Tune in for The Cinema Scribe

Tune in for the latest Cinema Scribe segment on Bring Me 2 Life Radio, today, March 5, at 2 pm ET, by clicking here. And, if you don't hear it live, catch it later on demand!

‘Celeste Garcia’ explores how to get what we really want

“The Extraordinary Journey of Celeste Garcia” (“El viaje extraordinario de Celeste García”) (2018). Cast: María Isabel Díaz, Omar Franco, Néstor Jiménez, Yerlín Pérez, Tamara Castellanos, Veronica Diaz, Roberto Espinosa, Reinier Díaz, Andrea Doimeadios, Beatriz Viña. Director: Arturo Infante. Screenplay: Arturo Infante. Web site. Trailer.

Much of our life is spent just trying to figure out how it all works. This leaves us little time to devote to attaining what we really hope for out of it. And, even then, we may not get it right through many attempts at doing so. But, at some point, we just might hit upon the right formula, one that gives us the happiness and contentment we seek. Such an odyssey is the stuff of one women’s pursuit to find a life that suits her as detailed in the offbeat new Cuban comedy, “The Extraordinary Journey of Celeste Garcia” (“El viaje extraordinario de Celeste García”).

Former school teacher Celeste Garcia (María Isabel Díaz) has led an often-difficult life, but the single, sixty-something retiree is now hoping her golden years in Havana will turn out better. She spends much of her time in the company of her Russian neighbor and volunteers as a docent at the local planetarium. Life’s admittedly far from perfect, but the spry senior enjoys a reasonably comfortable, albeit rather routine, existence, at least by present-day Cuban standards. But, while at home late one night, matters take a rather drastic and unexpected turn.

In the middle of a sound sleep, Celeste is awoken by an exceptionally bright light and strange sounds coming from her neighbor’s apartment. Celeste is mystified by these unusual happenings, so she decides to investigate. Upon entering the adjacent unit, however, she gets quite an eyeful; she finds herself in the company of several odd-looking individuals, beings who are unfamiliar and certainly not immediately recognizable as human. She doesn’t quite know what to make of this, but she doesn’t hang around to find out, quickly returning to her apartment and trying to ignore what she just witnessed.

The next day, she finds her apartment building crawling with authorities. She also learns that her neighbor is gone. But, rather than make waves, she essentially puts her head down and blinders on in an attempt to pay no attention to what’s going on. Before long, though, the truth of what’s happening is revealed through official TV news reports. It seems that Cuba has long been home to alien representatives from the planet Gryok, and the visitors now want to establish an exchange program with their earthly hosts, graciously extending an invitation to journey to their home world. And, with that revelation, Celeste strongly suspects her neighbor probably wasn’t Russian after all.

Demand for the exchange program is heavy, so the government establishes a lottery program to select its contingent of qualified applicants. Celeste’s friends and family encourage her to apply, believing that it would provide the lonely and unattached retiree with a fresh start, especially since it’s an opportunity that would feed her interest in astronomy. But Celeste says she has no desire to go, that she’s perfectly content to remain earthbound.

[caption id="attachment_10551" align="aligncenter" width="300"]Former school teacher Celeste Garcia (María Isabel Díaz) hopes that an invitation by extraterrestrials to visit their home world will bring happiness to her lonely and unfulfilled life in the offbeat comedy, “The Extraordinary Journey of Celeste Garcia” (“El viaje extraordinario de Celeste García”). Photo courtesy of The Match Factory.[/caption]

Despite her lack of interest in the exchange program, Celeste is nevertheless curious to find out what actually happened to her neighbor, so she decides to visit the office of the government agency overseeing the lottery to see if it has any information about her vanished friend’s whereabouts. While there, Celeste learns that her alleged Russian acquaintance had indeed been masquerading as a human for years, but that revelation pales in comparison to an even bigger surprise: It seems Celeste’s neighbor recommended her for the exchange program, making a reserved slot available to her with no need to go through the uncertainty of the lottery process.

So why did Celeste’s neighbor accord her such special treatment? Having been a teacher, Celeste is considered a superior being (for a human at least) and is looked upon as the kind of enlightened, uplifting individual that Gryokians (like her neighbor) believe make her an ideal candidate for inter-species exchange. The off-worlders are convinced they can learn as much from her as she can from them.

As word of the exchange program spreads, Cuba’s would-be space travelers grow more curious about the planet they hope to visit. Gryok, it seems, is quite an intriguing place – very earth-like in many ways but sufficiently different in others. For example, the distant world is home to animals not unlike those found on terra firma, but with some significant distinctions. Gryok’s chickens, for instance, are 20 feet tall (imagine the size of the eggs).

