The Departed

The Departed, directed by Martin Scorsese, is one of the most critically acclaimed gangster, mobster films to date. Scorsese wields a brilliant plot as a stellar cast brings the story to life. The Departed went on to win four Academy Awards, including Best Picture.

The film is about an Irish criminal syndicate in Boston lead by Frank Costello. The movie starts when Costello begins to groom young Colin Sullivan to be his mole inside of the Massachusetts State Police. Sullivan graduates from the police academy and is immediately placed in the Special Investigations Unit. At the same time, Captain Oliver Queenan and Sergeant Sean Dignam recruit William Costigan to become an undercover officer. Costigan serves time in prison on fake assault charges to solidify his undercover identity. The police department places Costigan undercover in Costello’s mob. The plot plays off of the tension between the two men, Costigan and Sullivan, who have no idea that they are moles in their respective professions.

Costello eventually catches wind of a rat in his syndicate and tells Sullivan to find his identity. Sullivan is also assigned to find the mole inside of the Police force. He is faced with the conundrum of risking his identity as the mole to find the identity of the rat in Costello’s mob. This entire time Costigan and Sullivan are romantically involved with the same women, psychiatrist Madolyn Madden.

As the intertwined plot rolls on, it culminates when Sullivan is forced to kill Costello to maintain his position in the SIU. The two moles then learn of each other’s identities and set out to clear their own names. This eventually leads to both of their deaths. Costigan gets murdered while trying to turn in Sullivan and Dignam murders Sullivan in the aftermath of Costigan’s death.

Scorsese is one of the most respected directors in Hollywood. He possesses a very stylized method of filmmaking that defines his position at the top of the list of prominent directors. Michael Ballhaus has worked as the cinematographer in many of Scorsese’s films, including two of his most famous Gangs of New York and Goodfellas. Not only are these Scorsese’s most famous movies they are also two of his most stylized. Ballhaus brings this same style to The Departed.

Scorsese tends to brilliantly weave his cinematography and sound to progress his characters and themes, and he does so in this film. As the plot progresses the camera catches the mood. As the characters digress the music and sound keep the film rolling.

First and foremost this film is loaded with close-ups. Scorsese uses these to show emotion, to evoke mood and to build characters. They are so important to the film and they are used incessantly.

The film begins with a monologue and flashback of sorts. Scorsese employs a rough grain to this opening sequence as to give it a more aged look. As the film progresses he moves to a finer grain for his images. However, this does not mean that Ballhaus’ shots are not rough. The entirety of the cinematography in the movie has a rough, edgy, and gritty feel.

This film is a textbook in camera movement. No one employs camera movement more effectively than Scorsese and few execute it better than Ballhaus. The camera movement in the film is extensive. Camera movement often signifies the beginning or the conclusion of scene. This occurs often with quick camera movements directly before a cut to the next scene. Camera movement is also often used in place of wide-angle shots to show the setting. Dolly movement is also common in the film. When a scene calls for an overload on dialogue and stationary camera, Scorsese will interlace shots with dolly movement in them to keep the action moving. Often times the film moves inside of itself. Different parts of the plot are occurring at the same time and Scorsese chooses to interlace scenes to convey this. When he does this, dolly movement is extremely important to signify a switch back and forth between scenes. Tracking between frames often accomplishes this transition into and out of simultaneous story lines. Other time dolly movements are utilized to move in close on a subject to get a reaction or to move a conversation back in forth. Ballhaus does this many times in the first interview with Wahlberg and DiCaprio. In action sequences, Ballhaus will also use the Steadicam in order to embed the audience in the action. The chaotic movement of the camera increases the intensity of the scenes.

Another movement that he uses not so sparingly is the 180-degree movement. The camera will move really rapidly from one side of the frame to the other to catch everything in frame. This portrays a sense of hurry or sometimes even sets the scene. Sometimes the camera takes its time getting from one side of frame to the other, ensuing a contrasting mood of tedium, slowing the pace of the film.

Scorsese utilizes shadows, light and color in this film much like he does in his other pieces of cinema. Different lighting is employed to emphasize characters and their moods. Throughout, Jack Nicholson’s character is found in the shadows. This strategy is used most heavily at the beginning when Scorsese wants to keep distance between the audience and Nicholson. However, this is not the only way that he utilizes shadows. Scorsese has an unbelievable gift of using lighting to his advantage. There are few directors who understand the combination of mood and lighting better than him. In nearly every scene in the Boston bars, Scorsese allows shadows to determine the mood. The results are scenes that appear leery and shady, as if nothing good is happening or will happen at that particular setting. Lighting is very important in the way that Scorsese uses it to build the characters of Damon and DiCaprio. The two men find themselves in very similar situations but on opposite sides of the ball, and because of their positions it is difficult to determine whom the hero actually is. Damon works for the Irish mob but appears to have his life together, whereas, DiCaprio’s character, although working as an undercover cop, often appears lost and chaotic. It seems that good is evil and evil is good throughout much of the film. Scorsese utilizes lighting to drive this tension. Scenes with Damon in them are much brighter and the colors are extremely sterilized. Darker lighting and more coarse, earthy colors are used in DiCaprio’s scenes. However, as the two men begin to lose their identities these distinctions begin to mold. As the two become intertwined it is much more difficult to determine the clear line in characterization. For instance, as Damon’s involvement becomes more apparent to the audience and his actions begin to wear on him, the lighting and mood shifts. The film now shows scenes with more shadows and dark colors. For a majority of the remainder of the movie, the two moles spend their time in the shadows as Scorsese attempts to emphasize the moods of uncertainty, loss of identity and secrecy. The only other significant use of color is when Scorsese literally drapes Nicholson in red at the opera. This scene uses red lights to signify the evil inherent in Nicholson’s character.

The chase scene where DiCaprio pursues Damon through Chinatown employs all of Scorsese’s cinematic styles and tendencies. From shadows on the wall to low lighting and vibrant colors, this scene encapsulates Scorsese’s work. The quick cuts and extreme camera movements are indicative of his style. But what brings this scene, and the rest of the film, together are his knowledge of music and sound.

Cinematography is not the only tool that he uses to determine mood and character. The music in this film only enhances the things seen on camera. A few things stand out about the score of this film, repetition of songs and the way that the music drives the film. Two songs are repeated throughout the film. The very fitting “Gimme Shelter” by the Rolling Stones is played in the opening of the film and again halfway through the film. Also, “I’m Shipping Up to Boston” by the Dropkick Murphies is played over the opening credit twenty minutes in and again many times throughout the film. These two melodies often drive the film, especially the latter one. It is primarily featured in action sequences because of the intensity of the melody. The soundtrack is important to the film, and often times it is the driving force behind it. Scorsese is known for giving a “juke-box” feel to his soundtracks. This score does that at some points, but most notably in the majority of the bar scenes. The music in the film, much like the lighting, is at many times utilized to draw a contrast in the main characters. Opera can often be heard behind Damon’s scenes, whereas, harsher, more “cultured” music can be heard in the background of DiCapiro’s scenes. Scorsese often employs short and quick stringed arrangements to exude a mood of high tension. The music is quickly cut in multiple scenes. This effect surprises the audience and brings their attention to something important. Almost every quick cut of music comes with an action or an abrupt sound, like a phone closing, a punch, or a gunshot. These utilizations of music compel the film from frame to frame and allow the movie space to continue moving.

