Brent Marchant's Blog, page 122
March 8, 2016
‘Eddie the Eagle’ inspires us to soar
“Eddie the Eagle” (2016). Cast: Taron Egerton, Hugh Jackman, Jim Broadbent, Christopher Walken, Jo Hartley, Keith Allen, Iris Berben, Tim McInnerny, Mark Benton, Edvin Endre, Rune Temte, Tom Costello Jr., Jack Costello. Director: Dexter Fletcher. Screenplay: Sean Macauley and Simon Kelton. Story: Simon Kelton. Web site. Trailer.
What are the chances that a geeky, somewhat-uncoordinated wannabe athlete is able to overcome his challenges and become an Olympic competitor? Most would probably say not very likely. But, as in any audacious undertaking, that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. Just ask the infectiously enthusiastic British ski jumper whose inspiring life story is the subject of the new, uplifting, fact-based feel-good movie, “Eddie the Eagle.”
Ever since Eddie Edwards was a child (Tom Costello Jr.), he desperately wanted to be an Olympic athlete, despite health challenges and the nonstop criticism of naysayers, including his own father (Keith Allen). But Eddie was not deterred by these obstacles; he was determined to see his dream realized, especially when his health improved as a teen (Jack Costello). He tried his hand at many sports, though not with much success, prompting even more ridicule from virtually everyone except his mother (Jo Hartley). He seemed reconciled to spend his life working as a plasterer like his dad – that is, until he discovered winter sports.
Eddie took up downhill skiing and fared well, just missing out at a spot on the British Olympic team. But Eddie was not willing to be left out of the Olympic experience. He decided to try a different path – by taking up the sport of ski jumping. And so, while in his early 20s, he began training for competition in a sport that most participants started learning while in childhood.
In 1987, Eddie traveled to Garmisch, West Germany, home of one of the world’s foremost ski jumping facilities, to begin his self-directed training. While there, he met some of the sport’s biggest contenders, like “the Flying Finn,” Matti Nykänen (Edvin Endre), winner of two Olympic medals at the 1984 Sarajevo Winter Games and several individual and team world championships. He also encountered a new round of critics, like the coach of the powerful Norwegian team (Rune Temte) and his squad of smug, self-assured competitors. But he also met some new supporters, like Petra (Iris Berben), a bar owner who gave the cash-starved competitor a place to stay, and Bronson Peary (Hugh Jackman), a hard-drinking slope groomer and former American ski jumper who was booted from the U.S. team by his coach (Christopher Walken) for a lack of discipline.
Eddie’s hope was to qualify for the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary, Canada by becoming the sole member of the British ski jumping team, a sport in which his country hadn’t fielded a contender in nearly 60 years. Unfortunately, the British Olympic Committee was reluctant to support Eddie’s bid for fear that the neophyte competitor would embarrass the team and his country, an opinion openly expressed by BOC President Dustin Target (Tim McInnerny).
Again, however, Eddie refused to be held back. Given the sport’s lax qualifying rules in place at the time, Eddie found a way to participate that wouldn’t allow the Olympic Committee to ignore his bid. That, combined with the valuable assistance afforded by Bronson’s impromptu coaching, allowed Eddie to qualify as Britain’s official ski jumping representative at the Calgary Winter Games. Before long, he was off to Canada to meet his destiny.
Even though Eddie’s Olympic performance was far below that of his fellow competitors (he finished dead last in both the 70- and 90-meter ski jumping competitions), Eddie the Eagle (as he came to be known) captured the hearts of spectators around the globe for his zealous enthusiasm. Sports commentators like those from the BBC (Jim Broadbent) sang his praises, despite his comparatively unimpressive results. The nerdy, bespectacled Brit thus became an overnight global celebrity for embodying the spirit of competition, a symbol for what it means to never give up.
Considering the odds that Eddie was up against, it might be tempting to think that his seemingly wrong-headed efforts were truly Quixotic. However, no matter the challenges, he continued to persevere, mainly because he believed he could succeed. Indeed, as anyone who practices conscious creation – the means by which we manifest the existence we experience through our thoughts and intents – beliefs are exceedingly powerful manifestation tools. And, based on his results, Eddie was a master at it.
In the case of an underdog like Eddie, he held onto beliefs that were off the scale compared to what many of us might be tempted to believe. But Eddie’s intents for what he was attempting to materialize were firmly supported by associated beliefs related to abilities for overcoming limitations and envisioning grand outcomes. His faith in those accompanying notions provided a substantial foundation for his manifestation skills, making the realization of his pie-in-the-sky objectives not only plausible but likely.
Eddie’s experience thus sets an excellent example for the rest of us, especially when we aspire to exceed the limits of our (and others’) perceived capabilities. Holding fast to such beliefs makes it much easier for us to reach our goals. What’s more, this practice enables us to silence the critics, which, in turn, further quashes any doubts that may be tempted to creep into our consciousness and undermine our efforts.
Taking such an approach also helps us to vanquish any fears we might have, perhaps one of the most virulent mechanisms for sabotaging ourselves. These restraining beliefs hold us back, keeping us from discovering what we’re capable of before we even make the attempt. That’s unfortunate, too, for it often leads to regrets, perhaps even resentments, toward ourselves or others. But by being willing to live courageously, we stand ourselves in good stead for seeing exactly what’s possible, especially results that may be beyond what we ever could have envisioned for ourselves.
This happens for Eddie, for example, when he tries the 90-meter ski jump for the first time. Having previously made attempts only on the 15-, 40- and 70-meter courses, tackling the big hill represented a huge step for the inexperienced competitor. But what made Eddie’s initial attempt at this height even more impressive was the fact that he did so at the Olympics, participating in a contest in which he hadn’t originally considered competing. Rising up to meet our destiny in such a way usually proves rewarding beyond measure.
Holding firm to our beliefs not only makes it possible to realize our dreams, but it also makes the process easier by opening doors when needed most. The appearance of fortuitous synchronicities frequently provides us with the tangible tools we need to foster the materialization of our hoped-for objectives.
For instance, when Eddie arrives in Garmisch, he’s in need of lodging and training assistance, both of which “just happen” to make their presence felt, as if on cue. Some might look upon such developments as mere coincidence, but, as conscious creators well know, synchronicities like this routinely materialize – quite naturally – as part of the manifestation process. This is the handiwork of our divine collaborator joining forces with us to see our intangible aspirations come to life, offering us valuable assistance in the realization of our most cherished desires. And, as a general rule, the greater our faith in our beliefs, the greater the number of synchronicities that emerge to make our dreams come true.
Synchronicities sometimes have a tendency to work both ways, too. When Eddie first meets Bronson, for example, he comes upon someone who can supply him with the much-needed coaching he requires. But Eddie’s appearance also provides something Bronson needs – a chance at redemption for achieving a measure of greatness in a sport from which he was banished years before.
As conscious creators well know, we’re all in a constant state of becoming. For those who may have “failed” at some previous manifestation attempt, this is an important consideration to bear in mind, for, even if one effort at achieving something didn’t work, this does not mean later ones won’t. We all have a chance to redeem ourselves for past “failures,” provided we believe in the possibility. And, if we do, the synchronicities that may have been absent before frequently show up subsequently, especially if the beliefs supporting a new materialization attempt are firmly grounded and free of undercutting influences like fear and doubt. For someone like Bronson, Eddie might not seem like what he needs to make up for his past disappointments. But, when the potential for Bronson’s redemption becomes apparent, Eddie proves to be just what his mentor needs.
Ultimately, though, Eddie’s efforts benefited others besides just Bronson. His love of competition for its own sake inspired countless fans worldwide, demonstrating the innate value in making an effort at achieving something, no matter what the outcome. Eddie’s personal heroism was even singled out at the Calgary Games’ closing ceremonies by Frank King, president of the event’s organizing committee. But, then, as conscious creators well know, making an impact in a way that benefits oneself and others is one of the aims of the philosophy, a practice known as value fulfillment. In his own way, Eddie lived out this concept, setting a shining example for an enthused world of onlookers.