Having essentially been given a free pass to make the trip, Celeste is welcome to go if she wishes. And, given the number of lottery applicants, she’s thought of as quite the lucky soul. As she learns more about the faraway planet, her interest is piqued, fueled by the encouragement of her sister, Luisa (Beatriz Viña), and her son, Pedrito (Roberto Espinosa), who note how many others wish they were in her shoes. So, after some additional thought, Celeste comes to recognize that there’s really nothing holding her here, a realization that prompts her to accept the offer to journey into the cosmos.

To prepare for the trip, Celeste and the lucky lottery winners are sent to a special training camp housed in a cramped, abandoned, run-down school in the Cuban countryside. Along the way, Celeste meets an interesting array of fellow travelers, including a flamboyant retired musician, Hector (Néstor Jiménez), a feisty, mouthy middle-aged woman, Perlita (Yerlín Pérez), and an expectant young mother, Mirta (Tamara Castellanos). She also runs into a familiar face, Augusto (Omar Franco), her neighborhood butcher, a gentlemanly senior who, without fail, inconspicuously takes care of his favorite customer while quietly swooning for her from afar. And, to make sure everyone learns their preparatory lessons, the aspiring travelers are placed under the supervision of a despotic government apparatchik, Zobeida (Veronica Diaz), a civil servant on steroids who approaches her duties with the efficient, impersonal, perfunctory attitude of a drill sergeant.

As Celeste goes through her training, however, she begins to discover that this supposedly coveted opportunity may not be everything it’s cracked up to be. In addition to Zobeida’s routine bullying, incessant barking and relentless criticisms, the bureaucracy of getting processed, and a variety of other issues, Celeste grows increasingly disillusioned. The once-hopeful prospect for a new beginning starts serving up the same kind of disappointment and frustration that has characterized much of her life.

What’s more, not everything is above board, either. Wannabe travelers who haven’t qualified for the trip are camped out on the periphery of the training facility, looking for ways to scam themselves into a ticket. Such is the case with a young couple, Yunier (Reinier Díaz) and Malu (Andrea Doimeadios), who are on the run from the law for a crime of passion they committed, hopeful that the Gryokians haven’t yet established any extradition arrangements with their earthly colleagues. There’s a problem, though; while Yunier has been approved for the journey, Malu has not and is desperately looking for a way to get on board. They’ll do just about anything to get what they want, too, including taking advantage of the good graces of legitimate travelers – like Celeste.

[caption id="attachment_10552" align="aligncenter" width="300"]Former school teacher Celeste Garcia (María Isabel Díaz, second from right) discusses her hopes for a new life on an alien planet to which she’s been invited with fellow travelers Hector (Néstor Jiménez, second from left), Perlita (Yerlín Pérez, right) and Mirta (Tamara Castellanos, left) in the offbeat new Cuban comedy, “The Extraordinary Journey of Celeste Garcia” (“El viaje extraordinario de Celeste García”). Photo courtesy of The Match Factory.[/caption]

With the time of the rendezvous with the mother ship fast approaching, circumstances grow increasingly tense. So how will everything shake out? That remains to be seen as the confluence of the film’s various story threads come together to reveal an outcome that surprises everyone – both on and off the screen. A curious mix of heartache, contentment and unforeseen affiliations will leave everyone – even the aliens – scratching their heads at how things turn out. But, if an odyssey like this is genuinely meant to be a trek into the unknown, Celeste Garcia’s extraordinary journey truly lives up to every bit of its billing.

Creating the life we want for ourselves is, obviously, up to us. But many find that they fail at this, and they’re usually not sure why. In large part, though, it usually comes down to either not really knowing what we want or allowing ourselves to be unduly imprinted with the influences of others. Such impacts serve to shape our thoughts, beliefs and intents, the building blocks of the conscious creation process, the philosophy that maintains we use these metaphysical tools to manifest the reality we experience.

From this, it’s easy to see that, if we don’t have a good handle on our beliefs, we don’t have a good handle on the reality we materialize. Such is the case with Celeste; as dear and sweet as she is, she’s also something of a push-over, letting others around her determine what she should want rather than allowing herself to decide those matters for herself. But, when she discovers that what others want or recommend isn’t necessarily what she wants, she invariably runs into trouble. That’s something that has plagued her much of her life, and it’s reared its head once again when it comes to making a decision about whether to accept the Gryokians’ invitation (and hence the issues she experiences in the training camp).

To a certain extent, that’s not to be unexpected in a society, like Cuba, where officials make the decisions for all of its citizenry. Indeed, is it realistic to believe that individuals can learn to think for themselves when they’re constantly being told by authorities what they’re supposed to think? Such circumstances would appear to speak volumes for why Celeste finds herself in the situation that she’s in (and probably always has been).

