Blade Runner Reflection - Malia

            Blade Runner is a movie that calls us to reflect upon the symbols in our life and the emphasis we place on certain objects through the story of a society that worships technology to a staggering degree.  Technology in this film has come to be synonymous with creation for the extent of what it has created – human “life”.  With this ability to create life, is there a reason to believe that there is a God above all else if humans have mastered the art of creation as well?  Is technology the new key to life? I believe that this movie aims to bring the role of technology in our lives into perspective and let us reflect on whether or not the extent to which we worship technology has gone too far.

            The creator in this film who manipulates technology, Tyrell, is the master behind the Replicants and is himself somewhat faultier than what he makes.  His glasses show his imperfection while technology has ironically created a more perfect being.  In fact, the Replicants even begin to evolve past expectations and have emotions and a desire on their own to live.  Another interesting point is that the real humans in the film seem to lack the emotion and huge appreciation and desire for life that the Replicants possess. So do we only really appreciate things that we don’t fully have because we know what it is like to not have them?  Is human faith in jeopardy because of the fact that we are unable to fully appreciate all that we have and do not have a reason to have faith?  And should the Replicants be considered humans for purposes of faith and religion because they appreciate their life and have more genuine feelings on life?  This film helps us appreciate our life and the role that technology plays in today’s society.  The Replicants also serve as a reminder to not take our life for granted because even though we don’t have a definite expiration date like they do, our end time will come some day. 

Decalogue

The Decalogue is about the 10 commandments. We watched film showing us the first commandment and the 5th commandment. Midrash is relevant in both films but in my opinion more so in the first film about a father losing his son and possibly his faith in science as well. The first commandment is "thou shall have no other gods before me" and this the commandment addressed in the first film. In the film, the father is raising his son alone and they seem to be very close, bonding over equations they can put into the computer.  The father is a man of science in reason, this is immediately shown in his response to his sons question about death. The father responded with a very technical answer about the body shutting down and when pushed more by the son the father has no biblical answer, but instead a mild disintrest. This leads his son down a path to search for deeper answers, guided to sources about god from his religious aunt. All 3 characters view the world differently, the father has a pragmatic approach and the aunt believes god is in control of everything, while son is searching for answers somewhere in between. The fathers faith is then rattled when his god, science, betrays him, and allows his son to fall through the ice and drown. This leads the father to have an emotional episode in a church. How can someone not believe in god but still be angry at him? I just saw that on house and is very applicable here.
The second film is about the 5th commandment "thou shall not kill" which is something I think everyone can get behind. The film follows a young deviant commiting increasingly deviant acts throughout the town. The character esclates from being an ass to brutally murdering a taxi driver with a rope, stick and rock to finish the job. His lawyer stands up not for his actions, but objects to the death penalty, saying it is not a deterent to murder, which empirically has a lot of evidence behind it. While waiting to die we see the sweet side of the killer, he has a family he cares about and thinks that if his sister wasnt killed by his friend this would be different. Then we have a very uncomfortable scene of his struggle before being hung. After he was hung I felt very empty. Despite him having a family he cared about, I didnt have much sympathy for him, and I didnt think his sister dying was an excuse at all. Before he was hung I had no opposition to that happening. But after it happened it doesn't feel like justice is served. The cab driver is still dead and his family no better off. The deviant leaves behind a crying mother. Also, the hypocrisy of killing someone for killing sinks in too.

tree of life

When I found out we were watching the tree of life I was very disappointed. I had watched the movie in theaters with high hopes but felt bored and confused through the whole movie. However, now that I am at a stage in my life where I feel I can reflect on my childhood from a distance, I feel differently about the movie. Still, I had trouble wrapping my head around some of metaphors and messages the movie conveys in an EXTREMELY artistic way. Nature vs. Grace is a very important theme in this movie with the father representing nature and the mother representing grace. She is loving and forgiving while the father is more pragmatic and cold saying that being nice will get his boys no where. When the movie got to the plot it shows Jack growing up and at times losing innocence. He will do cruel or lustful acts of nature. For example killing a dog and stealing the neighbors underwear. His mother consoles him and tries to show him in a loving way that is wrong, being the force of Grace against his acts of nature. Throughout the story of Jack's childhood, we get to see his little brother and the interactions he has with him. The movie shows Jack and his family mourning the death of his little brother the moment it happened and years later. This tests the mothers religion, when being consoled by her friend saying "hes in gods hands now"she thinks to herself "wasn't he in gods hands the whole time?" The end of the movie shows her letting go of him and telling god to take her son in a beautiful scene on the beach where she raises towards the sky in all white sheets and lets her hands go. So even in her sons death, she handles nature (her sons young death) with grace.

