DISCLAIMER: In the next while, you will see a lot of film reviews that have been delayed for the longest time. I’m passing them off as DVD reviews.
“Can’t you just go and speak to Judge Bazile? We ain’t hurting anybody.”
Loving was actually the very first film I saw in 2017. Pardon the delay of the review. It’s still worth reviewing as it is a unique film, and not just because of its subject matter.
Richard and Mildred Loving want to marry. It’s the right time; they’ve been dating for a long time she’s having a baby. Problem is Mildred is black and Richard is white and they live in Virginia where interracial marriage is forbidden by law. They travel to Washington, D.C. to marry, but it causes problems as the couple are raided by the police and told their marriage certificate is not valid.
The couple were tried in the court of law in Virginia and they plead guilty. They received a suspended sentence, but decided to move to Washington, D.C. Life in Washington doesn’t work out for them as the oldest of their three children was hit by a car. The child survives, but Mildred decides she prefers the calm life of the country and wants to move back to Virginia. Especially since their families are there. In addition, Mildred writes to Robert F. Kennedy of her situation. Kennedy sends her letter to the ACLU. Bernard Cohen, a lawyer associated with the ACLU, agrees to contest the marriage ruling in the state of Virginia, but is slapped by disapproval in the court based on Virginia’s constitutional law.
Mildred then has Cohen take the case to the Supreme Court of the United States. In 1967, the US Supreme Court overturned their convictions and ruled that the criminalizing of interracial marriages violates the Fourteenth Amendment. The Lovings could now live in Virginia without fear of threat and love each other peacefully.
This film is of a relevant topic. Interracial marriage is a topic that still develops some heated discussion in the United States today. Many countries like Canada, the UK and even France don’t see interracial love as much of a problem. However there are still a significant number of people in the United States that look down upon it. Even seeing how Richard’s mother was disapproving of the marriage and even telling Richard he ‘did a wrong thing’ really gets one thinking at first how someone, including many millions around the world, can think loving a person of a different race is ‘wrong.’ Even hearing how the courts of Virginia ruled that: “God created the continents to keep the races separate and that they don’t mix.” I thought that was bizarre that they thought that but the courts in the Commonwealth Of Virginia considered that to be the truth. Me, I’d demand they pull out the Bible and show me where marrying someone of another race is a sin. Which of the Ten Commandments did that violate?
I was anticipating the subject of race to be included in the film. I know the prime topic of interracial love would be the prime topic but I figured the topic of race would be present too,, especially since this is in Virginia. The topic of race was not focused too heavily. However there were some moments when the subject of race was present. Like the case when Richard was going for a beer with his brothers-in-law from Mildred’s side of the family. I remember one of them questioning “You think you’re black?’ That too had me thinking about the racial divide in the US that still hits today.
The most surprising thing about Loving is that it wasn’t as dramatic as one would expect it to be. In fact the film appeared less focused on the events and more focused on the people Richard and Mildred Loving. It focused on the two as a couple, but mostly on both Richard Loving and Mildred Loving as individuals. Richard was seen of having the personality of a man who’s both hard and sensitive at the same time, but fearful of what would happen. Possibly because he’s white and he knows about a lot of racism that he could be subject to hate and even violence for. Mildred, whose actually half-black and half-Native American, was seen as a person who was soft and smart, but always optimistic. She had that look on her like she had nothing to lose and whatever else to gain.
It first seems like an odd choice to be more focused on the people instead of the events. I often wondered too about why it was done so. Over time, I saw it as something that made sense. We should not forget that it was the Lovings’ love for each other that made this happen. Sure, history will record Richard and Mildred for making history for their interracial marriage, but they made history because of their love for each other. The feelings for each other are made very obvious to us as are their feelings towards the events in their lives. This angle of focus was a very good choice in making such a film. We more of a look at the couple that made history rather than the history they made.
I admire writer/director Jeff Nichols for using that angle in creating the story of the Lovings. It is a unique angle and keeps their story from coming off as a made-for-TV movie. The portrayals of the Lovings by Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga were excellent and very telling of Richard and Mildred both as individuals and as a couple. The other actors in the film didn’t have such well-developed roles, but they did own the scenes when they had them, like Sharon Blackwood as Richard’s disapproving mother and Nick Kroll as Bernie Cohen the lawyer. The score from David Wingo didn’t occupy too much of the film, but its presence helped with the storytelling.