In that regard, then, this film is as much a commentary on the state of Cuban politics and society as it is about the life of a woman seeking to find her way in the world (or on another planet). Those who quietly and compliantly always follow the rules, like Celeste, may not get into trouble, but they may also often find themselves less than satisfied with the results. Meanwhile, those who are willing to pursue what they actually want, like Yunier and Malu, frequently find that they must break the rules to reach their objectives, a potentially perilous course but one that at least allows them to think for themselves. Thus, in its own way, this picture quietly examines the roles of the group and the individual in society and how those influences factor into the manifestation of personal happiness and collective fulfillment (or lack thereof).



To a great degree, this is also an exploration into the question of personal power, namely, whether we successfully hold on to it or whether we capitulate and give it away. This, too, is determined by our beliefs, specifically when it comes to the value we place on retaining it. Intentionally choosing to maintain it may be a more difficult course, because doing so may fly in the face of what a powerful majority wants. However, because it also has the potential to provide us with eminently more happiness than surrendering it to others, it holds the promise of a more fulfilling existence. That’s something to bear in mind be it in our dealings with any type of authority figures, be they government officials, superior alien beings or even family members.

In the end, this is all a question of figuring out what we truly want for ourselves and then following through on it, first with our belief formation and then with the actions we take based on them. The “obvious” choices may be fine for some but not for others, and, if we truly want what we believe is best for ourselves, we must have the personal courage to stick to our guns. To do otherwise may place us in unsuitable circumstances, and there’s certainly nothing extraordinary about that.

Ironically, to find out what we really want, sometimes we have to experience disappointment first, largely because what lets us down is something we don’t really want in the first place, no matter how much we may have convinced ourselves that it is. But that can work to our advantage in that it can reach a breaking point, one that finally gets us to stop allowing ourselves to be talked into situations we don’t want and to start listening to our own true selves. That, in itself, can be quite an empowering experience, filling us with confidence and enabling us to direct our beliefs into the fulfillment of our own aspirations. The key, of course, is in finally coming to that realization and definitively acting upon it. It’s a life lesson Celeste could benefit from greatly – as long as she’ll have it.

This fun, delightful yet thought-provoking little comedy fills much bigger shoes than what one might think at first glance. This quirky but insightful offering features a host of colorful characters, offbeat incidents, absurdist humor and inventive sight gags, with ample symbolic sociopolitical commentary thrown in for good measure. There’s more going on than meets the eye in director Arturo Infante’s debut feature, so pay close attention, and don’t be quick to dismiss it as throwaway fluff.

Unfortunately, finding “Celeste Garcia” may take some doing, at least at the moment. This Cuban-German co-production has primarily been playing the film festival circuit, such as at the Chicago International Film Festival, where I first saw it. Check the picture’s web site or your local film festival’s web site for screenings.

An exceptional life is something most all of us seek, yet it often seems to elude us for reasons that are generally equally eluding. But that’s not to say it’s unattainable. Being truthful with ourselves about what we want and taking steps to achieve them are essential to see it realized. That can be quite an extraordinary journey in itself as we learn, usually through trial and tribulation, what it takes to reach that destination – no matter how far away or close it may be.

Copyright © 2018-19, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.

‘Pig’ asks, ‘What’s the price of popularity?’

“Pig” (“Khook”) (2018 production, 2019 release). Cast: Hassan Majooni, Leila Hatami, Leili Rashidi, Parinaz Izadyar, Siamak Ansari, Ainaz Azarhoush, Ali Bagheri, Mina Jafarzadeh, Ali Masaffa. Director: Mani Haghighi, Screenplay: Mani Haghighi. Web site. Trailer.

What does it mean to be liked? That can be a loaded question, depending on the context. But, in an age of omnipresent social media (and the social ostracism that often accompanies it, which can take myriad forms, again depending on the context), that question can become even more precarious. And, on top of all that, our responses to those circumstances can be truly mind-boggling. These are just some of the issues faced by an insecure citizen in an insecure society in the offbeat new Iranian dark comedy, “Pig” (“Khook”).

Filmmaker Hasan Kasmai (Hassan Majooni) is supremely frustrated. Once one of Iran’s most popular and respected directors, Hasan now finds himself on the outs, having been blacklisted by the government as a creator of subversive movies. Unable to get his proposed projects approved, he’s been relegated to directing TV commercials for innocuous products like bug spray. He still tries to bring his signature style to these “productions,” but it’s not the same, especially when he must sit back and watch filmmakers he considers less talented able to get work.

