Thursday, January 14, 2016
Three New Conscious Cinema Reviews
Check out three new Conscious Cinema Reviews on the New Consciousness Review web site -- "Fully Charged," "The Physics of the Soul" and Time Is Art," all available by clicking here.
Thursday, January 7, 2016
‘Concussion’ hails the merits of value fulfillment
“Concussion” (2015). Cast: Will Smith, Alec Baldwin, Albert Brooks, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, David Morse, Arliss Howard, Mike O’Malley, Eddie Marsan, Paul Reiser, Hill Harper, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Richard T. Jones, Luke Wilson, Matthew Willig, Dan Ziskie, Sara Lindsey. Director: Peter Landesman. Screenplay: Peter Landesman. Magazine Article Story Source: Jeanne Marie Laskas, “Game Brain,” GQ magazine. Web site. Trailer.
Even if it’s not always apparent, we all have a purpose in life. In some cases it will be patently obvious, while in others it’s about as seemingly unlikely as one can imagine. And it’s that latter scenario that provides the basis for the story line in the new fact-based sports drama, “Concussion.”
When forensic neuropathologist Dr. Bennet Omalu (Will Smith) performs autopsies in the morgue of the Allegheny County Coroner’s Office, he treats his subjects with a sense of respect and dignity one might not expect in such a cold, clinical setting. The highly educated Nigerian-born immigrant even speaks to his “patients,” asking them to help him discover why they died, a sensitive, humane approach that goes beyond simply cutting open the victims’ bodies and performing calculated scientific analyses to find the answers behind their demise. Some of his colleagues, like co-worker Daniel Sullivan (Mike O’Malley), find such practices quaint, even amusing, but Bennet insists on showing reverence, a quality that’s an outgrowth of his spiritual background as a devout Roman Catholic. And, despite such good-natured ribbing, he nevertheless has the support of his superior, County Coroner Dr. Cyril Wecht (Albert Brooks), who truly values Bennet’s conscientious, meticulous work.
Most of Bennet’s subjects are everyday people, but that changes one day when he’s asked to perform an autopsy on a high-profile victim, former Pittsburgh Steelers center Mike Webster (David Morse). The onetime National Football League all-star, who had played on four Super Bowl championship teams and was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame, died homeless and penniless of an apparent suicide after experiencing a prolonged period of mental instability. Most of Bennet’s colleagues want him to dispense with the procedure as quickly and quietly as possible to preserve the good name of the Steel City hero. But, true to form, the good doctor wants to learn why he died, looking for the underlying cause that prompted Webster to take his own life in the first place.
In performing Webster’s autopsy, Bennet makes some puzzling discoveries. He finds no evidence of brain tumors or other abnormalities typically associated with mental instability. So, in light of that, he wonders, why would a 50-year-old man with an apparently normal brain fall prey to a condition like this, one that would prove to be so troubling that it would lead to suicide? That’s what Bennet wants to find out.
To discover the cause, Bennet proposes conducting a number of specialized tests not typically performed on autopsy victims, a suggestion that meets with much resistance due to cost and potential damage to Webster’s legacy. In the interest of finding the truth, Bennet is at a loss to understand such opposition. When he’s asked if he knows who Webster is and what he meant to the City of Pittsburgh, Bennet confesses that he knows nothing of his subject’s career or about football in general, adding that such considerations don’t matter to him in the pursuit of finding an answer. In fact, he’s so concerned that he even agrees to pay for the tests out of his own pocket, an amount totaling about $20,000.
When Bennet receives the test results, he’s startled. He discovers evidence consistent with the effects of extreme repetitive head trauma, the kind that he postulates would come from repeated blows to the brain brought about by recurring hits from the helmets of opposing football players. Given Webster’s years of playing the game as a child, in high school, in college and in 16 years as a pro, Bennet estimates that Webster suffered over 70,000 such hits, most likely resulting in numerous concussions, many of which may have gone unrecognized. And, considering how many players participated in the game over the years, Bennet suspects that Webster’s case is far from an isolated instance, a suspicion that would soon prove correct.
With the suicides of additional players, like former Pittsburgh Steeler Justin Strzelczyk (Matthew Willig) and Philadelphia Eagle Andre Waters (Richard T. Jones), further evidence of the condition (now known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE) becomes available. Shortly thereafter, Bennet approaches renowned University of Pittsburgh neurology researcher Dr. Steven DeKosky (Eddie Marsan) with his findings, seeking to publish them in a professional medical journal. DeKosky agrees with Bennet’s conclusions, and, before long, word of his work gets into print, an unpopular development that launches an avalanche of retribution against the author from a variety of sources, most notably the NFL.
Given the potentially disastrous economic and public relations consequences of this disclosure, the NFL (led by the likes of League Commissioners Paul Tagliabue (Dan Ziskie) and Roger Goodell (Luke Wilson)) seeks to bury the issue. Bennet is called a quack with no substantiation for his findings, and he and his wife, Prema (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), are targeted for various forms of harassment and intimidation. Even Bennet’s boss, Dr. Wecht, comes under scrutiny; as an elected public official, he’s indicted on trumped-up charges of having used public resources for personal purposes.
However, despite this fabricated smear campaign, a supportive, highly credible ally comes to Bennet’s aid, Dr. Julian Bailes (Alec Baldwin). As former Pittsburgh Steelers team physician, Julian acknowledges and concurs with Bennet’s research. He also advises Bennet that the NFL had been aware of the concussion issue for years but chose to look the other way, claiming that the issue continually needed more study. And so, with this powerful new collaborator in tow, Bennet forges ahead to take on those who would attempt to silence him, to get them to tell the truth.
At first glance, Bennet’s crusade may seem almost quixotic. Who would have thought that a Nigerian immigrant who knows little, if anything, about a sport that’s totally foreign to him would be willing to take on one of America’s most cherished institutions (and most powerful and influential corporations) over the health and safety practices it employs with regard to its players? Yet that’s precisely what he does. So that naturally raises the question, why?
Ultimately the answer rests with Bennet’s character, the persona he has crafted for himself through the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents. In creating himself, Bennet produces a caring, compassionate soul, one who lives his life in line with his benevolent, spiritual nature for the betterment of himself and those around him, a principle in conscious creation circles known as value fulfillment.
Those who live their value fulfillment possess certain unmistakable qualities that are hallmarks of the conscious creation process. For example, they operate from a tremendous underlying capacity for integrity. In seeking to make his findings known, Bennet never second-guesses his actions or intentions. To him, the results speak for themselves and must be made known, regardless of the implications. The truth, in his eyes, is the truth and must be told, period.
This quality pervades Bennet’s character so thoroughly that it’s even reflected in his family surname, which he shortened to Omalu from Onyemalukwube when he emigrated. In a rare moment of doubt in which he shares with Prema some reservations about his actions, she reminds him that he can’t help but carry through because his efforts mirror what Onyemalukwube means – “he who knows, speak.” With that gentle reminder, Bennet’s resolve is re-energized, and he vows to proceed, no matter what the cost.
This outlook speaks to another conscious creation principle that Bennet freely embraces – his willingness to live heroically. When others outline the potential ramifications of making his findings known, he’s unfazed. This becomes apparent, for example, when Dr. Wecht warns Bennet that he’s about to take on a corporation “that owns a day of the week,” a prospect that he readily shrugs off, because, in his mind, even those stakes should not be allowed to trump the truth. Such innate courage enables him to confront his adversaries and carry on.
Bennet is also adept at making use of the synchronicities that come his way to increase awareness for his crusade. For example, when he needs allies, he skillfully attracts them to his cause as seen by the arrivals of Drs. DeKosky and Bailes in his life. He’s also not hesitant to draw attention to his work by drawing attention to the tragic events that yielded his findings, even personalizing the circumstances to enhance their impact on public opinion and lawmakers. The effect of this is compounded when he later learns about the tragic suicide of Dave Duerson (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje), a former safety for the Chicago Bears who became a League insider in retirement – and who subsequently took his own life when he was no longer able to cope with the effects of CTE. (In fact, the seemingly once-skeptical Duerson had such a change of heart about the seriousness of this condition that he even went so far as to shoot himself in the chest in order to preserve his brain for further study after his death, quite a reversal for a onetime company man.) Some might arguably call such tactics exploitation, but, then, would anyone have known about this troubling issue had Bennet not made word of it public?
Even seemingly “negative” or obstructing influences can have unexpectedly fortuitous, synchronistic effects. For instance, the many impediments that Bennet runs into may superficially appear to be hindrances or setbacks, but they also have a beneficial impact by keeping him focused and galvanizing him in his beliefs, the means by which he creates the outcomes he seeks. The attempted harassment, stonewalling, obstructionism and character assassination thrust upon Bennet not only fail to achieve their objective but actually serve to empower him in his efforts. He knows how to respond to such intended hampering initiatives by employing beliefs that turn them on their ear and making them work to his advantage. His ability to envision desired results by both effectively creating his own successes and making lemonade out of the foul fruits others throw him ultimately lead him to realize his goals, aspirations that benefit others and epitomize the very meaning of value fulfillment.
“Concussion” may not seem like interesting fare for a feature film, but it succeeds tremendously on virtually every front. Though somewhat formulaic, this exceedingly well-made picture tells an engaging tale about one sincere, committed man’s efforts to exact justice when it’s perilously impaled on the capitalist sacrificial altar. The film capably weaves suspense, heartfelt drama and understated heroics into a package loaded with outstanding performances, particularly those of Smith, Morse and Brooks. There’s a slight tendency for the pacing to drag at times in the second hour, and the romantic interest subplot doesn’t work as well as it could have, but “Concussion” passes muster in almost every other respect.
The film is truly one of the pleasant surprises of this year’s awards season releases. Which is why it’s also surprising that the film hasn’t garnered more attention in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has only earned one nomination, a best dramatic actor nod for Smith in the Golden Globe Awards contest. It would be gratifying to see the picture grab more attention in some of this year’s remaining competitions, like the Oscars.
Heroism comes in all forms and in all manner of milieus, and it often takes the form of the David and Goliath scenario on display here. And, no matter how bad things may get, thankfully we nearly always have champions who will step up to address such matters. But, then, that’s to be expected from anyone who is committed to living out his value fulfillment, an effort for which everyone who benefits should be eternally grateful.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Even if it’s not always apparent, we all have a purpose in life. In some cases it will be patently obvious, while in others it’s about as seemingly unlikely as one can imagine. And it’s that latter scenario that provides the basis for the story line in the new fact-based sports drama, “Concussion.”
