Friday, April 25, 2014

Addiction to a Dream




"Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic, be alcohol or morphine or idealism."

-Carl Jung




An ideal is the perfect dream.  A dream gives us purpose.  A dream stimulates our imagination, resuscitates our bodies and spurs us to trudge through the unforgiving landscape of life.  Getting married, graduating from college, buying the house on the hill; these are big dreams.  Sometimes a dream can be as simple as losing weight and fitting into a red dress.  After a dream manifest into reality, we become giddy.  Intoxicated off euphoria, we must keep doing it again and again, it's the ultimate addiction.  There's no harm in seeing through a major accomplishment but getting to the journey's end is not as satisfying if our moral compass is compromised.  The lows from dreams deferred can drag down the high of seeing them manifest.  Disappoints and discouragements are not welcomed but they barge through unannounced anyways.  During these valleys, shortcuts are desired and welcomed; attractive detours toward our dreams with minimal sacrifice and pain.  However, when these shortcuts are taken, we lose control of our dreams and fall into addiction.  Addiction to our dream becomes consuming.  Relationships and integrity are sacrificed in our pursuit of happiness.  The very force that gave us life now dries us up like a raisin in the sun.

Requiem for a Dream, as the title implies, is a ceremony of death.  The cause of the death is addiction.  In the opening scene; Harry steals his mother's television again to feed his drug habit and his mother, Sara, goes to the pawn shop and buys the television back, again.  At first, Sara's addictions in the film are not recreational drug related.  She watches daytime television infomercials alone all day.  She goes outside and talks to her neighbors, the same ones who see her son take the television again and again.  She's starving for attention and admiration from her neighbors and her son; it's her dream, it's her drug.  A prank call about being on television prompts Sara to lose weight, dye her hair and try to recapture her proudest moment, a picture of herself in a red dress at Harry's graduation.  After no success because of little effort and little patience, Sara takes "diet pills", which are actually amphetamines.  She becomes addicted to the drugs but the falsehood of her dreams were her gateway drug.  She desires to tell the world about her wonderful son, and her late husband; though in the one picture we see of all three, she's the only one smiling.  When the weight fades away and her neighbors shower her with attention,  she's finally in the sun. She continues to take the pills but once she fits into the red dress, her dreams have overtaken her.  Sara sags and crashes under the heavy load.

Dreams are not made of pixiedust and birthday wishes.  Because dreams are only of value at a cost, they're  grown through years of blood, sweat, and tears.  When our dream addiction sprawls out of control, the unrelenting internal pressure and external set backs make us shortsighted.  Requiem for a Dream illustrates this tragedy, especially through Sara. The electro shock therapy she endures is a last ditch resort to bring her back to reality.  Often times, its the broken promises, deceit and destroyed relationships in our pursuit of dreams that bring us back to reality.  If this is not traumatic enough, our manifest destiny is not built on solid foundation, but is built on sand.  The dream home comes with an albatross montage, a recent college graduate drowns in debt with little employment options, and marriage becomes a nightmare after settling for any mate because of an artificial timetable.  There's nothing wrong with having a dream and desiring and working for it to come to pass but as Requiem for a Dream shows, a dream pursued without regard to anyone, self included, is a prison sentence whether than a ticket to freedom.  We must take care to understand we're in control, one right step at a time.  


Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Religish?





"I'm Godless.  And so I've had to make my God, and my God is narrative filmmaking, which is-ultimately what my God becomes."

-Darren Aronofsky









Considering Darren Aronofsky's views on God, Noah is an odd choice.  The story in Genesis is short with sparse detail; the only things discussed in depth are the dimensions of the ark and  Noah and his family.  Noah is not the cliche' re-telling of the kindly old man from Sunday school who lets giraffes eat out his hand.  It doesn't follow scripture to the letter but it's not a slap in the face to Christians either.  The film says a lot of good things about trust, faith, obedience and how walking with God is not met with much fanfare.  Noah's biblical story inspired Aronofsky to explore themes such as environmentalism, humanity and man's depravity; which is why God floods the earth in the first place.  Noah is a challenging film and not just because of how Noah is portrayed; the bigger question Noah presents is how the Bible is used as creative inspiration for believers and non-believers alike.

I'm a Christian and an artist.  I've been inspired by scripture in developing ideas and characters.  I love reading about the relationship between David and Saul, their relationship  is ripe with dramatic tension and pathos.  David and Saul's story could inspire me to retell it through the lens of the gangster or superhero genre. I'm still telling the same story, same meaning, same arc but different interpretation. This potential film will run into the same issues as Noah because it does not follow the letter of the law.  The Bible is a literary work; some amazing film adaptations have stayed faithful to the heart of the story without holding onto every comma and period.  Sometimes the line between interpretation and biblical text isn't always easy to decipher.   

The Devil comes in many forms but many viewers of The Bible miniseries thought he looked like President Obamaso much so his appearance was cut from Son of God.  I'm pretty sure the Jesus on Family Guy isn't biblical.  These are easy examples but some interpretations have been accepted as biblical fact.  Many Christians grew up with the story of three wise men visiting Jesus after he's born, though the Bible never says how many wise men there were.  At some point three wise men became an acceptable part of the story but it doesn't change the heart or intent, though it's not strict to the letter of the law either.  There's a danger in taking interpretation as truth, something Noah never claims.  Satan looking like any politician injects subtext that distracts from the main intent of the story.  Family Guy's interpretation of Jesus is ridiculous on purpose but why is it fine or forgotten about and yet Noah is blasphemous beyond belief?     

Despite Aronofsky's beliefs, he didn't take God out of Noah, his Noah is a respectful, faithful and human interpretation.  Now, if Paul Verhoeven ever gets his interpretation of Jesus off the ground, there's no question about his intent and whether it's biblical.  Later this year, another well known director and atheist Ridley Scott will release Exodus, the story of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt.  Things will be changed for dramatic effect, though basic story outline will, I hope, will stay intact.  If these films make people curious enough to read the Bible, its a good thing; it's available for believers and non-believers alike.  The Bible is an anthology; a collection of narratives, not some thick book of rules.  The Bible is structured this way for a reason and the reason Aronofsky made this movie is because he was inspired by a story from it and the story points to the source of creation and inspiration.