nothing to do with movies.

But one of the most relevant issues of our time.

From Keith Olbermann, 11/10/08

Finally tonight as promised, a Special Comment on the passage, last week, of Proposition Eight in California, which rescinded the right of same-sex couples to marry, and tilted the balance on this issue, from coast to coast.

Some parameters, as preface. This isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics, and this isn't really just about Prop-8. And I don't have a personal investment in this: I'm not gay, I had to strain to think of one member of even my very extended family who is, I have no personal stories of close friends or colleagues fighting the prejudice that still pervades their lives.

And yet to me this vote is horrible. Horrible. Because this isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics. This is about the human heart, and if that sounds corny, so be it.

If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don't want to deny you yours. They don't want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.

Only now you are saying to them—no. You can't have it on these terms. Maybe something similar. If they behave. If they don't cause too much trouble. You'll even give them all the same legal rights—even as you're taking away the legal right, which they already had. A world around them, still anchored in love and marriage, and you are saying, no, you can't marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn't marry?

I keep hearing this term "re-defining" marriage. If this country hadn't re-defined marriage, black people still couldn't marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on the books which made that illegal in 1967. 1967.

The parents of the President-Elect of the United States couldn't have married in nearly one third of the states of the country their son grew up to lead. But it's worse than that. If this country had not "re-defined" marriage, some black people still couldn't marry black people. It is one of the most overlooked and cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if the people were slaves. Since slaves were property, they could not legally be husband and wife, or mother and child. Their marriage vows were different: not "Until Death, Do You Part," but "Until Death or Distance, Do You Part." Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.

You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if the people are gay.

And uncountable in our history are the number of men and women, forced by society into marrying the opposite sex, in sham marriages, or marriages of convenience, or just marriages of not knowing, centuries of men and women who have lived their lives in shame and unhappiness, and who have, through a lie to themselves or others, broken countless other lives, of spouses and children, all because we said a man couldn't marry another man, or a woman couldn't marry another woman. The sanctity of marriage.

How many marriages like that have there been and how on earth do they increase the "sanctity" of marriage rather than render the term, meaningless?

What is this, to you? Nobody is asking you to embrace their expression of love. But don't you, as human beings, have to embrace... that love? The world is barren enough.

It is stacked against love, and against hope, and against those very few and precious emotions that enable us to go forward. Your marriage only stands a 50-50 chance of lasting, no matter how much you feel and how hard you work.

And here are people overjoyed at the prospect of just that chance, and that work, just for the hope of having that feeling. With so much hate in the world, with so much meaningless division, and people pitted against people for no good reason, this is what your religion tells you to do? With your experience of life and this world and all its sadnesses, this is what your conscience tells you to do?

With your knowledge that life, with endless vigor, seems to tilt the playing field on which we all live, in favor of unhappiness and hate... this is what your heart tells you to do? You want to sanctify marriage? You want to honor your God and the universal love you believe he represents? Then Spread happiness—this tiny, symbolic, semantical grain of happiness—share it with all those who seek it. Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice telling you to stand against this. And then tell me how you can believe both that statement and another statement, another one which reads only "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

You are asked now, by your country, and perhaps by your creator, to stand on one side or another. You are asked now to stand, not on a question of politics, not on a question of religion, not on a question of gay or straight. You are asked now to stand, on a question of love. All you need do is stand, and let the tiny ember of love meet its own fate.

You don't have to help it, you don't have it applaud it, you don't have to fight for it. Just don't put it out. Just don't extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don't know and you don't understand and maybe you don't even want to know. It is, in fact, the ember of your love, for your fellow person just because this is the only world we have. And the other guy counts, too.

This is the second time in ten days I find myself concluding by turning to, of all things, the closing plea for mercy by Clarence Darrow in a murder trial.

But what he said, fits what is really at the heart of this:

"I was reading last night of the aspiration of the old Persian poet, Omar-Khayyam," he told the judge. It appealed to me as the highest that I can vision. I wish it was in my heart, and I wish it was in the hearts of all: So I be written in the Book of Love; I do not care about that Book above. Erase my name, or write it as you will, So I be written in the Book of Love."

progress.

One of the few/many drawbacks of living in this generation is having to come to terms with the fact that we have been spoiled silly by technology. I can't even begin to imagine what it's going to be like for the next generation that is growing up with the internet and youtube, where almost any kind of information/media can be accessed at any time of the day.
With the advent of the information superhighway, mankind has never been closer to the dream of consolidating all human knowledge in one place; however, this overload of information has had a less than positive effect on our youth.

I was twelve when the United States invaded Iraq.
I watched on TV as Baghdad was lit up on night vision with the flashes from hundreds of our tracers and bombs, and less than two months later I watched our president shake hands and smile with subsequent reassurances of a "mission accomplished," a "job well done."

Five years later I still find it hard to believe that we have spent (and continue to spend) over $500 billion dollars in a war that has cost us over 4,000 military deaths and for the Iraqis close to 100,000 civilian deaths.