Loving is an excellent film that shows a focus to a story many know, but a focus overlooked. It’s also a film relevant now as interracial marriage is still a hot topic to many today.
When you think of the Grateful Dead, who’s the first person that comes to mind? Jerry Garcia, right? Even though Jerry is the most famous member, rhythm guitarist Bob Weir is also a key part of the band. The Other One: The Long Strange Trip Of Bob Weir is a documentary focusing on Weir both as a member of the Grateful Dead and his own personal life.
Bobby weir was born in San Francisco in 1947 and was adopted by a well-to-do family. He had an adopted brother and a sister born to his adoptive parents. However Booby grew up a very restless boy. He was expelled from schools within a matter of months. However he developed a passion for the guitar at a young age. There’s even mention of how excited he was when he got a guitar for Christmas. At a young age, he caught the attention of a band playing in the back alley of a Palo Alto spot. They were the Grateful Dead. They took a liking to Booby and the rest is history.
The funny thing about Bobby is that he was a bit of an oddity with the Dead. The other members of the Dead describe themselves as ‘uglies’ and Booby as a ‘cutie’ and they describe the Grateful Dead in its early days as ‘Bobby and the four uglies.’ It seemed like a good break to be welcomed into a band at such a young age but his parents were firm on his education and reminded the other dead members of that.
Over time the San Francisco music scene of the 60’s would rise and eventually become a permanent fixture on pop culture and even definers of the counterculture of that period. The Grateful Dead themselves would become synonymous with the psychedelia of that time. But even before that happens, the documentary pays attention to the band’s first few years trying to make a name for themselves. It reminds you they had to struggle with small gigs just like many other bands before them. Then they signed onto a big label. Then they went from playing in bars to playing in concert halls. Then came the Deadheads: a group of people that stayed loyal to the band year after year, decade after decade. A loyalty not seen before in rock ‘n roll.
Even despite playing music and hitting the big time, the documentary shows of the friendship Weir had with the band. It was of a family nature to the point that Weir almost ignored his own family. The family relation with the other bands did take challenges of their own. The first sign was in the 1980’s when they made a comeback which included a chart-topping album for the first time with 1987’s ‘In The Dark’ and the single ‘Touch Of Grey.’ There was the focus of Jerry Garcia’s cult-of-personality: something Jerry didn’t really welcome in his life. There were even times Bob took personal vacations. Then there was the time Jerry was going through rehab and Bobby acted as a support for him up until his dying day.
It doesn’t stop there. It also focuses on how Weir decided to finally settle down after decades of womanizing with Natascha Munter. The two wed when he was 52 and they have two daughters. Even then the trip wasn’t over. Weir tried to learn of his birth parents. He learned of his mother after she died that she had gave birth to 12 children. He was able to meet up with his birth father and the two have been close ever since.
This documentary is definitely one for people who like biographies of musicians or biography shows in particular. No question Deadheads young and old will want to see this. In fact I remember seeing a wide range of people in the audience watching this documentary. It’s possible some of the seniors in the audience may have been amongst the first generation of Deadheads. If you only care about musicians and their star power, this is not for you. Also if you’re a Deadhead simply because of Jerry Garcia, this will remind you that you’re not a true Deadhead. It’s not just a biography but gives you a feel of the music Bob helped create and continues to play whenever he performs with surviving members of the Dead. The mix of biography with live performances of his music really adds into the feel of it.
The documentary doesn’t really offer anything original as far as documentary film making goes. What it does is showcase a musician’s life that is a life less ordinary. The stories of how he was adopted and how he got into a lot of trouble as a kid will surely raise eyebrows and even a giggle or two. However seeing how he was able to settle down in his older years and even meet up with his adoptive father in recent years shows this is no ordinary life. The intimacy of the biography doesn’t stop with his personal life. It also shows how Bob treated the other Dead members like family even more than he treated his own. In fact hearing from Jerry’s daughter how Bob was like a brother to Jerry up until his last days shows how much the other members meant to him.
The are some flaws with the documentary. Most noticeably, it focuses almost exclusively on his music with the Grateful Dead and hardly ever focuses on his music with his other bands like Kingfish, RatDog, Booby and the Midnites and Furthur. Also the documentary made him look like he was a swinger all his life before Natascha. There’s no mention of his seven-year relationship with Frankie Hart back in the 70’s.