Sound is so important to this film, first, because of the heavy use of dialogue. Because dialogue dominates entire scenes it is important that background sound is spot on. Two scenes in particular come to mind: the dinner date between Damon and his girlfriend and Nicholson’s phone conversation with Damon on the pier. Both of these scenes use a substantial amount of crowd and background music that provide believability to the setting’s dimensions and surroundings. Dialogue in the film is always distinct. The conversations on camera are many times abrasive in volume as to match the intensity of the film. Often times, particularly when dialogue is dominating a scene, Scorsese allots for silence as to emphasize what is being said. Volume is raised in other places. In action sequences the volume is boosted. In the firefight at the end, the sound effects are loud enough to make the viewer feel present in the chaos. The most significant way that Scorsese uses sound in the movie is overlapping sound and music when transitioning between different scenes. This allows for smooth transitions and fluid continuation of the plot. For the most part, that is the main aspect of the sound and music in the film.

The Departed is a brilliantly crafted film. Scorsese is a wizard behind the camera and his style is so influential in Hollywood today. He has been quoted as saying, “[The Departed] is the only movie of mine with a plot” (Martin Scorsese). This piece of cinema definitely has a weaving and winding plot, but the story is only as good as its cinematic pieces. In this case, the excellent cinematography and tedious sound editing combined with Scorsese’s unique style make for one of the most compelling stories in quite some time.

A Short Reflection on Toy Story

As tears peek out from underneath my 3D glasses, the joyful chuckles billowing from young mouths roll throughout the theater. Block them out. This is my moment after all. As Andy brings life to Woody and Buzz one last time and the melody of “You’ve Got a Friend in Me” invades my senses, glimpses of fun from my own toy chest, flash before my eyes. I plead with Andy to not hand Woody over, resisting the urge to leave the comfort of my seat to scream in disapproval as Andy finally surrenders the cowboy. With the final “to infinity and beyond” I’m off to the warmth of my childhood years.  Pull the string. “There’s a snake in my boot,” and I am the 10-year-old version of myself, engaging imaginary worlds and fantasylands.  As Andy walks away I choke back tears. But that’s what this is about after all. Revisiting the joy of our childhood years just long enough to realize that we must pass the baton of imagination on to the next generation. Woody waves and whispers, “Goodbye, partner.” Bonnie runs away content and you know that you did the right thing. But there is that part of you, that small, bowl cut, high socks, light up shoes, smiling part of you, that just cannot seem to find that right words to say. So, Andy voices them for you with a gentle, “Thanks guys.” Lump in throat, you ever so silently echo his words. You relinquish your senses and allow the joyful laughter of childhood years to flow through you. You embrace the overpowering smile and do not dare to fight your imagination as it, one last time, carries you back to where you go only on special occasions. Back to your set of Hotwheels blazing off the track. Back to your G.I. Joes engaged in full combat. Back to your Transformers, Power Rangers, and Ninja Turtles. Back to the Etch-A-Sketch and Legos, the Play-Doh and Teddy Bears. What a rush, you feel like a kid again. You want everyone in the audience to feel what you feel. But it’s different for all of us. The stories look different depending on the imagination. But they do all share one similarity. Toys! Toys and their stories can define a childhood. Toys can make a kid dream. They can take you somewhere, away from the pain and away from reality. Toy Stories are simple, yet beautiful and fun. They are happy, carefree, and easy. The good guy always wins and the hero always gets the girl. But there comes a point where we must say goodbye. So, here’s to fifteen years of fun with Woody, Buzz, and the gang. Here’s to adventures and laughter and tears. Toy Story taught us to dream and laugh, it bid us escape to an imaginary world where toys reigned supreme, it gave us time to put down the busy and the go-go-go and just embrace a child-like mentality. Woody’s final wave is urging you. Do not forget the friend you have in me. Do not let your imagination go stale. Never stop being a kid. And most importantly, never stop dreaming. There is only one thing left to say and I think Andy said it best, “Thanks guys.”

J. Edgar. Misunderstood

With J. Edgar, Clint Eastwood and Leonardo Dicaprio set out to bring one of the most prominent and controversial figures of the 20^th century to life. In doing so, the duo produced the season’s most polarizing film.

J. Edgar has some critics up in arms, unsatisfied with the missed potential and others praising the biopic as unique and even-keeled. The film has garnered a meager 41 percent on Rottentomatoes.com’s freshness scale. The movie experts at Flixster, cite “confusing narrative and humdrum storytelling” amongst the list of Edgar’s shortcomings. On the other hand, Roger Ebert, resident movie know-it-all, admires the film as a “masterful” biopic.

As a critic, I even found myself polarized by this piece of cinema. Going into the theater I expected to be knocked out of my seat by Eastwood’s mastery of J. Edgar’s story and completely engrossed by Dicaprio’s performance. At the movie’s conclusion I voluntary left my seat unimpressed and a little surprised. Admittedly, the film had me fooled.

But this was Eastwood’s intention. In his life, Hoover was a polarizing figure exciting mixed emotions from audiences. So it is only fitting that a J. Edgar biopic should do exactly that, polarize audiences. His public life was a façade masking the controversy and paranoia present in his private corridors. His public image was maintained at all costs and he was a steel-minded moralist who protected his beloved FBI until his death. Hoover launched a publicity machine that portrayed him as a man without a fault, a super hero of sorts. His public image was built on the foundation of the Bureau and vice versa. He refused to allow his image or that of the Bureau to be tainted.

A film with the glamour of J. Edgar and the topic of a man of Hoover’s stature would appear to jump off the screen. The final product comes across as flat and “unengaging.” But this is Eastwood’s thematic approach to the film. Eastwood is out to set the record straight about Hoover. For a man of Hoover’s stature he was relatively uncharismatic and anything but engaging. In opposition to his controversial public life Hoover lived a private life that flew under the radar. This is the story that J. Edgar is telling.

Initial reactions to the film have critics citing boring narrative and empty storytelling. But Ebert recognizes what few critics haven’t been able to understand.

“Eastwood’s film is firm in its refusal to cheapen and tarnish by inventing salacious scenes,” Ebert said in his official review of the film.