“Eddie the Eagle” is purely formula feel-good movie material, but it’s extremely well-executed formula feel-good movie material. In many ways, the film echoes the spirit and sentiments of another picture about the Calgary Games, “Cool Runnings” (1993), the story of the Jamaican bobsled team, another of the many unlikely heroes to come out of the 1988 Winter Olympics. In this offering, Egerton delivers a terrific, faithful performance as the protagonist, effectively portraying someone seeking to succeed despite the odds. Even though a number of the picture’s story elements are, regrettably, fictionalized (such as Bronson’s character, a supposed composite of several of Eddie’s real-life coaches), the film provides big fun, great cinematography and a wonderfully nostalgic look at the ʼ80s. For those in need of a potent shot of adrenaline and encouragement, this one shouldn’t be missed.
When life seems stacked against us, it’s easy to roll over and walk away. It takes real courage to face the challenges before us and move forward, especially when seemingly everyone and everything is going against us. But Eddie Edwards refused to let that happen to him, and his story shows us how, making it possible for us, like the Eagle himself, to soar.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
What are the chances that a geeky, somewhat-uncoordinated wannabe athlete is able to overcome his challenges and become an Olympic competitor? Most would probably say not very likely. But, as in any audacious undertaking, that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. Just ask the infectiously enthusiastic British ski jumper whose inspiring life story is the subject of the new, uplifting, fact-based feel-good movie, “Eddie the Eagle.”
Ever since Eddie Edwards was a child (Tom Costello Jr.), he desperately wanted to be an Olympic athlete, despite health challenges and the nonstop criticism of naysayers, including his own father (Keith Allen). But Eddie was not deterred by these obstacles; he was determined to see his dream realized, especially when his health improved as a teen (Jack Costello). He tried his hand at many sports, though not with much success, prompting even more ridicule from virtually everyone except his mother (Jo Hartley). He seemed reconciled to spend his life working as a plasterer like his dad – that is, until he discovered winter sports.
Eddie took up downhill skiing and fared well, just missing out at a spot on the British Olympic team. But Eddie was not willing to be left out of the Olympic experience. He decided to try a different path – by taking up the sport of ski jumping. And so, while in his early 20s, he began training for competition in a sport that most participants started learning while in childhood.
In 1987, Eddie traveled to Garmisch, West Germany, home of one of the world’s foremost ski jumping facilities, to begin his self-directed training. While there, he met some of the sport’s biggest contenders, like “the Flying Finn,” Matti Nykänen (Edvin Endre), winner of two Olympic medals at the 1984 Sarajevo Winter Games and several individual and team world championships. He also encountered a new round of critics, like the coach of the powerful Norwegian team (Rune Temte) and his squad of smug, self-assured competitors. But he also met some new supporters, like Petra (Iris Berben), a bar owner who gave the cash-starved competitor a place to stay, and Bronson Peary (Hugh Jackman), a hard-drinking slope groomer and former American ski jumper who was booted from the U.S. team by his coach (Christopher Walken) for a lack of discipline.
Eddie’s hope was to qualify for the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary, Canada by becoming the sole member of the British ski jumping team, a sport in which his country hadn’t fielded a contender in nearly 60 years. Unfortunately, the British Olympic Committee was reluctant to support Eddie’s bid for fear that the neophyte competitor would embarrass the team and his country, an opinion openly expressed by BOC President Dustin Target (Tim McInnerny).
Again, however, Eddie refused to be held back. Given the sport’s lax qualifying rules in place at the time, Eddie found a way to participate that wouldn’t allow the Olympic Committee to ignore his bid. That, combined with the valuable assistance afforded by Bronson’s impromptu coaching, allowed Eddie to qualify as Britain’s official ski jumping representative at the Calgary Winter Games. Before long, he was off to Canada to meet his destiny.
Even though Eddie’s Olympic performance was far below that of his fellow competitors (he finished dead last in both the 70- and 90-meter ski jumping competitions), Eddie the Eagle (as he came to be known) captured the hearts of spectators around the globe for his zealous enthusiasm. Sports commentators like those from the BBC (Jim Broadbent) sang his praises, despite his comparatively unimpressive results. The nerdy, bespectacled Brit thus became an overnight global celebrity for embodying the spirit of competition, a symbol for what it means to never give up.
Considering the odds that Eddie was up against, it might be tempting to think that his seemingly wrong-headed efforts were truly Quixotic. However, no matter the challenges, he continued to persevere, mainly because he believed he could succeed. Indeed, as anyone who practices conscious creation – the means by which we manifest the existence we experience through our thoughts and intents – beliefs are exceedingly powerful manifestation tools. And, based on his results, Eddie was a master at it.
In the case of an underdog like Eddie, he held onto beliefs that were off the scale compared to what many of us might be tempted to believe. But Eddie’s intents for what he was attempting to materialize were firmly supported by associated beliefs related to abilities for overcoming limitations and envisioning grand outcomes. His faith in those accompanying notions provided a substantial foundation for his manifestation skills, making the realization of his pie-in-the-sky objectives not only plausible but likely.
Eddie’s experience thus sets an excellent example for the rest of us, especially when we aspire to exceed the limits of our (and others’) perceived capabilities. Holding fast to such beliefs makes it much easier for us to reach our goals. What’s more, this practice enables us to silence the critics, which, in turn, further quashes any doubts that may be tempted to creep into our consciousness and undermine our efforts.
Taking such an approach also helps us to vanquish any fears we might have, perhaps one of the most virulent mechanisms for sabotaging ourselves. These restraining beliefs hold us back, keeping us from discovering what we’re capable of before we even make the attempt. That’s unfortunate, too, for it often leads to regrets, perhaps even resentments, toward ourselves or others. But by being willing to live courageously, we stand ourselves in good stead for seeing exactly what’s possible, especially results that may be beyond what we ever could have envisioned for ourselves.
This happens for Eddie, for example, when he tries the 90-meter ski jump for the first time. Having previously made attempts only on the 15-, 40- and 70-meter courses, tackling the big hill represented a huge step for the inexperienced competitor. But what made Eddie’s initial attempt at this height even more impressive was the fact that he did so at the Olympics, participating in a contest in which he hadn’t originally considered competing. Rising up to meet our destiny in such a way usually proves rewarding beyond measure.
Holding firm to our beliefs not only makes it possible to realize our dreams, but it also makes the process easier by opening doors when needed most. The appearance of fortuitous synchronicities frequently provides us with the tangible tools we need to foster the materialization of our hoped-for objectives.
For instance, when Eddie arrives in Garmisch, he’s in need of lodging and training assistance, both of which “just happen” to make their presence felt, as if on cue. Some might look upon such developments as mere coincidence, but, as conscious creators well know, synchronicities like this routinely materialize – quite naturally – as part of the manifestation process. This is the handiwork of our divine collaborator joining forces with us to see our intangible aspirations come to life, offering us valuable assistance in the realization of our most cherished desires. And, as a general rule, the greater our faith in our beliefs, the greater the number of synchronicities that emerge to make our dreams come true.
Synchronicities sometimes have a tendency to work both ways, too. When Eddie first meets Bronson, for example, he comes upon someone who can supply him with the much-needed coaching he requires. But Eddie’s appearance also provides something Bronson needs – a chance at redemption for achieving a measure of greatness in a sport from which he was banished years before.