When forensic neuropathologist Dr. Bennet Omalu (Will Smith) performs autopsies in the morgue of the Allegheny County Coroner’s Office, he treats his subjects with a sense of respect and dignity one might not expect in such a cold, clinical setting. The highly educated Nigerian-born immigrant even speaks to his “patients,” asking them to help him discover why they died, a sensitive, humane approach that goes beyond simply cutting open the victims’ bodies and performing calculated scientific analyses to find the answers behind their demise. Some of his colleagues, like co-worker Daniel Sullivan (Mike O’Malley), find such practices quaint, even amusing, but Bennet insists on showing reverence, a quality that’s an outgrowth of his spiritual background as a devout Roman Catholic. And, despite such good-natured ribbing, he nevertheless has the support of his superior, County Coroner Dr. Cyril Wecht (Albert Brooks), who truly values Bennet’s conscientious, meticulous work.
Most of Bennet’s subjects are everyday people, but that changes one day when he’s asked to perform an autopsy on a high-profile victim, former Pittsburgh Steelers center Mike Webster (David Morse). The onetime National Football League all-star, who had played on four Super Bowl championship teams and was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame, died homeless and penniless of an apparent suicide after experiencing a prolonged period of mental instability. Most of Bennet’s colleagues want him to dispense with the procedure as quickly and quietly as possible to preserve the good name of the Steel City hero. But, true to form, the good doctor wants to learn why he died, looking for the underlying cause that prompted Webster to take his own life in the first place.
In performing Webster’s autopsy, Bennet makes some puzzling discoveries. He finds no evidence of brain tumors or other abnormalities typically associated with mental instability. So, in light of that, he wonders, why would a 50-year-old man with an apparently normal brain fall prey to a condition like this, one that would prove to be so troubling that it would lead to suicide? That’s what Bennet wants to find out.
To discover the cause, Bennet proposes conducting a number of specialized tests not typically performed on autopsy victims, a suggestion that meets with much resistance due to cost and potential damage to Webster’s legacy. In the interest of finding the truth, Bennet is at a loss to understand such opposition. When he’s asked if he knows who Webster is and what he meant to the City of Pittsburgh, Bennet confesses that he knows nothing of his subject’s career or about football in general, adding that such considerations don’t matter to him in the pursuit of finding an answer. In fact, he’s so concerned that he even agrees to pay for the tests out of his own pocket, an amount totaling about $20,000.
When Bennet receives the test results, he’s startled. He discovers evidence consistent with the effects of extreme repetitive head trauma, the kind that he postulates would come from repeated blows to the brain brought about by recurring hits from the helmets of opposing football players. Given Webster’s years of playing the game as a child, in high school, in college and in 16 years as a pro, Bennet estimates that Webster suffered over 70,000 such hits, most likely resulting in numerous concussions, many of which may have gone unrecognized. And, considering how many players participated in the game over the years, Bennet suspects that Webster’s case is far from an isolated instance, a suspicion that would soon prove correct.
With the suicides of additional players, like former Pittsburgh Steeler Justin Strzelczyk (Matthew Willig) and Philadelphia Eagle Andre Waters (Richard T. Jones), further evidence of the condition (now known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE) becomes available. Shortly thereafter, Bennet approaches renowned University of Pittsburgh neurology researcher Dr. Steven DeKosky (Eddie Marsan) with his findings, seeking to publish them in a professional medical journal. DeKosky agrees with Bennet’s conclusions, and, before long, word of his work gets into print, an unpopular development that launches an avalanche of retribution against the author from a variety of sources, most notably the NFL.
Given the potentially disastrous economic and public relations consequences of this disclosure, the NFL (led by the likes of League Commissioners Paul Tagliabue (Dan Ziskie) and Roger Goodell (Luke Wilson)) seeks to bury the issue. Bennet is called a quack with no substantiation for his findings, and he and his wife, Prema (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), are targeted for various forms of harassment and intimidation. Even Bennet’s boss, Dr. Wecht, comes under scrutiny; as an elected public official, he’s indicted on trumped-up charges of having used public resources for personal purposes.
However, despite this fabricated smear campaign, a supportive, highly credible ally comes to Bennet’s aid, Dr. Julian Bailes (Alec Baldwin). As former Pittsburgh Steelers team physician, Julian acknowledges and concurs with Bennet’s research. He also advises Bennet that the NFL had been aware of the concussion issue for years but chose to look the other way, claiming that the issue continually needed more study. And so, with this powerful new collaborator in tow, Bennet forges ahead to take on those who would attempt to silence him, to get them to tell the truth.
At first glance, Bennet’s crusade may seem almost quixotic. Who would have thought that a Nigerian immigrant who knows little, if anything, about a sport that’s totally foreign to him would be willing to take on one of America’s most cherished institutions (and most powerful and influential corporations) over the health and safety practices it employs with regard to its players? Yet that’s precisely what he does. So that naturally raises the question, why?
Ultimately the answer rests with Bennet’s character, the persona he has crafted for himself through the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents. In creating himself, Bennet produces a caring, compassionate soul, one who lives his life in line with his benevolent, spiritual nature for the betterment of himself and those around him, a principle in conscious creation circles known as value fulfillment.
Those who live their value fulfillment possess certain unmistakable qualities that are hallmarks of the conscious creation process. For example, they operate from a tremendous underlying capacity for integrity. In seeking to make his findings known, Bennet never second-guesses his actions or intentions. To him, the results speak for themselves and must be made known, regardless of the implications. The truth, in his eyes, is the truth and must be told, period.
This quality pervades Bennet’s character so thoroughly that it’s even reflected in his family surname, which he shortened to Omalu from Onyemalukwube when he emigrated. In a rare moment of doubt in which he shares with Prema some reservations about his actions, she reminds him that he can’t help but carry through because his efforts mirror what Onyemalukwube means – “he who knows, speak.” With that gentle reminder, Bennet’s resolve is re-energized, and he vows to proceed, no matter what the cost.
This outlook speaks to another conscious creation principle that Bennet freely embraces – his willingness to live heroically. When others outline the potential ramifications of making his findings known, he’s unfazed. This becomes apparent, for example, when Dr. Wecht warns Bennet that he’s about to take on a corporation “that owns a day of the week,” a prospect that he readily shrugs off, because, in his mind, even those stakes should not be allowed to trump the truth. Such innate courage enables him to confront his adversaries and carry on.
Bennet is also adept at making use of the synchronicities that come his way to increase awareness for his crusade. For example, when he needs allies, he skillfully attracts them to his cause as seen by the arrivals of Drs. DeKosky and Bailes in his life. He’s also not hesitant to draw attention to his work by drawing attention to the tragic events that yielded his findings, even personalizing the circumstances to enhance their impact on public opinion and lawmakers. The effect of this is compounded when he later learns about the tragic suicide of Dave Duerson (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje), a former safety for the Chicago Bears who became a League insider in retirement – and who subsequently took his own life when he was no longer able to cope with the effects of CTE. (In fact, the seemingly once-skeptical Duerson had such a change of heart about the seriousness of this condition that he even went so far as to shoot himself in the chest in order to preserve his brain for further study after his death, quite a reversal for a onetime company man.) Some might arguably call such tactics exploitation, but, then, would anyone have known about this troubling issue had Bennet not made word of it public?
Even seemingly “negative” or obstructing influences can have unexpectedly fortuitous, synchronistic effects. For instance, the many impediments that Bennet runs into may superficially appear to be hindrances or setbacks, but they also have a beneficial impact by keeping him focused and galvanizing him in his beliefs, the means by which he creates the outcomes he seeks. The attempted harassment, stonewalling, obstructionism and character assassination thrust upon Bennet not only fail to achieve their objective but actually serve to empower him in his efforts. He knows how to respond to such intended hampering initiatives by employing beliefs that turn them on their ear and making them work to his advantage. His ability to envision desired results by both effectively creating his own successes and making lemonade out of the foul fruits others throw him ultimately lead him to realize his goals, aspirations that benefit others and epitomize the very meaning of value fulfillment.
“Concussion” may not seem like interesting fare for a feature film, but it succeeds tremendously on virtually every front. Though somewhat formulaic, this exceedingly well-made picture tells an engaging tale about one sincere, committed man’s efforts to exact justice when it’s perilously impaled on the capitalist sacrificial altar. The film capably weaves suspense, heartfelt drama and understated heroics into a package loaded with outstanding performances, particularly those of Smith, Morse and Brooks. There’s a slight tendency for the pacing to drag at times in the second hour, and the romantic interest subplot doesn’t work as well as it could have, but “Concussion” passes muster in almost every other respect.
The film is truly one of the pleasant surprises of this year’s awards season releases. Which is why it’s also surprising that the film hasn’t garnered more attention in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has only earned one nomination, a best dramatic actor nod for Smith in the Golden Globe Awards contest. It would be gratifying to see the picture grab more attention in some of this year’s remaining competitions, like the Oscars.
Heroism comes in all forms and in all manner of milieus, and it often takes the form of the David and Goliath scenario on display here. And, no matter how bad things may get, thankfully we nearly always have champions who will step up to address such matters. But, then, that’s to be expected from anyone who is committed to living out his value fulfillment, an effort for which everyone who benefits should be eternally grateful.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
‘Joy’ celebrates pursuing one’s dreams
“Joy” (2015). Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Robert De Niro, Bradley Cooper, Édgar Ramírez, Diane Ladd, Virginia Madsen, Isabella Rossellini, Dascha Polanco, Elisabeth Röhm, Susan Lucci, Laura Wright, Jimmy Jean-Louis, Ken Howard, Melissa Rivers, Drena De Niro, Isabelle Crovetti-Cramp, Emily Nuñez, Madison Wolfe, Aundrea Gadsby, Gia Gadsby, Alexander Cook, Bates Wilder, Bill Thorpe, Marianne Leone, Donna Mills. Director: David O. Russell. Screenplay: David O. Russell. Story: Annie Mumolo and David O. Russell. Web site. Trailer.
It’s a pretty safe bet to say that most of us have dreams we would like to see realized. But how many of us actually follow through even partially, let alone at all? Perhaps it’s because we don’t know how to make them happen. Or maybe we don’t have the gumption for what it takes. But perhaps it’s a matter of our outlook, the set of beliefs we hold about the viability of our dreams and how they can be made manifest. Those in search of inspiration on this front may find what they’re looking for in the new fact-based comedy-drama, “Joy.”
