Photos courtesy of A24 Films
Story telling has been at the heart of human communication since the development of language. Countless generations of people have gathered to share stories that entertain, inform, and offer insight into their condition. One of the iconic story forms is the ghost story. Whether sitting around a campfire hoping to take advantage of one’s perceived vulnerability in sleeping outside amidst the chaos that comes out at night, or connecting with people in a darkened movie theater hoping to plant seeds in dreams to come, storytellers have long 
talked of those who may or may not be forgotten and are not really gone.
Writer /director David Lowery (Pete’s Dragon) reaches back to this iconic story form in his latest film, A Ghost Story. Although the subject of the film is a ghost, A Ghost Story is not a horror film that lives off the rush and excitement fueled by graphic violence or helpless, clueless people putting themselves in harm’s way. A Ghost Story is a film that examines life, love, loss, life amidst loss, and the power of nostalgia through the black, cutout eyes of a ghost.
A Ghost Story is also about time, the timeline covered in the film as well as the time Lowery takes in presenting the story. As with any well-crafted ghost story, the desired impact is achieved not just in the narrative, but in the setting and setup of the story. Lowery’s desired impact for the viewer is not a chilling fright, but a contemplation of life, loss, and what we hold on to in life, and perhaps even beyond. While there is haunting, outside of one scene, it is the ghost who is haunted by people and memories rather than the people haunted by the ghost.
A Ghost Story has the feel of a mid-20th Century European film drama. As I watched the film I had the feeling I was watching an Ingmar Bergman examination of life and death, specifically, Wild Strawberries in which he examines life from the perspective of an older man, who is a ghost of his former, youthful self and life. In an interview with David Lowery I asked him if he had been a fan or student of European cinema. Lowery said he 
had studied the European masters as a youth and young adult and appreciated the minimalist approach to dramatic storytelling of Bergman and Federico Fellini and others. As with the great European cinematic masters, Lowery uses shot selection, silence and the time afforded by extended scenes to allow the thoughts and experiences of the viewers to grow organically rather than presenting ideas to the viewers in prepackaged form through active dialogue and cinema-graphic busyness.
In the Q&A following the screening of the film in the Oak Cliff Film Festival, David indicated he wanted to examine the idea of nostalgia through the two Ghost characters. In my interview I followed up with this notion of the power of nostalgia. Lowery indicated that he had experienced the power of nostalgia when he was growing up as he kept things and encountered the power of holding on to times and places and resisting moving on in the changing seasons of life.
Like many things, an appreciation for the past, keeping memories alive in things can have its place, up to a point. When taken too far, nostalgia can have negative consequences. There is a difference between remembering the past and holding on to the past by hording memories and objects. Remembering the past is carrying the events, feelings, memories and relationships in the present and into the future. There is a point, however, when possessing memories moves into being possessed by memories. Clinging to the past inhibits one from going forward in the future, whether it is going forward to the next adventure, or stage in life, or moving on to a new life after suffering loss. Holding on to the past denies the hope, life, and healing the future holds.
Moving toward the future, accepting and embracing the unknown, is an act of faith. Holding on to the past is a faith-deficient act of fear. There is a scene following the death 
when the Ghost, wearing the sheet that covered the body, begins wondering halls of the hospital. As the Ghost moves unnoticed past people in the hallways a portal of light appears on a wall. As the Ghost halts and lingers, the portal closes. Persons of faith are likely to interpret this as the opening to heaven and everlasting life. As presented, the Ghost, in death as in life, has freedom of choice, to go forward or stay back. As in life, there are consequences for the choices made. For the Ghost, the consequence is remaining in the present, even as that present will soon turn into a future that will not include the Ghost who must instead remain in a present that has lost all meaning. As hope is something of the future, a present with no future is a present with no hope.
The Ghost’s hesitation was reminiscent to the hesitation of Israel to take the land Yahweh had promised to provide. Even after Yahweh had led them out of slavery the Israelites were fearful of going forward. They chose to live by the perceptions before them, a strong nation they could not conquer, rather than the promises offered to them by God. This halting, fearful reaction to the challenge ahead reflected their doubt that Yahweh could provide and protect them, even as God had just led them out of their Egyptian bondage. In response to halting, Yahweh forced them to wander in the wilderness, still caring for them, until they had faith that God could provide as God promised. Part of the promise of this new land was the belief in Yahweh’s desire and ability to provide. Lacking faith in God’s desire or ability to faithfully provide, even this new land would be one without promise had God allowed them to enter.
