If there are any secrets of life, if there are any universal truths which can guide us, this film failed to illuminate them.
While an acceptable piece of movie making, Celstine Prophecy fell down in that category as well. Its main cinematic problems -- a lead actor who basically can't act; dialog that sometimes made even good actors like Hector Elizondro look bad and a confusing, inconclusive ending that failed completely to provide the "pay off" that is usually required to send the audience away feeling satisfied.
But this picture, first of the current mysticism or spirituality films to hit the screen this year, was also supposed to be about something more than movie making. While one could debate the validity of its philosophy till the cows come home, it would seem fitting to note just a couple of things.
The film, and the book which spawned it, are both called "The Celestine Prophecy," yet no prophecy was really detailed or even outlined. There were only some vague references to scrolls written about 500 or 600 AD which seemed to predict that sometime in the future the world would be racked with war and strife. Well, gosh, that's really going out on a limb, isn't it? Since the Dark Ages were racked with war and strife and since basically the entire history of mankind is filled with war and strife, predicting more war and strife doesn't make you insightful in my view. Its like predicting hurricanes are going to hit the Gulf Coast. Only FEMA could have been caught off guard by hurricanes in hurricane season.
Anyway, the scrolls are more about insight into human behavior than anything else, or so it would appear. Whose insight? That is not only never disclosed, its not even addressed in the film. Which gives us the image of a lot of seemingly well educated people willing to change their entire lives because of eight scrolls, which may be the earliest known examples of the chain letter.
And what is the philosophy? That isn't exactly explained either. Best I could figure out, it was a cross between the "feel the force, Luke," idea from Starwars and "The Power of Positive Thinking" stuff put forth in self help books in the 50s. It went a little beyond that, as it also included the kind of "look at the beauty around you" talk that usually came from people urging you to ingest controlled substances, probably not an unusual past-time for people in the Peruvian jungle.
This is a work of fiction, so the author was probably not intending it to become the foundation of a worldwide movement. But then maybe L. Ron Hubbard had good intentions, too, but the next thing we knew, we had Tom Cruise jumping up and down on a sofa and then planting his demon seed in poor little Katie Holmes and now we've got to mount a rescue mission to get her and her child away from those people. Gee, I wonder what Peter Graves and Marty Landeau are doing these days?
That brings us back to movie making and there was some good acting in "Celestine," mostly from the girls. Full props to Sarah Wayne Callies and the always reliable Annabeth Gish who both did fine jobs with their roles.
A marginal thumbs up, but very marginal. There are better cinematic experiences around and much better philosophical ones.
While an acceptable piece of movie making, Celstine Prophecy fell down in that category as well. Its main cinematic problems -- a lead actor who basically can't act; dialog that sometimes made even good actors like Hector Elizondro look bad and a confusing, inconclusive ending that failed completely to provide the "pay off" that is usually required to send the audience away feeling satisfied.
But this picture, first of the current mysticism or spirituality films to hit the screen this year, was also supposed to be about something more than movie making. While one could debate the validity of its philosophy till the cows come home, it would seem fitting to note just a couple of things.
The film, and the book which spawned it, are both called "The Celestine Prophecy," yet no prophecy was really detailed or even outlined. There were only some vague references to scrolls written about 500 or 600 AD which seemed to predict that sometime in the future the world would be racked with war and strife. Well, gosh, that's really going out on a limb, isn't it? Since the Dark Ages were racked with war and strife and since basically the entire history of mankind is filled with war and strife, predicting more war and strife doesn't make you insightful in my view. Its like predicting hurricanes are going to hit the Gulf Coast. Only FEMA could have been caught off guard by hurricanes in hurricane season.
Anyway, the scrolls are more about insight into human behavior than anything else, or so it would appear. Whose insight? That is not only never disclosed, its not even addressed in the film. Which gives us the image of a lot of seemingly well educated people willing to change their entire lives because of eight scrolls, which may be the earliest known examples of the chain letter.
And what is the philosophy? That isn't exactly explained either. Best I could figure out, it was a cross between the "feel the force, Luke," idea from Starwars and "The Power of Positive Thinking" stuff put forth in self help books in the 50s. It went a little beyond that, as it also included the kind of "look at the beauty around you" talk that usually came from people urging you to ingest controlled substances, probably not an unusual past-time for people in the Peruvian jungle.
This is a work of fiction, so the author was probably not intending it to become the foundation of a worldwide movement. But then maybe L. Ron Hubbard had good intentions, too, but the next thing we knew, we had Tom Cruise jumping up and down on a sofa and then planting his demon seed in poor little Katie Holmes and now we've got to mount a rescue mission to get her and her child away from those people. Gee, I wonder what Peter Graves and Marty Landeau are doing these days?
That brings us back to movie making and there was some good acting in "Celestine," mostly from the girls. Full props to Sarah Wayne Callies and the always reliable Annabeth Gish who both did fine jobs with their roles.
A marginal thumbs up, but very marginal. There are better cinematic experiences around and much better philosophical ones.