Monday, November 17, 2014
Introducing the New Edition of 'Get the Picture'
I'm thrilled to introduce the upcoming release of the new revised and updated edition of my first book, Get the Picture?!: Conscious Creation Goes to the Movies, coming soon in print and ebook formats from all major online retailers! My thanks to Paul L. Clark of www.inspirtainment.com for such a terrific cover design!
Cover design by Paul L. Clark, www.inspirtainment.com
Check out the Updated Facebook Page
Check out the updated "Get the Picture" page on Facebook, available by clicking here!
Page banner design by Paul L. Clark, www.inspirtainment.com
Master Your Life!
Join me for a lively conversation about conscious creation and the movies when I'll appear on Life Mastery Radio with hosts Todd Alan and Debby Handrich on Tuesday November 18 at 1 pm, Eastern. We'll discuss how film illustrates the principles of conscious creation (also known as the law of attraction). Click here for some fun and inspiring chat!
Friday, November 14, 2014
‘Dear White People’ probes personal, racial identity
“Dear White People” (2014). Cast: Tyler James Williams, Tessa Thompson, Kyle Gallner, Teyonah Parris, Brandon P. Bell, Brittany Curran, Justin Dobies, Marque Richardson, Malcolm Barrett, Dennis Haysbert, Peter Syvertsen, Brandon Alter, Brian James, Katie Gaulke. Director: Justin Simien. Screenplay: Justin Simien. Web site. Trailer.
Finding our place in the world can be a daunting task, both personally and in our respective peer groups in society at large. This can be especially challenging in racial and cultural contexts, particularly with ever-changing shifts in attitude and relations among various constituencies. And, for those with limited life experience, the task can be confusing, perhaps even overwhelming, as they seek to define their identity, a challenge brought to light with biting wit in the satirical new comedy, “Dear White People.”
“Dear White People” cleverly weaves threads from the lives and relationships of a group of black, white and multiracial students and administrators at Winchester University, a fictional upscale American college loosely patterned after the hallowed halls of an Ivy League institution. Told primarily in flashback format, the film follows the principals through a series of on-campus events leading up to a Halloween party where racially charged tensions explode with consequences that are both troubling and farcical. It thus offers an intriguing, somewhat unorthodox look at a number of important contemporary social issues – and takes no prisoners in doing so.
To say more about the narrative would reveal too much of the plot. But knowing something about the characters would definitely give viewers a sense of what they’re in for:
• Samantha White (Tessa Thompson), a mixed-race media arts major and host of an often-inflammatory college radio show titled Dear White People, seeks to find her way in life, both personally and in the world at large. Her multiracial heritage has left her conflicted, however, torn between two cultural sensibilities, an internal struggle evidenced in everything from her taste in music to her taste in men, including two would-be suitors, Gabe (Justin Dobies), a white teaching assistant in the media program, and Reggie (Marque Richardson), a black computer science major and avid supporter of the views she expresses on her radio show.
• Troy Fairbanks (Brandon P. Bell) seems to have everything going for him. The gregarious, popular African-American political science major seems to be on the fast track for success. He’s also paired to an adoring Caucasian girlfriend, Sofia Fletcher (Brittany Curran), daughter of Winchester’s president (Peter Syvertsen). Troy’s father, the Dean of Students (Dennis Haysbert), is proud of his son’s many accomplishments, but he demands a lot, too – even if those expectations aren’t necessarily in line with what Troy wants. But, then, dad’s expectations aren’t always driven by simple paternal pride, either; sometimes they’re tied up in his longstanding rivalry with President Fletcher, a contentious relationship that began years before, when the two administrators were Winchester students themselves.
• Colandrea “Coco” Conners (Teyonah Parris) desperately wants to make a name for herself, but she’s frustrated that her public profile and web video presence are overshadowed by the eminently more popular Ms. White, whom she smugly chastises as “a bougee Lisa Bonet wannabe.” To elevate her public persona, Coco seeks the attention of Helmut West (Malcolm Barrett), a reality TV show producer looking to create a program based on Winchester campus life – one driven by drama and controversy, no matter how incendiary or contrived it might be.
• Lionel Higgins (Tyler James Williams), an unfocused undergrad who has yet to declare a major, looks for direction in his college life. The reserved gay sophomore feels like a fish out of water much of the time, not really part of his own community but not really part of mainstream campus society, either. He’s also culturally conflicted, sporting an enormous ʼ70s style Afro while simultaneously professing to like the music of Mumford & Sons and the films of Robert Altman. But, by becoming a writer for the campus newspaper, he begins to find himself (not to mention a potential romantic interest, the paper’s white editor, George (Brandon Alter)). How it all works out for him, though, depends on what Lionel makes of his opportunities.
• Kurt Fletcher (Kyle Gallner), son of the aforementioned university president, fancies himself a prototypical BMOC. As the editor of Pastiche, Winchester’s highly influential humor magazine, Kurt is a raucous, loud-mouthed party animal who believes he can get away with just about anything (mainly because he knows dad will bail him out if trouble arises). Unfortunately, Kurt’s lack of discretion extends to expressing his opinion, too, something that increasingly gets him in hot water when it comes to matters of race and sexual orientation. But, then, none of this should really come as a surprise, since he’s also the one chiefly responsible for organizing the ill-fated Halloween party.
The mix at work here is quite a volatile one, to say the least. And, as all of the elements blend together, the students of Winchester University are setting themselves up for some notoriety – and consequences – they can’t even begin to fathom.
Given the film’s subject matter, the question of beliefs comes squarely front and center, and that’s significant not only for the picture’s exploration of its core social issues but also for its metaphysical underpinnings. Considering that our beliefs dictate the manifestation of our reality through the conscious creation process, it’s easy to see how the various characters experience existences directly in line with their particular thinking.
In light of the movie’s central premise, this is obviously most apparent when it comes to matters of race relations and racial identity. For instance, those who believe they see racism at every turn will experience a reality commensurate with such beliefs. By contrast, those who are convinced that such views are overblown or overly intellectualized observations will find their existence characterized accordingly. In either case, these varying viewpoints aren’t intended to suggest that one outlook is necessarily any more “correct” than another; they both merely point to the differing beliefs that fostered their respective materializations in the first place.