Based on the lives of several successful women entrepreneurs (most notably inventor and cable television product sales mogul Joy Mangano), the film follows the misadventures, exploits and accomplishments of a composite character simply named Joy (Jennifer Lawrence). When viewers first meet the film’s heroine, she lives a harried and frustrating life. As the divorced mother of two, she works a thankless job as an airline ticket counter agent, barely eking out a living to support her largely dysfunctional family. Besides her two kids, Joy shares a cramped house with her divorced, soap opera-addicted mother, Terry (Virginia Madsen), a socially challenged recluse who almost never leaves her bedroom; her ne’er-do-well ex-husband, Tony (Édgar Ramírez), an aspiring but mostly unsuccessful lounge singer who lives in the basement; and her recently arrived father, Rudy (Robert De Niro), a genuinely loving and supportive influence in Joy’s life but who, thanks to a history of failed relationships, has now been forced into sharing the basement with his former son-in-law. In addition to the challenges of her crazy housemates, Joy also has to contend with the routine wranglings of her malicious half-sister, Peggy (Elisabeth Röhm), with whom she has had an ongoing, inexplicably spiteful rivalry ever since childhood.
But Joy is not without her supporters either. First there’s Joy’s childhood friend, Jackie (Dascha Polanco), who has faithfully stood by her through the years, even when things were at their worst. And then there’s the bright spot of Joy’s household, Mimi (Diane Ladd), her adoring grandmother (and the film’s narrator), who sees great things for her granddaughter (even when she can’t envision them for herself).
The ability to envision those grand accomplishments, however, is precisely what Mimi believes will be Joy’s ticket to success and abundance. She sees sparks of this in her granddaughter’s ingenuity for coming up with ideas for simple, inventive products that fulfill important consumer needs and hold the potential to make piles of cash. But, given Joy’s frantic schedule and lack of funds, she seldom has time or money to devote to these pursuits. That all changes one day, however, when a little domestic accident gives rise to an idea that proves to be the seminal brainchild for launching a new career.
While on a sailing excursion with her family on the boat of Rudy’s latest love interest, Trudy (Isabella Rossellini), a wealthy widow, a wine bottle falls and breaks, spilling its contents and shattering glass all over the deck. Joy volunteers to clean up the mess, but, while manually wringing the mop head, she cuts her hand by glass shards that became embedded in the cloth. As painful as this is, however, the incident gives her an idea for creating a new type of self-wringing mop.
Not long thereafter, Joy develops a prototype and seeks backers, like Trudy, to finance her efforts. Jackie, Rudy and Tony lend their support, too, running interference against detractors like Peggy, who repeatedly snipes at her sibling, claiming that she knows nothing about running a business. So, with such tangible, intangible and backhanded assistance, Joy forges ahead, finding sources to create molds and supply materials for her product.
With her new Miracle Mop in hand, Joy begins marketing her wares but without much success. Her fates change dramatically, however, when Tony introduces Joy to an old friend, Neil Walker (Bradley Cooper), an influential programming executive at an up-and-coming powerhouse in the cable television home shopping industry, QVC. As an enterprise featuring such high-profile spokespeople as Joan Rivers (Melissa Rivers), QVC and its principals look upon an upstart like Joy with much skepticism. But, when Neil is sold on the product’s capabilities, he relents and decides to give Joy a shot. Thus begins a rollercoaster ride that Joy never could have imagined, one involving phenomenal success, devastating setbacks, internal family squabbles, fraud and personal heartache. But it also marks Joy’s emergence as a personal dynamo, a true force to be reckoned with, one who many underestimated – and very much at their peril.
Living our dreams is something that most of us hope to realize for ourselves, but many times we’re at a loss to figure out how to do so. When “life happens to us,” we often lose our focus, frequently becoming discouraged, unable to make much, if any, headway on reaching our goals. However, all need not be lost, especially if we make judicious use of the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience in all of its various aspects.
The core of this practice rests with our beliefs, the driving force in shaping our existence. They provide the conceptual template for our reality, and, when they are coupled with the energy provided by our divine collaborator (the Universe or whatever comparable name best suits you), they spring forth into tangible form. But, to make the process work to our liking, it’s important that we identify what those beliefs are. And, for those with an inherently creative bent, it’s crucial that we identify those beliefs with specificity to make the most of the process.
When inventive types (like Joy) seek to make use of the process, they must be able to envision the output of their ideas to bring them into being. This often involves thinking outside the box and pushing the limits of their creativity. Some might see this as an overwhelming task, but, for those who are able to conceptualize the solutions necessary to address their particular problems, the beliefs – and their physically manifested progeny – frequently follow.
The more one is able to embrace the foregoing, the more likely one is able to get the desired results. This is where the concept of faith comes into play. By imbuing our conceptions with an unshakable sense of certainty, we develop a greater sense of confidence in the viability of our ideas and the ability to see them realized as tangible materializations. And, the stronger the faith, the better the outcome.
There are several steps we can take to enhance our effectiveness at this. For instance, following our intuition can pay big dividends, because it provides clues about what we should consider pursuing in the formation of our beliefs. Joy picks up on this, for example, when the idea for the mop comes to her. She sees the potential and subsequently forms the beliefs necessary for bringing it into physical existence.
Intuition (and the beliefs that arise from it) can also show us what to avoid by birthing creations that depict what doesn’t serve us. In Joy’s case, this becomes apparent when she looks at her mother’s soap opera addiction. The show that Terry incessantly watches features a cast of pathetic, squabbling, self-serving characters (Susan Lucci, Laura Wright, Alexander Cook) reminiscent of Joy’s own family. Segments from the program are intercut with incidents from Joy’s everyday existence, paralleling her own reality and reminding her of what she doesn’t want out of life.
Mirrors like this are unmistakable, prompting us to identify what’s wrong and what needs to be changed. For Joy, they trigger memories of her younger self (Isabelle Crovetti-Cramp), an ambitious, enterprising young girl who believed she could do great things, like create marvelous inventions, and those flashbacks help to set her on a new course. And, when those insights are reinforced with Mimi’s supremely confident encouragement, Joy is able to adjust her prevailing outlook, enabling her to get back on track with her plans, to get back to those original beliefs about herself and what she wanted to do with her life.
In part successful materialization also depends on identifying the synchronicities that help foster our creations. These meaningful coincidences, which also spring forth from our beliefs, provide the catalytic sparks that prompt new rounds of more defined beliefs that further the manifestation process. For example, had Joy not recognized the opportunity available to her when the wine bottle broke on Trudy’s boat deck, she might not have invented her mop – or reaped any of the rewards that flowed from that.
These simple concepts are important for all of us, but budding entrepreneurs and inventors may find them particularly useful. They provide the inspiration we need to make things happen. And the example set by Joy just might be the impetus for helping us get our own plans off the ground.
While watching “Joy,” I couldn’t help but repeatedly remark to myself, “What unusual subject matter for a movie.” Given Hollywood’s current penchant for recycling story lines, unduly extending movie franchises and needlessly launching reboots, I appreciate the attempt at originality, something director David O. Russell has come to be known for, as seen in movies like “American Hustle” (2013) and “Flirting with Disaster” (1996). And its inspiring ideas are truly helpful for those seeking to live their dreams and to chart a path to success.
However, to make a movie such as this work, it has to fire on all cylinders, which, unfortunately, “Joy” does not do consistently. The film works well in a number of ways (acting, casting, inspirational themes) but drops the ball in others (writing, pacing, staying on point). Had the script and film editing gone through some additional tweaking, this might have been a truly terrific movie, but, as it stands now, it’s merely above average. With that said, however, be sure to give sufficient props to Jennifer Lawrence, Isabella Rossellini and Virginia Madsen for great acting turns in their respective performances.
Despite its shortcomings, the film has garnered a modicum of attention in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has earned two Golden Globe Award nominations for Lawrence’s stellar performance and as best comedy film. It has also captured comparable recognition in the Critics Choice Award contest, grabbing three nominations for best comedy film and two nods for Lawrence as best actress overall and best actress in a comedy.
When life doesn’t pan out as hoped for, it’s easy to become discouraged. We may reconcile ourselves to our circumstances, giving up on ever seeing our dreams come true. But sometimes simple adjustments in our thinking can bring about significant changes, as Joy’s experience illustrates. And who knows, if we go about it correctly, those changes just might prove to be the kind that allow us to mop up the rewards.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
It’s a pretty safe bet to say that most of us have dreams we would like to see realized. But how many of us actually follow through even partially, let alone at all? Perhaps it’s because we don’t know how to make them happen. Or maybe we don’t have the gumption for what it takes. But perhaps it’s a matter of our outlook, the set of beliefs we hold about the viability of our dreams and how they can be made manifest. Those in search of inspiration on this front may find what they’re looking for in the new fact-based comedy-drama, “Joy.”
Based on the lives of several successful women entrepreneurs (most notably inventor and cable television product sales mogul Joy Mangano), the film follows the misadventures, exploits and accomplishments of a composite character simply named Joy (Jennifer Lawrence). When viewers first meet the film’s heroine, she lives a harried and frustrating life. As the divorced mother of two, she works a thankless job as an airline ticket counter agent, barely eking out a living to support her largely dysfunctional family. Besides her two kids, Joy shares a cramped house with her divorced, soap opera-addicted mother, Terry (Virginia Madsen), a socially challenged recluse who almost never leaves her bedroom; her ne’er-do-well ex-husband, Tony (Édgar Ramírez), an aspiring but mostly unsuccessful lounge singer who lives in the basement; and her recently arrived father, Rudy (Robert De Niro), a genuinely loving and supportive influence in Joy’s life but who, thanks to a history of failed relationships, has now been forced into sharing the basement with his former son-in-law. In addition to the challenges of her crazy housemates, Joy also has to contend with the routine wranglings of her malicious half-sister, Peggy (Elisabeth Röhm), with whom she has had an ongoing, inexplicably spiteful rivalry ever since childhood.
But Joy is not without her supporters either. First there’s Joy’s childhood friend, Jackie (Dascha Polanco), who has faithfully stood by her through the years, even when things were at their worst. And then there’s the bright spot of Joy’s household, Mimi (Diane Ladd), her adoring grandmother (and the film’s narrator), who sees great things for her granddaughter (even when she can’t envision them for herself).
The ability to envision those grand accomplishments, however, is precisely what Mimi believes will be Joy’s ticket to success and abundance. She sees sparks of this in her granddaughter’s ingenuity for coming up with ideas for simple, inventive products that fulfill important consumer needs and hold the potential to make piles of cash. But, given Joy’s frantic schedule and lack of funds, she seldom has time or money to devote to these pursuits. That all changes one day, however, when a little domestic accident gives rise to an idea that proves to be the seminal brainchild for launching a new career.
