——Waking Life——

(B+)

This is a good film that could have been great had the plotting of the film been a little tighter. At first glance that sentence doesn’t really make much sense, since as a movie about dreaming the film automatically qualifies for the condition of not needing to be tightly scripted. And I’m not saying that it needs to have a A to B to C type plot, but what it could use is a little more focus on what it is that the film is trying to portray. Half of the film is extremely interesting discourse on what it is to dream, what it means to dream, what we do in dreams, how to lucid dream, how to tell you are dreaming, etc. etc.; and yet the other half of the film diverges on a whole surplus of other existential philosophy that either A) has little to do with dreaming, B) sounds like the ramblings of college students buried in books with little sleep, or C) is so incomprehensible that it quickly becomes boring. What I would have liked to have seen is more interaction from the main character with his dream. Too often he just sits back and listens to whomever talk about whatever, without offering any input of own. While this feeds into the whole idea that this is a dream, i.e. we have to sit back and accept whatever just like he has to in his dream, it makes for a few boring moments where we wait impatiently for the next person to start talking. Even after the main character starts to lucid dream he still interacts little with everything around him. Instead of doing something, he asks a question where he earlier would have remained silent.

There is though lots of great discussions of dreaming and what it means (and, much to my delight, some discussion of death and dreaming) even if you have to sit through a few stinkers to get there. Also, there is the one thing I haven’t mentioned, the amazing animation created by drawing over the actors filmed in live action. At times the animation can look extremely realistic, and yet at other times appear to be quite abstract, and the backgrounds are never still, creating the allusion of dreaming through a world that is familiar and yet with something quite off to it. The animation is stunning, and for that alone the film is worth at least one viewing. Whether repeat viewings are in order, however, really has to how interested you are on the philosophy concerning dreaming and what it is we think is real.

——To Kill a Mockingbird——

(A)

This is one of the few sentimental, little guy standing up for what’s right films where I felt that not a single “moment” felt forced or was manipulated to coerce the audience into feeling more than what was the actual substance of the scene. Gregory Peck creates an impossibly good Good Guy, and we believe it because he truly becomes that character. He isn’t two dimensional either, since all of the material and emotion is there for him to turn into a more traditional character, and yet you can see in the film his conscious decision to do the right thing if not for himself, than for the example for his children.

The scene where he is spit on I think is one of the most powerful scenes put to film where “nothing” actually happens. There is this moment after he is spit on where you can just feel this electric tension in the air, and you expect Peck to finally flip out and hit this man (especially since this happens just after he told the wife of his client that her husband was shot to death). In any other film Peck would have decked him, and you can just tell that Peck WANTS to hit him, and yet he simply takes out his handkerchief and wipes the saliva away. The power of the scene comes from the inter-cutting of the reactions of the two men. The man who spit on him expects Peck to swing back. He’s asking for a fight. And yet as the time goes on and nothing happens you can see the other man trembling in anticipation. We can now see that the real coward isn’t Peck for turning the other cheek, who stands tall and proud in a non-violent state of defiance, but the other man who seems to shrink in front of him.

All of Peck’s power comes from the fact that we know that he can fight back. In the excellent scene where he has to kill the rabid dog, we find out that Peck is the best shot in town, and that even though he condones violence and refuses to carry a gun (or let his son have one) in every other scene in the movie, we know that if push came to shove he could use a gun, and use it well. He’s not afraid to shoot the dog like the other man because he knows its necessary. Likewise he decides to avoid violence throughout the rest of the film because he knows that it is NOT necessary. He shows more strength in not throwing a single punch than any number of other muscle-bound action-heroes. That’s why I appreciate the fact that the AFI named Atticus Finch American Films greatest hero over everyone else. Even in defeat he shows us to stand tall and stick with doing the right thing.