However, in many ways, the characters’ struggles with racial identity issues are a pretext to some deeper, metaphysically oriented matters. In seeking to define their views on these questions, the students are also seeking to define themselves as individuals and the nature of their respective realities. These pretextual considerations lead the characters to ask themselves questions like, “Who am I, really?” Their beliefs, of course, will help to provide the answers, not only for the surface issues addressed in the film, but also for the much more personal questions that lurk within the consciousness of each character. And that can be quite a learning experience, as they each discover for themselves.
Given the learning experience nature of the story line, it’s only fitting that the narrative play itself out on a college campus, a haven for healthy debate and personal exploration of a host of topics, including those examined in the film. Of course, the academic environment, as a place of open discussion, makes it possible to explore these topics from a variety of angles, including everything from the noblest of enlightened dissertations to the shallowest, most cynical, most hypocritical, most self-serving belief stances.
One might easily question the breadth of such discourse, given that it may engender some “distasteful” notions. But, in true conscious creation fashion, the “universe-ity” environment makes it possible for all viewpoints to be addressed, no matter how politically incorrect some of them might seem. Now, this is not to suggest an implied endorsement of some of those less open-minded viewpoints (regardless of who endorses them), but it is a defense of the right for them to be aired, heard and debated. After all, conscious creation places all options on the table, all of which have their own intrinsic validity and their own rightful claim to expression, no matter how far out of fashion some of them may fall. And, in the film’s exploration of such matters, it doesn’t hesitate to probe them all, praising those with merit, deriding those that are questionable and unabashedly poking holes in all of them where warranted, regardless of how seemingly well intentioned (but inadvertently misdirected) some of them may be.
Exercises in self-exploration like those depicted here benefit immensely when approached with the aid of certain attitudes. For instance, taking on this task courageously often yields more satisfying results and produces desired outcomes more quickly. But those who allow their thinking to be clouded by fear or doubt are likely to stay stuck in place longer, as many of Lionel’s experiences illustrate, for example. However, those who step up forthrightly and without fear, as often happens with Troy, are likely to see their desires manifest more expeditiously. Now, this is not to suggest that no one ever backslides, either; we all make “mistakes” as part of our learning curve. Troy’s dealings with his father, for instance, sometimes cause him to back down and compromise his values. But, then, such incidents subsequently help to empower him, galvanizing his faith in his beliefs and making it possible for him to move forward with greater courage and confidence.
It also helps if we approach this task from a sense of personal integrity, for it promotes outcomes that are genuinely in line with our core being. But, while we’re learning our life lessons, as often happens when we’re still of college age, we might not always be able to identify our beliefs as clearly as they need to be. We may even convince ourselves that we’re being entirely sincere with ourselves when nothing could be further from the truth. However, by experimenting with our manifesting beliefs, we give ourselves an opportunity to work through the clutter and come ever closer to personal awareness. Such experiences, again, might be viewed as mistakes, but, instead, they should be seen as exercises in honing our skills as conscious creators. And what better place to learn how to be oneself than in the relative safety of a university setting, an environment that, at least theoretically, encourages us to robustly engage in such experimentation and exploration.
When all of the dust settles in scenarios like those depicted in the film, it becomes painfully apparent that divisive outlooks get us nowhere, regardless of how justified we might feel in buying into them. No matter how these outlooks may be clothed, they ultimately speak to a sense of selfishness and separation when, in fact, we’re all inherently and undeniably connected. This shortcoming is often drawn into sharp focus when viewed through the lens of race relations, especially when they’re strained, as they often are in this picture. However, the sooner we realize our intrinsic linkage to one another, the sooner we can move past these limitations and become everything we can be as one united people, no matter what our racial makeup.
“Dear White People” is a smartly satirical look at these issues, drawing upon an approach that’s very much in your face but that never goes over the top, successfully resisting the temptation to adopt a soapbox stance. Filmmaker Justin Simien, named one of Variety’s “10 Directors to Watch,” has come up with a winning formula in his first feature outing, producing a picture that’s well directed, nicely paced and capably edited while getting the most out of a cast of talented, up-and-coming performers. The film is generally well written, despite some occasional lapses into overly intellectualized dialogue, but that drawback is more than compensated for by its ample poignant laughs and razor sharp insights. As the winner of the 2014 Sundance Film Festival’s Special Jury Award for Breakthrough Talent, “Dear White People” is easily one of the best (and most underrated) releases of the year.
As we enter adulthood, we take our rightful places as individuals and in society at large. We have a wide range of choices available to us in doing so, and it’s in our best interests to choose wisely, for the decisions we make about which beliefs to embrace can have far-ranging implications. Just ask those in the university communities identified in the closing credits who underwent experiences of their own not unlike those depicted in the film. Suddenly, the abstract becomes startlingly real – and eminently disturbing. The cautionary tale served up in “Dear White People” should give us all pause to think about who we are, what values we seek to embrace and what kind of world we want to create for ourselves.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Finding our place in the world can be a daunting task, both personally and in our respective peer groups in society at large. This can be especially challenging in racial and cultural contexts, particularly with ever-changing shifts in attitude and relations among various constituencies. And, for those with limited life experience, the task can be confusing, perhaps even overwhelming, as they seek to define their identity, a challenge brought to light with biting wit in the satirical new comedy, “Dear White People.”
“Dear White People” cleverly weaves threads from the lives and relationships of a group of black, white and multiracial students and administrators at Winchester University, a fictional upscale American college loosely patterned after the hallowed halls of an Ivy League institution. Told primarily in flashback format, the film follows the principals through a series of on-campus events leading up to a Halloween party where racially charged tensions explode with consequences that are both troubling and farcical. It thus offers an intriguing, somewhat unorthodox look at a number of important contemporary social issues – and takes no prisoners in doing so.
To say more about the narrative would reveal too much of the plot. But knowing something about the characters would definitely give viewers a sense of what they’re in for:
• Samantha White (Tessa Thompson), a mixed-race media arts major and host of an often-inflammatory college radio show titled Dear White People, seeks to find her way in life, both personally and in the world at large. Her multiracial heritage has left her conflicted, however, torn between two cultural sensibilities, an internal struggle evidenced in everything from her taste in music to her taste in men, including two would-be suitors, Gabe (Justin Dobies), a white teaching assistant in the media program, and Reggie (Marque Richardson), a black computer science major and avid supporter of the views she expresses on her radio show.