While on a sailing excursion with her family on the boat of Rudy’s latest love interest, Trudy (Isabella Rossellini), a wealthy widow, a wine bottle falls and breaks, spilling its contents and shattering glass all over the deck. Joy volunteers to clean up the mess, but, while manually wringing the mop head, she cuts her hand by glass shards that became embedded in the cloth. As painful as this is, however, the incident gives her an idea for creating a new type of self-wringing mop.
Not long thereafter, Joy develops a prototype and seeks backers, like Trudy, to finance her efforts. Jackie, Rudy and Tony lend their support, too, running interference against detractors like Peggy, who repeatedly snipes at her sibling, claiming that she knows nothing about running a business. So, with such tangible, intangible and backhanded assistance, Joy forges ahead, finding sources to create molds and supply materials for her product.
With her new Miracle Mop in hand, Joy begins marketing her wares but without much success. Her fates change dramatically, however, when Tony introduces Joy to an old friend, Neil Walker (Bradley Cooper), an influential programming executive at an up-and-coming powerhouse in the cable television home shopping industry, QVC. As an enterprise featuring such high-profile spokespeople as Joan Rivers (Melissa Rivers), QVC and its principals look upon an upstart like Joy with much skepticism. But, when Neil is sold on the product’s capabilities, he relents and decides to give Joy a shot. Thus begins a rollercoaster ride that Joy never could have imagined, one involving phenomenal success, devastating setbacks, internal family squabbles, fraud and personal heartache. But it also marks Joy’s emergence as a personal dynamo, a true force to be reckoned with, one who many underestimated – and very much at their peril.
Living our dreams is something that most of us hope to realize for ourselves, but many times we’re at a loss to figure out how to do so. When “life happens to us,” we often lose our focus, frequently becoming discouraged, unable to make much, if any, headway on reaching our goals. However, all need not be lost, especially if we make judicious use of the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience in all of its various aspects.
The core of this practice rests with our beliefs, the driving force in shaping our existence. They provide the conceptual template for our reality, and, when they are coupled with the energy provided by our divine collaborator (the Universe or whatever comparable name best suits you), they spring forth into tangible form. But, to make the process work to our liking, it’s important that we identify what those beliefs are. And, for those with an inherently creative bent, it’s crucial that we identify those beliefs with specificity to make the most of the process.
When inventive types (like Joy) seek to make use of the process, they must be able to envision the output of their ideas to bring them into being. This often involves thinking outside the box and pushing the limits of their creativity. Some might see this as an overwhelming task, but, for those who are able to conceptualize the solutions necessary to address their particular problems, the beliefs – and their physically manifested progeny – frequently follow.
The more one is able to embrace the foregoing, the more likely one is able to get the desired results. This is where the concept of faith comes into play. By imbuing our conceptions with an unshakable sense of certainty, we develop a greater sense of confidence in the viability of our ideas and the ability to see them realized as tangible materializations. And, the stronger the faith, the better the outcome.
There are several steps we can take to enhance our effectiveness at this. For instance, following our intuition can pay big dividends, because it provides clues about what we should consider pursuing in the formation of our beliefs. Joy picks up on this, for example, when the idea for the mop comes to her. She sees the potential and subsequently forms the beliefs necessary for bringing it into physical existence.
Intuition (and the beliefs that arise from it) can also show us what to avoid by birthing creations that depict what doesn’t serve us. In Joy’s case, this becomes apparent when she looks at her mother’s soap opera addiction. The show that Terry incessantly watches features a cast of pathetic, squabbling, self-serving characters (Susan Lucci, Laura Wright, Alexander Cook) reminiscent of Joy’s own family. Segments from the program are intercut with incidents from Joy’s everyday existence, paralleling her own reality and reminding her of what she doesn’t want out of life.
Mirrors like this are unmistakable, prompting us to identify what’s wrong and what needs to be changed. For Joy, they trigger memories of her younger self (Isabelle Crovetti-Cramp), an ambitious, enterprising young girl who believed she could do great things, like create marvelous inventions, and those flashbacks help to set her on a new course. And, when those insights are reinforced with Mimi’s supremely confident encouragement, Joy is able to adjust her prevailing outlook, enabling her to get back on track with her plans, to get back to those original beliefs about herself and what she wanted to do with her life.
In part successful materialization also depends on identifying the synchronicities that help foster our creations. These meaningful coincidences, which also spring forth from our beliefs, provide the catalytic sparks that prompt new rounds of more defined beliefs that further the manifestation process. For example, had Joy not recognized the opportunity available to her when the wine bottle broke on Trudy’s boat deck, she might not have invented her mop – or reaped any of the rewards that flowed from that.
These simple concepts are important for all of us, but budding entrepreneurs and inventors may find them particularly useful. They provide the inspiration we need to make things happen. And the example set by Joy just might be the impetus for helping us get our own plans off the ground.
While watching “Joy,” I couldn’t help but repeatedly remark to myself, “What unusual subject matter for a movie.” Given Hollywood’s current penchant for recycling story lines, unduly extending movie franchises and needlessly launching reboots, I appreciate the attempt at originality, something director David O. Russell has come to be known for, as seen in movies like “American Hustle” (2013) and “Flirting with Disaster” (1996). And its inspiring ideas are truly helpful for those seeking to live their dreams and to chart a path to success.
However, to make a movie such as this work, it has to fire on all cylinders, which, unfortunately, “Joy” does not do consistently. The film works well in a number of ways (acting, casting, inspirational themes) but drops the ball in others (writing, pacing, staying on point). Had the script and film editing gone through some additional tweaking, this might have been a truly terrific movie, but, as it stands now, it’s merely above average. With that said, however, be sure to give sufficient props to Jennifer Lawrence, Isabella Rossellini and Virginia Madsen for great acting turns in their respective performances.
Despite its shortcomings, the film has garnered a modicum of attention in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has earned two Golden Globe Award nominations for Lawrence’s stellar performance and as best comedy film. It has also captured comparable recognition in the Critics Choice Award contest, grabbing three nominations for best comedy film and two nods for Lawrence as best actress overall and best actress in a comedy.
When life doesn’t pan out as hoped for, it’s easy to become discouraged. We may reconcile ourselves to our circumstances, giving up on ever seeing our dreams come true. But sometimes simple adjustments in our thinking can bring about significant changes, as Joy’s experience illustrates. And who knows, if we go about it correctly, those changes just might prove to be the kind that allow us to mop up the rewards.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Courage, hope and inspiration heralded in ‘The Danish Girl’
“The Danish Girl” (2015). Cast: Eddie Redmayne, Alicia Vikander, Matthias Schoenaerts, Ben Whishaw, Amber Heard, Adrian Schiller, Sebastian Koch, Pip Torrens. Director: Tom Hooper. Screenplay: Lucinda Coxon. Book: David Ebershoff, The Danish Girl. Web site. Trailer.
To get through awkward times during our upbringing, most of us were probably advised at one point or another to “just be yourself,” a nebulous suggestion we likely found difficult to fathom. But consider what that might mean for someone who lacks a clear sense of his or her own identity, even when it comes to something as fundamental as gender. Imagine how frightening such a prospect would be. If you can appreciate that, then you’ll have an idea of what goes on in the mind of the protagonist in the new fact-based biopic, “The Danish Girl.”
In 1926, life was good for Einar Wegener (Eddie Redmayne) and his wife, Gerda (Alicia Vikander). The couple lived comfortably in Copenhagen as aspiring artists; Einar specialized in landscapes, and Gerda painted portraits. When not working, they enjoyed a lively social life, hobnobbing with the city’s social elite and members of the arts community, such as their good friend, Ulla (Amber Heard), a colorful though somewhat flighty ballet dancer. But, above all, they were madly in love with one another. They were also anxious to start a family, a process that wasn’t going too well (but at which they nevertheless kept trying).
Life took a strange turn one day, however, when Gerda made an unusual, though seemingly innocent request of her husband. For some time, Gerda had been working on an oversized portrait of a ballerina for which Ulla had been modeling. But, true to her unreliable nature, Ulla didn’t show up for her appointment, leaving Gerda without a model. Given that the painting was nearly finished, Gerda was eager to complete it, so she asked Einar if he wouldn’t mind serving as a stand-in. Einar was reluctant, but Gerda assured him that she didn’t need him to don the full outfit; she merely needed him to model the ballerina’s shoes and stockings, a request to which he eventually agreed.
However, as Gerda began painting, she found she didn’t have sufficient perspective to continue with her work; she told Einar that she needed him to hold up the tutu so she could see how the stockings and shoes related to the rest of the outfit. He again agreed somewhat reluctantly, but, as he drew the costume close to him, it cast a spell over him. He felt a certain inexplicable comfort with this gesture, and Gerda could sense that almost instantaneously. She found Einar’s ease with the clothing somewhat provocative, even titillating, since it lent him an unexpectedly natural grace and beauty.
Einar and Gerda got a few laughs out of this incident, too, and those chuckles prompted an idea for an interesting little prank – wouldn’t it be fun if Einar went out in public dressed up in full female garb, perhaps even to one of their high-profile social events, to see if anyone would recognize him? And so, after a little coaching, that’s just what they did, a move that drew more of a reaction than they bargained for.
When the pair arrived at the event, Gerda introduced her female companion as Lili Elbe, Einar’s cousin. But Einar’s transformation was so convincing that no one but Ulla recognized him. His clothes, makeup and mannerisms were so alluring that he quickly drew the attention of a host of would-be male suitors, such as Henrik (Ben Whishaw), who made no attempt at hiding his affection. And, when Gerda saw this, suddenly the little joke didn’t seem quite so funny anymore.
Still, despite Gerda’s now-conflicted feelings about what might be going on with her husband, she also saw an opportunity emerge. Einar as Lili provided fertile subject matter for Gerda’s paintings, and, before long, she had ample interest from the Paris arts community in her newest works. But, while Gerda seemed to be finding herself, Einar was losing himself, and no one seemed to be able to help. Even a doctor (Pip Torrens) who claimed to be able to assist him was quick to give up on his patient, ready to subject Einar to sanctioned treatment for “perversion.”
News of the doctor’s diagnosis prompted a hasty move to Paris. Einar, who now spent much of his time as Lili, lost nearly all interest in painting. He saw several more doctors, but they were all quick to label him either a homosexual or mentally ill, diagnoses that both he and Gerda knew weren’t true. With little hope, Einar withdrew from life, lost and unsure what to do.
Gerda, meanwhile, saw her profile rise in the Paris arts community. She befriended an influential arts dealer, Hans Axgil (Matthias Schoenaerts), who turned out to be a childhood friend of Einar – and with whom she was developing a growing attraction. Together Gerda and Hans sought to find help for Lili, which they found through a progressively minded German doctor, Kurt Warnekros (Sebastian Koch). Through a series of counseling sessions, Prof. Warnekros came to realize that Lili was neither homosexual nor mentally ill; he recognized the real nature of her circumstances – the dilemma of being a woman trapped in a man’s body.
