Divided We Fall (Musíme si pomáhat) -- selfishness and selflessness, lies and truth

Director: Jan Hrebejk. 2000. (PG-13)

Set in Czechoslovakia during World War 2, this Oscar-nominated film presents a moral dilemma that will cause viewers to stop and think. Like another middle-European drama, The Trap, this presents an almost unthinkable situation but leaves us with a more hopeful conclusion.

The film begins in 1937 with an idyllic scene. A car is driving through a green countryside when it stops for a moment of relief. Three men are present. Two play a trick on the chauffeur. These three will be at the heart of the story, as it moves ahead to war-torn Europe.

The introduction makes it clear that the three know each other. But David (Csongor Kassai) is a Jew. When the war arrives in Czechoslovakia he and his family are evicted from their large mansion and moved to an unseen holding facility before being sent to the concentration camps. Meanwhile, the chauffeur Horst (Jaroslav Dusek) has become a collaborator, helping the Nazis find and capture Jews. The other man, Josef (Bolek Polivka), remains in his tiny apartment with his wife Marie (Anna Siskova). He has suffered broken legs and refuses to work with his "friend" Horst helping the Germans.

With this backdrop, the film moves to 1943, and David appears back in the village, a furtive fugitive, a skeletal image of the wealthy man he once was. Josef faces a choice and makes the snap decision to bring him home, to hide him in the secret room behind the closet. The problem is that Horst continues to drop in unannounced to flirt with Marie. As a "good citizen of the Third Reich" Horst cannot be denied this, and both Josef and Marie understand.

By helping David this couple put themselves in grave danger. Like other stories of Europeans helping the Jews during WW2, this one shows the risks that such people faced every day. With those risks come great stress that play upon the family relationships of those risking their lives. Every knock on the door could be the one that hastens a trip to the gallows.

David and Marie's willingness to put themselves at risk underscores the selflessness of humanity that often surfaces at times of great duress. Jesus identified this as a sign of love: "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends" (Jn. 15:13). Yet, humanity is complex, and selflessness and selfishness are kissing cousins, often being present in the same person. Horst is an example of selfishness, seeking to save himself at the expense of others.

To offset the risks, and to prevent Horst's almost daily visits, Josef agrees reluctantly to take a job working for Horst. In this sense, he is aiding and abetting a collaborator, making him almost one himself. In the eyes of his neighbors, though. he has become a German sympathizer and risks his reputation now as well as his life.

Josef's willingness to take on this role makes him a pariah. Like the lepers of old, his neighbors avoided him, treating him with disdain. Are we ready to sacrifice reputation and more if it would save the life of another? Or would we push the person aside, expecting someone else to help, as the priest and the Levite did in Jesus' parable of the "Good Samaritan" (Lk. 10:25-37)?

The dilemma, though, appears beyond the mid-point of the film. When Horst's eyes for Marie move beyond the academic to the physical, she rebuffs him. He is a selfish creep. But there is a price for this rebuttal. He seeks revenge by trying to move a German into their home. With this imminent danger, she tells a lie. The first thing that pops into her head becomes something that will eventually catch them out.  The lie forces Josef and Marie to contemplate and commit unthinkable acts. As one character says, in times of war "normal people do abnormal things."

Lying is a sin. The Old Testament declares unequivocally, "Do not lie" (Lev. 19:11). Paul repeats this in his letter to the Colossians: "Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices" (Col. 3:9). Yet in the context where the truth will not see free (Jn. 8:32) but will lead to execution for multiple people, perhaps the whole street, is it right to lie? The Israelite midwives lied to Pharaoh to save young lives (Exod. 1:19). But the truth is that one lie leads to another and to consequences we may have not imagined. And this is the case in this film.

At the end, as the village is liberated by the Russians, Josef finds himself facing yet another problem, the result of his earlier actions. And when the three men are brought together in one room, they each face a choice. Will revenge and justice win out? Or is there a spark of forgiveness that will provide redemption for those who don't deserve it?

Divided We Fall is a subtle film without action sequences. Yet it offers stirring performances of depth and humanity, contrasting selfishness and self-sacrifice. At its heart, it provides testament to the truth, that united we stand but divided we fall. And it leaves us with the hope that comes from new life.