Though the previous life of the Ghost was not one of suffering and bondage as was that of the Israelites, the Ghost refused to embrace the new life, the new opportunity, and chose to stay in the past. While allowed the choice to remain in the past, the Ghost was not allowed to live in the past. Rather than participating in life, the Ghost could only observe the lives others lived. Such existing is not truly living. Part of living is experiencing the present and anticipating the future. Persons of faith live in the present, preparing for the future that God not only desires for them, but provides and accompanies them into, if they choose to live by faith and go rather than submit to fear and seek to remain behind.
What is true for persons of faith, the call to live by faith for the future and the decision whether to accept of reject this calling applies also to churches and communities of faith. Churches are also susceptible to clinging to the past out of fear rather than faithfully accepting God’s call to accept and embrace the future and ministry God desires for them.
The choice to present the Ghost as a sheet with blackened eyes not only plays off the iconic image of ghosts, it represents the condition of the deceased, or anyone, when life is ruled by fear rather than lived by faith. The Apostle Paul teaches that persons of faith see God, even if only through veil, or a glass darkly. Upon death and entering God’s Kingdom the veil is removed and one views God fully, face to face. In not proceeding forward, the Ghost now sees and experiences present life as past life, only now it is seen as well through a veil, the veil of death as represented by the sheet.
Persons as well as churches and communities of faith are not called to reside in the comfort of the known and experienced, but rather they are called to go forth toward that which is promised and only seen dimly, trusting in God’s faithfulness to accompany and deliver them. To do otherwise is to stay under the veil and cease to truly live. The Gospel as presented in Scripture, and the film, is God is patient, kind, loving, gracious and willing to wait for one to act in their time, just as we are called and must live in God’s time.
Regarding the visual elements of cinema, A Ghost Story is a simple little film-the Ghost is under a sheet with black eyes, there are no special effects, no haunting, nor shrieks nor even a large orchestral score. When considering the story and themes, however, there is a deep reservoir of complex issues of life and living as well as life and death. As such, some viewers who require continuous action or dialogue, steady plot movement, and desire not having to consider deeper issues of life may be put off by the pace, feel, and introspective nature of the film. Those viewers who do not require a film by the numbers experience and are open to introspection will savor this finely crafted film.
A Ghost Story is rated R and stars Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara.
Link to a discussion guide from Pop Theology on Patheos.com
http://poptheology.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/A-Ghost-Story-Guide.pdf
13 Reasons Why is a story in which a high school junior, Hannah Baker (Katherine Langford) has killed herself, but rather than leaving a note, she left tapes in which she detailed the reasons behind her suicide. The tapes depict the behavior of 11 classmates whose treatment of her resulted directly or indirectly in her becoming the object of shame and ridicule in her school. Two other tapes are for two persons whose inactions prevented her from pulling out of the tunnel in which she saw suicide as the only option to find relief from the pain she was experiencing.
In the story, each of the 13 persons is directed to listen to all the tapes and then pass them on to the next person on the list. The story begins with her friend, and on again off again object of her affection, Clay Jenson (Dylan Minnette) as he receives and begins listening to the tapes which are presented visually in flashback.
The program is more effective in informing parents, whose high school experience did not include the realities of cyber bullying, where there is no safe zone nor opportunities to escape the harassment and shame. Unlike the impact of rumors whispered from ear to ear, in the cyber age, unflattering photos, taken casually, with little or no knowledge of the victim, can be distributed to everyone in the victim ’s community and circle of friends and classmates in an instant. Today, one surreptitious snapshot is the basis for digital rumors, the evidence of which is easily retrieved, replayed, and kept in the forefront of thoughts and conversations in a school or other community for days, weeks or even years. Explicit subject matter and instant availability of cyber bullying can lead to predatory actions including sexual assault, two of which are presented in the series.