Decalogue 1&5 - Numinous and the Search - Malia

          Decalogue 1 focuses on a father and son who both have different views on the world and place different levels of importance on the holy aspects of life.  The father places his faith in technology and the profane creations of humans, while his son places great importance on the sacred and that which he cannot even understand.  Pavel, as a child, is unblemished by the world's narrowness and his mind and heart is free to wander and be open to the calling of the numinous.  The father, on the other hand, is chained by what is concrete and proven, until the day that it stops working for him.  The father's faith in his technology is shattered when he loses his son.  He then musts start over and begins with no faith.  This is what brings him back to life, though, because he is again a blank slate, like his son was.  

         This is a testament to the fact that the mysterious is both daunting and fascinating.  For the son, he was too young to witness anything but the fascinating. The father, especially after having gone through what he did, experiences both aspects of the mysterious.  From the father's journey that we got to see, it seems to me that he personifies our search for something real; the numinous as the object of search and yearning that we sometimes don't realize we are searching for until all other obstacles are gone or until we are stripped bare of anything else and have only that left to discover. As the father runs into the church at the end of the Decalogue 1, it is a great symbol for the fact that numen begins to tak over everything once it is discovered. From now on, as the church encompassed him, he will be encompassed by his search to find that something more.

            In relation to Decalogue 5 and the murder, the numen relates to Jacek's need to find something more.  He does so in a very wrong way, obviously.  It is a completely human thing to have emotions and desires that we cannot understand , and I believe that this was a misdirection of the yearning felt in the numinous that was misdirected to resemble instead a profane desire. 

          The moral of these two stories is that the inherent yearning for the numinous is in all of us, but depending on the circumstance and what kind of person we are, that yearning can manifest in different ways, either for a benefit or detriment. But at the end of the day, God is here to fulfill that desire for something more in us, and it is our job to be able to discern how to do so. 

Decalogue 1 & 5 - Christine Porter

          In Krystsztof Kieslowski's film "Decalogue" each of the 10 commandments are interpreted and acted out in 10 one hour episodes. Kieslowski uses a style of interpretation used in Hebrew scripture, Midrash. These episodes focus on the deep meaning of each commandment and forces it’s viewers to feel and reflect internally on their own life.

           The first episode we watched focused on the first commandment, Thou shall have no other Gods before me. We see an agnostic father whom only believed in what could be quantified and proven. After completed his calculations on the computer, the father was confident that the lake outside of his home was solid enough for his son to ice skate. When the ice cracked and his son passed away, he questioned his reliance on calculations for the first time. When his son’s body if recovered from the freezing water, the bystanders are very upset and most of them are crying or showing some sort of distress. The boy’s father just stands there with a blank expression, feeling lost and in complete disbelief. Personally I believe Kieslowski did a great job portraying the importance of having faith and trusting in a God that cannot be physically seen or proven with numbers, but that can be felt. It is unfortunate the father had to go through the tragedy of losing his only son, but sometimes traumatic events like this are the only way to wake us up and expose our idols. Rudolf Otto writes in The Idea of the Holy, “It is not that the actual feeling gradually changes in quality… but rather that I pass over to make the transition from one feeling to another as the circumstances change” (Otto, pg. 42-43). The father’s circumstances definitely changed when his computer failed him and it cost him his son’s life. After losing his son, the father in this film may have had more appreciation for God’s sacrifice of his one and only son because he could now relate on a personal level about the amount of pain felt when losing a child.

