Jean-Francois Virey (jfvirey)

Mother Teresa: In the Name of God's Poor PG-13

This is not a film about a saint, unless you count canonisation by the media a true mark of sainthood, in which case most biopics about the "architects of the culture of death" would count as saints' lives. This is a film about a philanthropist who won the Nobel peace prize, and who happened to be a nun. What kind of nun is difficult to tell from the film, since she seems to have owed about as much to Gandhi (that other saint of the media) as to Jesus, and believed all religions worshiped the same God (another bromide of our religiously illiterate culture.) When she turns a former Hindu temple into a hospital, she considers it "already blessed for God's work", whereas an orthodox Catholic would probably have viewed it as in need of exorcism because of its association with idolatry.

Films about saints are extremely rare, and when they do get produced, they are usually released directly to DVD, and those DVDs are not distributed properly: try to do a search for "Clare and Francis" on dvdpricesearch for instance. And when you find one that is widely available and features stars like Geraldine Chaplin, you have the right to be suspicious.

In this case, what you get is the standard Hallmark treatment. I have a personal hatred of Hallmark movies. Whatever they are about, they are trite, bland, politically correct, "consensual", Americanised, watered down products, filled with feel-good cliches and prefabricated kleenex moments and merely contribute to the media fog that prevents us from getting at the truth of things.

In this case, Mother Teresa becomes a mere apostle of religious tolerationism and a one-woman welfare state, a kind of grandmotherly liberal icon whose more Catholic traits are edited out. Her orthodox stand on abortion, for instance, is never referred to, which is all the more blameworthy as she spoke on the subject in her Nobel prize speech, with which the film ends.

I will not go into the debate of whether Mother Teresa was actually a saint or not. A rather informative article can be found at the following url:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_025br_MotherTeresa_Zima.htm

The Elephant Man PG

"The Elephant Man" is my favorite film ever. When I first saw it though, back in 1982 I think, I was so much in love with "Eraserhead" that I wanted there to be more surrealistic, dreamlike sequences. But then as I became more human, and more Victorian, I gradually came to love the film more and more each time I saw it, which must be about twelve times as of today. Retrospectively, I realize this film probably contributed to making me an absolute opponent of abortion and euthanasia before I even thought about the subject. Joseph Merrick is definitely someone I want to meet in Heaven.

Dark Forces (Harlequin) (The Minister's Magician) PG

"Harlequin" is my second favorite movie of all time. Is it a coincidence if it was also made in 1980 like the first, "The Elephant Man"? I am surprised that it never became a cult movie, despite the awards it received around the world the year it was released. Is it because most of the people involved in it disappeared into limbo, with director Simon Wincer going on to direct much less brilliant scripts, mostly for TV, (including quite a few "Young Indiana Jones" episodes) and screenwriter Everett De Roche also moving to the small screen after a few other hits such as "Link" and "Razorback" (though he currently seems to be making a comeback) ? Or is it because the movie has not been released in widescreen in either the U.S. or the U.K. (it was shot in 2.35 : 1) ? Whatever the reasons, this fictional retelling of the story of Rasputin in a modern (late 70s) Australian context boasts a top-notch script, much in the same vein as M. Night Shyamalan's later works, except perhaps more subtle, and an unforgettable interpretation of the lead character, ambiguous and charismatic guru Gregory Wolfe, by the brilliant Robert Powell, who was also in my opinion the best Jesus on screen, and would have deserved to make a much more brilliant career. The only weakness of the film that I am aware of is its visual special effects, which are very poor, but fortunately very scarce : this makes it the very opposite of the usual Hollywood movie, which is strong on SFX and weak on story. The whole cast is good (including young Mark Spain as hemophiliac Alex Rast), the score by Brian May (of "Mad Max" fame) nicely supports the more dramatic moments, and the whole film casts a spell over the viewer with its mysterious atmosphere, strange imagery and moral dilemmas. Unfortunately, if you want to see a decent copy, and not a defaced, 4:3 one, you will have to purchase the zone 2 version that was released by the French magazine "Mad Movies". To my knowledge, this is the only way to see the film as it was originally shot. "Harlequin" definitely should not remain a sleeper.