October 8: This movie is advertised as a documentary. My viewing of this movie, executive produced by Will & Grace’s Debra Messing, who is Jewish, is that this promotes an interpretation of the actions and subsequent consequences and results of the attacks on October 7 last year in Israel by Hamas. Hamas attacked October 7th killing 1200 and taking 58 people hostage at various locations.
This part of the world has been in a stalement between Israel and the Palestinians for decades. The excellent movie Oslo from 2021 addressed attempts to bring peace to the region with talks back in 1993. One ongoing theme is that two wrongs do not make a right. Another theme for me for both sides is that the actions undertaken by a ruling government are not to be automatically associated as those of its people. Hamas is NOT the Palestinian people. The ruling party in Israel is NOT all Jewish people, and not all Zionists (for those looking to make that distinction).

The actions undertaken by Hamas on this day (October 7) are taken from that day forward and do ignore the ongoing and historical occupation and conflict within the region. Both parties in my limited view and understanding are not coming forward with clean hands. Far from it. To be clear, nothing justifies rape and the killing of innocent civilians attending an outdoor concert. Nothing. At the same time, how many ongoing actions of discrimination and oppression must any group accept? When is the breaking point. Nobody wins in a war of absolutes where there is no compromise or recognize of the others’ right to exist.

I am not looking to become overly political. Rather I am reviewing a recently released movie. I am mindful of a movie, however, that seems to take a very political attitude and only at the end mentions Gaza. The pictures and attitudes within US college campuses is most shocking to me. There are protestors openly chanting about the killing of Zionists and Jewish people. The universities are said to be too biased towards the Jewish perspective. Simultaneously we see that the rape and killing of Jewish women at the concert on that day has not been condemned by organizations like UN Women. Yet other atrocities against other women have been condemned straight away. I note that a number of the universities shown have more recetly had their federal funding threatened to be removed like Columbia and Harvard.

This is a very complex situation and this movie for me has limited its scope to black and white issues. One can disagree with the actions of any government and not criticize the people and their religion. One can further take a strong position for an issue, however by ignoring the wider context and historical background, it can turn the complexity into simple choices which for me don’t reflect reality. In the end as the credits rolled, I had learned a few things and better understood one perspective. I respect it. I see the threat which can be seen in campuses and social media. Isn’t the starting point to recognize that life is better than death? That parties have a right to live, and live in peace? That without that fundamental understanding, then any hope for a lasting and meaningful resolution isn’t possible. As a movie I think this does a disservice with avoiding bringing forward the larger issues and the perspective of the other side. I will remain hopeful that the political hawks who want death to the other side can be silenced and replaced with more moderate people, and poltical leaders can reflect the wishes of the majority of their citizens. But we can hope.

The Two Popes (revisited): With the passing of Pope Francis this past week, I decided to re-watch this excellent movie starring Academy award nominees Anthony Hopkins (best supporting actor) and Jonathan Pryce (best actor) from 2019. I found it more emotional, as I in retrospect could see how Pope Francis became an agent of change within the Catholic church. Hopkins had a difficult task, in humanizing Pope Benedict who was a more hardline conservative, and traditionalist. The interplay between the two men showed how their overall attitudes about the role of the church, and the traditions within it were compelling and telling. Fundamentally, the church was losing parishioners. The church was not changing with the times and growing, realizing that people were not the same and the message was getting lost. A sermon to an empty church doesn’t get heard. The emotion also came though with the realization of Pope Benedict that he was no longer the right man for the job. Sure he could hear some of the negative feedback on him, but he recognized that a popular Cardinal who engages with the people will carry a message that is more likely to be heard and followed.

I love the scene pictured above. I love this scene because after sharing a simple pizza and Fanta, these two men entered the Sistine Chapel and gave a thrill of a lifetime to a room full of tourists. Can you imagine the Pope showing up out of nowhere in this most holy place? Ultimately these two men, who have fundamentally opposing views on the direction of the church, can still respect one another deeply and grow to become friends. They share a difficult job and can be thankful for the other. Pope Francis was a simple man who led a remarkable life. He shunned the opulence of the leadership within the church, and he remained committed to the poor. He couldn’t ever understand how a world with so much could still have a billion people who are malnourished or starving. His final wish was to be buried in a simple wooden casket and in a smaller church. I am saddened by his loss, and it will be interesting to see how the next conclave will decide who should lead the church going forward.