Hasan is also upset that his star actress (and mistress), Shiva Mohajer (Leila Hatami), is about to be cast in a production directed by one of his rivals, Sohrab Saidi (Ali Masaffa), a filmmaker Hasan considers pretentious, overrated and lacking in ability. Hasan pleads with Shiva to reconsider taking the part, but she says she can no longer wait for his name to be cleared from the blacklist; after several years of patiently waiting for Hasan to return to the ranks of active auteurs, she says she needs the work to maintain her profile and simply can’t wait any longer.

[caption id="attachment_10545" align="aligncenter" width="300"]Blacklisted filmmaker Hasan Kasmai (Hassan Majooni) spends his days and nights distracting himself from his troubles by playing tennis, going to costume parties and engaging in other assorted diversions in the raucous new Iranian dark comedy, “Pig” (“Khook”). Photo courtesy of Daricheh Cinema.[/caption]

As this little drama plays out, however, an even bigger one is unfolding. Mysteriously, a number of Iran’s other filmmakers (especially subversive ones) are being murdered, beheaded in graphic fashion, with the results displayed under highly visible conditions and the word “pig” carved into their foreheads. It’s a subject on everyone’s mind in the public at large and Iran’s film community in particular, including Hasan, but for reasons that aren’t the same as most everyone else. He wonders why he hasn’t become a target himself. He’s “insulted” at being “passed over,” something that only further feeds his insecurities and makes him feel even more “left out.” Most look upon this worry in wonder, believing that he should be grateful for being spared. But not Hasan – he’s tired of being shunned, even under such gruesome circumstances. He consequently seeks ways to get involved in the mystery, hoping it will resurrect his profile and popularity – and maybe even draw the killer his way.

In the meantime, Shiva begins work on Sohrab’s film, a development that infuriates Hasan. He even believes that the director may be trying to woo the actress away from him, a notion that leads to embarrassing public incidents and strained relations between him and Shiva. Needless to, say, Hasan grows even more despondent and isolated.

Others try to cheer up Hasan, such as his elderly, doting, occasionally foul-mouthed mother, Jeyran (Mina Jafarzadeh), who ardently believes her baby can do no wrong and who’s willing to go to extreme lengths to protect him against any threats, no matter how great or incidental. Then there’s Hasan’s longtime friend and tennis partner, Homayoun (Siamak Ansari), who’s willing to indulge his pal’s whims, no matter how looney some of them may be. But, regardless of how much help his supporters provide, they never seem to satiate Hasan’s bottomless appetite for recognition and attention.

As time passes, the heat gets turned up considerably. Hasan finds himself being pursued by a persistent stalker, Annie (Parinaz Izadyar), who claims she’s smitten with the filmmaker and is interested in finding a way of becoming cast in his next production (whenever that will be), even though her unpredictable actions often make these contentions questionable. But, even more troublesome than that, claims circulate against Hasan that he’s killing the other directors (after all, accusers claim, how has he managed to survive while all of the others are dying?). Those accusations get fueled with further speculation when he’s placed near the scene of one of the murders, but, when Hasan is questioned by an investigator (Ali Bagheri), he’s cleared of all suspicion. Nevertheless, when word of his possible connection to the crimes is leaked to social media, he’s tried and found guilty in the court of public opinion, despite the authorities’ finding of innocence.

[caption id="attachment_10546" align="aligncenter" width="300"]Long sidelined from the acting scene, leading lady Shiva Mohajer (Leila Hatami) returns to moviemaking over the objection of her blacklisted lover and collaborator in the inventive new Iranian dark comedy, “Pig” (“Khook”). Photo courtesy of Daricheh Cinema.[/caption]

Ironically, Hasan suddenly has more popularity than what he knows to do with, but it’s far from the kind of notoriety he’s been seeking. What’s he to do to clear his falsely accused name and restore his reputation? That’s the challenge he now faces, one that perches him perilously on multiple fronts. And it’s bigger than anything he’s had to confront thus far.

In addressing these issues, the first question Hasan (or anyone else similarly situated) needs to ask is, “Is the popularity we seek worth the cost of what it takes to attain it?” It’s an age-old question in many ways, but it’s become particularly important in a hyperconnected world with ubiquitous social media, on-demand Internet access and constant (if often-uninformed) scrutiny by others. Indeed, is the result truly worthy of the effort needed to acquire it?

That naturally depends on the value we place on this sought-after commodity. And that, in turn, is based on the beliefs we hold on the subject. That’s crucial, because they will determine what arises given that our beliefs are the driving force behind the conscious creation process, the philosophy that maintains we manifest the reality we experience through the power of our thoughts, beliefs and intents.