The Other One: The Long Strange Trip Of Bob Weir is a very good documentary to watch even if you’re not a fan of the Grateful Dead. It was time well spent for me. It reminds you there are a lot of great rock ‘n roll musicians that contributed a lot to the genre but don’t get the star status as many others.
When I Walk is a unique documentary where the documentarian is the complete subject of the film. It’s a very personal documentary. Possibly because this may be the last film he ever makes.
We meet Jason da Silva, a promising young documentarian of Indian heritage living in Vancouver. He lived the life of a budding 25 year-old filmmaker and had a promising future ahead. That all changed in 2006 during a family vacation in St. Maartens. His legs weakened and he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. His condition wasn’t fatal but it would lead to weakening of his body and other deteriorations. Jason was encouraged by his mother not to allow his disease to limit what he can do. So Jason decided to make his battle with MS his subject of his next film.
Jason is determined to fight it or deal with it the best way he can. He tries his hands as many different types of medicines and healings. He first travels to his parents’ hometown of Goa, India where he agrees to Ayurveda medicine. He then goes to Lourdes, France on the advice of his very religious Catholic grandmother and receives healing water. He also arranges an appointment for a wonder-surgery that’s a breakthrough in fighting MS and is highly advertised on Youtube by people cured through this surgery. The Ayurveda medicine procedures didn’t work. Lourdes didn’t heal. And this ‘wonder surgery’ only gave limited improvements that didn’t last.
Family unity is another theme in the film as Jason comes from a close family with relatives in Canada, New York and back home in India. His mother is the one who’s trying to encourage him to stay positive and hold his head up high. Though she cries near the end of the film and admits she didn’t know how bad it was and how limiting it would be. There’s another time when he visits a relative in India and tries to find out if his MS is inherited.
Despite his illness and its dehabilitation over time, Jason continues to be strong. He talks of difficulties going to restaurants and various other places in New York. He meet up with another person in a wheelchair and they decide to organize a blog of wheelchair accessible locations in New York. It’s not just simply taking restaurants that advertise themselves as ‘wheelchair accessible’ at face value. Both Jason and his colleague go to the various locations and test out how ‘wheelchair accessible’ the places are in both the facilities and the washrooms. Jason also purchases various filmmaking software and various computer accessories to assist him with his filmmaking as his body functioning lessens over time. They show one gadget which assists in functions as Jason makes commands in a microphone. Some days it’s so hard to talk, Alice–who I will talk about shortly– has to learn filmmaking and its functions in order to complete certain jobs for Jason.
Possibly the biggest plot of the documentary is not just simply overcoming his condition of MS in daily life but his relationship with Alice Cook. Before Alice, Jason was a frequent dater in the film making scene. He first thought MS would be the end of the dating road. Then he went to a support group for people with MS offered by his mother. He met a woman named Alice who was around the same age as him. Alice is a fully able person who attended the sessions in support of her stepfather who has MS. Alice took an interest in Jason. They started dating. Alice started helping and assisting Jason in his daily life. Then in 2009 they married. They even show Jason using his scooter with Alice on the back and a Just Married sign on the seat.
However right after the marriage came some new hurdles. First was the stress of being married to a physically limited person. Alice is a very cooperative and a very supportive wife but the stress does take its toll and Alice needs a vacation for a week to give herself relief. One of the things she sacrificed in her relationship with Jason was her love of hiking. She would have the chance to hike again after so many years. There’s also the effort of the two to have children. The film takes us to the doctor’s office where Jason learns he’s fertile and conception is possible. The first conception works but Alice miscarries. SPOILER ALERT: However the film ends with Alice showing Jason the result of her home pregnancy test: a positive. The film’s last scene shows the two in the ultrasound lab and the screen showing a healthy fetus.
One thing about this documentary that stands out is how personal this is for the filmmaker. Before MS, Jason was no simple documentarian. He was already showing promise at a young age with short documentaries like Olivia’s Puzzle, Twins Of Mankala and a Song For Daniel. He also had two feature-length documentaries to his credit: Lest We Forget and From The Mouthpiece On Back. One would figure MS would be an end to a filmmaking career at such a young age but Jason’s determined not to let it stop him. The film is very personal as it not only hides nothing of Jason but also of Alice. We see an image of blood in the bathtub when Alice miscarries. We also hear Alice tell her side of the story at times and she holds nothing back. In fact there are times when she’s in tears when she talks of the stress of managing a physically challenged husband and her fears for the future as his condition deteriorates over time. This film is as much about the struggle of the two as it is the triumph. Even Jason admits there are times when he can’t handle it or wants to give up.