As conscious creators well know, we’re all in a constant state of becoming. For those who may have “failed” at some previous manifestation attempt, this is an important consideration to bear in mind, for, even if one effort at achieving something didn’t work, this does not mean later ones won’t. We all have a chance to redeem ourselves for past “failures,” provided we believe in the possibility. And, if we do, the synchronicities that may have been absent before frequently show up subsequently, especially if the beliefs supporting a new materialization attempt are firmly grounded and free of undercutting influences like fear and doubt. For someone like Bronson, Eddie might not seem like what he needs to make up for his past disappointments. But, when the potential for Bronson’s redemption becomes apparent, Eddie proves to be just what his mentor needs.
Ultimately, though, Eddie’s efforts benefited others besides just Bronson. His love of competition for its own sake inspired countless fans worldwide, demonstrating the innate value in making an effort at achieving something, no matter what the outcome. Eddie’s personal heroism was even singled out at the Calgary Games’ closing ceremonies by Frank King, president of the event’s organizing committee. But, then, as conscious creators well know, making an impact in a way that benefits oneself and others is one of the aims of the philosophy, a practice known as value fulfillment. In his own way, Eddie lived out this concept, setting a shining example for an enthused world of onlookers.
“Eddie the Eagle” is purely formula feel-good movie material, but it’s extremely well-executed formula feel-good movie material. In many ways, the film echoes the spirit and sentiments of another picture about the Calgary Games, “Cool Runnings” (1993), the story of the Jamaican bobsled team, another of the many unlikely heroes to come out of the 1988 Winter Olympics. In this offering, Egerton delivers a terrific, faithful performance as the protagonist, effectively portraying someone seeking to succeed despite the odds. Even though a number of the picture’s story elements are, regrettably, fictionalized (such as Bronson’s character, a supposed composite of several of Eddie’s real-life coaches), the film provides big fun, great cinematography and a wonderfully nostalgic look at the ʼ80s. For those in need of a potent shot of adrenaline and encouragement, this one shouldn’t be missed.
When life seems stacked against us, it’s easy to roll over and walk away. It takes real courage to face the challenges before us and move forward, especially when seemingly everyone and everything is going against us. But Eddie Edwards refused to let that happen to him, and his story shows us how, making it possible for us, like the Eagle himself, to soar.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
March 7, 2016
This Week in Movies with Meaning
Reviews of "Eddie the Eagle" and "Kabbalah Me" and a second look at "Tomorrowland" are all now available in the latest Movies with Meaning post on the web site of The Good Radio Network by clicking here.
Photo by Larry Horricks, courtesy © Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.
Photo by Larry Horricks, courtesy © Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.
March 3, 2016
‘Where to Invade Next’ reveals how to fix a broken system
“Where to Invade Next” (2015). Cast: Michael Moore. Director: Michael Moore. Web site. Trailer.
America likes to think of itself as the birthplace of all great ideas. But, considering the current state of the nation and its various institutions, the country can use all the help it can get. So what is the U.S. to do? What sources of ingenuity should it tap to rejuvenate itself? And are those aims realistic? Those questions are among those that controversial filmmaker Michael Moore has attempted to tackle in his new and perhaps most ambitious effort, “Where to Invade Next.”
In the spirit of how the U.S. typically goes after what it needs these days, Moore took it upon himself to lead his army of one and “invade” a number of countries that have employed good ideas in their societies, all with the intent of stealing those notions and bringing them back home to the Land of the Free. The results of those efforts are now chronicled in the director’s latest documentary.
Over the course of the film, Moore travels to nine countries, mostly in Europe, to look at various institutions and to see how those nations handle them. Specifically, he visits the following locales to address these topics:
• In Italy, Moore examines employee rights and compensation, illustrating how companies have managed to provide ample wages and benefits while remaining profitable and creating a healthy work/life balance for their staffs.
• While visiting France, the filmmaker looks at school lunch programs, specifically how children even in the poorest school districts are being provided nutritious, almost gourmet-style meals on a daily basis, a practice that teaches good eating habits for life.
• In Finland, Moore shows how the nation’s “radical” education policies have led to its children becoming some of the smartest in the world. And what do those reforms include? A shorter school day, free-form curricula and virtually no homework, practices that keep kids from becoming bored and that free them up for what are seen as more important pursuits, like developing their own interests, piquing their own curiosity, fostering relationships with others, spending more of their time engaged in play and exercise, and learning how to lead happier and more balanced lives overall.
• On a stop in the tiny nation of Slovenia, Moore looks at the country’s free university system, one that provides a quality (and in many ways more challenging) education to those wishing to attend – regardless of whether or not they’re Slovenian citizens, an option that has fostered growing appeal among loan-strapped Americans seeking to complete college.
• In Germany, Moore details the benefits of the nation’s health care system, specifically its provisions covering preventive well-being measures, such as enabling citizens to attend all-expense-paid visits to facilities like spas that offer such services as yoga, relaxation programs and massage.
• While in Portugal, the filmmaker outlines the country’s drug decriminalization program (one spanning the full range of substances) and how this hands-off policy has led to lower rates of incarceration, drug use, and the need for rehabilitation and recovery services.
• In Norway, Moore shows how the country has revamped its prison system, establishing facilities with minimal security (including guards who carry no guns) and an emphasis on rehabilitation (through developing skills and encouraging creativity), all of which has led to some of the world’s lowest crime and recidivism rates.
• On a visit to the North African nation of Tunisia, Moore profiles the country’s progressive women’s health programs (especially its contraceptive practices) and how they (and other reforms) emerged from citizen-led initiatives against a once-inflexible government, an extension of the Arab Spring movement that was born there and swept through other neighboring lands.
• Saving the best for last, Moore’s trip to Iceland shows how greater involvement by women in business and politics has led to significant improvement in correcting the nation’s once-severe economic ills. Moore also details how the tiny island country has successfully prosecuted and jailed many of the corrupt bankers who caused the nation’s monetary issues in the first place.
Through interviews with thought leaders in these various areas, Moore illustrates what these countries are doing right – and how far short of the mark the U.S. falls by comparison. The result is an eye-opening look at meaningful solutions to thorny issues, plans that can be implemented relatively simply and at little cost – and all of which pay big dividends in the end.
Many people (especially American politicians) might look at these ideas and think them unrealistic, concepts that are too good to be true. Yet these programs and institutions obviously exist and are flourishing in the nations where they’re present. So how is this possible? In the end, it all comes down to the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents.
In essence, these programs and institutions exist because their creators believe that they’re possible – and the proof is in their very real, tangible materialization. Those who conceived the ideas behind them were, on some level, convinced that their creations could indeed be realized. And, with the power of their creators’ thoughts behind them, they subsequently came into being.
But the mere existence of these programs and institutions doesn’t tell the whole story. Their effectiveness, both in terms of results and costs, is equally important, and those attributes of these creations have also been made possible by beliefs. Admittedly, such outcomes require some rather proficient and sophisticated envisioning capabilities, as well as the concurrence of the masses, but those prerequisites can be developed to produce results that clearly speak for themselves. By pushing the limits of what’s thought to be possible and combining those notions with an unshakable faith in them, the creators of these programs and institutions have brought forth models worthy of emulation.
Of course, if those seeking to copy these ideas harbor doubts, they’re unlikely to achieve success, since doubts are themselves a form of belief, one that generally undercuts (and usually cancels out) the intents aimed at realizing particular outcomes. Eliminating these contradictory notions is thus essential for success, though it’s sometimes easier said than done, especially if the belief in those doubts is strong.
However, those who have overcome their doubts (and fears) stand to reap tremendous rewards for their efforts. Not only do they have an opportunity to see their dreams realized, but they also place themselves in a solid position to yield additional dividends. The preventive nature of many of these programs, for instance, ultimately saves money in the long run by keeping unwanted issues from getting out of hand in the first place. What’s more, the good feelings and positive outlooks these initiatives inspire lead to a generally happier and healthier populace, one that’s more productive, creative, and compassionate toward others and the needs of the collective.