However, even with such an accurate diagnosis, what was Lili to do? Prof. Warnekros suggested a radical, experimental approach to addressing her circumstances – gender reassignment surgery. The procedure was untried, and success was far from guaranteed, but Lili seriously had to consider the option. Balancing the risks and rewards called for a big decision, but it was one that might be her only way to find peace.
When confronted with such a painful predicament, it’s understandable how one might not want to deal with it, especially when potential resolution involves making a painful choice. However, to remove the agony, having the courage to forge ahead may be the only way to alleviate the suffering. This is thus a prime example of how important it is to get in touch with our feelings and beliefs, the driving forces of the conscious creation process, the means by which our reality unfolds.
For Lili to be able to make a decision like this, it’s crucial that she examine her innermost beliefs about herself, and she must be brutally honest in doing so. Indeed, is she truly the woman she claims to be, or is the presence of this recently emerged persona some delusional creation of Einar’s? Facing down that question, then, is essential to understand those heartfelt intents.
In some ways, this may be a tricky proposition, given our intrinsic multidimensional nature. Conscious creation maintains that there are many parts to our greater selves but that we’re usually only aware of our “localized” personas, the ones into which we focus the lion’s share of our consciousness. However, sometimes we find that previously unknown aspects of our localized selves begin to emerge, which can cause conflict and confusion, especially if those new attributes tend to run counter to what we’ve typically come to believe about who and what we are.
In light of the foregoing, then, is it possible, for instance, for someone to identify with both a male and a female self simultaneously? From a conscious creation perspective, the answer could potentially be yes or no (and to varying degrees). This again depends on our beliefs, particularly those associated with how willing our localized selves are to allow the various aspects of our greater selves to express themselves, either individually or in tandem.
This is at the heart of Einar and Lili’s quandary, yet they must address it to know how to proceed. As the film unfolds, viewers learn that the emergence of Lili’s persona is not entirely the recent phenomenon that everyone has been led to believe. Einar acknowledges that he sensed her presence as far back as childhood but suppressed the idea; after all, he was in a man’s body. But does the body alone define one’s persona? As time passes and Lili begins to forge beliefs that allow her to give expression to her repressed self, her true identity starts to emerge. And, with that realization, perhaps now it’s time to finally let her come to life.
Once this question is answered, the next step is to determine whether or not one possesses the fortitude to press on, moving beyond whatever fears lie ahead. This, too, is crucial, for fear-based beliefs undercut our manifestation abilities by presenting our divine conscious creation collaborator with an unsolvable contradiction. The Universe (or God, Goddess, All That Is or whatever other term best suits you) is unable to comply with our materialization request because of this inherent paradox. So, to move head, our fears (and the beliefs that drive them) must be eliminated.
Given Lili’s willingness to embrace her true identity, it’s obvious the fear issue is something she’s ready to leave behind. It’s something that no longer serves her (or Einar for that matter), so she can press ahead with her newest creation – becoming a full-fledged woman in every sense of the word. It’s something she apparently wants badly enough, too, considering how adept she has become at drawing to her the synchronicities she needs to make it possible.
Synchronicities – those meaningful “coincidences” that seem so perfectly suited to our needs that they can’t possibly be instances of random chance – play a huge role in Lili’s transformation. For example, would Lili’s emergence have occurred if it had not been for Ulla’s failure to show up for her modeling appointment? Similarly, what would have happened if Gerda had managed to become pregnant? But, perhaps most importantly, would Lili have ever met Prof. Warnekros (and everything that came with that) if Gerda had not painted the portraits that raised her artistic profile and subsequently prompted the couple’s move from Copenhagen to Paris?
Such seemingly little incidents might superficially appear to have little significance at the time they occur. However, as events transpire, their importance grows in magnitude, ultimately proving to be quite fortuitous in helping Lili attain her goal. But, then, they also would not have occurred were it not for Lili putting out the beliefs and intents that manifested them – and everything that they birthed – in the first place. And, by drawing them into her existence, she demonstrates how conscious creation (or, as it’s sometimes known, the law of attraction) truly works.
In pursuing this course, Lili also lives out her value fulfillment, the conscious creation concept associated with being one’s best, truest self for the benefit of ourselves and those around us. This becomes apparent in a number of ways, too. For example, by providing subject matter for Gerda, Lili gave her onetime spouse a significant boost to her artistic career. But, perhaps even more importantly, Lili was a pioneer in the transgender movement. By taking such fearless steps at a time when gender reassignment surgery was experimental and when the mere thought of something so radically taboo as a sex change was considered positively scandalous, Lili courageously led all those who would follow her in generations to come. Her efforts ultimately benefitted many, none of whom she would know, but her legacy left an indelible mark that would help bring peace of mind to those who might not have otherwise known it.
As “The Danish Girl” aptly illustrates, director Tom Hooper seems to keep finding ways to knock it out of the park, much as he did in previous efforts like “The King’s Speech” (2010) and “Les Misérables” (2012). This sensitive, moving, lavishly produced period piece is easily one of the year’s best. Its superb performances by Redmayne and Vikander, backed by excellent production values, gorgeous cinematography and a sweeping soundtrack, make for heartfelt, affecting viewing. The pacing is a bit sluggish in a few spots, but everything else is top shelf across the board.
From my perspective, perhaps the film’s only troubling aspect is that it’s based on a novel, and not a biography, of historic figures. While such works tend to make for good entertainment, they’re not the most reliable when it comes to authenticity. Sticklers (like me) may take issue with this (to varying degrees), but, for those who can successfully look past it, good, inspiring storytelling nevertheless awaits, and it all comes wrapped up in a gorgeously executed package.
“The Danish Girl” is racking up significant recognition in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has earned three Golden Globe Award nominations for the lead performances by Redmayne and Vikander, as well as its original score. In the Screen Actors Guild contest, Redmayne scored another nod, as did Vikander but in the supporting actress category. The film’s biggest haul, however, has come in the Critics Choice Award competition, where it captured nominations for Redmayne and Vikander (again in the supporting category), as well as recognition for production design, costumes, and hair and makeup. Look for the picture to earn its share of Oscar nods when those nominations are announced.
Taking the first bold step toward discovering one’s destiny is rarely easy. That’s particularly true when such a step involves charting new territory, especially when it entails pursuing objectives that others ridicule or even persecute. But progress depends on pioneers who venture into unexplored realms, and that’s where courageous souls like Lili Elbe make their mark. They provide inspiration to those who walk in their footsteps – impressions that never would have been made were it not for the bold moves they were willing to make.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
To get through awkward times during our upbringing, most of us were probably advised at one point or another to “just be yourself,” a nebulous suggestion we likely found difficult to fathom. But consider what that might mean for someone who lacks a clear sense of his or her own identity, even when it comes to something as fundamental as gender. Imagine how frightening such a prospect would be. If you can appreciate that, then you’ll have an idea of what goes on in the mind of the protagonist in the new fact-based biopic, “The Danish Girl.”
In 1926, life was good for Einar Wegener (Eddie Redmayne) and his wife, Gerda (Alicia Vikander). The couple lived comfortably in Copenhagen as aspiring artists; Einar specialized in landscapes, and Gerda painted portraits. When not working, they enjoyed a lively social life, hobnobbing with the city’s social elite and members of the arts community, such as their good friend, Ulla (Amber Heard), a colorful though somewhat flighty ballet dancer. But, above all, they were madly in love with one another. They were also anxious to start a family, a process that wasn’t going too well (but at which they nevertheless kept trying).
Life took a strange turn one day, however, when Gerda made an unusual, though seemingly innocent request of her husband. For some time, Gerda had been working on an oversized portrait of a ballerina for which Ulla had been modeling. But, true to her unreliable nature, Ulla didn’t show up for her appointment, leaving Gerda without a model. Given that the painting was nearly finished, Gerda was eager to complete it, so she asked Einar if he wouldn’t mind serving as a stand-in. Einar was reluctant, but Gerda assured him that she didn’t need him to don the full outfit; she merely needed him to model the ballerina’s shoes and stockings, a request to which he eventually agreed.
However, as Gerda began painting, she found she didn’t have sufficient perspective to continue with her work; she told Einar that she needed him to hold up the tutu so she could see how the stockings and shoes related to the rest of the outfit. He again agreed somewhat reluctantly, but, as he drew the costume close to him, it cast a spell over him. He felt a certain inexplicable comfort with this gesture, and Gerda could sense that almost instantaneously. She found Einar’s ease with the clothing somewhat provocative, even titillating, since it lent him an unexpectedly natural grace and beauty.
Einar and Gerda got a few laughs out of this incident, too, and those chuckles prompted an idea for an interesting little prank – wouldn’t it be fun if Einar went out in public dressed up in full female garb, perhaps even to one of their high-profile social events, to see if anyone would recognize him? And so, after a little coaching, that’s just what they did, a move that drew more of a reaction than they bargained for.
When the pair arrived at the event, Gerda introduced her female companion as Lili Elbe, Einar’s cousin. But Einar’s transformation was so convincing that no one but Ulla recognized him. His clothes, makeup and mannerisms were so alluring that he quickly drew the attention of a host of would-be male suitors, such as Henrik (Ben Whishaw), who made no attempt at hiding his affection. And, when Gerda saw this, suddenly the little joke didn’t seem quite so funny anymore.
Still, despite Gerda’s now-conflicted feelings about what might be going on with her husband, she also saw an opportunity emerge. Einar as Lili provided fertile subject matter for Gerda’s paintings, and, before long, she had ample interest from the Paris arts community in her newest works. But, while Gerda seemed to be finding herself, Einar was losing himself, and no one seemed to be able to help. Even a doctor (Pip Torrens) who claimed to be able to assist him was quick to give up on his patient, ready to subject Einar to sanctioned treatment for “perversion.”
News of the doctor’s diagnosis prompted a hasty move to Paris. Einar, who now spent much of his time as Lili, lost nearly all interest in painting. He saw several more doctors, but they were all quick to label him either a homosexual or mentally ill, diagnoses that both he and Gerda knew weren’t true. With little hope, Einar withdrew from life, lost and unsure what to do.
Gerda, meanwhile, saw her profile rise in the Paris arts community. She befriended an influential arts dealer, Hans Axgil (Matthias Schoenaerts), who turned out to be a childhood friend of Einar – and with whom she was developing a growing attraction. Together Gerda and Hans sought to find help for Lili, which they found through a progressively minded German doctor, Kurt Warnekros (Sebastian Koch). Through a series of counseling sessions, Prof. Warnekros came to realize that Lili was neither homosexual nor mentally ill; he recognized the real nature of her circumstances – the dilemma of being a woman trapped in a man’s body.