Another addition to the documentary is the animation. Often the documentary will go to animated images of Jason in his life, MS eating away at him showing the MS as ‘bugs,’ and various other images. That is another added bonus to the documentary that keeps it from getting mundane. Although the animation is not the most professional, it still adds to the documentary.
As a documentary, it’s questionable whether this is worthy of box office release. It has already made appearances at the Sundance Film Fest and the Hot Docs Film Festival where it even won an award. It’s still possible. One thing I know is that it is definitely eligible for broadcast on a documentary television channel.
When I Walk is a film worth seeing. It’s as truthful about the struggles and the setbacks as it is about the triumphs. Definitely worth seeing for all types of people.
BONUS: If you want to learn more about Jason and When I Walk just go to: http://wheniwalk.com/ There’s even a mailing list to subscribe to.
DISCLAIMER: The object of the article is not to express my personal view of same-sex marriage but to give an analysis on how it could impact the National Election.
“I’ve been going through an evolution on this issue. At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married. I have hesitated on gay marriage in part because I thought that civil unions would be sufficient. I was sensitive to the fact that for a lot of people the word marriage was something that evokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs and so forth.”
That announcement from Barack Obama during an ABC news interview is seen by many as a positive move. For many Americans, this is an announcement they feel they’ve waited too long to hear. For other Americans, they are unhappy at what he declared and can’t believe that an American president would approve of such a thing. One thing to take a note of is that Obama made that announcement almost six months before the American people go to vote for President of the United States. The question remains was that a smart pre-election move or a risky move?
To get an understanding of why the topic of same-sex marriage has always been a hot button, you have to look at social history. Same-sex relationships and activities have always been looked down upon worldwide throughout history. Things started changing starting in the late 60’s. The signs of changes coming first occurred in the late-40’s early 50’s when professor Alfred Kinsey published his findings on human sexuality and activity. Part of his findings included what he learned of homosexuality and he even talked of the seven levels of homosexuality from the completely heterosexual Level 0 to the fully homosexual Level 6. It wasn’t until the 1970’s that things reached a turning point in the US when openly gay politician Harvey Milk was voted into San Francisco city council and helped defeat a bill banning homosexuals from housing and teaching jobs in 1978. The 80’s was a hard and dark time for gay men as the AIDS epidemic had gay men as most of their victims. The 90’s experienced a resurgence of pride with President Bill Clinton urging gays in the military. It’s only until this century that the gay population of the United States saw the possibility of gay marriage. And with good reason.
Hard to believe that 25 years ago, the idea of same-sex marriage was unheard of anywhere in the world. The first sign of things to come happened when same-sex relations were first legitimized in Denmark back in 1989 as ‘legalized partnerships’. Many countries followed with their own recognition, like ‘registered partnerships’ or ‘life partnerships’, but it wasn’t until 2000 when the Netherlands became the first country to officially recognize same-sex matrimony. Belgium and the Canadian province of Ontario followed in 2003 with Spain following in 2005 and South Africa following in 2006. Today thirteen countries legally recognize same-sex marriages.
The United States was always hard to achieve legal recognition. Even if a President is liberal in beliefs and stances, he will face the pressures of the political opposition. That explains why even though Bill Clinton was the most ‘gay-friendly’ President Of The United States in its history and even supported gays in the military, he compromised to a ‘don’t ask: don’t tell’ rule. In 1996 he even signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defines marriage as ‘one man and one woman’ after it was passed as law by Congress. Nevertheless the right would gradually increase state-by-state. It wouldn’t be until May 2004 that Massachusetts would become the first state in American history to legally recognize same-sex marriages. The issue of gay marriage would continue to be a state-by-state issue as some states would legitimize same-sex marriages while other states would pass laws prohibiting such recognition. Even some states–most noticeably the state of California with Proposition 8– would place the issue on the voter’s ballot. Currently nine states in the United States give full recognition to same sex marriages while most other states have either a statute or a constitutional law banning same-sex marriage. Nineteen states have a constitutional law banning recognition of any same-sex union.