• Troy Fairbanks (Brandon P. Bell) seems to have everything going for him. The gregarious, popular African-American political science major seems to be on the fast track for success. He’s also paired to an adoring Caucasian girlfriend, Sofia Fletcher (Brittany Curran), daughter of Winchester’s president (Peter Syvertsen). Troy’s father, the Dean of Students (Dennis Haysbert), is proud of his son’s many accomplishments, but he demands a lot, too – even if those expectations aren’t necessarily in line with what Troy wants. But, then, dad’s expectations aren’t always driven by simple paternal pride, either; sometimes they’re tied up in his longstanding rivalry with President Fletcher, a contentious relationship that began years before, when the two administrators were Winchester students themselves.
• Colandrea “Coco” Conners (Teyonah Parris) desperately wants to make a name for herself, but she’s frustrated that her public profile and web video presence are overshadowed by the eminently more popular Ms. White, whom she smugly chastises as “a bougee Lisa Bonet wannabe.” To elevate her public persona, Coco seeks the attention of Helmut West (Malcolm Barrett), a reality TV show producer looking to create a program based on Winchester campus life – one driven by drama and controversy, no matter how incendiary or contrived it might be.
• Lionel Higgins (Tyler James Williams), an unfocused undergrad who has yet to declare a major, looks for direction in his college life. The reserved gay sophomore feels like a fish out of water much of the time, not really part of his own community but not really part of mainstream campus society, either. He’s also culturally conflicted, sporting an enormous ʼ70s style Afro while simultaneously professing to like the music of Mumford & Sons and the films of Robert Altman. But, by becoming a writer for the campus newspaper, he begins to find himself (not to mention a potential romantic interest, the paper’s white editor, George (Brandon Alter)). How it all works out for him, though, depends on what Lionel makes of his opportunities.
• Kurt Fletcher (Kyle Gallner), son of the aforementioned university president, fancies himself a prototypical BMOC. As the editor of Pastiche, Winchester’s highly influential humor magazine, Kurt is a raucous, loud-mouthed party animal who believes he can get away with just about anything (mainly because he knows dad will bail him out if trouble arises). Unfortunately, Kurt’s lack of discretion extends to expressing his opinion, too, something that increasingly gets him in hot water when it comes to matters of race and sexual orientation. But, then, none of this should really come as a surprise, since he’s also the one chiefly responsible for organizing the ill-fated Halloween party.
The mix at work here is quite a volatile one, to say the least. And, as all of the elements blend together, the students of Winchester University are setting themselves up for some notoriety – and consequences – they can’t even begin to fathom.
Given the film’s subject matter, the question of beliefs comes squarely front and center, and that’s significant not only for the picture’s exploration of its core social issues but also for its metaphysical underpinnings. Considering that our beliefs dictate the manifestation of our reality through the conscious creation process, it’s easy to see how the various characters experience existences directly in line with their particular thinking.
In light of the movie’s central premise, this is obviously most apparent when it comes to matters of race relations and racial identity. For instance, those who believe they see racism at every turn will experience a reality commensurate with such beliefs. By contrast, those who are convinced that such views are overblown or overly intellectualized observations will find their existence characterized accordingly. In either case, these varying viewpoints aren’t intended to suggest that one outlook is necessarily any more “correct” than another; they both merely point to the differing beliefs that fostered their respective materializations in the first place.
However, in many ways, the characters’ struggles with racial identity issues are a pretext to some deeper, metaphysically oriented matters. In seeking to define their views on these questions, the students are also seeking to define themselves as individuals and the nature of their respective realities. These pretextual considerations lead the characters to ask themselves questions like, “Who am I, really?” Their beliefs, of course, will help to provide the answers, not only for the surface issues addressed in the film, but also for the much more personal questions that lurk within the consciousness of each character. And that can be quite a learning experience, as they each discover for themselves.
Given the learning experience nature of the story line, it’s only fitting that the narrative play itself out on a college campus, a haven for healthy debate and personal exploration of a host of topics, including those examined in the film. Of course, the academic environment, as a place of open discussion, makes it possible to explore these topics from a variety of angles, including everything from the noblest of enlightened dissertations to the shallowest, most cynical, most hypocritical, most self-serving belief stances.
One might easily question the breadth of such discourse, given that it may engender some “distasteful” notions. But, in true conscious creation fashion, the “universe-ity” environment makes it possible for all viewpoints to be addressed, no matter how politically incorrect some of them might seem. Now, this is not to suggest an implied endorsement of some of those less open-minded viewpoints (regardless of who endorses them), but it is a defense of the right for them to be aired, heard and debated. After all, conscious creation places all options on the table, all of which have their own intrinsic validity and their own rightful claim to expression, no matter how far out of fashion some of them may fall. And, in the film’s exploration of such matters, it doesn’t hesitate to probe them all, praising those with merit, deriding those that are questionable and unabashedly poking holes in all of them where warranted, regardless of how seemingly well intentioned (but inadvertently misdirected) some of them may be.
Exercises in self-exploration like those depicted here benefit immensely when approached with the aid of certain attitudes. For instance, taking on this task courageously often yields more satisfying results and produces desired outcomes more quickly. But those who allow their thinking to be clouded by fear or doubt are likely to stay stuck in place longer, as many of Lionel’s experiences illustrate, for example. However, those who step up forthrightly and without fear, as often happens with Troy, are likely to see their desires manifest more expeditiously. Now, this is not to suggest that no one ever backslides, either; we all make “mistakes” as part of our learning curve. Troy’s dealings with his father, for instance, sometimes cause him to back down and compromise his values. But, then, such incidents subsequently help to empower him, galvanizing his faith in his beliefs and making it possible for him to move forward with greater courage and confidence.
It also helps if we approach this task from a sense of personal integrity, for it promotes outcomes that are genuinely in line with our core being. But, while we’re learning our life lessons, as often happens when we’re still of college age, we might not always be able to identify our beliefs as clearly as they need to be. We may even convince ourselves that we’re being entirely sincere with ourselves when nothing could be further from the truth. However, by experimenting with our manifesting beliefs, we give ourselves an opportunity to work through the clutter and come ever closer to personal awareness. Such experiences, again, might be viewed as mistakes, but, instead, they should be seen as exercises in honing our skills as conscious creators. And what better place to learn how to be oneself than in the relative safety of a university setting, an environment that, at least theoretically, encourages us to robustly engage in such experimentation and exploration.
When all of the dust settles in scenarios like those depicted in the film, it becomes painfully apparent that divisive outlooks get us nowhere, regardless of how justified we might feel in buying into them. No matter how these outlooks may be clothed, they ultimately speak to a sense of selfishness and separation when, in fact, we’re all inherently and undeniably connected. This shortcoming is often drawn into sharp focus when viewed through the lens of race relations, especially when they’re strained, as they often are in this picture. However, the sooner we realize our intrinsic linkage to one another, the sooner we can move past these limitations and become everything we can be as one united people, no matter what our racial makeup.