Then again, those are numbers that took me about 40 seconds to find using google.

But every day I continue to eat well, sleep well, and dream well.
Because 4,000, 100,000, 300,000, 6,000,000- those numbers don't mean a thing to me.
I didn't have to see their faces.

I don't want to see their faces.

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."

-Joseph Stalin

Everything in this world is being slowly and systematically broken down into information that we can digest, and this generation is slowly but surely becoming indifferent to the world at large- we've stopped feeling,
and we've stopped caring.
Natural disasters caused by earthquakes and hurricanes.
Unnatural disasters caused by bombs and guns and hate and fear.

But who believes what they see on TV anyway?

...Bradbury was right.

This is our world.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing."

revenge is a dish best served..

Revenge (also vengeance, retribution, or vendetta amongst others) consists primarily of retaliation against a person or group in response to a real or perceived wrongdoing... The goal of revenge usually consists of forcing the perceived wrongdoer to suffer the same pain that was originally inflicted.

(from Wikipedia)

Nemesis and the Furies in The Remorse of Orestes (1862) by William Frederic Bouguereau

In olden days, the concept of revenge was synonymous with society's perception of 'justice.'
The Greeks worshipped a goddess named Nemesis, related to the Greek word for 'to give what is due,' and the Code of Hammurabi and later the Torah would set into stone the concept of 'an eye for an eye.'
"To give what is due.." sounds kinda nice when you say it like that.

Of course nowadays, our justice system is nowhere near as harsh as it was in the time of our ancestors.. and nowhere near as effective, as some would say. When those arise who are outside the reach of the law, so must they who rise above the law to deal appropriately with them: the rise of the modern vigilante- and the heart of every revenge film.

(from Batman Begins)

Bruce: My parents deserved justice.

Rachel: You're not talking about justice.
You're talking about revenge.

Bruce: Sometimes they're the same.

Rachel: No, they're never the same.
Justice is about harmony.
Revenge is about making yourself feel better.
It's why we have an impartial system.

Bruce: Your system is broken..

A young Bruce Wayne huddled over the bodies of his parents in Batman Begins (2005)

Almost every contemporary movie has some element of revenge in it, perhaps the protagonist is wronged in some trivial manner, plot proceeds, and nearing the conclusion of the film, the protagonist finds some method to cleverly return the favor, the audience laughs heartily,
and all is right with the world.
This concept of harmony, this old-fashioned idea of justice, this 'giving of what is due.'
and therein lies the great irony-
for what is "right" in this world?
Justice is, after all, a rather relative term.

It's interesting to see not just in movies, but in the real world as well, how there exists a double standard when it comes to the concept of revenge. Whereas in the 'light side' of Hollywood, the world of romantic comedies and.. romantic dramas (?) the protagonist is usually allowed to, and even encouraged to take appropriate revenge on an antagonist who had previously wronged him/her. (Recently we've seen a change in this as Hollywood is becoming more aware of its power not only to extort massive amounts of money off the youth of this nation, but to instill some good values in them.) Now it gets interesting though, because in thrillers/action/mystery films, where the subject matter begins to involve the premise of life and death, naturally, revenge becomes a less pleasant, though for some reason, more necessary option.

Al Pacino as Michael Corleone in The Godfather (1972)

Revenge and/or the use of violence to achieve a means in a realistic setting is very rarely glorified in Hollywood. I'm not referring to half the crap that comes out in theaters every year- because in movies such as Mr. and Mrs. Smith, The Transporter, (1, 2, and 3.) Shoot 'em up, and Iron Man, everybody knows it's fun to shoot people + if somebody dies, then it's cool as long as you didn't know them. Those movies don't pretend to be realistic. That's fine with me, and that's fine with America because we know the difference. (Hopefully.) In films such as Coppola's The Godfather, the violence that surrounds the Corleone family is never characterized as pretty, and it certainly isn't. However, Hollywood draws a very fine line between violence and revenge.

Now, what is the difference between the two?
The act of revenge, like the use of violence, involves the choice between life and death. However, while violence can encompass the thousands of Persians felled by the Spartans in the movie 300, revenge will differ slightly in that there is only one choice to be made, and it is very, very personal. (á la Xerxes) Even though the protagonist might have to kill a few people along the way, (It's just business.) there really is only one death that matters- again, this concept of a 'nemesis,' one who stands at the opposite end of justice from the protagonist, remembering, that justice is relative.

Uma Thurman as 'The Bride' in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

Even in stylized worlds such as Tarantino's Kill Bill, where it seems to be the social norm in Japan to have gigantic sword fights encapsulating an entire teahouse- the Bride's real struggle is never with the law, but with her own humanity.
That, is the real heart of every 'revenge' flick- the protagonist's humanity.
Life, death, and the ability to choose.

It's a pretty fascinating struggle that I think we can all relate to in some way or form, this battle between the goodness and darkness within our own hearts. In a classic example, in The Return of the Jedi, despite clear motives for revenge and displays of his emotionally driven nature throughout the original trilogy, Luke ultimately comes to the decision to spare Darth Vader's life. Yes, he could have achieved his revenge. But at what cost?