Given where Hasan is coming from, he has much to sort out for himself. But, before he can implement any corrective measures, he needs to decide what’s most important in his life. What gives him meaning? What provides genuine satisfaction? What does he want for his future? And what beliefs does he need to formulate to realize these outcomes?

[caption id="attachment_10547" align="aligncenter" width="300"]Blacklisted filmmaker Hasan Kasmai (Hassan Majooni, right) and his longtime friend, Homayoun (Siamak Ansari, left), partake in an array of wild schemes to solve a series of murder mysteries while restoring the director’s reputation in the hilarious new Iranian dark comedy, “Pig” (“Khook”). Photo courtesy of Daricheh Cinema.[/caption]

Hasan obviously craves attention and hopes that others like him, partly to get his career back on track, but also simply to rejuvenate others’ appreciation of him as a human being. Those objectives are intertwined with one another to a certain degree, which is why his inability to work is so painful to him. And, because of that, he’s willing to do almost anything to get back on track.

Of course, when we become obsessed like this, we may be tempted to do just about anything to attain our goal, and that may lead to the formation, deployment and maintenance of ill-considered beliefs. That’s apparent, for example, in Hasan’s misguided notion that he’s somehow less of a filmmaker (and, consequently, less of an individual) because the serial killer hasn’t targeted him for beheading. Such a distorted, misguided belief subsequently leads to all kinds of genuinely bizarre materializations, considerations that most anyone in his or her right mind would never seek to manifest. It leads to such wacky developments as his consoling mother trying to comfort him by saying that he needn’t fret about not being sought by the murderer, that he should rest assured that the killer will come around eventually because he’s “saving the best for last” (how’s that for a mother’s love?). It also leads to the stalker’s appearance, the suspicion that Hasan might be a suspect in the killings and his desire to become involved in the case in hopes that his efforts at solving the crimes will help to draw popularity-building attention to him.

What madness this is! Yet, if Hasan is upset with any of these developments, he has no one to blame but himself, since these manifestations are arising from his beliefs. That’s what can happen when we become so focused on an outcome that we give no thought to the consequences that can accompany its materialization. This is un-conscious creation or creation by default in full flower.

So what can we do to avoid this? First and foremost we need to place our faith in the workings of our divine collaborator, our trusty partner in the conscious creation process. When we state a desired intent and then let it go for our co-creator to act upon it, we’re more likely to get the result we want than if we try to manhandle the process, wrestling it to the ground to force our objective into being, a practice known as “pushing the Universe.” As seasoned conscious creators are well aware, the Universe naturally leans in our direction, so we should let it do its work, based on our input, rather than try to control a process that we’re not nearly as adept at managing as our collaborator is. If we’re impatient with the unfolding of the process or try to strong-arm the outcome, we’re likely to end up sorely disappointed, saddled with a distorted version of what we seek, as well as a host of unintended side effects that need to be resolved. It’s a lesson Hasan is sorely in need of learning – and before it’s too late. Indeed, it would seem the beleaguered filmmaker has his work cut out for him.



Director Mani Haghighi’s Farsi-cal crime story is quite an unexpected treat. Given the kinds of films that typically come out of Iran, one likely wouldn’t think that a dark comedy such as this would be among the releases. Nevertheless, this hilarious romp serves up big laughs amidst its many intriguing twists and turns. At the same time, the picture delivers a number of insightful, subtle observations about social media, the meaning of fame, and a host of other political and civic issues. What’s more, this exceedingly polished offering resembles contemporary Western releases much more than most of its homegrown peers, with gorgeous cinematography, snappy writing, high-quality production values, and influences from a variety of sources, including music videos, the films of the Coen Brothers and other outlets. The picture has a slight tendency to meander at times, but everything seemingly extraneous ends up playing a part in the end, making for a taut, well-told tale. Sensitive viewers should be aware, however, that there is some graphic imagery in this one; it never gets out of context, but it may still be more than some moviegoers can handle. “Pig” may be a little hard to find, but it’s worth a look if you have the chance.

Many of us would probably say that we’d like to be liked. But at what cost? How far are we willing to go to achieve the popularity we claim to crave? And at what point does the cost become too high? That’s something we each need to determine for ourselves, but the answers may take some scrutiny to determine exactly what we’re willing to do – and how far we’re willing to go – to attain that attention. Be sure to remember, though, as this film sternly cautions, it’s not something worth losing your head over.

Copyright © 2019, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.

‘Isn’t It Romantic’ muses about the true nature of love

“Isn’t It Romantic” (2019). Cast: Rebel Wilson, Liam Hemsworth, Adam Devine, Priyanka Chopra, Brandon Scott Jones, Betty Gilpin, Jennifer Saunders, Alexandra Kis, Ray Anthony Lewis, Zach Cherry, Sandy Honig, Dean Neistat. Director: Todd Strauss-Schulson. Screenplay: Erin Cardillo, Dana Fox and Katie Silberman. Story: Erin Cardillo. Web site. Trailer.