“Dear White People” is a smartly satirical look at these issues, drawing upon an approach that’s very much in your face but that never goes over the top, successfully resisting the temptation to adopt a soapbox stance. Filmmaker Justin Simien, named one of Variety’s “10 Directors to Watch,” has come up with a winning formula in his first feature outing, producing a picture that’s well directed, nicely paced and capably edited while getting the most out of a cast of talented, up-and-coming performers. The film is generally well written, despite some occasional lapses into overly intellectualized dialogue, but that drawback is more than compensated for by its ample poignant laughs and razor sharp insights. As the winner of the 2014 Sundance Film Festival’s Special Jury Award for Breakthrough Talent, “Dear White People” is easily one of the best (and most underrated) releases of the year.
As we enter adulthood, we take our rightful places as individuals and in society at large. We have a wide range of choices available to us in doing so, and it’s in our best interests to choose wisely, for the decisions we make about which beliefs to embrace can have far-ranging implications. Just ask those in the university communities identified in the closing credits who underwent experiences of their own not unlike those depicted in the film. Suddenly, the abstract becomes startlingly real – and eminently disturbing. The cautionary tale served up in “Dear White People” should give us all pause to think about who we are, what values we seek to embrace and what kind of world we want to create for ourselves.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Get Some Positive Living Vibrations!
Tune in for some lively chat about conscious creation and the movies when I appear on the Positive Living Vibrations Radio Show with host Sara Troy. The show will be available for on-demand listening by clicking here November 18-24, after which it will be available through the site's archives. Sara and I will discuss how films illustrate the conscious creation process, as well as my two books, Consciously Created Cinema: The Movie Lover's Guide to the Law of Attraction and the upcoming re-released edition of my first book, Get the Picture?!: Conscious Creation Goes to the Movies. Enjoy!
Cover designs by Pail L. Clark, www.insportainment.com
Cover designs by Pail L. Clark, www.insportainment.com
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Lackluster ‘Citizenfour’ implies much, delivers little
“Citizenfour” (2014). Cast: Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, Ewen MacAskill, Laura Poitras, William Binney, Jeremy Scahill, Julian Assange. Director: Laura Poitras. Web site. Trailer.
When presented with one of the biggest news stories of the century, one would hope that those covering it would make the most of the opportunity to inform the public about its scope and implications. That’s especially true when those ramifications have impacts that are far-reaching, both in our everyday lives and our metaphysical deliberations. Unfortunately, when it comes to coverage of one of the most significant milestone news events of recent years, those goals never reach the fruition they deserve, as becomes regrettably apparent in the recently released documentary feature, “Citizenfour.”
In January 2013, documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras received an email from an intelligence contractor working for the U.S. government who identified himself simply as Citizenfour. In the message, the contractor revealed that he possessed highly sensitive information that would create shockwaves if released to the public. The anonymous source made it clear that taking the information public involved significant risks but added that its ramifications were so staggering that it needed to be published.
So why did Citizenfour contact Poitras? Having made a name for herself with two acclaimed and provocative documentaries, “My Country, My Country” (2006), about the Iraq War, and “The Oath” (2010), about the Guantánamo Bay detention center, the anonymous contractor believed she would make the ideal cinematic scribe for telling his story. And so, after several months of encrypted correspondence, Poitras agreed to meet this mysterious source at a hotel in Hong Kong. That source would subsequently identify himself as Edward Snowden.
What ensued at that meeting would shock the world. Snowden and Poitras, who were now joined by reporters Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill of The Guardian, one of the United Kingdom’s most influential newspapers, thus embarked on several days of meetings in which the contractor detailed – with documentation – extensive revelations about the spying activities of the National Security Agency. Greenwald and MacAskill wrote a series of articles outlining the revelations, while Poitras captured the meetings on film as they happened, creating a cinematic record of one of the most historic events of the young century.
National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden (left) is interviewed by journalist Glenn Greenwald (right) of the United Kingdom’s Guardian newspaper in a Hong Kong hotel room in the new documentary, “Citizenfour.” Photo courtesy of RADiUS-TWC.
Through Snowden’s revelations, the world learned of the NSA’s intrusive and secret surveillance tactics involving the collection of customer information and user data from telecommunications and Internet companies like Verizon, Google, Yahoo, Apple, Facebook, AOL and YouTube, among others. The news set off a firestorm of controversy and a tidal wave of media inquiries, thrusting Greenwald into the limelight. And, when Snowden was publicly identified as the whistleblower, the story positively exploded.
With Snowden exposed, however, concerns over his safety, freedom and legal liability emerged, prompting him and his media associates to begin making plans for what would come next. He wanted to ensure that the information he had collected would continue to be disseminated. He also sought to find a location that would provide political asylum, a protracted odyssey that would eventually take him to Russia. The filmmaker follows Snowden through this process, chronicling his departure from Hong Kong and his eventual resettlement in Moscow, where he resides to this day.
Regardless of what one thinks about Snowden and his tactics, his revelation of the information in question raised the public debate about government involvement in surveillance activities both domestically and overseas. And, to have a real-time cinematic accounting of these disclosures, is indeed significant, if for no other reason than providing a documented record for the history books that will one day be written.
Revelations about the National Security Agency come under heavy scrutiny as a result of the whistleblowing activities of former contractor Edward Snowden, the subject of the new documentary feature, “Citizenfour.” Photo by Trevor Paglen, courtesy of RADiUS-TWC.
The real-life drama playing out on screen also raises a number of significant questions related to the conscious creation process. For instance, why did everyone involved in this story – including all the principals and the silent, unseen masses who are affected by its ramifications – create these contentious circumstances in the first place? What effects will the revelation of this information have on our collective existence going forward? And how will we respond to the continued unfolding of this story? Clearly, the implications here go deeper than just the exposure of information about government surveillance programs; they also have impact on the kind of world we create for ourselves.
As in any conscious creation-related scenario, everything depends on the beliefs involved, whether that relates to an individual’s particular manifestations or the mass-created materializations of a major public event such as this. These circumstances thus prompt us to take a hard look at the beliefs in question: Why have we allowed such secrecy to hold sway? Why have we allowed the agencies responsible for these actions to have such unchecked power? And, perhaps most importantly, why have we changed the game by prompting the exposure of such details now?
