Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

What is below is not a full fledged exploration into the films plot. I'm not looking to spoil the film if you haven't seen it. In fact if you haven't seen it and are reading this, stop reading and go see the movie! Who wants to read a Blog post anyway? Below is a thought, one of many that I had on this film, but I chose what I chose and so therefore.....

When I was in middle school I remember a social studies class lesson that dealt with oral traditions. Part of the lesson was how do we get history from long ago to now. The oral tradition of storytelling and relaying events over time was a means of providing information, and of course there is writing down information. This combination is not fail proof as we are sure to have experienced at one point, sometimes your memory fails you and sometimes you write in error. The class tried to do a simple telephone game to prove this by trying to relay a sentence from one end of the room to the other. Of course, the starting sentence was nowhere near close to what the final product revealed. The same can be seen in our traditions and mythologies. Throughout history we have mythologies and traditions that have passed from the oral, to written and then even to recorded, both audio and visual. Now we can even consider the myths and traditions to have passed on to digital with new forms on the horizon. With each passing we would like to think that we have come to a more solid transference of information, one where errors are limited and sources are plentiful. We can reserve somewhere in our minds that what we know is true and trust the traditions that have been passed on to us. Unfortunately that seems to be in antithetical to what mythology and traditions are.

Star Wars Episode 8: The Last Jedi (Dir. Rian Johnson, 2017) continues the mythology of the Star Wars universe. One where fans of the films have experienced the rise and fall of many characters and worlds and hopefully have experienced some sort of entertainment by films end. The film returns the main characters of the previous film The Force Awakens (Dir. Abrams, 2015) as well as introducing some new characters. There is Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran), Vice Admiral Holdo (Laura Dern) DJ (Benicio Del Toro) and in more physical form this time around, Snoke (Andy Serkis). We also get some new creatures that are sure to sell in all manners of plush to collectors. The small puffin like bird Porgs blow Ewoks away on the cute scale. We come to expect new characters, creatures and places when we watch a new Star Wars film, it's part of the tradition, adds richness to the mythology. What is not expected are when the core tenants to the mythology are changed.

At the time of writing this The Last Jedi is still new to the world. The criticism to the film is mixed, how can it not be? The franchise is so large and far reaching, that it extends beyond the movie screen to multiple media levels. Even if one is solely watching the films and nothing else Star Wars, there are certain traditions that have been ingrained within the viewers understanding of the Star Wars universe that any attempt at subverting those traditions risks a complete destruction of the space time continuum. Okay, not that serious, but people will be upset. This is where The Last Jedi leads us. The film tells us that everything we know, or think we know, is not absolutely true. For example, in a scene where Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) asks Rey (Daisy Ridley) what she thinks the force is, her answer is simple; It's a power that Jedi have that lets them control people and...make things float. Sounds about right, right? Luke says she's everything she says is wrong. In turn, he's telling us that everything we know is wrong.

The Last Jedi seems to put us in some unknown territory of the Star Wars mythology. The George Lucas  mythological construction of the first six films, and continued somewhat by J.J. Abrams in The Force Awakens, seems to be twisted into an uncomfortable form in The Last Jedi. Much of The Last Jedi shows a Rebel Alliance that is in complete disarray and failure, the Force as almost like a side note in a conflict of ambiguous wills, a conflict that is exploited by war profiteers, and heroes that seem to have taken a few steps back in their heroism. The Force Awakens teased us with Luke Skywalker but in The Last Jedi we get to spend some time with him. We find an older, bitter and still naive Jedi that seems to have thrown away his past successes because of one moment of perceived failure. We do get a glimpse into what happened to Luke, post Return of the Jedi (Dir. Marquand, 1983), but only that which serves The Last Jedi and its plot. That brief glimpse isn't much to dwell on. We don't get the Luke Skywalker that has turned into all powerful comic book hero.

