Being There

This is class related.

I think I might talk about both clips. First up: The final moment of the film.



(I love Youtube). Anywho - when I first saw this in class - I couldn't help but think, "Wait...what...?" At first I didn't understand why the director would make the choice to present such a blatant Christ myth in the character of Chance. I began to roll my eyes - thinking it a cop-out. But when reflecting upon the film and the character of Chance, it really is a beautiful moment. Chance is an innocent in a world of greedy, corrupt lawyers and politicians. Yet by his presence, he is infusing individuals with a new appreciation for life and love. He's cultivating beauty in this unattended garden. The simple, innocent mentality could be scene as dumb, or a disability - but the final scene negates any idea of Chance being "dumb" by infusing the character with mythical, Christ-like powers. The impact of this scene should leave the audience with a sense of wonder (and confusion)...but the credits kind of undermine the final statement of the film...



Ouch. While HILARIOUS, this interrupts the tone the final scene is setting and the statement of the innocent savior is lost to the comedy in the out-takes. It's no wonder that there was such a dispute about including these takes right after such a poignant clip. If I was the director/writer, I too would be up in arms about the inclusion of comedy right after the realization of beauty. They don't line up. An easy solution? Have the out-takes run AFTER the credits finish. I think it was a big mistake to place these two separate ideas right after the other. The voice of the writer/director is completely overpowered, and the audience does not leave thinking about the meaning - instead they leave chuckling. "What a cute film." I don't feel it was meant to be that way.