Copyright ©2010, Martin Baggs

W. -- approval, disappointment and conversion

Director: Oliver Stone, 2008. (PG-13) 

Oliver Stone is not afraid to tackle controversial topics. His resume include two Viet Nam war films, Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July, as well as two on presidents, JFK and Nixon. But this is the first time he focused on an in-office president, George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States.

W. presents the story of "Dubya", switching between the backstory of his growth from undergraduate at Yale to Governer of Texas and the build up to the invasion of Iraq in 2002. Along the way we realize that Bush was the product of his father in more ways than one, and was a man who may have made it to the White House but seemed to be in above his head. Of course, this is a biopic and so includes fictionalized segments alongside real events, such as the infamous choking pretzel scene (which bookends the film).

The film opens with Bush being hazed by the "good old boys" of Yale. Semi-naked and standing in ice-cold water, he has whiskey poured down his throat, a reference perhaps to the practice of waterboarding that was forced on inmates of Guantanamo (or renditioned prisoners elsewhere). But as the young Bush (Josh Brolin) grows up we see the older Bush, Poppy (James Cromwell), manipulating things behind-the-scenes to help his wayward son: bailing him out of jail, taking care of a pregnant girlfriend, getting him a job. As he says to the younger Bush, "Partying, chasing tail, driving drunk. What do you think you are -- a Kennedy?"

This brings up one of the themes present in the movie: the legacy of a family name. The elder Bush is concerned that his family leave a legacy for future generations, and a good one at that. We all want to be remembered for something good. Poppy was no different, although he was a president and a successful patriarch. David, in the Old Testament, a patriarch and king wanted this for his family. Although most of his children and decendants turned away from his faith and were disappointments, one came as the Messiah. David's legacy was legendary. How is yours?

As Bush fails in one j after another, he finds one he enjoys: owner of a baseball team. We see him dreaming of being a player. But he has no talent for the ball-game. His talents lie elsewhere, and he begins to develop his political ambitions and accomplishments. Along the way, he meets Laura (Elizabeth Banks), and woos and weds her.

In the other storyline, Bush is surrounded by a cadre of political advisors. Here the film sizzles with outstanding actors. Jeffrey Wright is Colin Powell; Scott Glenn (Secretariat) plays Donald Rumsfeld; Thandie Newton is razor-sharp as Condoleeza Rice; and Richard Dreyfuss (Jaws) is a scintillating Dick Cheney, portrayed here as the villain pushing for invasion. And there is dimunitive Toby Jones as Karl Rove, the puppeteer behind the president. But at the heart of the film is Josh Brolin, giving an astounding performance as Bush, capturing his quirks and even sounding like the man.

Another key theme of the film is approval. Not the approval of the public, although the president needs to understand this when he is in office. Rather, the approval here is that of Poppy. Dubya has big shoes to fill, and he is constantly seeking the approval of his dad. Yet, he never seems to get it. How often do we men seek the approval of our fathers. Do we get it? When we don't it hurts our psyche. But even if our fathers fail us in this regard, our heavenly Father never does. He loves us unconditionally and unceasingly (Psa. 100:5).

Approval is one thing, disappointment is another. Rather than approval, Bush junior feels the disappointment that oozes from his father. Several times, Poppy verbalizes this to his son. How tough is that, for a man to know he is a disappointment to his father? As fathers, we must realize how fragile our sons' pysches can be. And if we are disappointed with them, we should determine how we can help them rather than hurt them even more. Poppy thought he was helping with his behind-the-scenes manouverings, and they did help politically. But what W. wanted more than anything was to hear his father say he loved him and was proud of him. Have we told our sons this lately? If not, why not do so today?

In the backstory of Bush's political emergence, we see him come to Christ. In a low-key scene, W. professes faith in Jesus. This is something his father does not understand or really acknowledge. Later, W. tells his pastor that he feels the Lord is leading him to be president. Although we see him as President concluding meetings with silent prayer, it is not obvious that Christ is the person directing Bush. Instead, Karl Rove appears to be that person, orchestrating Bush's rise to power.

Like George W Bush, we all face a decision to convert to Christ or not. Jesus loves us and wants us to come to know him. As the apostle Paul said, "now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor. 6:2). There is never a better time. Don't put it off any longer. And if you have already made that decision, then live it out daily following Jesus, seeking his guidance and approval.