Eastwood is not in the business of creating a story that’s not there and it’s not fair to ask him to do so. He and Dicaprio portray Hoover in a light of honesty that is unique and courageous and you must give them credit for staying true to the story. The final image is a multi-faceted, complex, controversial yet monochromatic and barren character. Not much is known about Hoover and not much is said in this biopic. And there lies the narrative, a polarizing story of the most interesting boring man in America’s history. Ebert said it best.

“It’s a nice touch, the way Eastwood and DiCaprio create a character who seems to be a dead zone and make him electrifying in other actors’ reaction shots.”

But how do Eastwood and crew pull this off?

Technically the film does not miss a beat. Eastwood and crew effortlessly bridge over seven decades. It’s brilliant, almost a little ridiculous. The intention to detail is unrivaled and every bit of the story’s setting is absolutely believable. Set, props, clothes, lighting and make-up, J. Edgar covers their bases and creates an aesthetically pleasing film. This is indeed a masterful biopic. The flashbacks are stylized and necessary and although the pacing is somewhat mangled, the film stays true to itself.

Dicaprio is undeniably pursuing his ever-evasive Oscar. His portrayal of Hoover is epic. The accent, the delivery, the attention to detail, Leo proves he is able to adapt and exceed expectations. J. Edgar Hoover was a staunch and determined man but a man of little charisma. As such, Dicaprio’s brilliance could easily be missed. However, it is evident that he is an actor that studies character and immerses himself in his role.

Armie Hammer portrays Hoover’s lifelong companion and rumored partner Clyde Tolson in the film. Hammer, of Social Network fame, delivers an extremely believable performance. The combination of Dicaprio and Hammer makes for a tour de force in acting. Their chemistry is electric and the two propel the film.

The relationship between Hoover and Tolson is one lathered in rumor and intrigue. The two are thought to have been romantically involved and privately homosexual. When Dustin Lance Black, “Milk” screenwriter, signed on to write the script for J. Edgar many thought Eastwood’s film would be the portrait of a gay man. Intriguingly this is not so. Although the film hits on the issue it is more concerned with Hoover’s relentless protection of his public image.

The most shocking bit of it all is that Eastwood suggests that Hoover was to be taken at face value and he was simply misunderstood. He was exactly this: a man larger than life but smaller than the Bureau that built him. The intrigue and controversy that surround him have been speculated and researched since his death in 1972. But what we thought we knew about Hoover may in fact not be true. I think Eastwood would agree with his critics, the narrative is indeed empty. The intrigue and controversy may be empty claims and the smoke and mirrors may be exactly that. Hoover was the head of the FBI through eight presidents. He is arguably one of the most powerful men in American history but its what we don’t know about him that makes him so intriguing. And that’s what makes the story worth telling. Whether the film is worth seeing is up to you.

The Cultural, Historical and Aesthetic Relevance of “The Last King of Scotland.”

“The Last King of Scotland” is a piece of cinema that molds both fact and fiction in order to make a historical and political statement about a brutal collision of Eastern and Western ideologies. The film, based on Giles Foden’s award winning novel, paints a portrait of the infamous Ugandan dictator Idi Amin from within his palace walls. Director Kevin Macdonald adapts the novel into a brilliant work of film that rests heavily on the engrossing performances of James McAvoy and Forest Whitaker. “The Last King of Scotland” is culturally, historically and aesthetically significant because of the manner in which it utilizes superb acting and fluid storytelling to convey the atrocious effects of western colonialism in 1970’s Uganda and Africa today.

The film begins by introducing the audience to the main character, recently graduated Dr. Nicholas Garrigan (McAvoy). Garrigan is a young Scottish man searching for his identity. He decides to pack up and move to Uganda in hopes of changing the world. The film proceeds to tell the story of how he became the personal physician of Ugandan dictator Idi Amin (Whitaker). The doctor quickly rises into Amin’s favor and joins his inner circle of most trusted confidants. However, Garrigan quickly finds that Amin is not the man he initially appeared to be. The story follows the unraveling of their relationship as Garrigan loses faith in Amin.

While serving at the dictator’s side, Garrigan becomes disconcerted by the man’s deteriorating character. Amin exhibits traits of xenophobia and paranoia that cause him to kill off his political opposition. The death tolls rise into the hundreds of thousands. The young doctor begins to see his employer for who he really is and finds himself much deeper in the heart of Ugandan political unrest than he desires. However, Garrigan requests to return home and Amin refuses.

In the meantime a relationship has been building between Garrigan and one of the dictator’s wives. The two become involved in an extramarital affair and the Scottish doctor impregnates Amin’s wife. When Garrigan finds her brutally murdered, he begins to fear for his own life. Garrigan resolves that his only way out is to kill the Ugandan president. At this point, Amin begins to doubt the young doctor but still sees him as “like his own son.”

When a group of Palestinian hijackers seeking asylum land a plane in Entebbe, Uganda, Amin takes Garrigan to evaluate the health of the hostages. While in Entebbe, Garrigan develops a plan to assassinate the dictator but before it can be executed, the doctor’s plot is revealed. Amin orders him to be hanged by his skin until he dies. Amin leaves his soldiers to do the dirty work and returns to the media to announce that he has arranged for a plane to come and deliver the non-Israeli hostages to safety. After a period of intense torture, Amin’s henchmen lower Garrigan to the ground and leave the bloodied body of the young doctor reeling on the floor. Garrigan’s only remaining friend, Dr. Junju, arrives on the scene just in time. He bandages his wounds, urges him to tell the truth about what is happening in Uganda and escorts him into the masses of the released hostages, concealed from the eyes of the Ugandan soldiers. When Amin and his men find Garrigan gone it is too late, the doctor has already escaped, safely aboard the plane.

The film closes with authentic footage of Idi Amin and text telling the audience of the fall of Amin’s regime in 1979 and his exile to Saudi Arabia where he died in 2003. The final words on the screen tell of the some 300,000 souls murdered under the dictator’s regime.

Foremost amongst this film’s strengths is the impeccable acting. Forest Whitaker’s portrayal of Idi Amin is nothing short of breathtaking, as he strings along the audience in scene after scene. His performance is an unblemished depiction of a conflicting character. Amin although charming to the public was revealed to those closest to him as a monster hungry for power and paranoid of losing it at any second. Whitaker’s work set him apart from his colleagues in cinema as he won an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Drama in 2007.