What does it take to love someone? The answer may surprise you, as its origins actually stem from a source that might not be recognized at first glance. But making that realization is crucial if we ever hope to find that true love, an insight pursued in earnest in the delightful new romantic comedy parody, “Isn’t It Romantic.”

When pudgy 12-year-old Aussie Natalie (Alexandra Kis) gawks at a screening of the 1990 romantic fantasy “Pretty Woman,” she longs for the same kind of happily-ever-after ending for herself experienced by lead characters Richard Gere and Julia Roberts. But that wide-eyed wonder is summarily quashed by the hard-edged cynicism of her mother (Jennifer Saunders), who tells her daughter that such outcomes are unrealistic for common folk like them. Needless to say, Natalie is crushed, but she nevertheless takes the “advice” as gospel.

Fast forward to the present day, when a twenty-something Natalie (Rebel Wilson) is now an architect living in New York. However, despite the seeming prestige such a position should offer, she’s often put upon by co-workers (Zach Cherry, Sandy Honig) who ask her to perform menial tasks for them or even do their jobs. Even her personal assistant, Whitney (Betty Gilpin), is of little help, ignoring her responsibilities and spending her days endlessly watching romantic comedies on her computer. About the only person in her corner is her co-worker Josh (Adam Devine), who actively seeks to court her friendship and build up her morale. But even that encouragement does little to bolster her spirits when she’s treated shabbily during a project presentation by one of the firm’s clients, Blake (Liam Hemsworth), a terminally handsome but arrogant businessman who thoughtlessly assumes she’s the coffee girl and not the professional that she is.

Such treatment only reinforces the general malaise she feels about her life. With little respect at her office, no looming romantic prospects and even a pet dog that ignores her, Natalie feels like life is passing her by, but she accepts and expects that, an attitude that echoes the sentiments planted in her mind by her mother all those years ago. She even chastises Whitney for wasting so much time watching her silly movies, claiming that those pictures, like the film she gawked at as a youngster, paint an implausible picture of romance. Natalie recites a litany of clichés that characterize the pictures of that genre and itemizes how their narratives fill the heads of their viewers with naïve, unrealistic notions about love.



After yet another unfulfilling day at work, while riding home on the New York City subway, Natalie gets hit on by a flirty stranger (Dean Neistat). Unfortunately, the would-be suitor turns out to be a mugger. But, despite an attempt at snatching Natalie’s purse, the attacker is unprepared for his victim’s ability to fight back, an effort at which she nearly succeeds – were it not for running into a support beam and knocking herself unconscious.

When Natalie awakens, she finds herself in an emergency room unlike anything she’s ever seen. The designer hospital suite looks more like something from an interior decorator’s studio than a health care facility. The attending physician is a hunk, and flowers adorn everything. And, upon release, Natalie discovers an outdoor streetscape that resembles the set of a Hallmark movie.

Natalie naturally wonders how New York ended up looking like this. Gone are the grubbiness and the foul smells to which she’s grown accustomed. And everywhere she looks she sees couples madly in love. Given that everything she’s witnessing goes against her views about reality, she’s convinced she’s got to find a way to escape and get back to the existence that she knows and … loves?

Yet, as she makes her way through this alternate existence, she finds virtually everything is now working to her benefit. Her apartment has been transformed into something out of Architectural Digest. Her dog adores her. And Blake, the client who previously treated her like dirt, is now head over heels in love with her.

But is this allegedly perfect reality everything it’s cracked up to be? Whitney, for example, has suddenly been transformed from a warm and supportive colleague into a wicked witch. Josh, though still in Natalie’s corner, has taken a shine to a super model, Isabella (Priyanka Chopra). Blake, despite his claims of undying love, reveals that his affection comes with strings. So, given all that, is this really where Natalie wants to stay? And, if not, how does she escape?

The answer is not out of reach, but Natalie will need to discover where to look, and that may prove challenging. However, if she really wants to make a change – one that ultimately involves more than just a return to the reality she knows – she’ll have to take on that challenge. And the answer to that may surprise her – and us.

The quest to find the meaning of true love can take many twists and turns. And, since most of us are born without a guidebook, that can turn the search into an exercise in trial and error. We may look at the examples set by others. We may attempt winging it on our own. Or we may look to others for advice, as Natalie does in consulting her best friend and next-door neighbor, Donny (Brandon Scott Jones), the sort of unattached, flamboyant but infinitely wise gay man who often makes for a staple rom-com character. But, in the end, given that we have engaged in this search, perhaps we should consider starting with ourselves to see what we bring to the table of romance. Once we do that, we may find our quest much easier to fulfill.