I can only wonder why this challenge to the mythological structure of Star Wars with The Last Jedi? Was this the plan all along? Did a producer ruin things? Did the director fail the film? That insider information isn't available...yet. What could be a plausible thought is that maybe The Last Jedi is the normal shift that happens to traditions and myths as time progresses. The Star Wars universe is over 40 years old. Times have changed. The political realities have shifted, technology has allowed for different aspects of the story to be explored, our cultural outlooks have changed. When looking at mythology there doesn't seem to be too many absolutes. There are no set rules or meanings, but rather interpretations to understanding a myth. Take cats for example in Japanese mythology. Some see the cat as ominous but cats were often brought on ships as a measure of protection against sea creatures. There's context and then there is who is telling, or writing, the myth. In the end we compile what information we have and try to draw a conclusion, even if the conclusion creates some dissonance.

The Last Jedi may not fall on the favorites part of the spectrum of Star Wars films in the long run. There will be another Star Wars film and maybe the next one will give a boost of credit to The Last Jedi. Where the mythology goes next is not certain, and that, at least to me, is a good thing. These times are uncertain and so why shouldn't The Last Jedi, or any other future Star War film reflect that uncertainty. Take comfort in knowing that this myth is not going to go the way you think.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer

Never judge a book by it's cover, or for that fact, never judge a film by it's title. The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017), directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, might have the most evocative title for a film this year but the film goes beyond its title to areas both uncomfortable and horrific. The story revolves around Steven Murphy (Colin Farrell) and his family. Steven, a wealthy cardiovascular surgeon seems to have everything that one could want in life; riches, family, job security and the illusion of safety. That illusion is brought to him, and us, by Martin (Barry Keoghan). Martin is a 16 year old who seems to have no reasonable connection to Steven but as the film progresses we learn that, for Steven, the relationship is necessary with evil intentions. So you might be wondering, what does this have to do with killing a sacred deer?

Lanthimos provides the metaphorical title that we are to explore its meaning as the film progresses. The metaphors can also extend to Lanthimos style, which can be seen as very cold and uniform. Humanity seems to be lacking, especially through the characters interactions, it seems at times we are watching robots interact. This dryness and austere quality is nothing but a mask for deeper emotions and secrets that the characters internalize. Steven's family consists of his wife Anna (Nicole Kidman) son Bob (Sunny Suljic) and teenage daughter Kim (Raffey Cassidy). Steven and Anna put on the appearance of dutiful parents who try and be in control of all aspects of their children's life. They are schedule freaks whose relationship with their children has the appearance of success and dutifulness. Steven gives praise to his kids for their success while at the same time pushing them to be better. Which comes across as over bearing at first but later takes on a greater meaning. While Lanthimos shows us the family dynamic he seems to be showing us the structure of their relationships while also showing how easily things can fall apart. When we witness the breakdown of the family we begin to understand not only the design of the family but also  the reason behind Lanthimos design of their relationship. When Martin is introduced into the family dynamic it is then the facade of the successful family begins to crack away.

Martin's introduction to the Murphy family leads to the slow destruction of the family unit while also allowing us to understand what the sacred deer is. Martin's innocent introduction is nothing more than a cruel act, he is like an imp whose purpose is to push Steven to the breaking point. Lanthimos does not make the reasoning for Martin and his actions easy for us, and gratefully so for us. There are aspects to the Murphy families issues that are comedic and twisted while at the same time horrific. Lanthimos makes the journey uncomfortable, especially through the soundtrack of the film. At times the music is reminiscent of The Shining, timpani pitch rolls and high pitch strings and all. The music, acting and cinematography creates a dissonance of emotion that can put the viewer in some uncomfortable places.

It is in these uncomfortable places that we witness Steven struggle with what he finds sacred. Though he seems to be a cold figure that is at times distant from his family, his love and protection for his family grows as he fights for his family's survival. But the fight for survival comes at some great costs. Not just physically but also psychologically. What Lanthimos seems to show is that success in life is not without sacrifice, and those sacrifice's sometimes come at the cost of others. Steven may be proficient in being able to fix other peoples hearts but there are some matters of the heart that can not be fixed. The Killing of a Sacred Deer allows us to understand what sacred means. But in order to understand the sacred we have to go into dark territory and navigate it for a while. Once we have finished with that territory we, as well as the Murphy family in the film, are left to move on in silence.