             The second episode focused on the fifth commandment, Thou shall not commit murder. I experienced many emotions when viewing this film. The audience watches as the main character of this film mistreats most people that he comes into contact with, with the exception of a group of younger girls. The more people the main character mistreats, the more the audience wishes he would get some sort of revenge or face some sort of consequences for his actions. As the main character violently murdered an innocent cab driver, I felt anger and could not help but hope he would experience the punishment he deserved. When the man showed a personal side and opened up about his sister, mother, and his desire to be buried with his father it reminded me that he was a human as well and it caused me to question my morals. Does this man, that violently murdered an innocent man and caused harm to many others, deserve to die because of his actions or is this man a human that is struggling through mental issues and should just be given time in prison to think about his actions? I see both sides of the issue and find myself going back and forth. Towards the end of the film the murderer says, “They are against me” in which a different man responds, “No, they are against what you did.” Does someone actions define who they are? Is the main character seen only as a murderer now, and not as a human being?

               God gave us 10 commandments to follow here on Earth and because of my personal life and my faith I felt very connected to this film and the importance of understanding the deeper message Krzysztof Kieslowski was attempting to convey through Midrash. I believe Kieslowski did a wonderful job portraying the importance of God’s love above any Earthly love.

Grace and Nature

The Tree of Life was one of those films that I had difficulty wrapping my head around. I was completely fine until the dinosaurs appeared, and I kept asking myself "what the hell is going on" until the main storyline came back. After thinking about it and letting this particularly strange part of the movie settle in my mind for a little while, I actually think it's one of the most important parts. The director wanted to audience to realize that we are all part of the creation story, and that the struggle between grace and nature happens inside all of us.

Nature versus grace was a main point in the story, with Mrs. O'Brien saying at the beginning of the movie "The nuns taught us there are two ways of life - the way of nature and the way of grace. You have to choose which one to follow". To me it seemed like Mr. O'Brien represented the way of nature,  and his wife represented the way of grace. You can definitely see this distinction through how they treat their sons. They take completely different approaches. Mr. O'Brien uses discipline to teach his sons (especially with Jack) lessons that he thinks they need to learn. Mrs. O'Brien's approach comes majorly comes through in the scene where Mr. O'Brien has to go away on business. She is more forgiving and thinks that love and being gentle and nurturing is more powerful than being authoritative and strict.

Film as Midrash

Film as Midrash

February 19, 2016

Class Film

Krzysztof Kieslowski’s use of film as Midrash is an artistic attempt to convey meaning and create unity. The paradox of film as midrash is that it seeks to reveal what is ultimate in context of the common. The two are not as far apart as we often imagine. After all, if something is to be objectively applicable to human experience, it must be universally common to all. Kieslowski’s films are highly relatable because they depict very fundamental aspects of human existence. In the Decalogue, life is shown in a very real, mundane manner. Such plainness naturally provoked me to project myself onto each circumstance in the film without consciously realizing I had done so. The curiosity of Pavel resonated with me. He asked the very questions one would expect a bright child to ask. His death at the end was shocking. I felt as if I had been thrown into the grief and tragedy of the situation myself. I have always found visual portrayals of death and grief to have an incredibly sobering effect on me. Such an experience calls us to account before the ultimate questions of life. In the face of death, we long for an answer. Midrash is the hermeneutic that explores the contemplates the depth of meaning for a certain situation. Each of the ten commandments deals with a core issue of life. These are things that everyone, in all cultures encounter. The universally shared nature of such experiences undergirds the strength and power of the visual. 

Midrash

In the first film, the first Commandment is depicted as the father holds his computer as his most prized possession. He relies on the information and calculations that he computes to direct his life. The computer is depicted as a powerful symbol of contrast to the blind faith that the boy's aunt has for her Roman Catholic faith. There is no definite answer with God, but even the definite answer given by the computer happens to be incorrect and costs the father his son's life. In the beginning of the film, the boy finds a dead dog and becomes emotional while explaining what he saw to his father. The father explains, without emotion, that death is an anatomical occurrence in which the heart stops beating. The emotion and blinding faith that the boy has is juxtaposed by the father's very calculated and practical outlook on life events. The father teaches his son how to rely on calculations and naturally, the boy becomes interested in his father's passion. The aunt, however, introduces her nephew to the idea of faith. There is a man sitting by a fire throughout the film with no explanation and no dialogue. From what I gathered, this man is symbolic of God. While everyone is trying to find reason in tragedy or reason in any circumstance, sometimes there is none. The man is watching and waiting throughout the whole film, until the point where the son dies. I thought the placement of this mysterious man made the film the most interesting. 