On a purely metaphysical level, some would say that this is part and parcel of the general global awakening in consciousness that has been transpiring in recent years. From a conscious creation perspective, it also sheds a bright light on such issues as our power of choice, our concerns about fear and courage, and our exercise of personal integrity. But, perhaps most significantly, it has much to do with the exploration of our value fulfillment, the principle associated with being our truest, best selves for our own benefit and the well-being of those around us. The actions Snowden took in making these revelations, and the efforts of Poitras, Greenwald and MacAskill in documenting his actions, speak volumes about the roles they each play in the manifestation of their value fulfillment and personal destinies.
From the foregoing, one might easily assume that “Citizenfour” is a compelling and suspenseful piece of filmmaking. Regrettably, however, its exploration of the foregoing notions is largely by implication, with the picture itself often falling far short of the mark. With a story as seemingly absorbing as this, much of its “witness to history” impact is lost in a glut of plodding footage desperately in need of editing. What’s more, much of Snowden’s on-camera explanations of what’s transpiring is shrouded in jargon-ridden technospeak, and, while that’s somewhat understandable in light of his professional expertise, it often obscures the meaning and implications of the events and revelations involved. A lack of further clarification and elaboration on these points thus keeps viewers from getting as much out of the film as they might have otherwise.
Filmmaker Laura Poitras chronicles the revelations of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden in “Citizenfour.” Photo courtesy of RADiUS-TWC.
This is not to suggest “Citizenfour” is without its merits, however. The production values and cinematography are top notch, exceeding the quality often found in many independent documentaries. Its inclusion of material from other parties related to this story, such as the insights of investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and former NSA technical director William Binney, adds some much-needed elucidation to the film’s central narrative. But these attributes, unfortunately, aren’t enough to save the picture from its other shortcomings, which is disappointing, given the magnitude of the story involved here.
The kind of world we create for ourselves is obviously crucial to our continued well-being. But the responsibility for that falls squarely on us and the manifesting beliefs we maintain – in all areas of life. When we stumble in our efforts at this, it certainly helps to have resources (like movies and books) that undeniably show us the errors of our ways and where we need to make adjustments. It’s too bad that “Citizenfour” comes up short on this front, for it could have helped make us aware of changes we need to implement – while we still have the chance.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
When presented with one of the biggest news stories of the century, one would hope that those covering it would make the most of the opportunity to inform the public about its scope and implications. That’s especially true when those ramifications have impacts that are far-reaching, both in our everyday lives and our metaphysical deliberations. Unfortunately, when it comes to coverage of one of the most significant milestone news events of recent years, those goals never reach the fruition they deserve, as becomes regrettably apparent in the recently released documentary feature, “Citizenfour.”
In January 2013, documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras received an email from an intelligence contractor working for the U.S. government who identified himself simply as Citizenfour. In the message, the contractor revealed that he possessed highly sensitive information that would create shockwaves if released to the public. The anonymous source made it clear that taking the information public involved significant risks but added that its ramifications were so staggering that it needed to be published.
So why did Citizenfour contact Poitras? Having made a name for herself with two acclaimed and provocative documentaries, “My Country, My Country” (2006), about the Iraq War, and “The Oath” (2010), about the Guantánamo Bay detention center, the anonymous contractor believed she would make the ideal cinematic scribe for telling his story. And so, after several months of encrypted correspondence, Poitras agreed to meet this mysterious source at a hotel in Hong Kong. That source would subsequently identify himself as Edward Snowden.
What ensued at that meeting would shock the world. Snowden and Poitras, who were now joined by reporters Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill of The Guardian, one of the United Kingdom’s most influential newspapers, thus embarked on several days of meetings in which the contractor detailed – with documentation – extensive revelations about the spying activities of the National Security Agency. Greenwald and MacAskill wrote a series of articles outlining the revelations, while Poitras captured the meetings on film as they happened, creating a cinematic record of one of the most historic events of the young century.
Through Snowden’s revelations, the world learned of the NSA’s intrusive and secret surveillance tactics involving the collection of customer information and user data from telecommunications and Internet companies like Verizon, Google, Yahoo, Apple, Facebook, AOL and YouTube, among others. The news set off a firestorm of controversy and a tidal wave of media inquiries, thrusting Greenwald into the limelight. And, when Snowden was publicly identified as the whistleblower, the story positively exploded.
With Snowden exposed, however, concerns over his safety, freedom and legal liability emerged, prompting him and his media associates to begin making plans for what would come next. He wanted to ensure that the information he had collected would continue to be disseminated. He also sought to find a location that would provide political asylum, a protracted odyssey that would eventually take him to Russia. The filmmaker follows Snowden through this process, chronicling his departure from Hong Kong and his eventual resettlement in Moscow, where he resides to this day.
Regardless of what one thinks about Snowden and his tactics, his revelation of the information in question raised the public debate about government involvement in surveillance activities both domestically and overseas. And, to have a real-time cinematic accounting of these disclosures, is indeed significant, if for no other reason than providing a documented record for the history books that will one day be written.
The real-life drama playing out on screen also raises a number of significant questions related to the conscious creation process. For instance, why did everyone involved in this story – including all the principals and the silent, unseen masses who are affected by its ramifications – create these contentious circumstances in the first place? What effects will the revelation of this information have on our collective existence going forward? And how will we respond to the continued unfolding of this story? Clearly, the implications here go deeper than just the exposure of information about government surveillance programs; they also have impact on the kind of world we create for ourselves.
As in any conscious creation-related scenario, everything depends on the beliefs involved, whether that relates to an individual’s particular manifestations or the mass-created materializations of a major public event such as this. These circumstances thus prompt us to take a hard look at the beliefs in question: Why have we allowed such secrecy to hold sway? Why have we allowed the agencies responsible for these actions to have such unchecked power? And, perhaps most importantly, why have we changed the game by prompting the exposure of such details now?
On a purely metaphysical level, some would say that this is part and parcel of the general global awakening in consciousness that has been transpiring in recent years. From a conscious creation perspective, it also sheds a bright light on such issues as our power of choice, our concerns about fear and courage, and our exercise of personal integrity. But, perhaps most significantly, it has much to do with the exploration of our value fulfillment, the principle associated with being our truest, best selves for our own benefit and the well-being of those around us. The actions Snowden took in making these revelations, and the efforts of Poitras, Greenwald and MacAskill in documenting his actions, speak volumes about the roles they each play in the manifestation of their value fulfillment and personal destinies.