La La Land

In the early 1900's, plots of desert southern California land were purchased by entrepenuaers of a new form of entertainment, cinematic storytelling.  Those plots of land would become what would eventually be known as Hollywood Land, later shortened to Hollywood. A mythical place where the ordinary could become extraordinary and where life could transcend itself onto the eager eyes of millions of screen watchers across the country and the world. Hollywood was sold to the masses through the films in which it produced. Films that showed the glamour, glitz, and sun drenched skies that lead to posh night life with endless pleasures. The pull to be a part of this world has led and continues to lead hundreds and thousands to the mythical place in search of accessing the utopian dream. 

Damian Chazelle's musical film La La Land shows us that the mythical world still exists and that dreamers  are still striving to be a part of that world. Through the two lead characters Mia (Emma Stone) and Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) we follow two dreamers in their quest to become a part of Hollywood. Mia strives to be an actress and Sebastian a legitimate nightclub owner that plays true jazz. There first encounter is in Los Angeles traffic, which to form is never a positive experience for anyone. Later they meet at a party, Sebastian performing in an 80's cover band and Mia trying to avoid falling into a relationship trap with another party goer. They save each other and as expected, slowly form a relationship that leads from just friends to lovers.

Chazelle uses many classic storytelling devices that can be expected of romantic films, especially in classical Hollywood musicals; falling in and out of love, dance numbers, musical themes and motifs and that overall sense that the world can stop for a musical number. Though much of what happens on screen is not new to movie musicals, Chazelle injects a vibrancy of life into the narrative. The vibrancy is shown through the colors that jump out of the ultra wide screen that Mia and Sebastian move and dance their way through. The score and soundtrack put together by Justin Hurwitz is infectious and adds the all important layer of sound that bridges the emotions of the characters to the audience. 

La La Land is part homage to movie musicals (as many film critics have pointed out) but also homage to a type of storytelling that has been overshadowed by special effects and somber realism, the only way to describe it is Hollywood melodrama. Hollywood melodrama encompasses the grandeur of star actors and production design that leads to an overwhelming scope that we, the audience, inherently know is out of reach but we still reach for it. One example from the film is where Mia and Sebastian go the Griffith Observatory after having watched Rebel Without a Cause (Ray, 1955). While at the observatory Mia and Sebastian perform a dance number "in the stars" that are projected in the ceiling. In a moment of shared love they float into the air, dancing to music that would fit perfectly into a musical in the 1950's. Chazelle expresses the emotions of the moment through extraordinary means that in no way reflect actual reality. But Chazelle knows that the emotions are real, for we ourselves may have experienced them at some point in our life, and therefore we can suspend reality to get lost in the moment. (i.e Think Singin' in the Rain (Donen & Kelly, 1952) and Gene Kelly's iconic dance number where he sings in the rain.) Not many filmmakers would be willing to take that chance. In some respects Scorsese seemed to have tried for it with his film New York, New York (1977) and failed. Chazelle is successful in part because he allows us to float on the dreams of the characters and not force us into confined tropes. 

What seems to bring La La Land into more extraordinary filmmaking territory is its understanding of the nature of Hollywood. For all of the visions of grandeur that comes from dreaming of success there is an undertone of compromise that one has to journey through. In the film Sebastion takes a gig as a keyboard player in a successful band that has him on the road away from Mia. Mia sacrifices herself to trying to be successful that it causes strife in her relationship with Sebastian. The sacrifice eventually leads her to success but also moves her a world away from Sebastian. The relationship that we have seen grow throughout the film matures into something that is often times all too familiar and very much a part of the reality of life. The ending of the film allows us to understand the dream of both Mia and Sebastian while also the reality of choices they have made. 

Hollywood continues to be that epicenter of the big screen dream for so many. La La Land updates our dreamers into the twenty first century while utilizing past filmmaking styles and techniques. Chazelle reminds us that the big screen can still produce dreams and show us emotions in ways that sing to us. Those emotions in turn make us want to dance and sing and get ourselves lost in our own la la lands.