Of course, much depends on our beliefs about love, as they determine what unfolds in our life, thanks to the conscious creation process, the philosophy that maintains we manifest the reality we experience through the power of these metaphysical building blocks. And, given Natalie’s life, it’s apparent she holds some clearly defined beliefs about love, all of which characterize the nature of her romantic experience.

In Natalie’s case, we can go back to an early point in her life to see where these beliefs took shape, and clearly she’s conflicted. While watching “Pretty Woman,” for example, she willingly bought into the fairy tale aspect of love. But, in turn, she also embraced the sour outlook of her mother, a polar opposite attitude. This set of divergent beliefs has combined to create the antagonistic views she maintains. And, as conscious creators well know, contradictions like this are one of the chief causes of our hoped-for manifestations remaining unmaterialized.

Unfortunately, this attitude has permeated other aspects of her life as well. Disappointment and low expectations have creeped into other areas, affecting her overall outlook. She obviously doesn’t expect much romantically speaking, but that attitude has also left her with comparable views about her career, her living circumstances and even her relationship with her pet.

So, if she ever hopes to turn things around, what is Natalie to do? She needs to look to herself and what she hopes for out of life. If she continues to maintain such a dismal approach to her existence, it’s easy to see what she’ll get in return. But, if she were to believe that she deserves better, then perhaps she might realize a different outcome. And that is what triggers her alternate reality experience. It affords her an opportunity to see what else is possible, to get a glimpse of what alternatives she can experience besides what she’s typically known.

However, to make this happen, Natalie has to be the one to do the work, specifically where her manifesting beliefs are concerned. A different result won’t arise from the outside; it must begin from within. Natalie must change her views, particularly when it comes to her expectations, and that largely has its origins in such areas as self-esteem and self-love.

This is obvious to outsiders like Whitney and, especially, Josh. They try to encourage Natalie to see the worth she possesses and to demand more for herself, especially when it comes to her dealings with others, such as possible romantic partners, co-workers and even her dog. Interestingly, this is something from which many of us could probably benefit, but, for what it’s worth, many of us are like Natalie in that we don’t see it in ourselves. If there’s any takeaway we should glean from this film, that would be it. Should we do that, we might all be a lot happier in our lives, not just romantically but in all aspects of our existence.

“Isn’t It Romantic” explores what true love really means and where it originates. While at times a bit belaboring and at other times somewhat underdeveloped, the film is a generally charming rom-com parody reminiscent of the fun-filled independent production “(500) Days of Summer” (2009), albeit somewhat more commercial. The picture delivers lots of laughs and nice sentiments about matters that go beyond romance. Rebel Wilson shows that she can carry a lead role effectively, serving up the goods at every turn. And the film’s skewering of romantic comedy clichés, such as the inclusion of several impromptu, perfectly choreographed, over-the-top music video sequences, is an absolute hoot.

For something that we place so much attention on, you’d think that we’d all be experts by now when it comes to this thing called love. If only that were true. But that’s not to say we can’t master it with the right attitude, the right outlook and a willingness to put in the work to figure it out. After all, for those of us who’ve succeeded at this, we can honestly say that the effort is well worth it. And that truly is romantic.

Copyright © 2019, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.

This Week in Movies with Meaning

Reviews of "Isn't It Romantic" and "Pig," as well as my Oscar scorecard, are all in the latest Movies with Meaning post on the web site of The Good Media Network, available by clicking here.

How’d I Do on This Year’s Oscars?

With this year’s Academy Awards ceremony behind us, it’s time to take a look at how I did on my predictions for the winners in this annual competition, as first outlined in my previous blog, “Who Will Win This Year's Oscars?”, posted on February 7. This was a difficult season to handicap, but I was generally pleased with the results, even when I was wrong in my predictions.

So how did I do? Four out of six correct calls, with two misses (and qualified ones at that). Here are the details:

Best Picture

 

Projected Winner:  “Roma”

Actual Winner:  “Green Book”

Result:  Missed call (sort of)

This has become the most difficult category to call in recent years, largely because it’s been hard to discern the mind of the Academy voters. What’s more, there were four films actively in the running for this award, based on the results from competitions leading up to the Oscars. Going in, “Roma,” “Green Book,” “Bohemian Rhapsody” and “Black Panther” all had legitimate shots.

In my predictions blog, I called “Roma” the winner for a variety of reasons. However, much to my surprise, on awards night, the statue went to “Green Book,” which seemed more like a long shot than a shoo-in among the leading contenders.