The second film addressed the fifth Commandment, thou shall not kill. The main character is portrayed at first as a criminal, however later in the film exposes the tragedy in his past which evokes empathy and pity for him. While the murder that he commits is brutal, he seems to second guess himself throughout the scene and appears to be in a miserable state. The only time he smiles is while he is in a cafe and he sees two young girls who, we later learn, may have reminded him of his sister who passed away. The making of the film is interesting because the main character is portrayed as a mischievous boy, while the man he ends up killing is first portrayed as a creepy and perverted man. It is interesting because the audience is challenged with empathizing with a murderer or seeking justice for a sinful man. At the end, the boy is sentenced to death, but killed in an inhumane manner. The institutional death is very similar to the murder as both are drawn out including a struggle from the victim. There is also symbolism in the rope, as the boy murders with a rope and ends up being hung as a death penalty. Once again, there are average and human depictions of God, as a janitor and a road worker. God is present but not directly involved in the deaths. 

Film as Midrash - Decalogue 1 and 5

Midrash is a type of interpretation or the perspective with which someone views the world. In the Decalogue films Midrash is displayed through two main characters. In the first film it is displayed through the father, the father is a scientific man, a man who is interested in figuring out how the world works. The father is caught up in technology and sees the world from the view of a man who needs proof before he believes. This view from the father comes back to haunt him when he does the calculations on the strength of the ice on the lake. He does this and even tests the ice himself, to know that his son could skate on the lake. The father trusts in science and calculations, not in God or the faith he has now lost or at least fallen away from. We know he has fallen away because his sister explains it to his son, we know he grew up Catholic and is not a non-believer, but is big on measurements and needs a certain bit of proof to believe or understand something. In the other Decalogue movie we watched, number five, the idea of perspective comes in a few subtle ways. The character we follow is the killer, Jacek. Jacek is seen differently by different people, by the little girls at the coffee shop he is viewed as funny, kind man. The man who he kills, he is viewed as crazy person and killer. The lawyer who represents him he is viewed as a young man who is sorry for his actions and deserves to live(in prison, but still live). Jacek also views other things in his own way, when passing that man in the middle of the road while he is in the taxi, he feels guilt knowing what he is about to do and proceeds to hide his head in the shadow. This is done as if the man will then not see him. Also Jacek moves behind the taxi driver and is seen at different angle, this is to get an angle to strangle the man but Jacek is also at a different view point of the driver then. Jacek goes through a couple vantage points when killing the taxi driver as well, the driver door, down by the lake, then covering the man's head. The idea of Midrash is displayed by these characters in that they themselves view the world in a certain way and the world views them in a certain way as well.

The Tree of Life

The film The Tree of Life used interwoven timelines to create a unique sensory experience. The cinematography and the use of only natural light gave a true feeling to the film, which made the holy and natural worlds collide through visuals. Beauty and grace were the light shining through the movie while the undertones of savage mortality let the viewer accept the anxiety that comes with individual corruption. While I enjoyed the message and looks of the film the direction was somewhat lacking. I believe this story could have benefited from a more linear timeline. I understand the artistic aspect and appreciate the type of movie it was, but a story like this should be shared with the masses and I don't believe that many people would truly enjoy this film.

This film had many disturbing scenes that made it hard to watch, however the light of grace shown through in times of need. The attention to the duality of reality in this movie helps a viewer by letting them ask questions that many other films do not. Its deep religious undertones takes morality and humanity as its target in The Tree of Life.  

Tree of life - nature v. grace

In Tree of life, the character I believed was the best transformation from nature to grace was the father played by Brad Pitt. The Father is serious person who takes teaching his kids about the world they live very, almost too, seriously. The father is a man who seems to be a little upset on how things turned out for him. He wants his kids to follow their dreams because he did not follow his. Through this anger of not reaching his dream of being a musician the father seems to take out anger on his family, in a relatively abusive manner. This idea of nature is shown through the fathers actions towards his kids and wife, as well as interactions with other members of the community. The father tries his best to save the boy who drowns at the river but cannot. The scene of the family leaving the funeral shows the father trying to get his kids to the car, it is as if he wants to console his family but cannot. The turn from nature to grace comes at the end of the movie, when you hear the father talking in the background, he mentioned that he was worth nothing and that he had "dishonored it all" because he did not know it was the Glory[of God]. He talks to his son about how he is not perfect as well. This scene is a big moment of change in the film for the father because before this he was very aggressive. Then after his son is acting out for awhile he comes to a place where he wants reconciliation and forgiveness for his actions, not just towards his son it appears, but for his whole life.