The climactic showdown between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader in Return of the Jedi (1983)

Very rarely does Hollywood get away with casting heartless anti-heroes as the protagonist, but when they do, it's usually a refreshing, albeit frequently unsettling, change of pace from the norm. Movies such as Nolan's Memento features such a protagonist in Leonard, and reflect the real toll that revenge takes on the human psyche.
Obsession.
Delusion.
Insanity.
Revenge can drive a man mad, it consumes them until they have nothing left. For Leonard, his whole life was about revenge- a choice that wasn't driven so much by his condition, which left him unable to retain new memories, but by the fact that revenge was the only thing he had to live for. Leonard wasn't so much a heartless hero, than a truly tragic one.

It's funny, because one of the few times that Hollywood does get away with casting a heartless antagonist as the protagonist is when that person happens to be Johnny Depp, who, after Pirates of the Caribbean, can basically get away with anything. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street just happens to be a personal favorite though, because it so beautifully draws out the cycle of revenge in all its bloody glory- and that is the key to understanding revenge in movies; revenge is not of a linear nature, but a cyclical one. Again, this can be taken literally in the case of Memento, but its connotation tends to allude to the fact that there is a course that revenge has to take, a path that usually doesn't end with the death of one person.. and does it ever end?

Shakespeare's Macbeth himself remarked of those "bloody instructions, which, being taught, return to plague the inventor," and, well.. need I say more?

"An eye for an eye, and soon the world is blind."

-Mahatma Gandhi

Johnny Depp as Sweeney Todd and and Helena Bonham Carter as Mrs. Lovett in The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)

Musings aside, Todd also happens to serve as an exemplary example for another rather well-known aphorism, that being: 'Revenge is a dish best served cold.' Made popular again with the release of the original Kill Bill, this proverb traces its roots as far back as 18th century France in the novel 'Les Liaisons Dangereuses' by Pierre Choderlos de Laclos, though its true origins remain unknown. Essentially, what this saying seeks to impress upon the reader is that- in order to carry out his/her revenge with the highest chance of success, the avenger must not be blinded by any emotions, and must have their revenge "cold." It's an unsettling idea to swallow, that there exists an actual methodology to committing the act of revenge, but it certainly holds true in film, for it was emotion, be it bloodlust, or hubris- his pride that proved to be the bane of Sweeney Todd.

In film, certain prominent vindicators come to mind when pondering those that chose to take their revenge "cold," though it's ironic that the most well-known icon to come out of Hollywood had to have such a ridiculous tagline in: "It's not revenge, it's punishment." Agh, that alone causes me no end of sleepless nights, but having to sit through two hours of the movie itself really did make me believe that it was punishment. (For what crime, I remain oblivious.) However, The Punisher does serve its purpose in giving us a glimpse into what happens when revenge becomes something greater than just "making ourselves feel better" as was so quaintly put by Rachel Dawes earlier. Even though Frank Castle and Sweeney Todd both have nothing to lose (seemingly) as their lives are completely devoted to achieving their revenge, they differ fundamentally; they differ not only in methodology ('hot' vs. 'cold') but in their fundamental values.

Thomas Jane as Frank Castle in The Punisher (2004)

'Sometimes revenge is justice.' That thought is certainly what drove Peter Parker during the early part of the original Spiderman; that is, until he truly came to know the meaning of his uncle's parting words: "With great power comes great responsibility." At the climax of Se7en, time stands still for Detective Mills and John Doe as Mills looks his wife's killer directly in the eyes. Doe's eyes stare calmly back, telling him what he wants to do, needs to do, to take justice for himself, to "become wrath." He doesn't just want Mills to be a man with a gun, he wants him to 'become' vengeance itself, to become the avatar of justice on earth. The difference between all the power in the world is the trigger of his 9mm pistol.
"With great power comes great responsibility." And that is what our heroes have, is it not? The power over life and death- the power of a god. But what exactly is their responsibility?
To restore justice to the world.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

-John Emerich Acton

A cynical outlook on what happens when men try to play god- the price of which is the vindicator's life, or their humanity.

When does revenge bring life?
Never.
Because we will never get back those we have lost.
Forgiveness is the only way we can start living again.
To think that Sweeney Todd would have cried to be with his wife again, to think that Beatrix Kiddo didn't lose everything after all, to think that V was not an idea, but a man after all, to think that John Creasy would have laid down all his weapons for the sake of a little girl.
Is revenge worth so much, to bring death
in exchange for all hope for life?
Justice is never achieved through the use of violence- it is destroyed by it.

"To err is human, to forgive, divine."

-Alexander Pope

In truth, we all have the power of gods. The power over life and death, the difference between choosing forgiveness and vengeance.

forgive those that have wronged you.
forgive yourself.
and begin anew.

Because the god of war cannot compare to the god of life.