozart for forgiveness. He adored Mozart, it was God he hated!

AND, IN THE END…

I have seen this movie so many times since it came out many years ago and never realized that it is in fact about Salieri and his struggle with God. It’s however great to see how Mozart does his tricks, like hearing a musical piece only once and then performing it even better than Salieri wrote it in the first place! And what about the scene in which he improvises on a given melody in the style of other composers; beautiful!

– André van Haren