[Jenson71]

Today I watched Chariots of Fire.

It's a fine sports movie, one that really stresses the pursuit of individualistic excellence that sports demand. It's also a fine religious movie, focusing on both the problems faced by minority religions and also the unwavering value some of the greatest individuals place in religious faith.

It's a period piece, set just after the Great War, and some of the movie feels ancient. Would people feel that it is an honorable thing to not run on the Sabbath in our time? Doubtful. Most would probably consider that fundamentalist drivel. The movie wants us to honor that though, and for that, the movie is commendable. In our time, most stores are open on Sunday, and some of the most watched sporting events like football and Nascar are played and celebrated on Sunday. The sacredness of things in life is dying, and that is nothing newly revealed, but should often be deplored.

Patriotism is very elemental in the movie. The British Empire is a thing of glory that is desired to be protected. To those in power, it was important that runners ran for that, not for themselves or their beliefs. In the end, the feeling to me was that the individual still triumphs over all setbacks, and still the Empire remains unweakened, the old order remains content. Everyone's happy! But in reality, the sun was setting on the British Empire and other forms of European imperialism. Nationalism between the two world wars was very high on both the European continent and outside of it. In some cases, it was a positive display of self-determination and independence, like in India or a number of Eastern European nationalities. In other cases, it regrettably turned itself into a monsterous corrupted state, like Germany. In this movie, everybody comes together for a huge hug and tea. The Jew is happy, the Scot is happy, the Prince of Wales is happy, even the Arab trainer is happy.

The film tries to show how sports can conquer all divisions. After a Jew wins a medal, we can assume that things are now great for Jews. That's far too simple. It's like saying Jackie Robinson or Jesse Owens or Louis Armstrong ended black racism in our country. They were significant, no doubt. But presenting them as the cures for problems distorts the realities of the NAACP or Martin Luther King or the more liberal Catholic priests and nuns coming into existence demanding racial justice. Of course, we need ourselves to be aware of the history to actually critic it's artistic representations. What was the experience of Jews in England compared to the Jewish experience in the notoriously anti-Semitic Germany? Probably much better. And probably better than the black experience in America. But still a problem. Why else would there be any conflict in the story then about a man and his Jewish tradition and identity? And we can certainly tell that the Olympics didn't help Jews outside of perhaps the Jews of the winning team or of that country. We know that in Europe, things got much worse for Jews.

A movie can't say all of this, but it shouldn't distort realities in the presentation of hope and inspiration. Hope must be based on some reality. Taking these into account, I don't think there is enough serious historical analysis and reflection to make Chariots of Fire the great and serious film that deserves its accolades.

But it still has a lot going for it, including the individualistic themes of honor and perseverence and religious background. Also, some of its historical ancedotes are very interesting, like the baggage guys who fought in World War I. The music is done by the same man who did Blade Runner's. It is great and iconic, and is similar to Grant Wood's American Gothic in the amount of parodies it inspires. It is a solid family movie, and one that wishes to stir the soul into action and perhaps can come close.