However, even with such an accurate diagnosis, what was Lili to do? Prof. Warnekros suggested a radical, experimental approach to addressing her circumstances – gender reassignment surgery. The procedure was untried, and success was far from guaranteed, but Lili seriously had to consider the option. Balancing the risks and rewards called for a big decision, but it was one that might be her only way to find peace.
When confronted with such a painful predicament, it’s understandable how one might not want to deal with it, especially when potential resolution involves making a painful choice. However, to remove the agony, having the courage to forge ahead may be the only way to alleviate the suffering. This is thus a prime example of how important it is to get in touch with our feelings and beliefs, the driving forces of the conscious creation process, the means by which our reality unfolds.
For Lili to be able to make a decision like this, it’s crucial that she examine her innermost beliefs about herself, and she must be brutally honest in doing so. Indeed, is she truly the woman she claims to be, or is the presence of this recently emerged persona some delusional creation of Einar’s? Facing down that question, then, is essential to understand those heartfelt intents.
In some ways, this may be a tricky proposition, given our intrinsic multidimensional nature. Conscious creation maintains that there are many parts to our greater selves but that we’re usually only aware of our “localized” personas, the ones into which we focus the lion’s share of our consciousness. However, sometimes we find that previously unknown aspects of our localized selves begin to emerge, which can cause conflict and confusion, especially if those new attributes tend to run counter to what we’ve typically come to believe about who and what we are.
In light of the foregoing, then, is it possible, for instance, for someone to identify with both a male and a female self simultaneously? From a conscious creation perspective, the answer could potentially be yes or no (and to varying degrees). This again depends on our beliefs, particularly those associated with how willing our localized selves are to allow the various aspects of our greater selves to express themselves, either individually or in tandem.
This is at the heart of Einar and Lili’s quandary, yet they must address it to know how to proceed. As the film unfolds, viewers learn that the emergence of Lili’s persona is not entirely the recent phenomenon that everyone has been led to believe. Einar acknowledges that he sensed her presence as far back as childhood but suppressed the idea; after all, he was in a man’s body. But does the body alone define one’s persona? As time passes and Lili begins to forge beliefs that allow her to give expression to her repressed self, her true identity starts to emerge. And, with that realization, perhaps now it’s time to finally let her come to life.
Once this question is answered, the next step is to determine whether or not one possesses the fortitude to press on, moving beyond whatever fears lie ahead. This, too, is crucial, for fear-based beliefs undercut our manifestation abilities by presenting our divine conscious creation collaborator with an unsolvable contradiction. The Universe (or God, Goddess, All That Is or whatever other term best suits you) is unable to comply with our materialization request because of this inherent paradox. So, to move head, our fears (and the beliefs that drive them) must be eliminated.
Given Lili’s willingness to embrace her true identity, it’s obvious the fear issue is something she’s ready to leave behind. It’s something that no longer serves her (or Einar for that matter), so she can press ahead with her newest creation – becoming a full-fledged woman in every sense of the word. It’s something she apparently wants badly enough, too, considering how adept she has become at drawing to her the synchronicities she needs to make it possible.
Synchronicities – those meaningful “coincidences” that seem so perfectly suited to our needs that they can’t possibly be instances of random chance – play a huge role in Lili’s transformation. For example, would Lili’s emergence have occurred if it had not been for Ulla’s failure to show up for her modeling appointment? Similarly, what would have happened if Gerda had managed to become pregnant? But, perhaps most importantly, would Lili have ever met Prof. Warnekros (and everything that came with that) if Gerda had not painted the portraits that raised her artistic profile and subsequently prompted the couple’s move from Copenhagen to Paris?
Such seemingly little incidents might superficially appear to have little significance at the time they occur. However, as events transpire, their importance grows in magnitude, ultimately proving to be quite fortuitous in helping Lili attain her goal. But, then, they also would not have occurred were it not for Lili putting out the beliefs and intents that manifested them – and everything that they birthed – in the first place. And, by drawing them into her existence, she demonstrates how conscious creation (or, as it’s sometimes known, the law of attraction) truly works.
In pursuing this course, Lili also lives out her value fulfillment, the conscious creation concept associated with being one’s best, truest self for the benefit of ourselves and those around us. This becomes apparent in a number of ways, too. For example, by providing subject matter for Gerda, Lili gave her onetime spouse a significant boost to her artistic career. But, perhaps even more importantly, Lili was a pioneer in the transgender movement. By taking such fearless steps at a time when gender reassignment surgery was experimental and when the mere thought of something so radically taboo as a sex change was considered positively scandalous, Lili courageously led all those who would follow her in generations to come. Her efforts ultimately benefitted many, none of whom she would know, but her legacy left an indelible mark that would help bring peace of mind to those who might not have otherwise known it.
As “The Danish Girl” aptly illustrates, director Tom Hooper seems to keep finding ways to knock it out of the park, much as he did in previous efforts like “The King’s Speech” (2010) and “Les Misérables” (2012). This sensitive, moving, lavishly produced period piece is easily one of the year’s best. Its superb performances by Redmayne and Vikander, backed by excellent production values, gorgeous cinematography and a sweeping soundtrack, make for heartfelt, affecting viewing. The pacing is a bit sluggish in a few spots, but everything else is top shelf across the board.
From my perspective, perhaps the film’s only troubling aspect is that it’s based on a novel, and not a biography, of historic figures. While such works tend to make for good entertainment, they’re not the most reliable when it comes to authenticity. Sticklers (like me) may take issue with this (to varying degrees), but, for those who can successfully look past it, good, inspiring storytelling nevertheless awaits, and it all comes wrapped up in a gorgeously executed package.
“The Danish Girl” is racking up significant recognition in this year’s awards competitions. Thus far it has earned three Golden Globe Award nominations for the lead performances by Redmayne and Vikander, as well as its original score. In the Screen Actors Guild contest, Redmayne scored another nod, as did Vikander but in the supporting actress category. The film’s biggest haul, however, has come in the Critics Choice Award competition, where it captured nominations for Redmayne and Vikander (again in the supporting category), as well as recognition for production design, costumes, and hair and makeup. Look for the picture to earn its share of Oscar nods when those nominations are announced.
Taking the first bold step toward discovering one’s destiny is rarely easy. That’s particularly true when such a step involves charting new territory, especially when it entails pursuing objectives that others ridicule or even persecute. But progress depends on pioneers who venture into unexplored realms, and that’s where courageous souls like Lili Elbe make their mark. They provide inspiration to those who walk in their footsteps – impressions that never would have been made were it not for the bold moves they were willing to make.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 17, 2015
‘Youth’ explores what we make of life
“Youth” (2015). Cast: Michael Caine, Harvey Keitel, Paul Dano, Rachel Weisz, Jane Fonda, Abe Macqueen, Dorji Wangchuk, Madalina Ghenea, Luna Mijovic, Roly Serrano, Wolfgang Michael, Ed Stoppard, Paloma Faith, Robert Seethaler, Lee Artin Boschin, Sumi Jo, Nate Dern, Alex Beckett, Mark Gessner, Tom Lipinski, Chloe Pirrie, Sonia Gessner, Emilia Jones, Heidi Maria Glössner, Helmut Förnbacher. Director: Paolo Sorrentino. Screenplay: Paolo Sorrentino. Web site. Trailer.
The meaning of life is something that has mesmerized, perplexed and confounded mankind throughout the ages. And, much of the time, we come away from asking this question with no definitive conclusions. But making the effort to find answers is ultimately what counts, especially before the end arrives, an undertaking pursued in earnest by a colorful cast of characters in the moving new cinematic meditation, “Youth.”
British composer and orchestra conductor Fred Ballinger (Michael Caine), former maestro of the Venice Symphony, has spent years vacationing at a luxury spa in the Swiss Alps, enjoying the exquisite scenery and the company of his long-time friend, Hollywood filmmaker Mick Boyle (Harvey Keitel). In some ways, the octogenarians have a lot in common, such as years of memories, mutual prostate problems, and the marriage of Fred’s daughter, Lena (Rachel Weisz), to Mick’s son, Julian (Ed Stoppard). But, in other ways, the pair couldn’t be more different; Fred is perfectly content to kick back and enjoy his retirement in seclusion, while Mick remains active and in the public eye, working on yet another new movie.
Long-time friends Fred Ballinger (Michael Caine, left) and Mick Boyle (Harvey Keitel, right) share memories and good times while vacationing together at an exclusive Swiss Alps resort in director Paolo Sorrentino’s latest release, “Youth.” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Despite Fred’s insistence that he’s put his working life to rest, there are those who try nudging him back onto the conducting podium. Lena, for example, calls her father “apathetic,” urging him to become more active musically as a means to remain vital, aware and alive. And then there’s Queen Elizabeth’s emissary (Alex Macqueen), who informs the maestro that Her Majesty would like to bestow the honor of knighthood upon him in exchange for conducting a command performance in celebration of Prince Philip’s birthday.
In both instances, however, Fred flatly refuses. He becomes particularly incensed when the emissary reveals the Queen’s request that he conduct his signature composition, Simple Songs, a piece the Prince is particularly fond of. But it’s also a work that holds personal – and painful – significance for Fred, and the thought of performing it again, even for a command performance and with the collaboration of famed soprano Sumi Jo (as herself), troubles him deeply, for reasons he’s highly reluctant to admit.
Mick, meanwhile, continues actively working on his new film with a coterie of young screenwriters (Nate Dern, Alex Beckett, Mark Gessner, Tom Lipinski, Chloe Pirrie) whose wide-eyed enthusiasm helps keep him young. However, despite Mick’s insistence on remaining active, he’s also aware that the years are catching up with him. So, with that in mind, he’s intent on making this film his testament, a consummate expression of who he is and the pinnacle of his artistry. He envisions the picture as a showcase for his favorite actress, Brenda Morel (Jane Fonda), an aging but prolific and profoundly versatile star with whom he has worked on many previous occasions. In doing all this, Mick’s clearly placing a lot of pressure on himself, but, with the clock winding down – and his health becoming questionable – he’s committed to seeing things through on this project while he’s still able.
As Fred and Mick attempt to sort out these matters, they also have ample opportunities to sort out their feelings about their lives. They frequently lounge by the pool or go on leisurely mountain walks, engaging in philosophical discussions about everything from their work to their families, their friendship, their love lives, their emotions, their regrets and, perhaps most importantly, what to do with the time they have left.