From the foregoing, one might easily assume that “Citizenfour” is a compelling and suspenseful piece of filmmaking. Regrettably, however, its exploration of the foregoing notions is largely by implication, with the picture itself often falling far short of the mark. With a story as seemingly absorbing as this, much of its “witness to history” impact is lost in a glut of plodding footage desperately in need of editing. What’s more, much of Snowden’s on-camera explanations of what’s transpiring is shrouded in jargon-ridden technospeak, and, while that’s somewhat understandable in light of his professional expertise, it often obscures the meaning and implications of the events and revelations involved. A lack of further clarification and elaboration on these points thus keeps viewers from getting as much out of the film as they might have otherwise.
This is not to suggest “Citizenfour” is without its merits, however. The production values and cinematography are top notch, exceeding the quality often found in many independent documentaries. Its inclusion of material from other parties related to this story, such as the insights of investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and former NSA technical director William Binney, adds some much-needed elucidation to the film’s central narrative. But these attributes, unfortunately, aren’t enough to save the picture from its other shortcomings, which is disappointing, given the magnitude of the story involved here.
The kind of world we create for ourselves is obviously crucial to our continued well-being. But the responsibility for that falls squarely on us and the manifesting beliefs we maintain – in all areas of life. When we stumble in our efforts at this, it certainly helps to have resources (like movies and books) that undeniably show us the errors of our ways and where we need to make adjustments. It’s too bad that “Citizenfour” comes up short on this front, for it could have helped make us aware of changes we need to implement – while we still have the chance.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
‘Birdman’ explores the power of discernment
“Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)” (2014). Cast: Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough, Zach Galifinakis, Amy Ryan, Lindsay Duncan, Jeremy Shamos. Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu. Screenplay: Alejandro González Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacabone, Alexander Dinelaris and Armando Bo. Web site. Trailer.
Making up our minds about what we want from life can be tricky business. Sometimes we think we know what we want only to find out later that we’ve confused ourselves, often in ways that we have trouble sorting out. This is where the power of discernment can be a big help to us. It’s a tool that comes in handy for a long-suffering protagonist in the eccentric new comedy, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).”
Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is trying to figure out his life. The late middle-aged actor, who made a name for himself 20 years earlier portraying a big screen action hero named Birdman, seeks to redeem his sagging career by directing and starring in a new Broadway production. The play in question, What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, is based on a Raymond Carver short story that Riggan has adapted for the stage. This piece represents a radical departure from Riggan’s typical fare, but it’s an attempt to return to the early days of his acting career, when he was performing more serious material, a time when he earned the praise of Carver himself.
But, as earnest as Riggan is about staging this new play, the production is fraught with problems. For example, one of his principal actors, Ralph (Jeremy Shamos), is severely injured during rehearsal right before previews are set to begin. While Riggan is not entirely upset with needing to find a replacement (Ralph’s acting is terrible), he’s still saddled with the challenge of having to do so at the eleventh hour. Thankfully, another of his performers, Lesley (Naomi Watts), recommends a stand-in, Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), her romantic partner – and one of the hottest names on Broadway.
When faced with needing to make a last-minute replacement for one of his performers for his new play, writer-director-actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton, left) taps the services of Mike Shiner (Edward Norton, right), one of the hottest names on Broadway, in director Alejandro González Iñárritu’s latest offering, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Still, even though Riggan is able to find a replacement, his challenges continue: Mike proves to be a capable but highly unpredictable substitute; some elements of the play work, while others don’t, causing Riggan to frequently second-guess the viability of his project; money issues threaten to undermine the production’s future, especially with an impending lawsuit from an injured actor looming; and scathing, prejudicial, unjustified attacks from a powerful, self-important critic (Lindsay Duncan) endanger the play’s run before it even starts.
Patching up a troubled parental relationship is a goal for aspiring Broadway actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton, left) and his daughter, Sam (Emma Stone, right), in director Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
If all that weren’t bad enough, Riggan has his share of issues to contend with offstage as well. For starters, there’s his troubled relationship with his daughter, Sam (Emma Stone), a production assistant on the play who recently emerged from drug rehab. Then there’s Riggan’s on-again/off-again relationship with one of his co-stars, Laura (Andrea Riseborough), a promising and potentially healthy romance that, unfortunately, he often takes for granted because of his many other preoccupations. But, perhaps most importantly, there’s the recurring voice in his head, that of an alter-ego of sorts – the character he portrayed on the screen so many years ago – who alternates between deriding Riggan and counseling him on how to reclaim his personal power.
The on-again/off-again romance between actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton, right) and his co-star, Laura (Andrea Riseborough, left), is one of many troubled relationships associated with a new Broadway production in “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Riggan’s challenges obviously give him a full plate to manage. Thankfully, he’s not without support, such as the aid provided by his producer, attorney and best friend, Jake (Zach Galifinakis), and the loving compassion of his ex-wife, Sylvia (Amy Ryan), both of whom always manage to show up and offer assistance just when it’s needed most. And, then, there’s the aforementioned advice served up by Birdman, who seems to have Riggan’s best interests at heart, even if his recommendations don’t always involve suggestions that our hero wants to hear.
When trouble strikes the life of an aspiring Broadway actor, he fortunately has the support of his best friend, Jake (Zach Galifinakis, right), and his ex-wife, Sylvia (Amy Ryan, left), to come to his rescue in the unconventional new dark comedy, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
So how will everything shake out for Riggan? It all comes down to what he’s willing to believe, particularly about himself and the reality he creates. Of course, that requires him to sort out what he believes in the first place, a feat easier said than done. To his credit, he’s willing to pursue practices like meditation to help him get a handle on matters, but, if any of his issues are to be successfully resolved, he must commit to doing the work needed to realize that goal – and that’s what his story (and this film) are ultimately all about.
To get where we want to be in life, it’s imperative that we take charge over our personal power. To do that, though, we must first believe we can and then know what we want to do with it. For his part, Riggan struggles on both fronts.
This is where the significance of the conscious creation process comes into play, for it impels us to get a clear handle on what we believe and, consequently, how we employ it. And that’s crucial, because what we materialize in life is a direct result – and reflection – of our beliefs, especially those that characterize the core of our being.