In light of that, then, one can’t help but wonder, “Why wouldn’t a country want to create and promote such affirming conditions for its citizens?” That’s a good question, especially for a nation such as the U.S., which likes to think of itself as the land of opportunity, a place where anyone can realize his or her most cherished dreams. But that’s hard to accomplish when the majority of its residents are overworked, underpaid, undernourished and stressed out, as well as often inadequately cared for by a profit-driven health care system. If Americans hope to turn things around, these are some essential questions they should begin to ask themselves, paying particular attention to the beliefs they hold and the creations they’re ultimately manifesting.
Perhaps the greatest irony in all this is the misconception that these progressive ideas were born overseas. However, as Moore points out, many of these notions, ironically enough, are based on ideas that originated in the U.S. For example, many of the workers’ rights and benefits programs prevalent throughout Europe today are rooted in American initiatives from the late 19th Century. Similarly, the Icelandic litigation program used to prosecute the nation’s corrupt bankers was actually based on an American plan employed against the guilty parties in the U.S. savings and loan scandal of the late ʼ80s and early ʼ90s. Interestingly, in the wake of the global financial meltdown of 2008, Iceland has jailed nearly 30 corrupt bankers, while the U.S., by comparison, has prosecuted only one. This disparity speaks volumes, not only in terms of outcomes, but also with respect to the priorities of the two nations.
Fixing the present circumstances is genuinely possible, as these examples clearly illustrate. What it takes, though, is the will and desire to make it happen, something that stems from our beliefs, both individually and collectively. But, with that behind us, truly remarkable results are possible – and we don’t even have to invade anybody to make it happen.
Even though Moore’s films (and politics) don’t jibe with everyone’s sensibilities, “Where to Invade Next” provides an excellent survey approach to its subject matter, with segments that link nicely from one to another and ultimately serve to provide an integrated comprehensive whole. The signature humor that typically infuses the director’s movies is present here again, but it’s toned down somewhat from his previous efforts, providing just enough chuckles to keep the picture entertaining without becoming too smug, self-serving or partisan. The interview segments hit all the right notes without overkill, providing valuable, meaningful insights in a number of areas. Admittedly, the pacing slows a bit in the last half hour, but otherwise this is easily the filmmaker’s best effort to date.
Given the challenges beleaguering us these days, we can’t really afford to rule out anything to set matters right. Keeping an open mind and having the courage to pursue the seemingly outlandish may be just what it takes to resolve today’s pressing ills. The inspiration and ideas provided by films like this could well serve as shining examples of what we can and should do to repair a broken system – and we don’t even have to steal anything to make that happen.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
America likes to think of itself as the birthplace of all great ideas. But, considering the current state of the nation and its various institutions, the country can use all the help it can get. So what is the U.S. to do? What sources of ingenuity should it tap to rejuvenate itself? And are those aims realistic? Those questions are among those that controversial filmmaker Michael Moore has attempted to tackle in his new and perhaps most ambitious effort, “Where to Invade Next.”
In the spirit of how the U.S. typically goes after what it needs these days, Moore took it upon himself to lead his army of one and “invade” a number of countries that have employed good ideas in their societies, all with the intent of stealing those notions and bringing them back home to the Land of the Free. The results of those efforts are now chronicled in the director’s latest documentary.
Over the course of the film, Moore travels to nine countries, mostly in Europe, to look at various institutions and to see how those nations handle them. Specifically, he visits the following locales to address these topics:
• In Italy, Moore examines employee rights and compensation, illustrating how companies have managed to provide ample wages and benefits while remaining profitable and creating a healthy work/life balance for their staffs.
• While visiting France, the filmmaker looks at school lunch programs, specifically how children even in the poorest school districts are being provided nutritious, almost gourmet-style meals on a daily basis, a practice that teaches good eating habits for life.
• In Finland, Moore shows how the nation’s “radical” education policies have led to its children becoming some of the smartest in the world. And what do those reforms include? A shorter school day, free-form curricula and virtually no homework, practices that keep kids from becoming bored and that free them up for what are seen as more important pursuits, like developing their own interests, piquing their own curiosity, fostering relationships with others, spending more of their time engaged in play and exercise, and learning how to lead happier and more balanced lives overall.
• On a stop in the tiny nation of Slovenia, Moore looks at the country’s free university system, one that provides a quality (and in many ways more challenging) education to those wishing to attend – regardless of whether or not they’re Slovenian citizens, an option that has fostered growing appeal among loan-strapped Americans seeking to complete college.
• In Germany, Moore details the benefits of the nation’s health care system, specifically its provisions covering preventive well-being measures, such as enabling citizens to attend all-expense-paid visits to facilities like spas that offer such services as yoga, relaxation programs and massage.
• While in Portugal, the filmmaker outlines the country’s drug decriminalization program (one spanning the full range of substances) and how this hands-off policy has led to lower rates of incarceration, drug use, and the need for rehabilitation and recovery services.
• In Norway, Moore shows how the country has revamped its prison system, establishing facilities with minimal security (including guards who carry no guns) and an emphasis on rehabilitation (through developing skills and encouraging creativity), all of which has led to some of the world’s lowest crime and recidivism rates.
• On a visit to the North African nation of Tunisia, Moore profiles the country’s progressive women’s health programs (especially its contraceptive practices) and how they (and other reforms) emerged from citizen-led initiatives against a once-inflexible government, an extension of the Arab Spring movement that was born there and swept through other neighboring lands.
• Saving the best for last, Moore’s trip to Iceland shows how greater involvement by women in business and politics has led to significant improvement in correcting the nation’s once-severe economic ills. Moore also details how the tiny island country has successfully prosecuted and jailed many of the corrupt bankers who caused the nation’s monetary issues in the first place.
Through interviews with thought leaders in these various areas, Moore illustrates what these countries are doing right – and how far short of the mark the U.S. falls by comparison. The result is an eye-opening look at meaningful solutions to thorny issues, plans that can be implemented relatively simply and at little cost – and all of which pay big dividends in the end.
Many people (especially American politicians) might look at these ideas and think them unrealistic, concepts that are too good to be true. Yet these programs and institutions obviously exist and are flourishing in the nations where they’re present. So how is this possible? In the end, it all comes down to the conscious creation process, the means by which we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents.
In essence, these programs and institutions exist because their creators believe that they’re possible – and the proof is in their very real, tangible materialization. Those who conceived the ideas behind them were, on some level, convinced that their creations could indeed be realized. And, with the power of their creators’ thoughts behind them, they subsequently came into being.
But the mere existence of these programs and institutions doesn’t tell the whole story. Their effectiveness, both in terms of results and costs, is equally important, and those attributes of these creations have also been made possible by beliefs. Admittedly, such outcomes require some rather proficient and sophisticated envisioning capabilities, as well as the concurrence of the masses, but those prerequisites can be developed to produce results that clearly speak for themselves. By pushing the limits of what’s thought to be possible and combining those notions with an unshakable faith in them, the creators of these programs and institutions have brought forth models worthy of emulation.
Of course, if those seeking to copy these ideas harbor doubts, they’re unlikely to achieve success, since doubts are themselves a form of belief, one that generally undercuts (and usually cancels out) the intents aimed at realizing particular outcomes. Eliminating these contradictory notions is thus essential for success, though it’s sometimes easier said than done, especially if the belief in those doubts is strong.
However, those who have overcome their doubts (and fears) stand to reap tremendous rewards for their efforts. Not only do they have an opportunity to see their dreams realized, but they also place themselves in a solid position to yield additional dividends. The preventive nature of many of these programs, for instance, ultimately saves money in the long run by keeping unwanted issues from getting out of hand in the first place. What’s more, the good feelings and positive outlooks these initiatives inspire lead to a generally happier and healthier populace, one that’s more productive, creative, and compassionate toward others and the needs of the collective.