Film as Midrash - Dusty Nelson

Midrash is meant to bring out questions.  It brings out the meaning of scripture, however the meaning is personal for the receiver.  Decalogue I, centers around the relationship between a father and son.  The father, a man who is inclined to learn about the world through math, or anything that can be measured is shattered by the death of his son after he falls through the ice skating.  My personal feelings about the meaning of the movie were that of heartache for the dad.  It seemed that the movie was trying to inform us that regardless of how to want to deal with it, there is always an element of the unknown.  Some higher power that we can't ever know.  The father acknowledges this when his son asks him what death is.  He says, "Me personally, I don't know".  Even a person who believes in the ability to know things acknowledges that he doesn't know everything.  However I'm not sure how faith would make something like the death of your child any easier to bear, or why it would bring you closer to a personal God.  I don't think this film is trying to inject a position either way.  I think it is a beautiful representation of a simple idea.  In this way it must be personal.  A universal truth that no one fully understands must be reckoned with personally.

David Clarkson- Film as Midrash

February 18, 2016

Krzysztof Kieslowski's hermeneutic style of making films is demonstrated in his series, The Decalogue. To start, these two films were relatively hard to watch because of the immense violence and tragedy that was demonstrated in the two films, which were written in defense of two of the ten commandments: Thou shall have no other Gods before Me, and Thou shall not kill. The happenings were real life events that could occur, and do occur everyday. In the first film, the father sees the computer and calculations as the God of his life. All his decisions are based on rationality and reason. There is nothing he does out of pure faith or emotion, as everything is calculated and comfortable to him. Things change quickly for the worse for him, as his son falls through the "frozen" lake to his death, after his calculations deemed it was safe for his son to go skating. The trust the father had put into calculation and reason completely breaks into shambles, as his beloved son is now dead because of his failure. To me, the message the director is making is clear- It is detrimental to put other Gods before the one true God. Some questions I had were, did the man sitting by the fire kill his son? Or did he just fail to save him? And what about the computer, was God speaking to him or mocking him through the device?

In the second film we experience and extremely violent murder carried out by a troubled young man. There is not doubt that this young man was wrestling with his life, as he seemed like a lost outcast to society. Scarred by the part he played in the death of his sister, the young man has had a troubled and complicated past. Clearly, he is planning to do something, something that he believes he HAS to do. Soon, we are able to begin to piece together his plan, and soon enough he strangles and beats a random taxi driver to death. This murder leads to his death, as he is hanged for his actions. Again, to me the message the director is attempting to make is clear: Killing a human will only lead you to death and despair. Some questions I had were, Why didn't he try to run and hide after murdering the taxi driver? How and Why did he believe that this action would rectify his past shortcomings?

David Clarkson Tree of Life

February 18, 2016

The Tree of Life was way different than I first expected. I did not expect to be as drawn in and interested as I was during the movie. During the film, we are taken on a journey that we as humans can relate to on multiple levels. The Texas family is a very relatable group of people through, where we can see a lot of similarities between our life and theirs. Through this family we can see the main theme that the director, Terrence Malik, presents- the conflict between nature and grace. Mrs. O'Brien is the representative of grace in the film. Her children love her deeply because she loves them unconditionally even when their father, the representative of nature, is disciplining them. No matter what the situation is, Mrs. O'Brien always finds a way to make her children happy. This was easily noticeable when the father went on a business trip, leaving her alone with the kids. While he was gone they could have fun, and enjoy themselves together without limits. The children's love for the mother seems to continually grow throughout the movie. The father on the other hand is always disciplining the children. They seem to love him because they have to, and because they fear his punishment instead of loving him because he is their father. There is no doubt that he is deeply in love with his children, however his love is hard to grasp for the younger children, especially at such a young age. His discipline is blatantly highlighted, as he makes his son Jack practice closing the door quietly 50 times, because he has closed it so loudly the first time. This makes me wonder what the correct balance of nature and grace is in the family setting for parents? I think both extremes can have the upsides and downsides, but the line seems to be unclear. Should parents act more like Mr. or Mrs. O'Brien when they are raising their children?