In Riggan’s case, the primary core belief issue he struggles with is the ability to distinguish between matters of love and admiration. He has always confused the two, often believing that admiration equates to love, and such thinking has been faithfully reflected back to him in his professional accomplishments and personal life. But does the admiration he receives fulfill him in the same way that love does? And, if not, what does it take to get the love he hopes for? That’s what Riggan’s current experiences are all about – to illustrate why he’s getting the results he does and to show him the way toward what he truly wants to achieve. Such is the power that comes from our judicious application of discernment.
Lesley (Naomi Watts), one of the stars in a new Broadway production, realizes her dream of finally making it to the Great White Way in Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
This theme plays out in many ways in the film. Consider, for instance, the play Riggan is staging. Look at its subject matter, and compare that to the quandary he’s seeking to reconcile. The parallels are more than a little coincidental. But is Riggan’s rationale behind this production based on the admiration he’ll get back from audiences and critics or from some hoped-for outpouring of love that will come flooding his way?
This conundrum is also mirrored back to Riggan through the lives and creations of those around him. In their own ways, they, too, wrestle with issues of reconciling love and admiration (particularly in terms of what they get from Riggan in these regards). For instance, Riggan clearly admires Laura for her acting talent and her personal qualities, but, considering the emotional distance he often places between them, does such admiration really equate to heartfelt love? In many ways, it would seem not. And, for her part, Laura recognizes this deficiency in their relationship, realizing that, if she ever hopes to be happy, she must change her beliefs to change her circumstances to attract what she wants in life – those manifestations that are genuinely in line with her core convictions.
Riggan’s awareness of this core distinction is obviously not as clearly defined as it is in the minds of others, so his challenges regarding it permeate more aspects of his life than it does in the lives of those around him. And, in an attempt to make sense of it all, he often looks outside of himself for answers. However, as seasoned conscious creators know, the real answers lie elsewhere – inside, in the realm of our beliefs – which is where Riggan needs to look, too.
If Riggan believes he readily receives admiration but not love, then he must ask himself why. From a conscious creation perspective, that shortcoming almost certainly has nothing to do with what he gets from others but, rather, what he gives to himself. Indeed, if he believes he’s incapable of genuinely loving himself, is it realistic to expect that he’ll receive love from others? If he ever hopes to rectify circumstances in his outer world, he must first do so in his inner world. But, once he does, that change of heart is sure to be reflected back to him in the reality he experiences.
To a great degree, this is where Riggan’s alter-ego comes into play. Birdman pushes his real-world counterpart to take a hard look at himself and his beliefs, to encourage him to see where he truly excels, and to see why people either love or admire him. In his own unconventional way, Birdman realizes that the insights Riggan gleans from these musings will help him understand himself and his beliefs better, which, in turn, will fuel his sense of personal empowerment. And with his empowerment energized, Riggan can more effectively create an existence that brings him what he wants – no matter how unusual that may be.
Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), a former big screen action hero, is haunted by his past as he struggles to make a career transition to a Broadway actor in the audacious, unconventional dark comedy, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).” Photo courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Without such clarity of thought and personal empowerment, however, Riggan (or any of us, for that matter) won’t be able to manifest what we seek. When fear, doubt or an internal sense of contradiction is allowed to hold sway (all of which Riggan wrestles with to one degree or another), sought-after results simply won’t materialize. To be sure, if our hero aspires to the heroic attainment of fulfilling his innermost destiny, these are the steps he must take. And, if he does, he just might soar.
“Birdman” is definitely not for everyone, but those who appreciate the thoughtfully offbeat will certainly enjoy this quirky offering. It’s an audacious black comedy that makes us think as much as it does laugh. Its metaphysical insights are spot-on, as are its incisive observations of what we believe constitute love and admiration in today’s culture (such as unapologetically posing questions like, “Is a massive Twitter following really a valid measure of love for someone?”). Admittedly, there are some lapses in writing and pacing at times, but they’re more than compensated for by its many other attributes, such as its distinctive soundtrack and inventive visual effects.
The picture’s greatest strength, though, is its superb ensemble. Keaton shows a range in this role unlike any other part he’s ever played, and he’s a deservedly strong contender for awards season consideration. The supporting cast is excellent as well, with Norton and Stone turning in some of the best work they’ve ever done. Even those players with small roles, like Duncan, shine in their performances. This truly is an actors’ film, and viewers who value the art will certainly relish the stellar portrayals on display here.
Realizing the life we desire is a truly admirable goal, but we had better be prepared to do the work necessary to achieve it. That means getting our belief houses in order through the virtues of discernment, clarity of thought and personal empowerment. At the same time, we must also avoid the pitfall of overthinking our circumstances, for that practice has the potential to keep us from making effective use of those conscious creation powers that are integral to our accomplishments. If we triumph on those fronts, we just might find ourselves taking flight, successfully bringing our high-flying aspirations into being, no matter what they may be.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Making up our minds about what we want from life can be tricky business. Sometimes we think we know what we want only to find out later that we’ve confused ourselves, often in ways that we have trouble sorting out. This is where the power of discernment can be a big help to us. It’s a tool that comes in handy for a long-suffering protagonist in the eccentric new comedy, “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).”
Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is trying to figure out his life. The late middle-aged actor, who made a name for himself 20 years earlier portraying a big screen action hero named Birdman, seeks to redeem his sagging career by directing and starring in a new Broadway production. The play in question, What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, is based on a Raymond Carver short story that Riggan has adapted for the stage. This piece represents a radical departure from Riggan’s typical fare, but it’s an attempt to return to the early days of his acting career, when he was performing more serious material, a time when he earned the praise of Carver himself.
But, as earnest as Riggan is about staging this new play, the production is fraught with problems. For example, one of his principal actors, Ralph (Jeremy Shamos), is severely injured during rehearsal right before previews are set to begin. While Riggan is not entirely upset with needing to find a replacement (Ralph’s acting is terrible), he’s still saddled with the challenge of having to do so at the eleventh hour. Thankfully, another of his performers, Lesley (Naomi Watts), recommends a stand-in, Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), her romantic partner – and one of the hottest names on Broadway.
Still, even though Riggan is able to find a replacement, his challenges continue: Mike proves to be a capable but highly unpredictable substitute; some elements of the play work, while others don’t, causing Riggan to frequently second-guess the viability of his project; money issues threaten to undermine the production’s future, especially with an impending lawsuit from an injured actor looming; and scathing, prejudicial, unjustified attacks from a powerful, self-important critic (Lindsay Duncan) endanger the play’s run before it even starts.