In light of that, then, one can’t help but wonder, “Why wouldn’t a country want to create and promote such affirming conditions for its citizens?” That’s a good question, especially for a nation such as the U.S., which likes to think of itself as the land of opportunity, a place where anyone can realize his or her most cherished dreams. But that’s hard to accomplish when the majority of its residents are overworked, underpaid, undernourished and stressed out, as well as often inadequately cared for by a profit-driven health care system. If Americans hope to turn things around, these are some essential questions they should begin to ask themselves, paying particular attention to the beliefs they hold and the creations they’re ultimately manifesting.
Perhaps the greatest irony in all this is the misconception that these progressive ideas were born overseas. However, as Moore points out, many of these notions, ironically enough, are based on ideas that originated in the U.S. For example, many of the workers’ rights and benefits programs prevalent throughout Europe today are rooted in American initiatives from the late 19th Century. Similarly, the Icelandic litigation program used to prosecute the nation’s corrupt bankers was actually based on an American plan employed against the guilty parties in the U.S. savings and loan scandal of the late ʼ80s and early ʼ90s. Interestingly, in the wake of the global financial meltdown of 2008, Iceland has jailed nearly 30 corrupt bankers, while the U.S., by comparison, has prosecuted only one. This disparity speaks volumes, not only in terms of outcomes, but also with respect to the priorities of the two nations.
Fixing the present circumstances is genuinely possible, as these examples clearly illustrate. What it takes, though, is the will and desire to make it happen, something that stems from our beliefs, both individually and collectively. But, with that behind us, truly remarkable results are possible – and we don’t even have to invade anybody to make it happen.
Even though Moore’s films (and politics) don’t jibe with everyone’s sensibilities, “Where to Invade Next” provides an excellent survey approach to its subject matter, with segments that link nicely from one to another and ultimately serve to provide an integrated comprehensive whole. The signature humor that typically infuses the director’s movies is present here again, but it’s toned down somewhat from his previous efforts, providing just enough chuckles to keep the picture entertaining without becoming too smug, self-serving or partisan. The interview segments hit all the right notes without overkill, providing valuable, meaningful insights in a number of areas. Admittedly, the pacing slows a bit in the last half hour, but otherwise this is easily the filmmaker’s best effort to date.
Given the challenges beleaguering us these days, we can’t really afford to rule out anything to set matters right. Keeping an open mind and having the courage to pursue the seemingly outlandish may be just what it takes to resolve today’s pressing ills. The inspiration and ideas provided by films like this could well serve as shining examples of what we can and should do to repair a broken system – and we don’t even have to steal anything to make that happen.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
March 1, 2016
Reviews, the Power of Choice and More on Movies with Meaning
Reviews of "A War" and "Meru," Movies and the Power of Choice, and an Oscar report card are now all available in the latest Movies with Meaning post on the web site of The Good Radio Network, available by clicking here.
Photo courtesy of Magnolia Pictures.
Photo by Renan Ozturk, courtesy of Music Box Films.
Photo courtesy of Magnolia Pictures.
Photo by Renan Ozturk, courtesy of Music Box Films.
'Movies and the Power of Choice' now available in NCR magazine
Check out my latest article in New Consciousness Review magazine, "Movies and the Power of Choice," available by clicking here.
February 29, 2016
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 17.
And the result? Five out of six correct calls, with one miss. Here are the details:
Best Picture
Projected Winner: “Spotlight”
Actual Winner: “Spotlight”
Result: Correct call
As the toughest of the major races to call in this year’s Oscars, it was gratifying to make the right prediction in this category. Despite the formidable challenge put forth by “The Revenant” and modest competition from “The Big Short,” “Spotlight” managed to prevail, probably for the reasons outlined in my previous blog. I still would have preferred “The Big Short” as the winner in this category, but, in the end, it didn’t have enough momentum behind it to pull off a win.
Best Actor
Projected Winner: Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Actual Winner: Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Result: Correct call
This was a slam dunk. Because DiCaprio won virtually everything leading up to the Oscars, there was no way this trend wouldn’t hold in this competition. As noted in my previous blog, in my opinion, this wasn’t the winner’s strongest performance, but he was overdue for a victory, and the Academy honored him accordingly. I still would have preferred Bryan Cranston for “Trumbo” in this category, but there was no stopping the DiCaprio juggernaut.
Best Actress
Projected Winner: Brie Larson, “Room”
Actual Winner: Brie Larson, “Room”
Result: Correct call
This was another slam dunk. Larson won every major award leading up the Oscars, so her victory came as no surprise, and, thankfully, this was a case of the right performer winning her award for the right performance. She fended off some rather formidable competition on her way to victory (on her first nomination, too), but she indeed was the best of the bunch. Look for more great things from this remarkable talent.
Best Supporting Actor
Projected Winner: Sylvester Stallone, “Creed”
Actual Winner: Mark Rylance, “Bridge of Spies”
Result: Missed call
I truly thought this was going to be another slam dunk, but Rylance’s upset win proved to be one of Oscar night’s true surprises (and a very pleasant one at that). Stallone won every award in the competitions in which he was nominated leading up the Oscars, and he appeared to be the sentimental favorite. However, there were two contests in which Stallone failed to secure a nomination – the Screen Actors Guild Awards, which recognized Idris Ela for “Beasts of No Nation” (who was not nominated here), and the BAFTA Awards, the most recently presented of the major awards, which honored Rylance. It could well be that Rylance’s BAFTA win marked the turning of the tide in his favor, and it’s a result I can’t say I was disappointed with. While my first choice in this category would have been Tom Hardy for “The Revenant,” Rylance would have been my second choice, given his understated performance as a quiet, unassuming man who harbors a wealth of secrets. In any event, whether Hardy or Rylance (or any of the other nominees for that matter) had come up the victor, I’m just glad that the Academy didn’t give in to the undue sentimentality for Stallone, a performance that never should have even been nominated, let alone come away an undeserving winner.
Best Supporting Actress
Projected Winner: Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Actual Winner: Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Result: Correct call
At the time I posted my first blog, this was the only acting category in which I believed there was any room for doubt. I saw the contest as a two-horse race between eventual winner Vikander and Kate Winslet for “Steve Jobs,” with Vikander as the predicted victor (and deservingly so). As in the best actress competition, Vikander was the class of the category, and it was gratifying to see her take home the statue.
Best Director
Projected Winner: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, “The Revenant”
Actual Winner: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, “The Revenant”
Result: Correct call
Once again, this was a fairly easy win to project, given Iñárritu’s victories in all of the major competitions leading up to the Oscars. I still would have preferred Adam McKay for “The Big Short,” but the victor had the momentum behind him coming into the Oscars, and it held firm in the end.
To find out more about what I had to say about this year’s winners and my preferences in some of the leading categories, check out my reviews at the following links:
“Room”
“Spotlight”
“The Big Short”
“The Danish Girl”
“Trumbo”
Oscar® and Academy Award® are registered trademarks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
And the result? Five out of six correct calls, with one miss. Here are the details:
Best Picture
Projected Winner: “Spotlight”
Actual Winner: “Spotlight”
Result: Correct call
As the toughest of the major races to call in this year’s Oscars, it was gratifying to make the right prediction in this category. Despite the formidable challenge put forth by “The Revenant” and modest competition from “The Big Short,” “Spotlight” managed to prevail, probably for the reasons outlined in my previous blog. I still would have preferred “The Big Short” as the winner in this category, but, in the end, it didn’t have enough momentum behind it to pull off a win.