In the end, it seems if the director's answer to this question is revealed, as Mr. O'Brien loses his job, and the family is forced to move. Mr. O"Brien seems to regret his previous style of parenting. Grace triumphs, as the family is ultimately brought closer together through the tough time they are going through. Even Jack seems to come around and forgive his father by giving him a second chance. Grace brings the family back together, grace brings them back into love, but if they had not gone through the suffering and hardships they experienced would they have ever found this redeeming and transforming grace?

Nature and Grace

Nature and Grace 

February 8, 2016

Class Film 

Terrence Malick’s film, Tree of Life, depicts two ways of life: the way of nature and the way of grace. Nature only takes for itself. It is harsh, cruel, and unforgiving. Grace enjoys, shares, loves, and cherishes life. It overlooks all wrongs gives without asking. Throughout the film, these two ways are held in tension with one another. Mr. O’Brien becomes so consumed by his work and driven for success. He warns his sons that in order to make it in life they must suspend goodness. One must exercise the will to power in this world of cruelty and unfairness. Mrs. O’Brien, on the other hand, represents the way of grace. She loves her boys unconditionally, delighting in their innocence, playfulness, and curiosity. She struggles with the loss of her middle son mightily, asking God why He took him from her. It is at the end of the film when she says, “I give him to you,” realizing that he was God’s all along. The way of grace and the way of nature clash in the marriage of Mr. and Mrs. O’Brien, perhaps symbolizing how these two ways clash in nearly all of life. In the end, however, grace wins out. “The nuns taught us that no one who loves the way of grace ever comes to a bad end.” The loss of his job makes Mr. O’Brien realize his own disillusionment in life and how he had acted foolishly for so long, thinking that the way of nature would put him on top. The family is forced to leave their home. As the car is driving away, Mrs. O’Brien is heard saying that “the only way to be happy is to love. Unless you love, your life will flash by.” Grace triumphs over nature in the end because it comes from a power far greater than that of nature. Nature is man’s creation and projection onto the world. Grace is God’s designated order of all things. In the end, grace must win, as reality is unveiled.

The Rise of Film

The Rise of Film

January 18, 2016

Topic of Choice

After the invention of the printing press, ideas spread all throughout Europe with a rapidity unparalleled in history. Books became accessible to the common man and the secrets of the university became a part of the average layman’s everyday dialogue. This extraordinary historical and social transformation may be compared to the rise of film in the contemporary age. Whereas books were the medium for stories during the early modern age, film has become the most prevalent medium for stories in contemporary society. The power and ascendency of film is found in it’s ability to portray image, sound, and narrative together. When it comes to books we are left to our own imaginations in hearing and seeing a character. Film is perhaps the most complete form of art, bringing together the whole of the human experience onto a screen. Movies depict the human condition in a complete way that other forms of art fail to do. Understanding how film has risen as a contemporary form of art evokes the question of how film will continue to develop as art. In every other medium of art, besides film, there is a category for the sacred. This begs the question: will there ever be a sacred category for films? I believe the answer is no. All other forms of art seem to capture a part of a whole. Film is exclusive from other forms of art in it’s ability to tie all other forms together in a complete whole, incorporating words, dance, music, architecture, ideas, etc. Film cannot be contained in the way that other expressions of art can be, since it contains elements of them all. For this reason, I believe, film has the power to reveal and communicate the sacred but that no sole film will be considered sacred. 

Tree of Life

Tree of Life is a film that is very philosophically rich. Director, Terrence Malick, explores many questions about our world and about human nature. The theme that Malick explores in most detail is the affect that the clash of nature and grace has on human life. The film follows the life of a family in the 1950s. the mother serves as the provider of grace, while the father embodies the idea of nature. 

