I saw Fireproof for the first time tonight. It is absolutely amazing. I love how it addresses things honestly, realistically, and completely. It covers a lot of issues very important to us as people. I highly recommend it.
Here's the problem with Fireproof:
It's a movie. (Don't get me wrong -- I know it's also a book now. ;) )
With books, we have more of a tendency to stop and think about what we have read. We assimilate the information, lessons, morals, and content. It connects with our mind, and then our emotions. With movies, we have a tendency to watch the images and participate in the emotion. But we often fail to think about the message and plug in the morals. It connects with our emotions, but can often miss our mind.
This can sometimes be accomplished in movies. But Fireproof was too short for that. It had a lot of ground to cover, and was forced to cover it quickly. The Lord of the Rings, on the other hand, actually accomplishes this connection with the mind quite well. It just took 12 hours to do it. :) In 12 hours, you have more reprieve and reverie time to think and connect mind and emotion.
SO -- How can this problem be addressed?
Watch Fireproof several times, of course! Take some alone time after the movie to think and replay. Might even be better to watch it alone, so you have a chance to ask questions. How would I react in that situation? Could I do that? Am I willing to take the dare? What is love, anyway?
The movie can keep you thinking for awhile. I am. Have you?
1 comment:
The first time I watched FIREPROOF, it frustrated me a little. It seemed to me like it at times justified the wife's actions, on the pretext that her husband was being such a jerk. From reading that I have done, it seems like guys are not so complex (I don't mean that in a bad way). If the wife treats him right (it may have to start with her) he is going to in return, treat her right. Now, in looking back, I do remember that the Mom had to do the love dare on her husband. So, I suppose that was the movie's way of showing that it has to start with one party -- not necessarily the husband. Basically, it has to start with the party that is not asking for a divorce. Maybe it was just the people I was watching the movie with. Or, maybe I missinterpreted their comments. However, it seemed to me like many of the problems in their marriage wouldn't have been there in the first place if the wife had been a "good wife". However, I guess the movie meets people where they are at -- crashed-marriage-land. And once there, they are going to have to get out somehow. Perhaps the movie didn't fully express the fact that the wife should be sweet to her husband regardless if he is living a love dare or not. People are going to be selfish. People are going to not do things the right way some time, but that doesn't give the second party the right to not do their side of things right. Two wrongs don't make a right. Am I making sense? Is my thinking way off track?!
Post a Comment