National Anthems in Film
In my long tradition of being consumed by obscure subjects, my fascination has recently zeroed in on national anthems. Listening to the songs themselves is quite pleasurable, especially given my fondness for choruses, but they grow much more powerful when a crowd of patriots are there to sing along.
My obsession may have been sparked by the film “Invictus.” The post-apartheid South African Rugby team had spent most of the film merely mouthing the words to their new national anthem until the world cup when the captain, played by an accent donning Matt Damon, passes out the lyrics for the team to memorize. They embrace a new national identity at the end of the film and sing their hearts out in a swelling of pride and Hollywood romanticism. The contemporary version of South Africa’s anthem is a very beautiful song, made up of multiple languages, the lyrics gathered from several different songs. And to see actual footage of it performed in front of real citizens, reveals pride indeed.
Similarly, the Star Spangled Banner is depicted as bringing people together in multiple films, but these scenes are meant to hold your attention amid the chaos of the plot. Immensely proud of their anthem, and the high degree of difficulty needed to sing it, American’s stop everything they are doing to listen, sing along, and hold their hands to their hearts in a pause preceding or proceeding the crazy happenings about them. Sometimes this is for comedic effect, as in “Christmas Vacation’s” rocketing Santa scene, or the purpose is to instill a calm before the storm as portrayed in “Dark Knight Rises” just before a football field collapses.
This ominous use is most often how the Russian national anthem shows up in American films. Still recovering from Cold War era films where the Soviet Union was a very common enemy, movies still use the “cut to Russia” transitions that are heralded by the Soviet era and later anthem. It is strange that the proud theme of one country could invoke a sense of danger and auster alienness for those in another. In “Rocky IV,” the two fighters size each other up, in “The Hunt for Red October” the singing introduces the beginning of a delicate cat and mouse game, and in many a spy movie, the chorus warns the undercover hero to be cautious in enemy territory. Each anthem has been a very powerful symbol for a country not to be taken lightly.
But perhaps the most powerful and memorable use of a national anthem I have seen, was in “Casa Blanca.” While Lazlo tries to make a deal with Rick for the papers of transit, they overhear German singing. As the Nazi officers crowd around a piano the entire bar of refugees and French countrymen stare at these would-be conquerors who, by this point in time, have attempted to stomp out and displace entire cultures. Lazlo walks over and tells the band to play “La Marseillaise.” With a nod from Rick, the band plays and all gradually join in until the officers are drowned out. They strain to keep singing under the weight of emotion, with tears in their eyes. That is the power of a song, the strength of a people’s identity. And the anthem becomes a rallying cry calling on people to defend their very way of life.
Book to Movie Adaptations and The Giver Trailer
I’ve been waiting for this movie to get off the ground for years. I remember when it was first announced, in my IMDB forum lurking days, it was slated for a 2011 release, and I still remember thinking how long a wait that would be. When the project was shelved, I knew it was in trouble. It’s just such a difficult novel to adapt, not your average young adult formula of good triumphing over evil.
I wrote a short treatment of the novel for a literature film class. I envisioned a more conceptual approach. The actual plot was simple, it was the world that I thought should be as vivid as possible, with gradual changes in visuals as the film progressed (starting in black and white and gradually adding one color at a time), mimicking the character’s changes from within. My initial approach was basically to make some Darren Aronofsky-esque boring art film that was more slow and emotional than plot driven. Not exactly a film targeted to the young adult audience. Not to insult YA audiences. Let’s just say that my overblown, self indulgent vision would probably need some toning down even for a general demographic. I just wanted to translate the experience I had from reading the book into film, but the two mediums elicit emotion in very different ways.
The book, one of my favorite books, manages to hold it’s audience because it is very character driven, we are in Jonas’s head and Jonas’s voice sounds very genuine to his age. But in a movie, you have a wider world to explore and less time to do it in. The scenes added to The Hunger Games movie, that weren’t in the book, illustrate the political climate and world a lot better than narrative exposition between the actors would have. The book is from Katnis’s perspective, but in the movie you get to step outside of her and get a more concise understanding of the situation than if we relied on the character’s gradual realization alone. So after watching the trailer for The Giver, when I saw that they seemed to add more character interactions and more dialogue (much of the novel’s ideas are conveyed through Jonas’s inner thoughts) I was worried, but hopeful. They seem to have made a few minor characters more prominent and are making the governing body, in the form of Meryl Streep, more of an obvious antagonist (also, Hollywood can never resist slipping in a dramatic kiss). I understand they have to make things more explicit in the movie or things will be left more confusing than artfully ambiguous. But too much spelling out and you might end up with another David Lynch style Dune, inner thoughts conveyed in voice overs (however much I love Dune, it probably wouldn’t work today).
The dangers with book adaptations is that you have to be explicit to convey an idea, but not so heavy handed that your just stating all the themes. So if the movie version has to inject some things into the plot to make a good movie, then I won’t resist (too much). Faithful adaptation don’t necessarily make good movies, that’s just the case for some books. A book could read like a movie and a movie could sound like a book (looking at you Chris Nolan), but the trick is finding the right approach to convey the ideas and spirit of the source material.
The Giver was more than a coming of age story to me. I saw it as a fight to claim your own identity and artistic freedom. I read it at a time when I didn’t really know what type of person I wanted to be, which I didn’t figure out until years later, but at that time, The Giver gave me the will to start that journey. It was also my introduction to dystopian stories and broadened my mind to a new way of thinking about the world around me, allowing me to examine the mechanics of society and a person’s place in it. However the filmmakers choose to interpret the novel for this adaptation, I hope it brings that sort of growth and introspection to many more people.
Nerdy Pursuits 