Lena Ballinger (Rachel Weisz), daughter of a former orchestra conductor, encourages her retired father to keep active to remain vital, one of the principal themes of the emotive new release, “Youth.” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
In their attempts at arriving at meaningful conclusions about these issues, Fred and Mick often draw upon the examples set by other guests at the spa, such as Jimmy Tree (Paul Dano), a young actor desperately seeking to find his voice as a performer, the spark that will give meaning to his career. Additional inspiration comes from other visitors, such as the recently crowned Miss Universe (Madalina Ghenea), an aspiring child violinist (Lee Artin Boschin), an ever-smiling Buddhist monk (Dorji Wangchuk), and an obese, middle-aged South American celebrity (Roly Serrano) in failing health who valiantly fights to stay vital. Even the resort’s employees have something to offer, such as the insights of a shy but proficient mountain-climbing instructor (Robert Seethaler), an amusing staff physician (Wolfgang Michael) and an intuitive young masseuse (Luna Mijovic).
Over the course of their stay, Fred and Mick’s vacation turns out to be as much an exercise in personal revelation as it is an enjoyable respite, and what they find out about themselves surprises as much as it enlightens. One can only hope that whatever newfound understanding they attain will serve them well as they move forward into the future – one that’s likely going to be just as uncertain now as it was when they were younger.
When we reach the point in life that Fred and Mick have, there’s a tendency for many of us to look back and ask, what has it all meant? Have we made the most of it? Have we done all that we wanted to do? What, if anything, would we have done differently (and, if so, how)? These are “the big questions” of life, the kind that often arise when our time grows short, which, as noted earlier, also usually leads to the all-important inquiry, what do we do with the time we have left?
In assessing these questions, we nearly always end up taking a serious look at our beliefs, for they ultimately determine how our realities – and our lives – unfold, the essence of the conscious creation process. So, if we truly want to find the answers we’re supposedly looking for, the first thing we need to do is ask ourselves, what do we really believe?
This is a question we seldom pose when we’re young; in fact, most of us don’t even recognize its relevance or importance in our youth. But, even if we do, we often put off addressing it until our sunset years (if then). Nevertheless, it’s an inquiry that’s pertinent at any age, whether we’re 19 or 90, because the underlying principle is just as true when we come of age as it is in our waning days. And, in light of that, this is why the answer becomes so crucial when our time is short; if we want to take full advantage of those dwindling days, we had better have a good handle on what we hope to accomplish – and the beliefs that will make it possible – with the time we have left.
Jimmy Tree (Paul Dano), a young actor seeking to find his voice, looks to draw inspiration from the wisdom of elders to bring meaning to his work in director Paolo Sorrentino’s “Youth.” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Of course, if we really want to get the most out of life, we’d be wise to ask this question sooner rather than later. By grasping this concept as early on as possible, we significantly increase the likelihood of creating the life we want (and a full one at that). Unfortunately, many of us evade it, allowing ourselves to become distracted by incidentals, worrying about trivial obsessions, and frequently whittling away valuable time, energy and consciousness on irrelevancies, ill-conceived pursuits and unproductive endeavors.
To that end, then, think about how much potential grief, disappointment and regret we might be able to avoid by addressing this issue in our 20s rather than our 80s. Admittedly, some may contend that it’s easy to reach that conclusion in hindsight, arguing that the experience of making “mistakes” and engaging in other assorted missteps is part of our learning curve, an often-problematic but necessary step on the path to the sage wisdom that comes with age. But, if we’re able to successfully fathom this realization and put it to work in our youth, we may find ourselves astonishingly pleased with the results.
As Fred and Mick come to discover, there are a number of principles that we should consider to increase our chances of success on this point, no matter how old we are:
• Allow ourselves to feel, because our emotions often provide clues about our beliefs, and the more clarity we have about them, the better we’ll understand how and why our reality materializes as it does. Of course, we must also believe that it’s acceptable to allow ourselves to feel in the first place; if we have problems with this, we may encounter undue difficulty in getting a handle on the intents that truly drive us. Several of the film’s characters wrestle with this, and often with regretful consequences.
• Be willing to live in the moment, not in an unchangeable past or an uncertain future. As conscious creators are fond of saying, the point of power is in the present, the only moment over which we have any meaningful direct control. By getting in touch with, and having faith in, the beliefs we hold at such time, there’s no telling what we might accomplish. The fulfillment achieved in such a state of mind could startle those around us, not to mention ourselves. (If you need proof of that, look to the example set by the Buddhist monk noted earlier.)
• Give yourself the time and space to deeply examine this issue. That’s where vacations can prove invaluable. By freeing up those precious resources and removing the everyday diversions that often get in the way, we enable ourselves to pursue (and, one would hope, achieve) this goal. Vacations, retreats and other such getaways provide ideal conditions for this kind of self-examination, as the protagonists come to discover with stunning clarity.
• Warmly embrace beliefs that allow you to give yourself permission to pursue your ambitions. This is particularly true when seeking to manifest your most cherished desires or when looking to extricate yourself from situations that no longer serve you. Of course, this also requires overcoming fear- or doubt-based beliefs that undercut intents aimed at realizing such dreams; by holding on to those outmoded notions, you run the risk of sabotaging the materialization of your heart’s desire, a potentially huge source of regret as the years add up.
• Remain active, both physically and mentally, at any age. When we allow our thoughts and beliefs to atrophy, we become less engaged with our manifestation skills and, consequently, with the reality we create. This may be fine when we’ve made peace with moving on to the next phase of our soul’s evolution, but, if we’re not ready to give up on our current incarnation, we had better remain involved with the realization of our existence. It’s not dependent on age or health, either; even those in the prime of life and who possess a vigorous sense of well-being may be tempted to withdraw, especially if their journeys have been full of disappointment. However, we must remember that our beliefs create our reality, for better or worse, and, if we don’t like what we’ve materialized, we had better get busy and make the necessary adjustments. And, because such modifications depend on us taking action, this is clearly something we need to address while we still have the chance.
Aging screen idol Brenda Morel (Jane Fonda) discusses her latest film project with a long-time friend and collaborator, a filmmaker near the end of his career, in “Youth.” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
In the end, the principal life challenge we all face – just like Fred, Mick and all of their cohorts at the spa – is to sort out our beliefs to make some sense of it all. This is essential for understanding why we have experienced what we have, thereby giving us a newfound appreciation of the nature of existence. And, with the attainment of such enlightenment, there’s nothing that will make us feel more young at heart.
“Youth” is a sublime, thoughtful treatise about aging, what we do with the years we have and how well we understand it all as we move through the process. The picture stylistically recalls director Paolo Sorrentino’s previous offering, the Oscar-winning best foreign language feature, “The Great Beauty” (“La grande bellezza”) (2013). With its gorgeous cinematography, its superb performances by Harvey Keitel and Jane Fonda, its diverse and emotive musical score, and its deftly nuanced, beautifully layered writing, the film is a feast for the senses and leaves viewers with much to think about in its wake. Despite a few slow passages in the first hour, “Youth” tends to grow on you the further you get into it, effectively wiping away any memories of that minor shortcoming. Allow yourself to be moved by the experience, and you’ll come away richly rewarded.
For its efforts, “Youth” has received a modest share of accolades thus far, including a Palme d’Or nomination earlier this year at the Cannes Film Festival, the event’s highest honor. In current contests, the film has earned two very deserving Golden Globe Award nominations for Fonda’s superb supporting actress performance and for the picture’s signature musical piece, Simple Song 3, an honor also bestowed on the composition in the Critics Choice Awards competition.
When we reach the end of the line, many of us would like to hope we come away from the experience having learned something about life and, more importantly, about ourselves. But doing so requires some effort on our part to assess how it all came into being, a process that, for what it’s worth, intrinsically begins with each of us and what we believe. By regularly taking stock of this, we increase the likelihood of getting the most out of the experience. To be sure, life truly is what we make of it, and films like this serve as valuable reminders of that. We can only hope we heed that advice while we still have the chance to do so.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
The meaning of life is something that has mesmerized, perplexed and confounded mankind throughout the ages. And, much of the time, we come away from asking this question with no definitive conclusions. But making the effort to find answers is ultimately what counts, especially before the end arrives, an undertaking pursued in earnest by a colorful cast of characters in the moving new cinematic meditation, “Youth.”
British composer and orchestra conductor Fred Ballinger (Michael Caine), former maestro of the Venice Symphony, has spent years vacationing at a luxury spa in the Swiss Alps, enjoying the exquisite scenery and the company of his long-time friend, Hollywood filmmaker Mick Boyle (Harvey Keitel). In some ways, the octogenarians have a lot in common, such as years of memories, mutual prostate problems, and the marriage of Fred’s daughter, Lena (Rachel Weisz), to Mick’s son, Julian (Ed Stoppard). But, in other ways, the pair couldn’t be more different; Fred is perfectly content to kick back and enjoy his retirement in seclusion, while Mick remains active and in the public eye, working on yet another new movie.
Despite Fred’s insistence that he’s put his working life to rest, there are those who try nudging him back onto the conducting podium. Lena, for example, calls her father “apathetic,” urging him to become more active musically as a means to remain vital, aware and alive. And then there’s Queen Elizabeth’s emissary (Alex Macqueen), who informs the maestro that Her Majesty would like to bestow the honor of knighthood upon him in exchange for conducting a command performance in celebration of Prince Philip’s birthday.
In both instances, however, Fred flatly refuses. He becomes particularly incensed when the emissary reveals the Queen’s request that he conduct his signature composition, Simple Songs, a piece the Prince is particularly fond of. But it’s also a work that holds personal – and painful – significance for Fred, and the thought of performing it again, even for a command performance and with the collaboration of famed soprano Sumi Jo (as herself), troubles him deeply, for reasons he’s highly reluctant to admit.
Mick, meanwhile, continues actively working on his new film with a coterie of young screenwriters (Nate Dern, Alex Beckett, Mark Gessner, Tom Lipinski, Chloe Pirrie) whose wide-eyed enthusiasm helps keep him young. However, despite Mick’s insistence on remaining active, he’s also aware that the years are catching up with him. So, with that in mind, he’s intent on making this film his testament, a consummate expression of who he is and the pinnacle of his artistry. He envisions the picture as a showcase for his favorite actress, Brenda Morel (Jane Fonda), an aging but prolific and profoundly versatile star with whom he has worked on many previous occasions. In doing all this, Mick’s clearly placing a lot of pressure on himself, but, with the clock winding down – and his health becoming questionable – he’s committed to seeing things through on this project while he’s still able.