In an interview with Brad Balfour of Popentertainment.com, Whitaker recounts how he spent countless hours learning Swahili, forming a dialect and teaching himself to play the accordion. Whitaker adequately immersed himself in his role, interviewing the family of Amin and spending time with those who knew him (Balfour, 2007). For Whitaker though it went so much further than just the technical side of acting, “For me acting is a little bit of a spiritual experience, so for me [I was] deeply searching for a connection inside of myself…” (Balfour, 2007). The hours of research and character study made for a near spiritual performance on screen. The film is defined by his performance and it appears that the actor did indeed find the connection that made the character so real. His brilliant work shows an authentic understanding of the man he was portraying and the culture surrounding him. Whitaker addressed this himself, “The Idi Amin story is very complicated. He’s a product of western intervention… I think as a result it’s important to take this character and move him in and understand what he was toying with. He was brought up in Africa, but he was embracing certain traits from the west, certain hedonistic features from the west, and it’s a lot about this clash of cultures” (Balfour, 2007). Whitaker’s deep connection with his conflicted character is what made this film so engaging. Roger Ebert praised the actor for breaking the mold and for somehow combining, “Amin’s blend of cruelty and jovial good fellowship in a portrait of an extroverted madmen” (Ebert, 2007). It is this, Whitaker’s ability to blend parts of Amin’s character so flawlessly, that make this film worth watching.

However, it is what the character of Amin stands for that makes this film historically significant. It is what he symbolizes that pushes this from simply a film to a piece of art that has cultural meaning. Amin is the representation of everything that went wrong with British colonialism. The African nations, after years of oppression and slavery, began desiring their freedom, but once they attained it, Britain had left them in such a horrific state that the plains of Africa quickly became unchecked arenas for power struggles. Britain left no governmental structure in place and stayed only to feed off of the economies of the resource-rich countries. The people of these countries followed whoever offered them freedom, often leading to the election of harsh dictators. The British showed support to the leaders that would remain favorable to the homeland and cooperate economically, regardless of the leaders political stance or qualification to lead. What Amin signifies is what is seen in Rwanda and Lybia and other Africa countries like these. He signifies the persistent and ongoing atrocities of British colonialism. He signifies the consequences of greed and disregard for human interest.

Not to be outdone by his on screen collaborator, the young James McAvoy, in a role every bit as important as Whitaker’s, is also very convincing. In his largest part to date he delivered a performance that, although overshadowed by Whitaker’s genius, was at the heart of the film and willed it to its conclusion. Without Whitaker’s performance the film is lost, but McAvoy provides the canvas on which Whitaker’s masterpiece can be painted. And it is McAvoy’s character that perhaps makes the boldest statement in the film.

Director Kevin Macdonald, in his adaptation of Foden’s work, made a film about the unsettling character of Idi Amin. As much as this story is about a man, it is about so much more than that. It is about British nationalism, it is about the void left in the wake of post-colonialism, it is about the collision of east and west, but most importantly the film is about the inner-racial struggle for freedom. All of these themes are found in the character of Nicholar Garrigan. This is why McAvoy’s performance is central to the film.

With Garrigan, the filmmakers are making a political statement. The young doctor is a hyperbolic, over handed symbol of western culture. Garrigan leaves Scotland to escape his life of discontentment. Much like the British coming into Africa he is in search of more to add to his “empire.” In the film McAvoy’s character sets off for Uganda with hopes of making a difference in this world. Despite his supposed mission for change, it becomes blatantly obvious to the viewer early on that Garrigan is a flawed character with conflicting intentions. Garrigan’s first act in Uganda is not to feed the hungry or help with doctoral aid; his first act is to have sex with a local woman he hardly even knows. It is impossible to miss what the filmmakers are doing here. This is a politically charged statement. The British, much like Garrigan, claim good intentions promising the Africans aid and help but in coming to Africa, a land they hardly know, they rape the innocence of the people and take whatever they want. Garrigan epitomizes this British disregard for culture. When McAvoy is sitting in his room in the opening scene, he has the globe in his hand. It is as if he can choose anywhere in the world to be his, he spins and vows to go wherever his finger lands. His arrival in Uganda is almost as superfluous as Britain’s decision to inhabit the African nations. Garrigan’s nonchalant attitude displays the same disregard for consequences that the British decision of “colonialization” exhibits. It is this tie between Garrigan and the British people, this symbol that drives the film.

However, the film would not be complete without the brilliant storyline that brings the collision of ideals, the merging of east and west. The plot moves in a way that brings the two unsuspecting characters of Amin and Garrigan into a place that they never intended to be. This is where the symbolism is the thickest. Garrigan and Amin begin their relationship amicably. Garrigan has a sort of respect for Amin and Amin an equally dumbfounded awe for Garrigan. As the story drags on though, neither man is what he seems and the relationship becomes fractured. Neither of the men can claim innocence and neither of the men leave the story without consequence. This is an extended metaphor of the collision of east and west. Amin and Garrigan symbolize an assimilation that rid everyone involved of innocence and left behind unintended, permanent consequences. Amin himself is a picture of what happens when ideologies collide. The British brought their ideas to Africa and these started molding with the ideas of the Africans. When certain men got a hold of this power, a monster was created, a monster that was jovial and promised good, but was greedy and cruel and concerned only with power. “The Last King of Scotland” is about Idi Amin, one of these creations of colonialism, but it extends past this. Whitaker’s Amin is a representation of the consequences of colonialism. The unlikely collision of Garrigan and Amin, and the ensuing erosion of the two characters is a symbol of post-colonial Africa.

This is what makes “The Last King of Scotland” both culturally and historically relevant. The film tells the horror stories that are a direct result of British colonialism. At the conclusion of the film when Dr. Junju is helping Garrigan escape, he tells him that he is tired of the hatred that is swallowing his country. He tells the doctor to go and sends him on his way saying, “My fate is in God’s hands.” As Garrigan flies to safety, Junju, the only heroic and innocent character left in the film, is left behind to pay for the consequences of the doctor’s actions. Dr. Junju is the Ugandan people. Innocent lives left in the destructive wake of British colonialism to pay for the consequences of the white man’s actions.

What colonialism left in its tracks is still present today. The blood of the 300,000 lives taken by the regime of Amin is just as much on the hands of the British colonialists. The ongoing struggle for liberation in Africa is a direct result of the British atrocities. This is the story that “The Last King of Scotland” is telling. We tell stories about the history to remember the past, but history is just as much about the future as it is about the past. Niccolo Machiavelli said it this way, “Whoever wishes to foresee the future must consult the past; for human events ever resemble those of preceding times. This arises from the fact that they are produced by men who ever have been, and ever shall be, animated by the same passions, and thus they necessarily have the same results” (Machiavelli, 1517). Every so often a film will come along and attempt to speak into the future, attempt to make a comment about the past in hopes of changing the future. “The Last King of Scotland” is one such film. This is why it is significant.

Balfour, B. (2007). Forest Whitaker Becomes the First King of the Hour. Retrieved January 20, 2012. PopEntertainment. http://www.popentertainment.com/whitaker.htm.