One of the disappointments of W.  is the lack of insight into Bush himself. We see his exterior but not his interior. He remains a mystery, an empty enigma. Two scenes at the close of the film, both dream sequences, show us the continued disappointment and emptiness of the man. Yet Stone leaves multiple balls in the air, as Bush looks skywards wondering. The question at the end remains: who is W.?

Copyright ©2010, Martin Baggs

RED -- dealing with retirement and aging

Director: Robert Schwentke, 2010. (PG-13)

Retired. Most of us out of school give a glimmer of thought to the idea of future retirement. What will it be like? Days filled with fun activities? Slow and lazy days by the pool? Endless rounds of golf? Or perhaps a long, laborious descent into deteriorating health. Frank Moses (Bruce Willis) and his team of retirees show us different approaches to retirement, but reunite for a post-retirement blast of black-ops fun.

At the start of RED, we meet Frank, an early retiree from government work. He is clearly lonely and bored. He sits in his Cleveland home and tears up his retirement checks so he can call Sarah (Mary Louise Parker), his pension planner in Kansas and flirt with her over the phone. That is the highlight of his week. Apart from this he reads pulp romance fiction as conversation starters for his calls to Sarah. What a life!


But Frank's government work was as a CIA killer. So, it is not completely surprising when one night a team of wet-work assassins shows up at his house to kill him. Retired he might be, but Frank is no slouch. At 55 he can easily handle the odd killer or three. Even when the backups fire machine guns redecorating his house a la swiss cheese, he takes care of them and escapes. His concern is for Sarah, who he fears may appear on the killer's list, since he has called her so much.

With this beginning, Frank journeys to Kansas, meets and kidnaps Sarah, for her own good, and sets about regathering his old CIA team. All are retired, but in different stages of retirement. They, like Frank, are RED: Retired and Extremely Dangerous.

This team includes Victoria (Helen Mirren), the former British spy now turned into a Martha Stewart type of bed-and-breakfast owner; Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich, Secretariat), a paranoid recluse who trusts no one and carries a pink pig with him for protection; Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman, Invictus), the kindly killer who is dying of cancer; and even garnering support from former Russian spy and enemy Ivan Simanov (Brian Cox). Of course Sarah, the newcomer who warms up to Frank, as expected. Set against them is current CIA agent William Cooper (Karl Urban, Star Trek) and his handler-boss Cynthia Wilkes (Rebecca Pidgeon). This is quite a cast of seasoned actors, which makes this lightweight film so appealing. There is even a cameo for Ernest Borgnine, himself 93 in real-life.


As superficial as this is, RED does bring up the issue of retirement and aging and puts it squarely into our consciousness. For a society that venerates the young, the old are a forgotten and often ignored demographic. So, what do we see?

Frank is bored. His life seems to lack purpose. His mission is accomplished, and now what? Without someone to love and something to live for, life becomes mundane and dreary. Frank's sole solace is Sarah and he does not even really know her. For those of us fortunate enough to retire alongside a loving spouse, we can enjoy the time we can spend together in our golden years. Yet, having a purpose can amplify this enjoyment in our waning days.

Victoria offers the perspective of a second career or vocation after retirement. She has energy to spare and is not prepared to descend into pulp fiction. She has found a purpose. For some, a second career may prove a critical necessity economically, and we see these people in blue shirts at Wal-Mart. But for Christians we might find retirement an opportunity to serve in missions work overseas, or even in a rescue mission downtown. Our spare time can be converted into useful service for those who have genuine needs. This is something Jesus would be pleased with.

Marvin and Joe offer more negative perspectives on retirement. With age comes mental changes, such as Alzheimer's (or Marvin's paranoia), or bodily breakdown, such as strokes and cancer (or simply the aches and pains of muscle loss and lack of mobility). These bring a dependency we have not known since early childhood. Here, too, is an opportunity, but one we may not welcome. It is the opportunity to see ourselves dependent on others and ultimately God himself. We learn humility in realizing others must do for us what we once did for them. We see parents diapered by their adult children. Any earlier pride will be broken through this. Though we are immortal in soul and spirit, our bodies are mortal this side of eternity.

The movie moves along in a fairly linear fashion, each
action sequence and character introduction leading to the next. There are no major twists and a somewhat loose and disappointing conclusion. But the journey is worth it. Frank may be Retired and Extremely Dangerous. But this film is itself RED: Ridiculous but Entertaining Despite this.