If all that weren’t bad enough, Riggan has his share of issues to contend with offstage as well. For starters, there’s his troubled relationship with his daughter, Sam (Emma Stone), a production assistant on the play who recently emerged from drug rehab. Then there’s Riggan’s on-again/off-again relationship with one of his co-stars, Laura (Andrea Riseborough), a promising and potentially healthy romance that, unfortunately, he often takes for granted because of his many other preoccupations. But, perhaps most importantly, there’s the recurring voice in his head, that of an alter-ego of sorts – the character he portrayed on the screen so many years ago – who alternates between deriding Riggan and counseling him on how to reclaim his personal power.
Riggan’s challenges obviously give him a full plate to manage. Thankfully, he’s not without support, such as the aid provided by his producer, attorney and best friend, Jake (Zach Galifinakis), and the loving compassion of his ex-wife, Sylvia (Amy Ryan), both of whom always manage to show up and offer assistance just when it’s needed most. And, then, there’s the aforementioned advice served up by Birdman, who seems to have Riggan’s best interests at heart, even if his recommendations don’t always involve suggestions that our hero wants to hear.
So how will everything shake out for Riggan? It all comes down to what he’s willing to believe, particularly about himself and the reality he creates. Of course, that requires him to sort out what he believes in the first place, a feat easier said than done. To his credit, he’s willing to pursue practices like meditation to help him get a handle on matters, but, if any of his issues are to be successfully resolved, he must commit to doing the work needed to realize that goal – and that’s what his story (and this film) are ultimately all about.
To get where we want to be in life, it’s imperative that we take charge over our personal power. To do that, though, we must first believe we can and then know what we want to do with it. For his part, Riggan struggles on both fronts.
This is where the significance of the conscious creation process comes into play, for it impels us to get a clear handle on what we believe and, consequently, how we employ it. And that’s crucial, because what we materialize in life is a direct result – and reflection – of our beliefs, especially those that characterize the core of our being.
In Riggan’s case, the primary core belief issue he struggles with is the ability to distinguish between matters of love and admiration. He has always confused the two, often believing that admiration equates to love, and such thinking has been faithfully reflected back to him in his professional accomplishments and personal life. But does the admiration he receives fulfill him in the same way that love does? And, if not, what does it take to get the love he hopes for? That’s what Riggan’s current experiences are all about – to illustrate why he’s getting the results he does and to show him the way toward what he truly wants to achieve. Such is the power that comes from our judicious application of discernment.
This theme plays out in many ways in the film. Consider, for instance, the play Riggan is staging. Look at its subject matter, and compare that to the quandary he’s seeking to reconcile. The parallels are more than a little coincidental. But is Riggan’s rationale behind this production based on the admiration he’ll get back from audiences and critics or from some hoped-for outpouring of love that will come flooding his way?
This conundrum is also mirrored back to Riggan through the lives and creations of those around him. In their own ways, they, too, wrestle with issues of reconciling love and admiration (particularly in terms of what they get from Riggan in these regards). For instance, Riggan clearly admires Laura for her acting talent and her personal qualities, but, considering the emotional distance he often places between them, does such admiration really equate to heartfelt love? In many ways, it would seem not. And, for her part, Laura recognizes this deficiency in their relationship, realizing that, if she ever hopes to be happy, she must change her beliefs to change her circumstances to attract what she wants in life – those manifestations that are genuinely in line with her core convictions.
Riggan’s awareness of this core distinction is obviously not as clearly defined as it is in the minds of others, so his challenges regarding it permeate more aspects of his life than it does in the lives of those around him. And, in an attempt to make sense of it all, he often looks outside of himself for answers. However, as seasoned conscious creators know, the real answers lie elsewhere – inside, in the realm of our beliefs – which is where Riggan needs to look, too.
If Riggan believes he readily receives admiration but not love, then he must ask himself why. From a conscious creation perspective, that shortcoming almost certainly has nothing to do with what he gets from others but, rather, what he gives to himself. Indeed, if he believes he’s incapable of genuinely loving himself, is it realistic to expect that he’ll receive love from others? If he ever hopes to rectify circumstances in his outer world, he must first do so in his inner world. But, once he does, that change of heart is sure to be reflected back to him in the reality he experiences.
To a great degree, this is where Riggan’s alter-ego comes into play. Birdman pushes his real-world counterpart to take a hard look at himself and his beliefs, to encourage him to see where he truly excels, and to see why people either love or admire him. In his own unconventional way, Birdman realizes that the insights Riggan gleans from these musings will help him understand himself and his beliefs better, which, in turn, will fuel his sense of personal empowerment. And with his empowerment energized, Riggan can more effectively create an existence that brings him what he wants – no matter how unusual that may be.
Without such clarity of thought and personal empowerment, however, Riggan (or any of us, for that matter) won’t be able to manifest what we seek. When fear, doubt or an internal sense of contradiction is allowed to hold sway (all of which Riggan wrestles with to one degree or another), sought-after results simply won’t materialize. To be sure, if our hero aspires to the heroic attainment of fulfilling his innermost destiny, these are the steps he must take. And, if he does, he just might soar.
“Birdman” is definitely not for everyone, but those who appreciate the thoughtfully offbeat will certainly enjoy this quirky offering. It’s an audacious black comedy that makes us think as much as it does laugh. Its metaphysical insights are spot-on, as are its incisive observations of what we believe constitute love and admiration in today’s culture (such as unapologetically posing questions like, “Is a massive Twitter following really a valid measure of love for someone?”). Admittedly, there are some lapses in writing and pacing at times, but they’re more than compensated for by its many other attributes, such as its distinctive soundtrack and inventive visual effects.
The picture’s greatest strength, though, is its superb ensemble. Keaton shows a range in this role unlike any other part he’s ever played, and he’s a deservedly strong contender for awards season consideration. The supporting cast is excellent as well, with Norton and Stone turning in some of the best work they’ve ever done. Even those players with small roles, like Duncan, shine in their performances. This truly is an actors’ film, and viewers who value the art will certainly relish the stellar portrayals on display here.
Realizing the life we desire is a truly admirable goal, but we had better be prepared to do the work necessary to achieve it. That means getting our belief houses in order through the virtues of discernment, clarity of thought and personal empowerment. At the same time, we must also avoid the pitfall of overthinking our circumstances, for that practice has the potential to keep us from making effective use of those conscious creation powers that are integral to our accomplishments. If we triumph on those fronts, we just might find ourselves taking flight, successfully bringing our high-flying aspirations into being, no matter what they may be.
Copyright © 2014, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)