The eldest son, Jack, is harshly disciplined by his father, while his mother serves as a source of comfort. He is an incredibly complex and dynamic character. He is stuck in between this battle of nature versus grace. A good chunk of the film is Jack dealing with the quintessential difficulties of boyhood. He begins to disobey his mother and runs off doing destructive things with the neighborhood boys. This is Jack following the path of nature. He does these things to be accepted by his friends rather than doing what is right. When Jack steals the night gown, he is overwhelmed with guilt and feels compelled to rid himself of the stolen gown. This serves as a reminder to the audience that despite all of the destructive behavior that Jack has engaged in recently, he still is a good kid with a good heart. It is easy to stray away from the path of grace and Jack has certainly experienced this, but we are led to believe that Jack has decided to pursue a path of grace. He is shown providing love and compassion to his younger brother who is very upset. Additionally, Jack’s father also expresses glimpses of compassion. He apologizes for being so harsh on his son and asks for his forgiveness. 

I think Terrence Malick was trying to make a statement about humans and free will. Because humans have free will, it is incredibly hard to choose to live a life of grace. We are constantly being influenced by different forces of nature. Unfortunately most of these forces are negative, and this makes it difficult to be virtuous. The path of nature preceded the existence of humans and it is deep rooted within all of us, making us inherently self- interested and covetous. However, when an individual chooses grace and acts compassionately or selflessly, it is especially powerful. It is as if once a seed of compassion is planted, it has the power to grow into something beautiful. 

Tree of Life - Dusty Nelson

The Tree of Life was a unique movie experience for me.  Dr. Balay ended his paper on the tree of life saying something along these lines, "only where wonder grows does the tree of life blossom".  The movie seemed to focus on how we make sense of the big questions that confront us.  What is the meaning of it all?  Why do bad things happen?  Do we have to choose between living on the ground or up in cities built in the clouds? (I think I'm stealing that analogy from a Josh Ritter song).  Through a mostly visual presentation, the director Terrence Malick takes us on a journey through the lives of a 1950's Texas family who are wrestling with these questions.  At the same time Malick gives us a visually striking representation of the evolution of the universe.  For me it seemed to serve as a representation of the smallness and insignificance we sometimes feel when we wonder at the expanse of it all. Yet in that expanse there was incredible beauty.  It made everything that does happen, seem to be a miracle in itself.  This "reflecting on the condition to possibility" (Dr. Balay), seemed to be at the heart of our spiritual growth. 

At the end of the movie Jessica Chastain, the mother, lets go of her struggle to make sense of her sons death. She says, "I give him to you".  It seems to be an acceptance of the way of nature and the way of grace.  Could Malick be trying to show us that the way of nature, and the way of grace, go together?  Or is this just meant to be a work of art?

Tree of Life- two paths of life

When the film The Tree of Life began, I originally assumed it was going to be about a family in the mid 1950's coping with the death of their son and learning to overcome the tragedy. I was expecting to watch a long, painful journey with the mother and father that eventually would end with the two of them overcoming the hardship and falling deeper in love. A good, cliche ending to a film. But boy, was I mistaken. This film takes on the big questions of life and forces the viewers to feel, like actually feel. I experienced more emotions than I can list while watching this film. I went from simply watching the film to emotionally investing myself into the lives of the characters and feeling what I imagined they must have been feeling at the time. The Tree of Life requires its audience to feel and ask questions. 

Personally, I believe that the overall theme of this film is the choice between Nature and Grace. There are two different paths to take in life, living by nature or living by grace. Taking the path of Nature will show you the cruel, survival of the fittest view of the world. Adversely, the path of grace is forgiving, loving, and very sympathetic.  The father in this film follows the path of nature. He wants to instill the competitive, hard working mindset onto his sons so badly that he is shown as emotionally abusive. The mother follows the path of grace and in return her husband views her as weak and admits that he blames her for turning his sons against him. The mother continuously loves her boys and her husband, even when they are far from lovable in return, because grace has taught her forgiveness and unconditional love.

Whichever path you choose, between grace or nature, it will dictate your decisions and completely shape the way you see the world. I like to think we have a choice of the path we take through life, but the way we were raised is going to have a large impact on the path we choose to take. The oldest son grew up with an emotionally abusive father, following the path of nature, and an extremely caring mother whom he loved very much, following the path of grace. One would think it would be an easy choice for this boy to see the more favorable path to follow in life, but because of the large impact his father had on him while growing up the boy finds himself falling into the path of nature. There was a scene in the film that shows the father and son in the backyard and the son admits to his father "I'm more like you than I am her." This does not seem to be something the boy is proud of, but it is something that he is aware of.

After watching this film, did you think about the path that you chose? If you did, are you confident in that path or would you considering switching?