Copyright ©2010, Martin Baggs

Salt -- Identity and Motive; Who and Why?

"Who is Salt?" That is the question at the heart of the movie, and its marketing campaign, driving it along its action-packed journey. And it underscores the issues addressed, albeit superficially, in this thriller.

We meet Evelyn Salt (Angelina Jolie, Changeling) in the introduction, which occurs two years before the setting of the story. She is a captive of the North Koreans, bound and being tortured, all the while denouncing their claim that she is a CIA spy. But is she? When the Americans, led by her boss Ted Winter (Liev Schreiber, The Manchurian Candidate), negotiate a transfer of prisoners, she is set free. But it is her German husband-to-be, Mike Krause (August Diehl) whose incessant appeals have instigated this. So, is she CIA?

Cut to the present and we find out that she is indeed a CIA spy, an assassin and covert operative. As her workday as a corporate executive is about to end and she is ready to go celebrate her wedding anniversary, a Russian defector Orlov (Daniel Olbrychski) shows up ready to give up national secrets. This on the eve of the Russian President's visit to the US to pay his respects at the funeral of the US Vice President. When Winter puts Salt in the cell to do a quickie interrogation, Orlov drops a bombshell. He has trained a team of children to live in America as sleeper agents waiting for his word to strike at the heart of the US. But the biggest shock is the name of the agent who will kill the Russian President in New York: Salt. So, is she CIA or a carefully prepared Russian spy?

From here, Orlov escapes surprisingly from the hands of two experienced CIA agents. Salt herself is able to escape from the CIA locked interrogation cell, and then from the building despite a SWAT team ready to take her down. On the run, Salt avoids her friend and boss, as well as the chief US interrogator Peabody (Chiwetel Ejiofor). But her husband disappears and she has multiple threats to worry about.

Salt becomes a female version of The Bourne Identity and carries with it the same intense action sequences and hand-held camerawork. The story, at a mere 100 minutes, feels fast-paced as this kind of thriller should. The stunt work is stellar, although somewhat unbelievable. Jolie appears clinging to buildings or jumping from moving truck to moving truck, hanging on by the very tips of her painted fingernails. But Jolie pulls off the difficult task of being a killer secret agent while remaining feminine and sexy. She has the ability to change her appearance at the turn of a stolen hat.

As the film progresses, the plot thickens with key twists and turns, particularly one midway through, that really leave us wondering who Salt is. Is she the person Orlov described? Is she the innocent, she claimed in the intro? Is she a defamed CIA agent whose own country will not accept her?

Salt really touches on the question of identity. And it makes us reflect on the identity of those around us, as well as our own identity. We can look at people and see what they want us to see. We take at face value their claims of ancestry and pedigree. We don't think to question their veracity. But we don't really know. Are they lying, even a little. Perhaps their stories are spun to make them look better. Who are they? Can we really know, short of a thorough background check, which few of us will do?

What about our own identity? This is probably more relevant. Who do we present ourselves to be? Are we being open and honest with those in our circle of influence, our family, friends, coworkers, etc? Will we maintain our integrity, as Job did despite all the trials he faced and the tempation to turn against God (Job. 2:9)? As children of Adam we have a tendency to lie and deceive, as Satan did to Eve who led her husband into the original sin (Gen. 3). Our fallen nature leans this way. We tend to hide our identity behind a mask of deceit and hypocrisy. But as followers of Jesus, our new nature (2 Cor. 5:17) demands that we speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15), even if this portrays us as less than we desire.

Further, Salt makes us ponder our motives and drives. What was driving Evelyn Salt? Not knowing who she is, it is hard to understand inner drivers. But knowing ourselves to some degree, we can seek enlightenment from the Spirit to show us why we do the things we do. Sometimes it is our old nature that pushes us. As Paul says in Romans 7:15, "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do." At other times, we are "compelled by the Spirit" (Acts 10:22) in our actions. The more we know who we are, the easier it is to understand our motives and drives, and align them with God's plans.

Salt presents a sweet action thriller but ultimately leaves us hanging, like its heroine. It never really answers the question it set before us: who is Salt? We never really find out. And the ending's ambiguity seems destined to encourage a sequel. Will that answer the question? I doubt it. But it will likely be a fun journey, like this one, nevertheless.

Copyright ©2010, Martin Baggs