Best Actor
Projected Winner: Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Actual Winner: Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Revenant”
Result: Correct call
This was a slam dunk. Because DiCaprio won virtually everything leading up to the Oscars, there was no way this trend wouldn’t hold in this competition. As noted in my previous blog, in my opinion, this wasn’t the winner’s strongest performance, but he was overdue for a victory, and the Academy honored him accordingly. I still would have preferred Bryan Cranston for “Trumbo” in this category, but there was no stopping the DiCaprio juggernaut.
Best Actress
Projected Winner: Brie Larson, “Room”
Actual Winner: Brie Larson, “Room”
Result: Correct call
This was another slam dunk. Larson won every major award leading up the Oscars, so her victory came as no surprise, and, thankfully, this was a case of the right performer winning her award for the right performance. She fended off some rather formidable competition on her way to victory (on her first nomination, too), but she indeed was the best of the bunch. Look for more great things from this remarkable talent.
Best Supporting Actor
Projected Winner: Sylvester Stallone, “Creed”
Actual Winner: Mark Rylance, “Bridge of Spies”
Result: Missed call
I truly thought this was going to be another slam dunk, but Rylance’s upset win proved to be one of Oscar night’s true surprises (and a very pleasant one at that). Stallone won every award in the competitions in which he was nominated leading up the Oscars, and he appeared to be the sentimental favorite. However, there were two contests in which Stallone failed to secure a nomination – the Screen Actors Guild Awards, which recognized Idris Ela for “Beasts of No Nation” (who was not nominated here), and the BAFTA Awards, the most recently presented of the major awards, which honored Rylance. It could well be that Rylance’s BAFTA win marked the turning of the tide in his favor, and it’s a result I can’t say I was disappointed with. While my first choice in this category would have been Tom Hardy for “The Revenant,” Rylance would have been my second choice, given his understated performance as a quiet, unassuming man who harbors a wealth of secrets. In any event, whether Hardy or Rylance (or any of the other nominees for that matter) had come up the victor, I’m just glad that the Academy didn’t give in to the undue sentimentality for Stallone, a performance that never should have even been nominated, let alone come away an undeserving winner.
Best Supporting Actress
Projected Winner: Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Actual Winner: Alicia Vikander, “The Danish Girl”
Result: Correct call
At the time I posted my first blog, this was the only acting category in which I believed there was any room for doubt. I saw the contest as a two-horse race between eventual winner Vikander and Kate Winslet for “Steve Jobs,” with Vikander as the predicted victor (and deservingly so). As in the best actress competition, Vikander was the class of the category, and it was gratifying to see her take home the statue.
Best Director
Projected Winner: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, “The Revenant”
Actual Winner: Alejandro G. Iñárritu, “The Revenant”
Result: Correct call
Once again, this was a fairly easy win to project, given Iñárritu’s victories in all of the major competitions leading up to the Oscars. I still would have preferred Adam McKay for “The Big Short,” but the victor had the momentum behind him coming into the Oscars, and it held firm in the end.
To find out more about what I had to say about this year’s winners and my preferences in some of the leading categories, check out my reviews at the following links:
“Room”
“Spotlight”
“The Big Short”
“The Danish Girl”
“Trumbo”
Oscar® and Academy Award® are registered trademarks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
February 25, 2016
‘Race’ elevates us to rise to our destiny
“Race” (2016). Cast: Stephan James, Jason Sudeikis, Jeremy Irons, William Hurt, Shanice Banton, Carice van Houten, Eli Goree, David Kross, Jonathan Higgins, Barnaby Metschurat, Shamier Anderson, Jeremy Ferdman, Giacomo Gianniotti, Michèle Lonsdale Smith, Andrew Moodie, Glynn Turman, Adrian Zwicker, Gaetan Normandin, Jacob Andrew Kerr, Dondre Octave, Chantel Riley, Kayla Stewart, Yvanna-Rose Leblanc. Director: Stephen Hopkins. Screenplay: Joe Shrapnel and Anna Waterhouse. Web site. Trailer.
Fulfilling our destiny often seems like a daunting prospect. Can we achieve it? Are we willing and able to do what it takes to rise to the occasion? And what if we undertake that task under intimidating circumstances, especially if there’s much at stake and the whole world is watching? Those are among the questions raised in director Stephen Hopkins’s inspiring new biopic, “Race.”
In 1936, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler (Adrian Zwicker), leader of the notorious Third Reich, sought to use his country’s hosting of the Berlin Olympic Games as a platform for propagandizing the Nazi ideology and the rise of the Aryan race. Through a carefully constructed plan orchestrated by Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels (Barnaby Metschurat), and documented cinematically by his hand-picked filmmaker, Leni Riefenstahl (Carice van Houten), the Führer wanted the event to showcase the glories of fascist society and the qualities he believed constituted human perfection. But those grand plans were significantly undercut by the remarkable accomplishments of someone who represented the antithesis of Hitler’s blonde-haired, blue-eyed ideal, a talented African-American athlete from Cleveland, Olympian J.C. “Jesse” Owens (Stephan James).
In the run-up to the Olympics, Owens – a natural sprinter and long jumper – refined his abilities at Ohio State University under Coach Larry Snyder (Jason Sudeikis), himself a onetime world-class contender. And hone those skills he did; at the Big Ten championship track and field meet in 1935, for example, Owens set three world records and tied a fourth – all in a span of 45 minutes. He would later best rivals like fellow American Eulace Peacock (Shamier Anderson), emerging as one of the shining stars of the U.S. Olympic team. Indeed, with a performance record like that, Owens seemed destined for greatness in Berlin.
But, as the games approached, Owens also faced a future full of uncertainty. While he was anxious to compete, he was also under considerable pressure to abstain from participating as part of a growing American protest against Hitler’s policies toward minorities, particularly Blacks and Jews. The arguments in favor of a proposed U.S. boycott certainly had merit, but so did those in favor of competing, with proponents contending that a conspicuous American presence would serve as a striking counterpoint to the German propaganda machine. This disagreement even led to a schism within the ranks of the U.S. Olympic Committee, with president Jeremiah Mahoney (William Hurt) leaning in favor of a boycott and influential committee member Avery Brundage (Jeremy Irons) lobbying for participation. Brundage argued that American success on the playing field would send a powerful message to the Germans and the world at large, and he believed that Owens was a prime candidate – in more ways than one – for serving as the messenger.
Owens’s Olympic challenges weren’t the only ones he faced; he also had his share of struggles on the home front, particularly with money. He worked a variety of jobs while attending college, looking for ways to generate enough income to support himself, his unemployed father (Andrew Moodie), and his fiancée, Ruth (Shanice Banton), with whom he had a young daughter, Gloria (Kayla Stewart (age 2) and Yvanna-Rose Leblanc (age 4)). Fortunately, he also had his share of backers, like Snyder, who made sure Owens had what he needed to stay on track with fulfilling his destiny.
By the time the Olympics rolled around, Owens didn’t disappoint, either, handily capturing three gold medals in the events in which he was originally scheduled to compete. He also won an unexpected fourth gold when he was named as a last-minute replacement to an American relay team. And, even though his success infuriated the likes of Hitler and Goebbels, Owens emerged as a fan favorite at the Berlin games, even among such unlikely supporters as Riefenstahl and European champion long jumper Carl “Luz” Long (David Kross), who Owens defeated in front of his home crowd. His was a performance that won the day – and stood the test of time.
Owens’s achievements made their mark not only because of the athleticism involved, but also because of the statement they made. As someone who embodied the opposite of what Hitler considered the ideal human, Owens effectively rebuked the inflated, arrogant claims of innate superiority put forth by the German Chancellor, and he did so without hubris, taking his accomplishments all in stride. But, then, Owens didn’t need to resort to blatant chest-thumping to make his point, because he knew he could reach his goals, a mindset that grew out of a firm faith in his beliefs in himself and his abilities. That’s to be expected, however, when one becomes proficient in the practice of conscious creation, the philosophy that maintains we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents.