Now comes President Barack Obama. Like Bill Clinton before him, Obama has also had his times of personal stances and bowing to pressures from the opposition. Obama favored legalizing same-sex marriages in a 1996 interview but during the 2008 Presidential Election campaign, he stated he believed marriage to be one man and one woman. Obama exhibited similar complications when in January 2009 he opposed a federal mandate for same-sex marriage and opposed DOMA. He’d continue to say that his opinion of same-sex marriage was ‘evolving’. However the first hint of Obama siding with the position of same-sex marriage came in February in 2011 when he announced that DOMA was unconstitutional. It wouldn’t be until May 9, 2012 that Obama would finally make his stance on same-sex marriage heard. His opinion was warmly greeted by many people, especially LBGT groups and other liberals. Some people were skeptical, feeling they might still get the same raw deal they’ve been getting for years. There’s no question that the upcoming Presidential Election had a lot to do with his announcement.
Even though Obama’s gay marriage stance appears as a positive step towards the upcoming election, there is also the opposite side as this could pave the way for a Republican being President. Of all issues facing the United States, it’s this issue that best resembles the current divisiveness and polarization of American politics. Its strongest opponents of course are those that side with the Republican Party and the values it stands for. The Republican Party has always left a bitter taste in the throats of the LGBT population of the United States. They still remember how conservative icon President Ronald Reagan sided with religious leaders; including the Moral Majority’s Jerry Falwell who declared the AIDS epidemic in the early 80’s as “God’s punishment to the gay lifestyle”. This may have a lot to do with the Reagan Administration’s slow acting upon the epidemic. President George Bush Sr. was strongly opposed to gays in the military and campaigned the Republican Party during the 1992 Presidential election as ‘the party of family values’: a title that has popularity stuck since. The younger George Bush even tried to push for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as ‘one man and one woman’ only to lose in the Supreme Court in 2004. Many believe his opposition to same-sex marriage is what helped him win the 2004 Election.
Soon after came the right-wing of the United States of today. You can hear it in the many voices of the right-wing pundits on the airwaves constantly stating their opposition to same-sex marriage, even going as far as declaring that ‘marriage is not a right’. Many Republicans strongly believe that defining marriage as ‘one man and one woman’ is a value instead of a prejudice. There’s even a set of voters in the millions that vote at election time on ‘family values issues’, known as ‘Values Voters’. Even Republican politician Mike Huckabee slammed Obama’s declaration of DOMA as ‘unconstitutional’ and a bad move come the Election. As expected, all candidates for the Republican Race were opposed to same-sex marriage.
You can bet after Obama’s stance that Wednesday, there was a lot of talk of the right-wing and the Republicans, especially from Race front-runner Mitt Romney. Three days after, Romney spoke to a graduating class at Liberty College reaffirming his opposition towards same-sex marriage and declaring his strong support for traditional Christian values. He even declared: that the “pre-eminence of the family” remains at the heart of the principles that underpin the nation. That drew a loud cheer from the 25,000 in the crowd.
There is an interesting footnote in Romney’s view. It’s also been known that he’s not opposed to same-sex adoption. Also interesting to know is just days after his stance on traditional marriage, it was brought to the attention that Romney was a high school bully who bullied an allegedly gay student because of his fancy hairstyle. Romney promptly apologized in public for all the bullying he did.
So Obama said his thoughts on same-sex marriage and the public have responded. His stance on same-sex marriage could either help him or hinder him. The big question is will it work against him n the upcoming Presidential Election or will it work for him? And if it does work for him, will that pave the way for full recognition of same-sex marriages in the whole of the United States? It will all be decided on November 6th, and possibly the four years after.
WIKIPEDIA: Timeline of Same-Sex Marriage. Wikipedia.com. 2012. Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
WIKIPEDIA: Same-Sex Marriage In The United States. Wikipedia.com. 2012. Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
Roberts, Robin. Interview. ABC News. May 2012. 9 May 2012. <http://news.yahoo.com/transcript-robin-roberts-abc-news-interview-president-obama-001212560–abc-news-topstories.html>
Parisse, Emmanuel. “Romney adamantly rejects same-sex marriage” Yahoo! News 12 May 2012. <http://news.yahoo.com/romney-courts-young-evangelicals-promotes-values-062331045.html>