As Fred and Mick attempt to sort out these matters, they also have ample opportunities to sort out their feelings about their lives. They frequently lounge by the pool or go on leisurely mountain walks, engaging in philosophical discussions about everything from their work to their families, their friendship, their love lives, their emotions, their regrets and, perhaps most importantly, what to do with the time they have left.
In their attempts at arriving at meaningful conclusions about these issues, Fred and Mick often draw upon the examples set by other guests at the spa, such as Jimmy Tree (Paul Dano), a young actor desperately seeking to find his voice as a performer, the spark that will give meaning to his career. Additional inspiration comes from other visitors, such as the recently crowned Miss Universe (Madalina Ghenea), an aspiring child violinist (Lee Artin Boschin), an ever-smiling Buddhist monk (Dorji Wangchuk), and an obese, middle-aged South American celebrity (Roly Serrano) in failing health who valiantly fights to stay vital. Even the resort’s employees have something to offer, such as the insights of a shy but proficient mountain-climbing instructor (Robert Seethaler), an amusing staff physician (Wolfgang Michael) and an intuitive young masseuse (Luna Mijovic).
Over the course of their stay, Fred and Mick’s vacation turns out to be as much an exercise in personal revelation as it is an enjoyable respite, and what they find out about themselves surprises as much as it enlightens. One can only hope that whatever newfound understanding they attain will serve them well as they move forward into the future – one that’s likely going to be just as uncertain now as it was when they were younger.
When we reach the point in life that Fred and Mick have, there’s a tendency for many of us to look back and ask, what has it all meant? Have we made the most of it? Have we done all that we wanted to do? What, if anything, would we have done differently (and, if so, how)? These are “the big questions” of life, the kind that often arise when our time grows short, which, as noted earlier, also usually leads to the all-important inquiry, what do we do with the time we have left?
In assessing these questions, we nearly always end up taking a serious look at our beliefs, for they ultimately determine how our realities – and our lives – unfold, the essence of the conscious creation process. So, if we truly want to find the answers we’re supposedly looking for, the first thing we need to do is ask ourselves, what do we really believe?
This is a question we seldom pose when we’re young; in fact, most of us don’t even recognize its relevance or importance in our youth. But, even if we do, we often put off addressing it until our sunset years (if then). Nevertheless, it’s an inquiry that’s pertinent at any age, whether we’re 19 or 90, because the underlying principle is just as true when we come of age as it is in our waning days. And, in light of that, this is why the answer becomes so crucial when our time is short; if we want to take full advantage of those dwindling days, we had better have a good handle on what we hope to accomplish – and the beliefs that will make it possible – with the time we have left.
Of course, if we really want to get the most out of life, we’d be wise to ask this question sooner rather than later. By grasping this concept as early on as possible, we significantly increase the likelihood of creating the life we want (and a full one at that). Unfortunately, many of us evade it, allowing ourselves to become distracted by incidentals, worrying about trivial obsessions, and frequently whittling away valuable time, energy and consciousness on irrelevancies, ill-conceived pursuits and unproductive endeavors.
To that end, then, think about how much potential grief, disappointment and regret we might be able to avoid by addressing this issue in our 20s rather than our 80s. Admittedly, some may contend that it’s easy to reach that conclusion in hindsight, arguing that the experience of making “mistakes” and engaging in other assorted missteps is part of our learning curve, an often-problematic but necessary step on the path to the sage wisdom that comes with age. But, if we’re able to successfully fathom this realization and put it to work in our youth, we may find ourselves astonishingly pleased with the results.
As Fred and Mick come to discover, there are a number of principles that we should consider to increase our chances of success on this point, no matter how old we are:
• Allow ourselves to feel, because our emotions often provide clues about our beliefs, and the more clarity we have about them, the better we’ll understand how and why our reality materializes as it does. Of course, we must also believe that it’s acceptable to allow ourselves to feel in the first place; if we have problems with this, we may encounter undue difficulty in getting a handle on the intents that truly drive us. Several of the film’s characters wrestle with this, and often with regretful consequences.
• Be willing to live in the moment, not in an unchangeable past or an uncertain future. As conscious creators are fond of saying, the point of power is in the present, the only moment over which we have any meaningful direct control. By getting in touch with, and having faith in, the beliefs we hold at such time, there’s no telling what we might accomplish. The fulfillment achieved in such a state of mind could startle those around us, not to mention ourselves. (If you need proof of that, look to the example set by the Buddhist monk noted earlier.)
• Give yourself the time and space to deeply examine this issue. That’s where vacations can prove invaluable. By freeing up those precious resources and removing the everyday diversions that often get in the way, we enable ourselves to pursue (and, one would hope, achieve) this goal. Vacations, retreats and other such getaways provide ideal conditions for this kind of self-examination, as the protagonists come to discover with stunning clarity.
• Warmly embrace beliefs that allow you to give yourself permission to pursue your ambitions. This is particularly true when seeking to manifest your most cherished desires or when looking to extricate yourself from situations that no longer serve you. Of course, this also requires overcoming fear- or doubt-based beliefs that undercut intents aimed at realizing such dreams; by holding on to those outmoded notions, you run the risk of sabotaging the materialization of your heart’s desire, a potentially huge source of regret as the years add up.
• Remain active, both physically and mentally, at any age. When we allow our thoughts and beliefs to atrophy, we become less engaged with our manifestation skills and, consequently, with the reality we create. This may be fine when we’ve made peace with moving on to the next phase of our soul’s evolution, but, if we’re not ready to give up on our current incarnation, we had better remain involved with the realization of our existence. It’s not dependent on age or health, either; even those in the prime of life and who possess a vigorous sense of well-being may be tempted to withdraw, especially if their journeys have been full of disappointment. However, we must remember that our beliefs create our reality, for better or worse, and, if we don’t like what we’ve materialized, we had better get busy and make the necessary adjustments. And, because such modifications depend on us taking action, this is clearly something we need to address while we still have the chance.
In the end, the principal life challenge we all face – just like Fred, Mick and all of their cohorts at the spa – is to sort out our beliefs to make some sense of it all. This is essential for understanding why we have experienced what we have, thereby giving us a newfound appreciation of the nature of existence. And, with the attainment of such enlightenment, there’s nothing that will make us feel more young at heart.
“Youth” is a sublime, thoughtful treatise about aging, what we do with the years we have and how well we understand it all as we move through the process. The picture stylistically recalls director Paolo Sorrentino’s previous offering, the Oscar-winning best foreign language feature, “The Great Beauty” (“La grande bellezza”) (2013). With its gorgeous cinematography, its superb performances by Harvey Keitel and Jane Fonda, its diverse and emotive musical score, and its deftly nuanced, beautifully layered writing, the film is a feast for the senses and leaves viewers with much to think about in its wake. Despite a few slow passages in the first hour, “Youth” tends to grow on you the further you get into it, effectively wiping away any memories of that minor shortcoming. Allow yourself to be moved by the experience, and you’ll come away richly rewarded.
For its efforts, “Youth” has received a modest share of accolades thus far, including a Palme d’Or nomination earlier this year at the Cannes Film Festival, the event’s highest honor. In current contests, the film has earned two very deserving Golden Globe Award nominations for Fonda’s superb supporting actress performance and for the picture’s signature musical piece, Simple Song 3, an honor also bestowed on the composition in the Critics Choice Awards competition.
When we reach the end of the line, many of us would like to hope we come away from the experience having learned something about life and, more importantly, about ourselves. But doing so requires some effort on our part to assess how it all came into being, a process that, for what it’s worth, intrinsically begins with each of us and what we believe. By regularly taking stock of this, we increase the likelihood of getting the most out of the experience. To be sure, life truly is what we make of it, and films like this serve as valuable reminders of that. We can only hope we heed that advice while we still have the chance to do so.
Copyright © 2015, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Spread Some Holiday Cheer!
Why are these people smiling? They just got their copies of Get the Picture?!: Conscious Creation Goes to the Movies and Consciously Created Cinema: The Movie Lover’s Guide to the Law of Attraction!
Photo by David Castillo Dominici, courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net
These books, available in print and ebook formats, make ideal gifts for movie lovers and followers of conscious creation/law of attraction principles, so pick up copies for everyone on your holiday shopping list – including yourself if that’s you! For a sample of Get the Picture?!, click here, and for a sample of Consciously Created Cinema, click here.
To find our more about these titles, visit their dedicated web sites. For Get the Picture?!, click here, and for Consciously Created Cinema, click here. The books are available from all major online retailers, including Amazon, Barnes & Noble, iTunes and Kobo, among others. You can also keep up with the latest developments about these titles on Facebook, Pinterest and Google+, and be sure to follow me on Twitter (@Brent_Marchant).
Happy Holidays, everybody, and best of luck with your creations in the New Year!
For Get the Picture?! on Amazon, click here
For Get the Picture?! on Barnes & Noble, click here
For Get the Picture?! on iTunes, click here
For Get the Picture?! on Kobo Books, click here
For other Get the Picture?! retailers, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Amazon, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Barnes & Noble, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on iTunes, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Kobo Books, click here
For other Consciously Created Cinema retailers, click here
Book cover designs by Paul L. Clark, Inspirtainment
These books, available in print and ebook formats, make ideal gifts for movie lovers and followers of conscious creation/law of attraction principles, so pick up copies for everyone on your holiday shopping list – including yourself if that’s you! For a sample of Get the Picture?!, click here, and for a sample of Consciously Created Cinema, click here.
To find our more about these titles, visit their dedicated web sites. For Get the Picture?!, click here, and for Consciously Created Cinema, click here. The books are available from all major online retailers, including Amazon, Barnes & Noble, iTunes and Kobo, among others. You can also keep up with the latest developments about these titles on Facebook, Pinterest and Google+, and be sure to follow me on Twitter (@Brent_Marchant).
Happy Holidays, everybody, and best of luck with your creations in the New Year!
For Get the Picture?! on Amazon, click here
For Get the Picture?! on Barnes & Noble, click here
For Get the Picture?! on iTunes, click here
For Get the Picture?! on Kobo Books, click here
For other Get the Picture?! retailers, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Amazon, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Barnes & Noble, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on iTunes, click here
For Consciously Created Cinema on Kobo Books, click here
For other Consciously Created Cinema retailers, click here
Project Bring Me To Life Radio Show Now Available on Multiple Web Sites
In case you missed last week's broadcast of my interview on the Project Bring Me To Life radio show with host Christopher Closson, you can now hear it in podcast format for on-demand listening from the following sources: iTunes, Stitcher, Spreaker, Reality Sandwich and Disinfo. And, while you're at it, check out the show's YouTube preview and my PBMTL profile on the web site's home page. Tune in for a lively discussion about conscious creation/law of attraction principles in the movies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)