Not that I’m disappointed with the choice; after all, “Green Book” was the No. 2 film on my list of 2018’s top 10. Even though many onlookers and critics have been inexplicably disappointed by the choice, I’m pleased that Oscar voters recognized this picture’s many strengths and made the right decision, picking the film that deserved to win. After all, there were precedents for this film, having taken top honors from the National Board of Review and at the Golden Globe Awards.

To my own credit, ahem, I did say that “Green Book” was the nominee that should win. So, given that this ended up being the case, I’ll gladly take a half-credit on this one (because I can!). Maybe I’ll get the mood of the voters right in future years.

Best Actor

[caption id="attachment_10269" align="alignnone" width="300"]Rami Malek. Photo by Alex Bailey @ 2018 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. [/caption]

Projected Winner:  Rami Malek, “Bohemian Rhapsody”

Actual Winner:  Rami Malek, “Bohemian Rhapsody”

Result:  Correct call

This was a two-horse race between Rami Malek and Christian Bale for “Vice.” Initially they were splitting the accolades in the run-up to the Oscars, but, in recent weeks, Malek began to pull away. It’s not much of a surprise, then, that he came across the finish line first.

Best Actress

[caption id="attachment_10328" align="alignnone" width="300"]Olivia Colman. Photo by Yorgos Lanthimos, © 2018 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. [/caption]

Projected Winner:  Glenn Close, “The Wife”

Actual Winner:  Olivia Colman, “The Favourite”

Result:  Missed call (sort of)

By all accounts, this looked like it was finally going to be Glenn Close’s year. Having won virtually everything leading up to the Oscars, and having seemingly been a sentimental favorite with six previous nominations and no wins, it appeared the seventh time would be the charm for her fine performance in “The Wife.” Not so. The statue went to Olivia Colman for her brilliant portrayal of England’s Queen Anne in “The Favourite.”

However, even though my prediction was incorrect, this was another case where I was not disappointed with the result. Colman was the nominee who I said should win, and thankfully she did (I’ll take another half-credit on this one, thank you very much). While it must have been disappointing for Close to be passed over yet again, I’m pleased that Academy voters recognized the truly best performance in this category.

So how did I miss on this one? I suspect that it was due to a momentum shift that took place at the BAFTA Awards in early February, where Colman bested Close for the best actress award, the first time that had happened during awards season. Based on results in other acting categories in recent years, it seems that the BAFTAs are an awards competition to watch, since this contest seems to be where momentum shifts, if any, occur. Something to bear in mind for future prediction blogs!

Best Supporting Actor

[caption id="attachment_10302" align="alignnone" width="300"]Mahershala Ali. Photo courtesy of Universal Pictures, Participant Media and DreamWorks. [/caption]

Projected Winner:  Mahershala Ali, “Green Book”

Actual Winner:  Mahershala Ali, “Green Book”

Result:  Correct call

This was pretty much a no-brainer. Ali had won virtually everything leading up to the Oscars, and he was truly the class of the field (even though he had formidable competition from all of his fellow nominees). It was good to see another deserving performance take home the win.

Best Supporting Actress

[caption id="attachment_10403" align="alignnone" width="300"]Regina King.  Photo by Tatum Mangus/Annapurna Pictures © 2018 Annapurna Releasing, LLC.[/caption]

Projected Winner:  Regina King, “If Beale Street Could Talk”

Actual Winner:  Regina King, “If Beale Street Could Talk”

Result:  Correct call

This was a difficult category to handicap, as it could have conceivably gone to any of the nominees (and it wasn’t an especially strong lineup of candidates). King had the early season momentum, but it was unclear if she’d be able to hold onto it, given that she wasn’t even nominated in the last two major competitions before the Oscars. In the end, though, it seems she had enough gas left in the tank to hold on and take home the prize.

Best Director

 

Projected Winner:  Alfonso Cuarón, “Roma”

Actual Winner:  Alfonso Cuarón, “Roma”

Result:  Correct call

This was another no-brainer. Having won everything leading up to the Oscars, this was his award to lose. Even though I believed there were other more worthy candidates, such as Yorgos Lanthimos for “The Favorite,” this was Cuarón’s year, and his win proved that.

Oscar® and Academy Award® are registered trademarks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences.

Copyright © 2018, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.

Frankiesense Goes to the Oscars

Join me and host Frankie Picasso for our annual look at the Oscars on Frankiesense & More on The Good Media Network, Thursday February 21 at 1 pm ET. For the video version, tune in on Facebook Live by clicking here. And, for the audio only podcast edition, check out The Good Media Network’s home page by clicking here.