Skip to main content

Does the Movie Matter (when it is screened to benefit a good cause)?

John Leguizamo, as Frank Diaz, and David Castro as the son, Justin, in "Where God Left His Shoes."

On February 18, the film "Where God Left His Shoes" will be screened at The Crest theater on K Street to benefit Faith and Homeless Families Initiate, "a 2009 pilot program of the Ending Chronic Homelessness Initiative [which will match] ... homeless families with faith communities to mentor and help them obtain self-sufficiency and permanent housing."

Now, this new initiate of an initiate is very very likely to do good work for a good cause, efficiently and effectively rising to its ambitions, helping many homeless Sacramento families.

The little-seen arthouse film to be screened to raise money for the pilot initiative has gotten mostly good reviews [5 of 7 reviewers at rottentomatoes.com call it Fresh, whereas only two give it a thumbs-down Rotten rating.] And even in the bad reviews I've read, star John Leguizamo's performance is bountifully lauded. But I do think it troubling that the film -- about homelessness, raising funds for a homelessness cause -- is denounced by reviewers for presenting homelessness inauthentically.

The Village Voice review ends with these almost-indeciferable words, "the movie's vérité is diluted by a cozy, adult-contemporary empathy with those less fortunate that left me hearing 'Another Day in Paradise.'"

Variety says the movie "piles the pathos high as if to see how many hard-luck cliches its pugilist hero can fend off without succumbing to schmaltz."

Slant magazine ends its positive two-star review with this sentence: "It's cheap emotional manipulation for a topic that needs none: The Bicycle Thief for the Starbucks generation."

The New York Times' review of the movie begins with these words: "A fishy odor of unearned sanctimony clings to 'Where God Left His Shoes,' Salvatore Stabile’s queasy-making drama about a homeless New York family seeking shelter on a snowy Christmas Eve." And goes on to say, "The bureaucratic hurdles [the main character] encounters are real enough, but [his family], who are neither illegal immigrants nor drug abusers and who apparently have no relatives or friends on whom to lean, come across as much more helpless and victimized than they would actually be in such a situation."

Only Film-Forward demurs, writing that the protagonist's "plight is so realistic and the film’s reflection of our economic problems so devastating and direct, we can’t help but be deeply touched."

The movie did win a prestigeous award at Sundance, the 2007 Humanitas Prize. According to the Humanitas Prize website, the prize "honors stories that affirm the dignity of the human person, probe the meaning of life, and enlighten the use of human freedom." All that is all to the good, but perhaps veracity isn't an element that the prize-awarding committee values, even in a fictional film presented as being real or possible.

For us who live in Homeless World, getting news out there about the truth of our situation is of high value. Sentimental or phony or hyped depictions of homelessness can only add to the general misimpression of what life is like "out here."

I'm not meaning to criticize anyone, exactly. I mean, What can you do? The Community Services Planning Council and the folks of Ending Chronic Homelessness are wanting to raise funds and the film producers made "Where God Left His Shoes" available for that effort. The movie is well-regarded and seemingly a perfect fit to the ideals of anything called the Faith and Homeless Families Initiative.

It remains that presentations of the true nature of homeless life continue to be rare, overwhelmed by what is hyped, extreme and sentimentalized.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I saw this movie, and it is truly wonderful. The only "unrealistic" depiction of homelessness in this movie is the fact that men were able to stay in the same homeless shelter as women and children. Apart from that, this is the same type of story that takes place all too often to too many people. It's worth a watch.
Anonymous said…
It's seems curious to quote the NY Times in this context since, essentially, the reviewer says that if you are not mentally ill or a drug addict you should be able to help yourself out of homelessness. To those who have experienced homelessness, is that amore "truthful" depiction than in the movie.

My suggestion to this blogger is to see the movie before criticizing it. Otherwise you are just reviewing reviews - which as opinion pieces have no obligation to be objective or truthful.
Unknown said…
Anon 1: OK; fair enough. I hope to see the film if it plays in town, at regular prices.

Anon 2: The Times reviewer DOES NOT say what you say he essentially says. External reviews listed at IMDB are repleat with 'authenticity' criticism of the film.

Reviewers MOST CERTAINLY have a journalist's obligation to be fully truthful and fair.

Also, the blogpost asks a question, that I think is worth thinking about. Basically, it alights on the idea that organizations serving homeless needs have an obligation they may be neglecting of bringing to the public very valid depictions of homelessness.

Frankly, the trailer for the film is very suspicious by itself. It presents the movie as playing on viewers' heartstrings; not as insight into the homeless condition.

Popular posts from this blog

More obstacles revealed in effort to make Mather cottages habitable

Mold, asbestos and lead paint, oh my! The 35 cottages out at Mather Community Campus seem closer to being condemned today than ever again being inhabited. But the expectation that some of the cottages can and will be restored to house homeless families before spring abides. A report in the Sacramento Bee tells us ... Some [of the cottages] have extensive mold, a county analysis showed. It's not clear how the county planned to deal with lead paint and asbestos, [Rancho Cordova] Councilwoman Linda Budge said. Still, hope of getting some of the cottages in shape such that homeless families can move in is in play, though not before New Year's day.  Word of where the money might come from to make needed restorations has not been forthcoming, though it is known that the Winter Shelter Task Force hopes to hold a fundraiser to boost the pool of funds to meet the need to keep homeless people warm and safe. At the end of October, placing families, totalling 105 individuals, was

Ron Russell and Summerhills Realty

Readers of this blog should be aware that I am receiving some information that Summerhills Realty and someone named Ron E. Russell is using this blog as a reference in an effort to scam homeless people.  Be aware that Mr. Russell and his business is cited as a possible perpetrator of fraud by a website called Ripoff Report .  See this webpage .  Also, there is this claim of fraud against Ron Russell Properties at the website BizClaims - Latest scams, frauds and complaints . Please be aware that the information of being 'ripped off'' may be coming from only one source is coming from multiple sources, with perhaps as many as twelve persons/couples now pursuing legal action after paying thousands of dollars for services and receiving none of the services that were promised/contracted. While I know neither Mr. Russell nor Summerhills, I do know that an inordinate number of “in links” from readers of this blog have come via summerhillsrealestate.com for quite some time.  I

Loaves & Fishes implicates Buddhism and Jack Kornfield in its June Donations Plea.

The Sukhothai Traimit Golden Buddha was found in a clay-and-plaster overlaid buddha statue in 1959, after laying in wait for 500 years. It's huge and heavy: just under 10 feet tall and weighs 5 1/2 tons. At the beginning of their June newsletter , Loaves and Fishes relates a story, taken from the beginning of renowned Buddhist teacher Jack Kornfield's 2008 book The Wise Heart: A Guide to the Universal Teachings of Buddhist Psychology . The first part and first chapter in Kornfield's book is "Part I: Who are you really?" and chapter 1 is called "Nobility: Our Original Goodness," which ought to serve as a clue to what the beginning of the book is about, not that that sentiment isn't strewn through-out the chapter, section and book such that what Kornfield is telling us should be crystal clear. Somehow, the not-ready-for-primetime management at Loaves & Fishes have managed to use Kornfield's wise and kindly words in a way that mangles th