Ebert, R. (2007, Feb. 10). Oscar Predictions. Retrieved Jan. 21, 2012. Rogerebert.com. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070210/OSCARS/70210001

Machiavelli, N. (1517). The Discourses. Harmondsworth, E

The Hurt Locker Review

Originally published in the Samford Crimson

What Avatar did with 3D, CGI and special effects The Hurt Locker did with superb acting, unique cinematography, and an emotionally saturated script.   The Academy looked kindly upon this and declared The Hurt Locker film of the year.    Once again the underdog prevails.   Independently produced The Hurt Locker topped multi-million dollar blockbuster, Avatar.  The Hurt Locker cost $15 million significantly less than Avatar’s budget of nearly $500 million.  Tip of the hat to Kathryn Bigelow, newcomer to the Academy but no stranger to the world of directing, for making a nearly perfect movie.  This movie merited enough praise to bring Bigelow her first Oscar as she prevailed against her ex-husband James Cameron, director of Avatar.

All of this to say that I walked into BlockBuster last week to find The Hurt Locker sitting at number 12 on the most rented DVDs list, behind movies such as 2012, Princess and the Frog and The Box.  No offense to these titles, but it is a tragedy that viewers value exaggerated special effects and predictable plot lines over reality on the silver screen.  The Hurt Locker effectively conveyed the conflict in the Middle East and avoided the typical romantic, sentimentalized portrayal of war.  Bigelow and crew held no punches in their attempt to show the stark realities of war on an unwilling country, fought by exhausted soldiers, and yielding unnecessary casualties.  The movie depicts the racial generalization that has engulfed our nation as a result of this war and wrestles with the issues at the center of the conflict.  Iraq is depicted as a wounded country, limping around after years of living in fear of a dominating regime, yet occupied by a people that salt these festering wounds.  Although The Hurt Locker may be a little heavy on the anti-war sentiment it engages the viewer with a convincing story acted by a stellar cast with great conviction.

The audience experiences the war through the eyes of a bomb squad.  The scenes that ensue are edge-of-the-seat, sweat on your forehead, adrenaline-pumping action.  When the squad finds themselves bunkered down in a long-range firefight the film is turned up a notch.  The scene is viscerally tantalizing and physically exhausting.  As the hot winds roll over the dunes of the desert, the soldiers lay in motionless anticipation of an enemy, slapping at pestering bugs, and wanting nothing more than to quench their thirst, the audience becomes uneasy.  I found myself sweating, thirsty, and wanting to swat at the incessant flies circling on the screen.  The film successfully places the audience there in the ditch with the squad as the scene drones on monotonously for what seems like hours.  When the scene is complete it is necessary to breathe a deep breath along with main character, Will James played by Jeremy Renner.

Renner did an outstanding job of portraying an egotistical, bitter, and domineering soldier.  Many of his character’s actions are misguided, foolish and frustrating but Renner pulls it off, convincing the audience that his tactics are necessary.  Though fed up with James’ antics, by the conclusion of the movie the audience empathizes with him in an emotionally loaded scene.  As he returns home from his tour and spends time with his family the viewer feels the emotional displacement and vulnerability he exhibits.  The result is a character that begs to be rooted for yet leaves the audience with an empty frustration.  Renner’s creation is a conflicted and numb soldier that, while holding the audience at arm’s length, invites the viewer to appreciate his courage in crucial circumstances.

The film’s opening epigraph states simply, “War is a drug,” a quote from journalist Chris Hodges.  The Hurt Locker hopes to wean America away from this addiction to war by telling the story of a man who desperately needs war to survive.    Academy Awards earn for this movie an instant respect but it is the film’s unmatched ability to engage the conflict we Americans find ourselves in today that will establish this movie as historic cinema.

 

 

The Academy Awards look toward next year

Originally published in the Samford Crimson 3/9/11

The 83rd annual Academy Awards occurred last week and there weren’t many surprises.

“The King’s Speech,” behind a late push from the British theater and the Producer’s Guild Association, took the spoils in Best Picture. More impressing than that, however, Tom Hooper’s film is the first film to be awarded four of the Big Five (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Screenplay) since “American Beauty” in 2001.

“The Social Network” brought in a disappointing haul. The early favorite only received awards for three of its eight nominations. Director David Fincher must still await his long desired directing Oscar.

Natalie Portman and Wally Pfister were amongst the first time Oscar winners for their respective work in “Black Swan” and “Inception.”

“Inceptions” unmatched imaginative prowess swept the sound editing and visual effects awards. While palpable performances by Christian Bale and Melissa Leo aided “The Fighter” in knocking out the supporting role categories.

The awards were not much for surprises; however, outside of a creative opening piece, the hosts were entirely shocking.

Anne Hathaway was so surprised and thrilled that she was asked to host the Oscars that she forgot how to act. Or maybe she never really knew how. You can’t really blame the poor girl though. Despite an overly raunchy and overtly steamy appearance in “Love and Other Drugs,” it seems she will always be the awkward, excessively giddy “tween” from “The Princess Diaries.”

James Franco on the other hand was too “exhausted” to remember why he was asked to be a host. His lackluster approach stuck out like a sore thumb next to the overeager babbling of his counterpart.

The 83rd Oscars were down nine percent in ratings from 2009 and failed to appeal to a younger audience as the Academy had hoped. But this is not due to a less spectacular list of award winning movies.

“The Social Network” will be a film that defines a generation and speaks volumes about society. Inception pushed the boundaries of reality and moved blockbusters to a new level. The Coen brothers remade John Wayne’s “True Grit” with absolute class regardless of a need for Cogburn subtitles. Danny Boyle’s repackaging of the amazing story of Aron Ralston shook audiences and retold a painful story of redemption with gut-wrenching tangibility.

And “The King’s Speech” will join the ranks of the Best Pictures. Tom Hooper’s work, alongside a brilliant cast and a flawless performance from Colin Firth, will forever be revered as theatric brilliance. It already received the approval of the Queen and the Academy what more does it need?

Rottentomatoes.com has the film listed at number 31 on their Best of the Best Pictures list. But Colin Firth’s performance and recent emergence as a dominant force in the acting world is what boasts the most staying power in this film.

With the 83rd Academy Awards in the rear view mirror, it is never too early to begin looking forward to next year’s awards.

Nothing is more fun than a little speculation. Here is a little preview of some upcoming films that may possibly be Academy worthy next time around.

Already established directors Stephen Spielberg, David Fincher, Robert Redford, Martin Scorsese and George Clooney will release notable titles this year, along with a host of first timers, headlined by Jodi Foster. A couple of promising return films from Terrence Malick, David Cronenberg and Cameron Crowe will also hit the silver screen in 2011. Overall it is shaping up to be a promising year in cinema.