Employing conscious creation to make a statement represents an especially effective use of this practice, because it reflects the metaphorical nature of how the process works. The act of making a statement essentially involves the materialization of a symbolic, outward expression of something inherently intangible, a physical representation of something intrinsically conceptual, one that innately embodies what this philosophy is ultimately all about. For his part, Owens proved a master at this.
When one recognizes what a realization like this signifies, the impact is often considerable, perhaps even profound. In fact, the effect may be significant enough to change the hearts and minds of others, including those whose views might seem unlikely to be swayed, such as Owens’s long jump competitor and Hitler’s partisan documentarian. Such is the power that drives conscious creation, a force that can not only yield stunning outcomes but that can also serve as the impetus for shifting viewpoints, perhaps even changing the world.
Reaching that point, however, requires that certain qualities are in place when the process is put to use. First, the ability to envision the desired outcome is crucial, because it helps shape the manifesting beliefs that need to be put into place to produce the hoped-for result. When it comes to this particular conscious creation application, athletes are among its most proficient practitioners, because they must be able to picture where they want to end up before they even begin. For example, a quarterback winding up to throw a pass doesn’t toss the football to where his receiver is; he throws it to where his receiver is going to be. Likewise, when a golfer tees off, he swings his club to drive the ball to where he wants it to land, a practice that requires him to envision where he wants it to end up before he even initiates the process. A similar practice underlies the accomplishments of track stars like Owens, who picture the results they want to attain before the starter’s pistol ever fires.
Second, conscious creators must also weed out whatever impediments might get in their way. This involves eliminating beliefs associated with fear and doubt, the chief elements that undercut our manifestation efforts. Such notions contradict what we seek to achieve, so putting them out of mind is essential to fulfill our objectives. Thus, by approaching things confidently and courageously (even heroically), we stand ourselves in good stead to bring about what we want. Owens undeniably employed such tactics in his quest, both in terms of fulfilling his athletic goals and in making a statement through his acts and deeds.
Like so many other landmark occurrences, the story that plays out in this film is also a prime example of a consciously co-created mass event in which numerous participants join forces to collectively manifest a single scenario consisting of multiple lines of probability, multiple individual experiences and multiple life lessons. While the Berlin Olympics represented a distinct, singular event, the games contained within them the diverse experiences of many collaborators, including Owens, his coach, his family, his teammates, the U.S. Olympic Committee and the German hosts, all of whom had different underlying reasons (and beliefs) for creating what they ultimately did. Events such as this effectively illustrate the broad range of diversity that conscious creation makes possible and how those various lines of probability can all be explored through a collective individual experience. The shared outcome makes for a great tale, one that lends further credence to the insightful words of poet Muriel Rukeyser, who wrote that “The Universe is made of stories, not of atoms.”
“Race” tells its inspiring story beautifully with great production values, gorgeous cinematography and effective re-creations of Owens’ heroic athleticism. It effectively captures the look and feel of both Depression Era America and a resurgent Germany in the days before the start of World War II. It also capably weaves multiple story lines into a cohesive whole, providing sufficient background and insight into their various events and principals without becoming bogged down in excessive detail or undue confusion.
With that said, however, the film is also somewhat schmaltzy and rather formulaic at times, with sometimes-uneven performances, inconsistent pacing and occasionally trite dialogue. Still, the film will tug at the heart, prompting audience members to succeed at their goals, surpassing self-imposed limitations and doubts. This is far from landmark filmmaking, but it certainly makes for stirring viewing, especially for those who aspire to live out their own greatness.
It’s impossible to talk about this film without addressing the double entendre embodied in its title, a choice of wording that relates not only to Owens’s athletic ambitions, but also to the prevailing conditions of the backdrop in which he competed. In line with that, it’s interesting to see how the film illustrates the variable degrees of treatment Owens received when it came to the matter of race. While he was treated fairly by supporters (like Snyder and Brundage) and kindly by admirers (like Long and Riefenstahl), he was also subjected to the open prejudice and disdain of detractors, like Hitler and Goebbels, who snubbed acknowledgment of his achievements, a congratulatory gesture routinely afforded to all of the games’ other victors. It’s also interesting to note how many Americans openly objected to the Führer’s racial policies while hypocritically tolerating segregationist practices not all that different in their own homeland, a duplicity that becomes all too apparent when Owens attends a banquet at a New York hotel and is forced to use the service entrance, ironically at an event thrown in his honor.
Like many other films that profile the stories of minority athletes competing under challenging circumstances (such as “Glory Road” (2006), “42” (2013), “The Express” (2008) and “Pride” (2007)), “Race” effectively draws into focus the indignities of the past and how far we have come. It also serves as a poignant reminder, given today’s sometimes-stressful race relation issues, how diligent we must be to preserve the progress that has been made, lest we run the risk of losing it and backsliding into the unacceptable ways of the past.
Attaining our destiny is perhaps the greatest challenge any of us will pursue during our lifetimes. It requires us to aspire to the greatness within us, reaching deep down inside to find the sparks of inspiration and confidence needed to achieve that goal. But, as long as we possess a keen awareness of our beliefs and the conscious creation process that puts them to work, we stand a great chance of living out what we were meant to do. Owens’s inspiring example sets a standard for all of us to follow, one that encourages us to each go for the personal gold that we know we’re capable of achieving.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Fulfilling our destiny often seems like a daunting prospect. Can we achieve it? Are we willing and able to do what it takes to rise to the occasion? And what if we undertake that task under intimidating circumstances, especially if there’s much at stake and the whole world is watching? Those are among the questions raised in director Stephen Hopkins’s inspiring new biopic, “Race.”
In 1936, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler (Adrian Zwicker), leader of the notorious Third Reich, sought to use his country’s hosting of the Berlin Olympic Games as a platform for propagandizing the Nazi ideology and the rise of the Aryan race. Through a carefully constructed plan orchestrated by Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels (Barnaby Metschurat), and documented cinematically by his hand-picked filmmaker, Leni Riefenstahl (Carice van Houten), the Führer wanted the event to showcase the glories of fascist society and the qualities he believed constituted human perfection. But those grand plans were significantly undercut by the remarkable accomplishments of someone who represented the antithesis of Hitler’s blonde-haired, blue-eyed ideal, a talented African-American athlete from Cleveland, Olympian J.C. “Jesse” Owens (Stephan James).
In the run-up to the Olympics, Owens – a natural sprinter and long jumper – refined his abilities at Ohio State University under Coach Larry Snyder (Jason Sudeikis), himself a onetime world-class contender. And hone those skills he did; at the Big Ten championship track and field meet in 1935, for example, Owens set three world records and tied a fourth – all in a span of 45 minutes. He would later best rivals like fellow American Eulace Peacock (Shamier Anderson), emerging as one of the shining stars of the U.S. Olympic team. Indeed, with a performance record like that, Owens seemed destined for greatness in Berlin.
But, as the games approached, Owens also faced a future full of uncertainty. While he was anxious to compete, he was also under considerable pressure to abstain from participating as part of a growing American protest against Hitler’s policies toward minorities, particularly Blacks and Jews. The arguments in favor of a proposed U.S. boycott certainly had merit, but so did those in favor of competing, with proponents contending that a conspicuous American presence would serve as a striking counterpoint to the German propaganda machine. This disagreement even led to a schism within the ranks of the U.S. Olympic Committee, with president Jeremiah Mahoney (William Hurt) leaning in favor of a boycott and influential committee member Avery Brundage (Jeremy Irons) lobbying for participation. Brundage argued that American success on the playing field would send a powerful message to the Germans and the world at large, and he believed that Owens was a prime candidate – in more ways than one – for serving as the messenger.