13 Reasons Why can offer teachable moments, when adults/parents and teens watch it together. Teens can experience a reality of the devastating impact suicide has on families and communities. Parents can experience the unrelenting social pressure to avoid becoming a target and subject of bullying, and the unimaginable difficulty it is to have a target removed. The program shows the all too common reality that, for many students, the chosen method of not having a target on yourself is to put one on someone else. Where there are these and other benefits of communal viewing , that the program is 13 episodes makes watching the program with youth difficult, something requiring intentionality and, one of the other things around which there is incessant pressure, time.
The resurrection demonstrates that in God transformation of life and circumstances are possible. Faith in God’s transforming grace and power can be a ray of light that cuts through the darkness that is depression and suicide ideation. This reality can be powerfully communicated when discussed in community or groups, and should be a part of a faith group’s viewing or discussion of the topics of the program. Parents and leaders should watch the entire series prior to deciding whether to watch with their youth or youth groups.
My thoughts on the Academy Awards Best Picture nominations. At the top of my list is Fences. I thought it was by far the strongest ensemble with two great performances by Denzel and Viola. It is a story that speaks to the degenerating power of anger and frustration and he restorative power of love, grace, and forgiveness. Director Denzel Washington effectively stages and shoots the film to have the intimate and connected feel of the stage play it was based on.
My second favorite was Lion. While I would have trimmed some from the second half, the first half was truly riveting. At times it was epic and vast, showing the Indian countryside and inner city of Calcutta, and at other times it was profoundly intimate. While Dev Patel gave a strong performance, Sunny Pawar, portraying the 5 year old Saroo who gets separated from his family by 1600 miles is one of the stronger child performance in recent years. The fact that it was a true story adds to the power and celebration of hope and love The film speaks to building awareness that 80,000 children in India go missing every year, most of whom end up in the sex trafficking industry.
the third film is Hacksaw Ridge, which shows that Mel Gibson is truly a skilled filmmaker. Yes it’s brutal, but it would be a disservice to portray combat in any other way. As with Lion, the fact that it was a true story adds to the poignancy of the film. Showing a man stand up for his faith and belief even in the hell that is war is humbling. It’s not quite up to Saving Private Ryan, but it is close.
Hell or High Water was an enjoyable and solidly written, directed, and acted film. It had the feel of a Coen brothers film with impressive cinema photography of west Texas via New Mexico. The dialogue was top-notch as were the performances of the down the line cast members. “What don’t you want?”
Manchester by the Sea took time in letting the story and plot unfold. Some might say too long, but it was effective. The point about not getting stuck in the mourning is important especially as it can be so difficult. Afflect’s subtle and minimalist performance, always a challenge to pull off, shows his wide range as an actor.
Arrival has solid performances by Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner. The story has interesting nuances regarding the importance of communication and an unexpected ending that speaks to the joy of living life even in the midst or prospects of loss and pain.
Moonlight has been described as symphonic in telling the story of a life in three chapters. There is power in the understated script and performances. There are certainly powerful and profound moments, but, as with Boyhood, those there was a lack of momentum carried throughout the vignettes resulting in a film where the sum of the parts did not add up to a spectacular whole.
Hidden Fences was a very good and profound story that did not translate into as profound and special film. While the three leads, Taraji Henson, Octavia Spencer, and Janelle Monae gave strong performances including Octavia’s Oscar nomination, the supporting cast did not provide the necessary intangibles to lift the film to the level of being something truly special.
Silence is based on the Shusaku Endo, 1966 historical novel of the same name. In the novel and film the main character is the Portuguese Jesuit missionary priest Fr. Sebastiao Rodrigues ( Andrew Garfield), a character Endo based on the 17th century Italian Jesuit missionary Giuseppe Chiara. Fr Rodrigues and another priest, Fr Francisco Garupe ( Adam Driver) insist to their superior Fr. Alessandro Valignano ( Cerian Hinds) they be allowed to travel to Japan to find their teacher and mentor Fr. Cristovao Ferreira (Liam Neeson) after they have received reports that after being tortured he committed apostasy during persecutions of Christians in Japan.
that of the surviving, “hidden Christians” living on the islands of Japan. Although the priests bring tangible reminders of God and the Church, crosses, Scripture, rosaries, and the Mass, in the eyes of the villagers they have brought God. The priests who wonder about God’s silence, are themselves God’s answering the prayers of the Japanese Christians. Yet even as they bring reminders of salvation in Christ, the priests, by their presence on any island or any village, bring danger to the Christians near them.