Stephen Spielberg’s “War Horse,” a film adaptation of Michael Morpugo’s novel, comes out in late 2011. The World War I story should be Spielberg’s first real Oscar hopeful since 2005.

Fresh off of his recent Oscar defeat, David Fincher will release a remake of the Swedish film, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,” based on the book by Stieg Larson. With Daniel Craig and Roonie Mara headlining the cast this is an optimistic Oscar nominee. Oscar winner Trent Reznor will once again write the score for Fincher’s project.

In 1980 legendary actor Robert Redford made the move to director with “Ordinary People” and won four Oscars. Since then only “A River Runs Through It” has garnered him any notice from the Academy. This year Redford’s film “The Conspirator,” about the only female linked to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, hits theaters and hopes to bring the film legend back to Oscar level.

Martin Scorsese looks to add to his lone Oscar with “Hugo Cabret,” a film based on a novel by Brian Selznick. Scorsese’s first 3D film will be released the day before Thanksgiving.

George Clooney won his first Oscar just a year ago for his work in “Up in the Air.” This time Clooney looks for an Oscar win on the other side of the camera. Clooney directs and acts in “The Ides of March” set to release in October 2011.

It is hard to decide which is the bigger news for this next film: Academy Award winner Jodi Foster’s directing debut or recent breakdown of the year winner Mel Gibson’s interaction with a stuffed beaver puppet. Jokes aside, this film has potential and has already created a considerable amount of buzz. Had the film made the cut for the Sundance Film Festival it would have had a better shot at Oscar contention.

Three successful directors who have been out of the game for a while will reenter the scene this year. Terrence Malick, David Cronenberg and Cameron Crowe all make their returns to the cinema in 2011.

“The Tree of Life,” Malick’s film featuring Brad Pitt and Sean Penn is at first glance the most promising of these three.

However, Cronenberg’s “A Dangerous Method,” about the relationship between Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, stars the brilliant Viggo Mortentsen and could be an interesting nominee. Crowe, the only one of these three returning directors to have won an Oscar, joins forces with Matt Damon and Scarlett Johannson in a “dramedy” of typical Crowe style.

These are just a few of the films coming out in 2011 that hope to be in consideration for the 84th annual Academy Awards.

The 83rd Academy Awards Preview

Originally published in The Samford Crimson 2/2/11

Despite a slow start, 2010 proved to be an interesting year in cinema.

A year that saw Christopher Nolan redefine the world of the dream, David Fincher unravel the fabrics of this generation’s social network and Pixar complete a 15 year-old trilogy.

Oscar nominations were announced a week ago and now, nearly a month from the awards show, the speculations have begun.

Around mid-July of last year the outlook for the 83rd Academy Awards looked bleak at best. However, the Academy’s nomination list has left little to be desired.

Best Film

The Academy is spot on in this category. Unlike the ridiculous nominations handed out by the Golden Globes and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, the Academy’s best film nominations make logical sense.

The Academy knows a good movie when it hits the silver screen and does not base its nominations merely on whether or not Johnny Depp makes a sub-par appearance. The Golden Globe nominations were nothing short of ridiculous, but faithfully the Academy has righted the ship.

Despite the brilliance across the board in the best film category, it is shaping up to be a two horse race. The award will most likely go to either “The King’s Speech” or “The Social Network”.

The Producer’s Guild of America somewhat surprisingly awarded “The King’s Speech” as its best film. This bodes well for Tom Hooper’s film as the PGA and Academy agree 71 percent of the time.

The Director’s Guild of America also honored Hooper for outstanding directorial achievement and Colin Firth’s lead role in the film earned him a Screen Actor’s Guild award. This recent success and the awards garnered by Hooper and cast place “The King’s Speech” at an advantage going into the Academy Awards.

Previous front-runner, “The Social Network”, needs to make a big push in the coming weeks to have a chance at bringing David Fincher his first Oscar.

Final Say: “The King’s Speech”

Score

Hans Zimmer is no stranger to this nomination list, but a win would be his first in this category since “The Lion King”.

Zimmer is an expert composer and his third composition for Nolan is sensational. A.R. Rahman (“127 Hours”) returns only two years removed from his win in this exact category when he took the Academy by storm with his music in “Slumdog Millionaire”.

However, his reunion with Danny Boyle is going to be hard pressed to yield him another award.

The main reason for this is the duo of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. Their combination on the score for “The Social Network” was a pleasant surprise.

Final Say: Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross,”The Social Network”

Screenplay

“The Social Network” will not leave the Oscars empty-handed because it will be an absolute outrage if Aaron Sorkin’s work does not win best adapted screenplay. Original screenplay will either end up with Christopher Nolan for his incredibly creative work on “Inception”‘s script, or with David Siedler for his coy and witty work in “The King’s Speech”. It is past time for Nolan to his receive his first Oscar and that film may be just enough to give him the edge in this category.

Final Say: Aaron Sorkin, “The Social Network”, Best Adapted Screenplay; Christopher Nolan, “Inception”, Best Original Screenplay

Actor

Colin Firth and James Franco have emerged as two of the best actors in recent years. Franco’s gritty performance in “127 Hours” is simply sublime, and he had the category locked up until Colin Firth delivered a flawless depiction of King George VI.

This category is one of the most appealing because 2010 was one of the best years for actors in recent memory. Eisenberg, Bridges, Franco, Firth, and Bardem all delivered performances well deserving of the award.

Final Say: James Franco

Actress

If Natalie Portman does not win this award, the Academy has issues much larger than Portman’s character, Nina. Her performance as a slowly deteriorating and obsessive dancer was brilliant. Although Aronofsky’s film is about the unattainable nature of perfection, Portman’s work is indeed nearly flawless. Her performance is a refreshing glimpse of pure acting.

Final Say: Natalie Portman

Directing

If “The Social Network” fails to bring home best film, I believe the Academy will finally acknowledge David Fincher as director of the year. However, the Academy is kind to the Coen brothers and they are always a threat to win this award. Their work directing the unlikely duo of Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfield is definitely deserving of the nod in this category.

Cinematography

This category is a tough one.

“Black Swan” was incredibly stylized. It was shot in color but cinematographer Matthew Libatique created the illusion of a black and white feel. This unique approach may win him the award.

However, “The Social Network”, which was shot on the new, sensational Red camera, was incredibly streamlined and pure. Jeff Cronenweth’s style fit with Fincher so well that he may just win the award.

Christopher Nolan’s most visually ambitious film to date, “Inception”, teams him up with friend Wally Pfister whose only nominations have come under Nolan’s direction. The things done in this film are groundbreaking and the images are displayed on an insurmountably grand scale. The snub in editing should alone warrant a win for Inception in this category.