Owens’s Olympic challenges weren’t the only ones he faced; he also had his share of struggles on the home front, particularly with money. He worked a variety of jobs while attending college, looking for ways to generate enough income to support himself, his unemployed father (Andrew Moodie), and his fiancée, Ruth (Shanice Banton), with whom he had a young daughter, Gloria (Kayla Stewart (age 2) and Yvanna-Rose Leblanc (age 4)). Fortunately, he also had his share of backers, like Snyder, who made sure Owens had what he needed to stay on track with fulfilling his destiny.
By the time the Olympics rolled around, Owens didn’t disappoint, either, handily capturing three gold medals in the events in which he was originally scheduled to compete. He also won an unexpected fourth gold when he was named as a last-minute replacement to an American relay team. And, even though his success infuriated the likes of Hitler and Goebbels, Owens emerged as a fan favorite at the Berlin games, even among such unlikely supporters as Riefenstahl and European champion long jumper Carl “Luz” Long (David Kross), who Owens defeated in front of his home crowd. His was a performance that won the day – and stood the test of time.
Owens’s achievements made their mark not only because of the athleticism involved, but also because of the statement they made. As someone who embodied the opposite of what Hitler considered the ideal human, Owens effectively rebuked the inflated, arrogant claims of innate superiority put forth by the German Chancellor, and he did so without hubris, taking his accomplishments all in stride. But, then, Owens didn’t need to resort to blatant chest-thumping to make his point, because he knew he could reach his goals, a mindset that grew out of a firm faith in his beliefs in himself and his abilities. That’s to be expected, however, when one becomes proficient in the practice of conscious creation, the philosophy that maintains we manifest the reality we experience through our thoughts, beliefs and intents.
Employing conscious creation to make a statement represents an especially effective use of this practice, because it reflects the metaphorical nature of how the process works. The act of making a statement essentially involves the materialization of a symbolic, outward expression of something inherently intangible, a physical representation of something intrinsically conceptual, one that innately embodies what this philosophy is ultimately all about. For his part, Owens proved a master at this.
When one recognizes what a realization like this signifies, the impact is often considerable, perhaps even profound. In fact, the effect may be significant enough to change the hearts and minds of others, including those whose views might seem unlikely to be swayed, such as Owens’s long jump competitor and Hitler’s partisan documentarian. Such is the power that drives conscious creation, a force that can not only yield stunning outcomes but that can also serve as the impetus for shifting viewpoints, perhaps even changing the world.
Reaching that point, however, requires that certain qualities are in place when the process is put to use. First, the ability to envision the desired outcome is crucial, because it helps shape the manifesting beliefs that need to be put into place to produce the hoped-for result. When it comes to this particular conscious creation application, athletes are among its most proficient practitioners, because they must be able to picture where they want to end up before they even begin. For example, a quarterback winding up to throw a pass doesn’t toss the football to where his receiver is; he throws it to where his receiver is going to be. Likewise, when a golfer tees off, he swings his club to drive the ball to where he wants it to land, a practice that requires him to envision where he wants it to end up before he even initiates the process. A similar practice underlies the accomplishments of track stars like Owens, who picture the results they want to attain before the starter’s pistol ever fires.
Second, conscious creators must also weed out whatever impediments might get in their way. This involves eliminating beliefs associated with fear and doubt, the chief elements that undercut our manifestation efforts. Such notions contradict what we seek to achieve, so putting them out of mind is essential to fulfill our objectives. Thus, by approaching things confidently and courageously (even heroically), we stand ourselves in good stead to bring about what we want. Owens undeniably employed such tactics in his quest, both in terms of fulfilling his athletic goals and in making a statement through his acts and deeds.
Like so many other landmark occurrences, the story that plays out in this film is also a prime example of a consciously co-created mass event in which numerous participants join forces to collectively manifest a single scenario consisting of multiple lines of probability, multiple individual experiences and multiple life lessons. While the Berlin Olympics represented a distinct, singular event, the games contained within them the diverse experiences of many collaborators, including Owens, his coach, his family, his teammates, the U.S. Olympic Committee and the German hosts, all of whom had different underlying reasons (and beliefs) for creating what they ultimately did. Events such as this effectively illustrate the broad range of diversity that conscious creation makes possible and how those various lines of probability can all be explored through a collective individual experience. The shared outcome makes for a great tale, one that lends further credence to the insightful words of poet Muriel Rukeyser, who wrote that “The Universe is made of stories, not of atoms.”
“Race” tells its inspiring story beautifully with great production values, gorgeous cinematography and effective re-creations of Owens’ heroic athleticism. It effectively captures the look and feel of both Depression Era America and a resurgent Germany in the days before the start of World War II. It also capably weaves multiple story lines into a cohesive whole, providing sufficient background and insight into their various events and principals without becoming bogged down in excessive detail or undue confusion.
With that said, however, the film is also somewhat schmaltzy and rather formulaic at times, with sometimes-uneven performances, inconsistent pacing and occasionally trite dialogue. Still, the film will tug at the heart, prompting audience members to succeed at their goals, surpassing self-imposed limitations and doubts. This is far from landmark filmmaking, but it certainly makes for stirring viewing, especially for those who aspire to live out their own greatness.
It’s impossible to talk about this film without addressing the double entendre embodied in its title, a choice of wording that relates not only to Owens’s athletic ambitions, but also to the prevailing conditions of the backdrop in which he competed. In line with that, it’s interesting to see how the film illustrates the variable degrees of treatment Owens received when it came to the matter of race. While he was treated fairly by supporters (like Snyder and Brundage) and kindly by admirers (like Long and Riefenstahl), he was also subjected to the open prejudice and disdain of detractors, like Hitler and Goebbels, who snubbed acknowledgment of his achievements, a congratulatory gesture routinely afforded to all of the games’ other victors. It’s also interesting to note how many Americans openly objected to the Führer’s racial policies while hypocritically tolerating segregationist practices not all that different in their own homeland, a duplicity that becomes all too apparent when Owens attends a banquet at a New York hotel and is forced to use the service entrance, ironically at an event thrown in his honor.
Like many other films that profile the stories of minority athletes competing under challenging circumstances (such as “Glory Road” (2006), “42” (2013), “The Express” (2008) and “Pride” (2007)), “Race” effectively draws into focus the indignities of the past and how far we have come. It also serves as a poignant reminder, given today’s sometimes-stressful race relation issues, how diligent we must be to preserve the progress that has been made, lest we run the risk of losing it and backsliding into the unacceptable ways of the past.
Attaining our destiny is perhaps the greatest challenge any of us will pursue during our lifetimes. It requires us to aspire to the greatness within us, reaching deep down inside to find the sparks of inspiration and confidence needed to achieve that goal. But, as long as we possess a keen awareness of our beliefs and the conscious creation process that puts them to work, we stand a great chance of living out what we were meant to do. Owens’s inspiring example sets a standard for all of us to follow, one that encourages us to each go for the personal gold that we know we’re capable of achieving.
Copyright © 2016, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.
Movies with Meaning Is Back!
Join me and host Frankie Picasso for this month's edition of Movies with Meaning on Frankiesense & More radio, today at 1 pm ET. We'll look at some enlightening new movie releases and preview this week's Oscars. Tune in by clicking here.
February 23, 2016
Check out the Smart Women Talk Podcast!
Did you miss Conscious Creation Goes to the Oscars on Smart Women Talk Radio with host Katana Abbott? Catch the podcast for on-demand listening by clicking here.
Reviewers Roundtable Is Back!
Looking for recommendations of inspiring new books and movies? If so, tune in to this quarter's broadcast of New Consciousness Review radio's Reviewers Roundtable with host Miriam Knight, reviewer Cynthia Sue Larson and yours truly. We'll look at the latest in enlightening books and cinema, with detailed descriptions and critiques. Tune in for some great tips by clicking here.