Viewing Silence is a humbling experience. One is humbled by the faith of those depicted on the screen who have suffered beyond measure. One is then humbled by the reminder of all the millions through the centuries who suffered and were martyred for their faith. I was humbled because prior to the screening I spoke with a clergy colleague and we discussed the challenges and difficulties of ministry today, where there is a rise in apathy and commitment within congregations and bureaucratic challenges and frustrations at the denominational level. Two minutes into the film, I felt shame at what I had just voiced. Were laity to watch the film, they may feel humbled at complaints and conversations they have had regarding worship wars, the color of carpeting, or not “being fed.”
Some viewers may choose not to attend because of the heaviness of the film. It is heavy and while few would describe the film as escapist, if viewed with keen eyes and an open mind and spirit, Silence offers the opportunity for true escape. For the majority of viewers, the film will allow them to escape their troubles with the realization that what they currently consider suffering is perhaps more an inconvenience or disappointment. And if one is truly suffering, there can be comfort in knowing they are not alone, now nor through the ages, in their struggles.
Persons of faith who choose not to see the film will miss an opportunity to reflect upon what faith, suffering and apostasy is, and what they are not. They will also miss out on the reminder that the times they step on Christ or reject God, there is grace to hold them and for them to hold on to. As the final scene in the film indicates; like faith, grace, even the size of a mustard seed, is all that is needed.
Troy shines the brightest light or casts the darkest shadow to every gathering and conversation. Troy is known for his gift of gab and storytelling as well as his passion for baseball. His good, and perhaps only friend Bono tells Troy he “has some Uncle Remus in him,” as he has the ability and seeming compulsion to mythologize and spin any life event or experience. While blessed with talent reserved for only the best of the best baseball players of his time, Troy had the misfortune of barely missing out on the integration of the major leagues. The result of this loss for Troy (and so many others black baseball stars who never made the majors) is that the game that defines his life no longer brings joy, but rather renewed resentment. Each season, if not every game in each season, when he sees much lesser players succeed he is reminded of what could have been as well as what should have been.
As Troy often says, the finest woman he knows is his wife Rose (Viola Davis) who requires all the strength of the “steel magnolia” she is so as to stand with, and when necessary, up to the force that is Troy. Because of her relationship with and proximity to Troy, Rose, more than anyone including Troy himself, must live out Maxson’s maxim for baseball, which provides Troy the setting and secrets to understanding life itself; “you got to take the crookeds with the straights.” When Troy is a “straight,” no one makes life more alive, and when he is a crooked, no one makes life more delicate or complicated. Throughout the film, Rose enjoys more “straights” as well as endures more “crookeds” than most persons would ever hope or expect.
Troy believes it is his “duty” as a father to prepare his younger son Cory for life in the same world in which he grew up. Even though the world in the mid-1950’s to early 1960’s, far from perfect, it had and was continuing to change from Troy’s world in the 1920’s to 1940’s. In addition to what could be considered emotional abuse toward his son and wife, Troy believes his life challenges have entitled him to selfish indulgences. Though he knows his action is a betrayal, he also believes he is owed something in life, and when offered, he accepts it without ambivalence.
On the other end of the spectrum of choices in response to life’s challenges are Rose’s choices. Rather than responding to pain and anger by inflicting pain onto others and living off anger, Rose responds with grace and hope. As with Troy, Rose has had challenges and disappointments in life. Rose has fears associated with living continually on the financial edge. She worries about the world her son is about to face on his own.Yet, Rose chooses to look and live for the positives and possibilities in people and situations. Even when betrayed and asked to do the unimaginable, Rose seeks to find and model grace so as to bring beauty even into ugly circumstances. Rose matches and exceeds the selfishness of Troy with a selflessness that brings light into the darkest shadow cast by her husband.
the manner and delivery of the dialogue, Fences has the feel of a play rather than a film which suits this material very well. August Wilson is indeed credited as the screenwriter as Denzel Washington used a screenplay Wilson had written before his death in 2005. The setting, script, staging and performances allow viewers to fully experience the transformational arcs of Troy, whose decline and weakness emerge from his demonstrations of strength, and Rose whose growth and strength are unveiled through her Kingdom living by grace and meekness.
