Million Dollar Baby is a film about a boxing coach who loves the people he trains and therefore is unable to give them "big fights", cause he is afraid that they get beaten up too badly. So sooner or later the Fighters leave him. Until he reluctantly starts to train a girl and gets her to the top, then loses her just the way he fears. Se gets injured in a fight.
In the Valley of Elah is a film about a father who is a patriot, whose 2 boys have gone to the army. While investigating the missing of his older son he finds out that everything he has believed about the army, U.S.A. and therefore his entire life, has been, or at least is now, totally wrong and twisted.
Both of these movies are written by Paul Haggis. I am not surprised if 6 out of 10 would write the plot synopsis differently. For Example that Million Dollar Baby is about a woman boxer who wins her dreams or something like that.
That happens also in the movie, but it does not matter.
Valley of Elah tells us that the father finds out who has killed his son and so on, or the conspiracy in the army, but that is not so important also.
In both of these movies the main focus is how the lead character, and old man, deals with what decisions he does and how he copes with them and the decisions done in the past. In the Valley of Elah broads the view to the decisions of a whole country and to the war.
Lead character being a well-built, old, decent man also gives an interesting perspective. That same man could have been the hero of the movies while he was younger, but now he is just and old hero. Realizing that he is alone and all he has believed, or what he has done, has been wrong or meaningless. Now he tries to cope and find peace in himself, while, in both movies, a young energetic woman has taken the place of the hero, or the achiever. And it could be argued that the arrangement could have been the opposite some time ago. It also tells us something about our time and the ways of old perspectives.
These films give a simple, but meaningful statements, using somewhat usual stories or characters, but twisting them or making them the opposite. Sometimes a basic story, is a good foundation to a good filmmaker to do a film that has a meaning. These films are not great works of art. But in the field of film making they are good examples of films that at least make sense and are really well done.
It just seems to be the case that too many of us, including the people who study film making or watch them a lot have lost the ability to really watch movies. Some might say, including me, that these films contain some clichés or too common plots or characters. But no one never takes under consideration that a filmmaker would do this to use it for a purpose. Or just that we should or grow a bit more humble and not demand something innovative every time we see a movie.
Do we also have to grow old and on our last days see the iniquity of our ways? I think so. Or am I wrong?
1 kommentti:
Minusta tuntuu, että tuonkaltaisten elokuvien viehätys on osittain historialliseen kontekstiin liittyvää. Tietynlaisella asenteella tulkittu arvomaailma ja konstailematon juoni ja kerronta ovat tervetulleita kaikenmaailman pinnallisen kikkailun ja itsetarkoituksellisen räväkkyyden keskellä. Ja esim. Million Dollar Babyahan voi pitää jopa esimerkkinä siitä, miten tietyllä tavalla aiemmin hegemoniaa edustaneesta hahmosta tuleekin vastakulttuurinen hahmo, vaikkei hän muuta toimintaansa mitenkään olennaisesti.
Lähetä kommentti