Final Say: Wally Pfister,”Inception”

 

5 best films of the year:

1. The Social Network

2. The King’s Speech

3. 127 Hours

4. Inception

5. Black Swan

 

 

I’m made of bronze

Originally published in The Samford Crimson 12/8/10

Twitter has successfully turned an inanimate object into a social hero.

There is evidently more to the statue of Mr. Beeson than meets the eye.

The minor statue of major benefactor Ralph Waldo Beeson sits at the end of Centennial Walk. Although the life-sized, bronze Beeson sits only three and half feet tall, it assumes the large role as Samford’s main motionless man.

This petite persona has been the unmoving, solid mainstay at the heart of Samford since its dedication in 1988.

For years, well-intentioned students have poked fun at Beeson, made jokes and attempted to speak for him.

But now, after years of silence, the “metaled” man has finally found a way to share his thoughts with the Samford community.

The recent arrival of Ralph Beeson on Twitter has caused an uproar on Samford’s campus. And to be honest, the guy has an engaging sense of humor. Students cannot stop laughing at his ability to put a comical spin on his unique situation.

In just a week’s time, @RalphBeeson has accumulated more than 300 followers.

“I think that he is one of the funnier people that I follow,” sophomore journalism and mass communication major Laura Powell said.

As his popularity has progressed, he has remained humble about his success. He still works to be a very relatable figure on campus.

“I follow him to get a better idea of what happens through the eyes of someone who doesn’t eat, sleep, or interact with anyone else,” junior entrepreneurship major Jordan Cole said.

Select students and faculty have received the pleasure of being “retweeted” by the notorious and nostalgic Samford hero. But Mr. Beeson still invites anyone who wishes to come and sit in his presence.

“I feel like he is a man of the people,” senior accounting major Sam Dickerson said.

The Caf and the Quad have been bustling with discussion about personal favorites and the newest tweet. This has become such a trend among students that other busts and statues on campus are getting word of Beeson’s antics.

Jabez L.M. Curry, the marble statue of former Alabama legislator and Howard College president, has recently started his own twitter, much to Beeson’s annoyance. He can be followed at @JabezCurry.

Rumor has it that others are trying to get in on the action. Word is getting around that the bust of Major Davis in the entrance of Goodwin Davis Library is interested in joining the madness. As soon as he can figure out why his nose is so special he plans on jumping on the Twitter bandwagon. He is now looking for an able-bodied partner well equipped with hands to help run his twitter. However, this is all just speculation.

It seems some students would be perfectly okay with more openness in the inanimate community of Samford.

“I hope that more of the statues on campus will open up and tell us what goes on in their head,” Cole said.

Others, although acknowledging the hilarity of the tweeting statues, refuse to believe that these sculptures are gifted enough to run a Twitter. There are those few calling for the identity of the tweeters.

“I don’t want it to be anonymous anymore, I just want to know,” sophomore English major Emma Stevens said.

These speculations do raise the question of how the @RalphBeeson Twitter account is maintained. However, one needs only to look to Mr. Beeson himself for the answer.

“People seem to think someone else controls my Twitter,” @RalphBeeson said. “I actually tweet using a special iPhone app made for statues, sculptures, and busts.”

As long as Mr. Beeson has his iPhone, you can be sure you will know what he is thinking and I am sure he appreciates you allowing him to get it all off of his firm, bronze chest.

Birmingham’s changing of tunes

Originally published in the Samford Crimson 11/17/10

The music scene of Birmingham is in flux.

Earlier this year, when local Birmingham radio station Live 100.5 underwent a format change, the musicians and music gurus of the area admitted that it would have a large impact on the music scene in the city.

“It’s really going to hurt the scene. It’s going to hurt a lot of up-and-comers like me,” locally born artist Matthew Mayfield said.

The company that produced 100.5, Citadel Broadcasting, was in debt and had to make changes. People in the area began calling for fans to support the station.

“If something good is around, it may not be around forever. You really need to get off your rear and support it,” Bottletree Café promoter Brian Teasley said.

In the following weeks, fans came out in droves to support the cause. The SaveLive100.5 Facebook group quickly surpassed 20,000 fans.

However, this was not enough to save Birmingham’s favorite station.

Corporations did not jump on the support train and the station was shut down in March 2010.

With the station’s downfall, fans, supporters and venue owners began to express the idea that Birmingham’s music niche was experiencing a massive overhaul.

“That whole niche of music is gone. It’s wiped away with them closing down,” Teasley said.

The loss of Live 100.5, only a year after City Stages’ $1 million debt drove the festival out of business, clearly foreshadowed trouble for the music scene.

At the beginning of November, news came out that WorkPlay, another of Birmingham’s unique, independent music venues, was going through foreclosure.

WorkPlay is a nationally respected concert venue that caters to the independent audience. In 2007, it was included in “America’s 40 Best Music Venues,” by Paste Music. However, days of success seem to be a thing of the past for the heralded venue.

WorkPlay, founded by Alan Hunter and his three brothers in 2001, recently invited investors and co-owners into the financial ownership of the building. The company was subsequently split into two businesses. One side owned the property and the other ran the venue. In the process of looking for a potential buyer for the future of WorkPlay, the loans on the building matured and Superior Bank began the foreclosure process. The side of the company responsible for the property is the one undergoing foreclosure.

In the past six months, WorkPlay and Superior were in talks with a potential buyer, but when the talks fell through the bank went ahead with foreclosure.

In interviews, Hunter has blamed the economy for WorkPlay’s struggles. Much like other venues in the area, WorkPlay has had trouble lately acquiring the finances necessary to book big name bands.

“I feel like we are in a battle,” Hunter said. “Two years of bad economy definitely took their toll.”

Once again, music fans are coming out of the woodwork to voice their support for a struggling venue. It took only 24 hours for the save WorkPlay group on Facebook to reach 5,000 fans. In just over a week, the group reached more than 13,000 strong.

WorkPlay issued an official statement to fans thanking them for the support and encouraging fans to continue spreading the word.

But the question still remains: Will the efforts of the fans be enough?

Music fans in the area are fully prepared for yet another of their sacred venues disappearing. However, they are extremely concerned about the affect that WorkPlay’s absence would have on the local scene.

Matthew Stewart, lead singer of “On the Rocks,” winner of the 2009 Battle of the Bands at WorkPlay, spoke about Birmingham’s fading music scene.

“It’s almost dead anyways, it’s gotten worse,” Stewart said. “That whole scene is almost dead, (WorkPlay) is just one step closer.”

Samford University juniors Matt Davidson, an undeclared major, and Trevor Starnes, a history major, have expressed their own concerns with WorkPlay’s recent struggles.