One can describe Collateral Beauty as a film that is powerful cubed. It has powerful performances of a powerful subject that can have a powerful impact on viewers. Collateral Beauty is a film about profound loss, pain, and the restorative power of love. Viewers may have the temptation to skip the film so as not to be reminded of the pain that is a part of life. For some, it may take them back to a time and place of loss, or it may speak to those who, as of yet, have not experienced tragedy but realize and fear their vulnerability to being caught in its wake. For those who have been through the tunnel that is tragedy and come out on the other side, the film offers reminders of the struggle as well as the reality that wholeness can be achieved even in the most broken of situations. For those still in the tunnel, the film offers hope that though not the same, a new life with joy and happiness is possible.
Will Smith stars as Howard, a founder, and CEO of a successful advertising firm who suffers perhaps the most feared and painful loss imaginable. Set three years following his loss, Howard is paralyzed by his mourning and is in danger of now losing his business. In the years since his loss, his only contribution to his firm is his spending days and weeks setting up elaborate domino designs which he then knocks over with but a push. Howard has stopped building and maintaining relationships in a business built on his talent and magnetism. While initially patient, clients are now moving on to other firms and the only out is a buyout offered by a larger agency.
The only true connection to life Howard has is through his writing letters to those whom he believes are responsible for his pain, Love, Time, and Death. Howard’s friends and co-workers, Whit (Edward Norton,) Claire (Kate Winslet,) and Simon (Michael Pena) seek to reach Howard before it is too late by employing actors to personify these characters and connect with him so Howard can confront those whom he blames. The hope is that he will either snap out of his condition so he can close on the sale of his company or have him declared incompetent and be able to finish the buyout and avoid everyone losing everything.
After accepting the gig, Brigitte/Death (Helen Mirren,) Amy/Love (Keira Knightley,) and Raffi/Time (Jacob Latimor) read the letters Howard has written. After further debriefing from one of the friends, each approach Howard allowing him to confront them as well as hear from them about the full nature of the characters they are playing. As it turns out, Howard is not the only character who is experiencing trials of life. Because of some comedic moments and a broadening of focus, Collateral Beauty is not as intense, burdensome, or heavy as other films addressing loss. Will Smith’s 2006 The Pursuit of Happiness was much heavier and more difficult to watch.
relationships. Howard’s preoccupation with the domino structures is symbolic of his life. With one action, an entire chain reaction of collateral destruction occurs. For Howard, this chain reaction following his loss is now taking down his business and impacting the lives of everyone in his life and business.
Reversing the concept of collateral damage, damage or destruction that is beyond the intended target, is the complex idea that the film’s title and story lift up in a direct and powerful way. The idea that there can be beauty that comes out of loss and tragedy is central to Christian theology and experience of God. The Apostle Paul teaches the Christians in Rome that in all things God works for good for those who love God, and that nothing in all creation, not even death, has more power than the power of God to love and for that love to be experienced. The collateral damage of humanity not trusting and turning away from God as illustrated in the story of Adam and Eve was that all creation was impacted and separated from God by sin. The collateral beauty of that loss was the opportunity for God to demonstrate the unimaginable depth of God’s love for humanity and creation. The damage of the cross was the suffering and death of Jesus. The collateral beauty was the defeat of mortality, the offering, on an individual level, of forgiveness and reconciliation with God and life everlasting in God’s Kingdom.
Both Collins and Ehrenreich give impressive performances that range from vulnerable, wide-eyed young people who suddenly find themselves in the glamor, the hustle and bustle of Hollywood and working for Howard Hughes. Through the film, both characters change subtly as they experience firsthand the cost that comes with such glamor, and must decide whether they will pay it.
A second storyline is the famous eccentricity of Mr. Hughes. While it is not necessary for viewers to know the history of Howard Hughes, some familiarity with his story and his eventual becoming a recluse, helps follow and appreciate the film which is set in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Throughout the film, Hughes’s emotional state seems to falter as he thinks bankers and others are out to take TWA away from him by accusing him of being of unsound mind. The more Hughes seeks to avoid communicating with them, and making himself vulnerable to being judged incompetent, the greater the suspicions about him and the demands that he appear in public grow.
Warren Beatty is believable as Howard Hughes even though he is considerably younger than Hughes was during the film’s setting. Back is Beatty’s energetic and disarming delivery that seems to speak through other characters and to each audience member.