Both Davidson and Starnes have a stake in Birmingham’s music culture, as they are instrumental in bringing artists to Samford’s venues as a part of the Student Activities Council.

“I really do think it will be a huge loss for Birmingham,” Davidson said. “Now people will be more apt to drive to Nashville and Atlanta instead of seeing shows here.”

“Either Bottletree or the other music venues will have to take over the artists that come to WorkPlay or the entire music scene will be lost,” Starnes said.

The Birmingham musical community understands the importance of WorkPlay as a venue. It is a unique place that, with recent losses of City Stages and Live 100.5, has given a place for music fans in Birmingham to hold on to hope.

Hunter expressed the value of his business in an interview with the Birmingham News last week.

“I don’t want to overstate the importance of WorkPlay in Birmingham,” Hunter said. “But a lot of people here depend on it as a unique place to go to events or see a show, and there would be a hole left in the Birmingham music scene where WorkPlay had filled a niche over the past nine years.”

It is yet to be seen if the gaping holes in the music community of Birmingham will be detrimental.

What it means to be home

Originally published in The Samford Crimson 10/20/10

Take a trip with me across the railroad tracks.

Hear the crunch of gravel beneath the soles of your shoes. Cross the rusted metal tracks as the vibrations of distant locomotive shake you to your soul. Meet some men who, by your definition, have no home. Sit with them under the overpass, as thousands pass over oblivious, on their way to and fro the rigorous nine to five.

See the man on the street corner, begging for five minutes of your time. Look at his weathered skin. Shake his dirty hand. Smell the loose-leaf tobacco and alcohol. Examine the tattoos. Hear the strain of his ruffled voice. Listen to his story.

Standing on your corner

Homewood has its share of homeless people. But in the midst of the abundance and wealth they are far too often ignored. Step back from your life and consider the people behind the stats. The homeless stand on your corner, so take some time out of your day to stand in their’s.

The wealth of homewood

Homewood is one of the wealthiest communities in all of the U.S.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Homewood has a population of approximately 26,750, and only ten percent of this population lives below the poverty level. The median family income for Homewood is $77,021 compared to the U.S. average of $63,211. The median Homewood house is valued at $313,200.

“Bible-belt” conundrum

Not only is Homewood one of the most well to do areas in this country but it is also in the middle of the South’s “Bible-belt.” From the Church of the Highlands to Dawson Memorial Baptist Church, mega-churches of every denomination flood the surrounding areas.

The community of Homewood is heavily churched and comparatively wealthy. However, the churched of Homewood are faced with the dichotomy of their three-story houses and the tents of the homeless.

Taking action

Christian communities in the area are not turning a blind to the homeless in this town. In 2008, Church of the Highlands purchased some land at 5705 First Ave. N. in the Woodlawn community. The church possess 22,000 square feet of land in Woodlawn, including the renovated Woodlawn Fire Station and a medical clinic. The building occupying this area is called the Birmingham Dream Center and was erected to serve the surrounding the community.

According to the Church of the Highlands website the Dream Center has the potential to serve 30,000 patients annually. The Dream Center is referred to as the “nerve center” of their outreach programs and allows them to partner with local organizations like Christ Health Center and the education system of Woodlawn.

“This is a coordination point for all Church of the Highlands’ ministries and mission projects,” Highlands Mission Pastor Scott Montgomery said.

We are here to stay

According to its website, the mission of the Dream Center is to provide social services and outreach programs designed to meet both physical and spiritual needs.

“We don’t need a building to do ministry,” Montgomery said. “But we’re investing in the community. This tells you we’re here to stay.”

Homewood’s neighbor

However, the work does not stop here. The homeless people of Homewood and Birmingham are still in need.

Homewood may be one of the wealthier cities in the U.S. but, this approximately eight square mile city, finds itself neighbor to the city of Birmingham, where those living below the poverty level increases to nearly 25 percent.

In 2007, The Governor’s Statewide Interagency Council of Homelessness released a statewide data report for homelessness in Alabama. Metropolitan Birmingham was reported as having 2,104 people homeless on any given night.

Reaching the “houseless”

Mosaic Church of Birmingham, is another small community of believers downtown scouring the streets looking for the “houseless” and meeting their needs. The ministry involved with the houseless is called Kaleber and is headed up by church members, Austin Richardson and Hunter Davis.

“You have heard them referred to as the homeless,” Richardson said. “But a home is a place where you dwell, where your friends and family are. A house is a building, four walls, and a structure. These men have homes, what they lack is a house.”

Behind the stats

One of the houseless of Birmingham, Dave Owens, goes by “Dusty Dave.” Dave is a simple man. Graying beard and decaying teeth do not subtract from a smile that shines from a mile away. He has seen his share of life. He has been around; experienced things most will never endure.

“I’ve been in and I’ve been out, I’ve slept in ditches. I’ve been cold and I’ve been hungry, but I’m still here,” Owens said.

Owens just turned 50-years-old, he was surprised with his first birthday party in years. Tears rolled down his face as he unwrapped gifts for the first time since his childhood days. He looked over to his houseless companion of many years, Mike Campbell and nodded his head as they cherished the moment.

“This, this right here is family. Not too many people get this,” Owens said.

A new sense of life

Kaleber has been reaching men like Campbell and Owens for ten months now. The houseless community has shown great improvement during this time. It turns out that when people take time to care for others, something beautiful happens and the world, just for a skip of a heartbeat, seems to be right.

Owens phrased it this way, “Everybody take care of everybody, and everything else will take care of itself.”

Owens and Cambell are looking for ways to share the love they have received from men like Davis and Richardson.

Owens has found his purpose in the midst of all the “hard times, medium times, and good times,” by caring for others in the houseless community when they cannot provide for themselves. Owens is one of the pillars of his community. He knows the streets and helps others find their way. His camp, always equipped with two extra tents, gives stragglers in the houseless community a place to stay for the night.

“I guess you could say Dave’s place serves as a halfway house,” said Davis

Campbell has recently been assigned as the project manager at St. Benedict’s Veterans Center. Here he oversees every new member at the center and is in charge of their initiation.

Campbell spent half of his life searching for his purpose and now he has finally found it. Four months after being rushed to the hospital with a clot in his lungs, Campbell has only 15 percent usage of his lungs but has found a new sense of life.

Finally home

These men are full of story. Their tired eyes tell of journeys past and the dirt on their hands is witness to many hours of hard work. But these are man that, day after day, have their stories ignored, men who are passed in the busyness of work schedules. These are some of the houseless faces of Birmingham.

Dave Owens is much more than just one of the ten percent. Mike Campbell is not simply one of the 2,000 houseless in our community. These are men who have found their way home.

To learn more about Kaleber’s ministry visit their website at Kaleber.wordpress.com or their twitter at Twitter.com/bhamkaleber.