Peaceful Warrior

[snodart]

IMDB link (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438315/)

Um, some spoilers:

First off, I am a bit biased. I read the book many years ago in the Navy (Way of The Peaceful Warrior). I read it at the right time and the right place... long story. Anyway, I saw the DVD on the shelf while renting some other movies. I assumed that it would have that sort of made-for-tv feel about it... with textbook shots and the such. I was wrong about that... at least I think. It is so hard for me to have an unbiased opinion about this movie, but damn, some of those shots looked pretty. There was enough slow motion to make American History X look like it was being played at 4X (one of my favorites by the way). The slow-mo didn't feel over the top to me at all though... in fact I loved it (can't wait to get my HVX!). I still can't get over how great the shots looked. I did my best not to totally focus on the details (so I could just actually enjoy the movie), but I did notice some great steadicam work mixed in there. Seems that the DOP (Sharone Meir) shot Mean Creek as well... another movie full of great shots... and good in general (good commentary on that DVD by the way).

The acting overall was good. I wouldn't say breathtaking, but still at a decent level. Nick Nolte was great, and god for the part. I was surprised to see that this was directed by the same guy (Victor Salva) who wrote and directed Jeepers Creepers part 1 and 2. I haven't seen either, but the reviews aren't exactly something to brag about. I don't think that some of the points were driven home 100%, but I'm not sure if it was a fault of directing or adaptation from the book. By the way, this movie was ripped an new one on Rotten Tomatoes... ouch. It faired well at IMDB though.

This one from Rotten Tomatoes is great:


For a story that is supposed to be about gymnastics and Eastern philosophy, The Peaceful Warrior is as riddled with homo-eroticism as Robert Smigel's 'Ambiguously Gay Duo' cartoons on Saturday Night Live.


Anyway, having recently come down from a rant about my disappointment with Apocalypto, this is the movie that I needed to see. I'm sure there are some that will not see what the big deal is about this movie... and maybe there isn't a big deal since I am, after all, biased. But this just feels like such a breath of fresh air from the typical, how much $$ will we make, Hollywood, violent, eye candy, movie that I do at times enjoy.

The few things that stood out to me were the recovery montage and 30% of the score. They were a little too expected I guess.

As for the screenplay... what can I say. Yes, the story arc was a bit paint-by-numbers. Oh well, is that so different than 90% of the movies we see? I am a fan of this type of story... something that actually turns my brain for a period of time that extends beyond 2 hours. I know that there is a loved it or hated it feeling about this movie. Again, I am biased, the book version of this story is somewhere on my shelf along side Jonathan Livingston Seagull and the like.

I would love to hear what you all thought about this movie. Was it shot as well as my first viewing would lead me to believe, or am I crazy? Is the adaptation so cookie cutter that it made you sick, or did it slide by unnoticed? Is this a decent movie, or do I just like it for the same reason that I liked Karate Kid when I was a kid?

P.S. I'm off to watch 300 now. Go figure.

[Jon Starr]

Kind of an old thread, but felt it needed to pick up.

I feel exactly the same. I just watched it and loved the movie (never read the book though). It seems like your typical sports film, mentor, training montage, etc... and it has all those elements, but there's something more to it. And besides, I like those movies. :)

I really loved it, but I can see why some don't. Some call it a typical underdog sports story mixed in with a self-help book. Rotten tomatoes really did rip it up. To each their own.

I loved the cast as well. Dan and "soc" really worked well together, especially those funny realizations, "you brought me here to see a rock?"

And my goodness, it's so beautiful. I just kept thinking that throughout the film. Great DP work.

[snodart]

Nice. I'm glad to hear that somebody else enjoyed it.

[Neal Buconjic]

I echo the sentiments.

I was anxiously awaiting the release of this film - but it never had a huge theatrical rollout. Had to wait for the DVD release.

I had three friends who worked on this film. One was the "gymnastics specialist" on set, and all three of them served as stunt/gymnastic doubles for some of the actors.

I enjoyed the movie and the philosophical enlightenment it provided.
My biggest hurdle early on in the film was to get past Scott Mechlowicz in the role of Dan. I thought he did a fine acting job, but physically he isn't built like a world class gymnast. Once I surrendered that reservation, the movie took me for a ride.

Speaking of ride - loved the motorcycle accident. Nice shot.

[Jon Starr]

This film also made me fall in love with slo-mo. Not that I wasn't already in love, but they used it so well, and it didn't feel like over-kill. It really inspires me, not just with life issues, but in film making as well.

I think as long as you know what to expect (in terms of predictability), I think you'll really go in enjoying the film.

Also, there were a small handful of scenes that, if performed/shot/directed/written in any different way, could have come out extremely cheesy, but ended up very well done in this film. Such as the scene at the ledge, the healing by touch, etc...

[Jeremy Ordan]

Having just found this thread I need to chime in because my experience was completely different than those expressed here.

I was stoked the moment this movie was announced because I was a huge fan of the book (discovered it on an Outward Bound trip when I was a teenager... great time to discover a book like this) and could not wait for the film to come out...

For me this movie was awful along the lines of the Celestine prophecy movie. Both of these films take best selling philosophical novels that have touched tons of people's lives and simply scratch the surface of what the message of the original text was.

I never felt that Peaceful Warrior got to the core of what made Millman's book tick. The relationship with Joy never had the 'umph' and they presented the battle of his returning from injury as the core rather than the triumph over self.

As a film this might have been the greatest film anyone has ever seen, but as a fan of the book I am unable to see the forest through the trees and rather just see all the lacking omissions.

The book was a masterpiece, the movie is something I won't waste anymore of my life seeing for a second time.

[Jon Starr]

Hmm, so maybe I'll pick up the book then. I'm very curious.

[Huy Vu]

In my opinion this film treads a fine line between being inspirational and just spewing dime-store philosophy BS. There are some lines that make you think, and there are others that were like "Wait, how does that relate to anything?" I'm not sure if it was a good idea for the filmmaker to play up the "supernatural" element of the story. I can buy alot of it being all in the main character's head, but when you actually have him fall through the ceiling with leaves fluttering around his bed, that stretches my suspension of disbelief.

My biggest disappointment was how he recovered from his injury. Everybody in the movie keeps telling him that it was physically impossible for him to train again, but evidentally he managed to do it, through sheer force of will!! This is where this movie slips into fairyland territory, where anything is possible if you REALLY REALLY want it.

[snodart]

I think part of the problem is that you just can't replace a great book (and the effects it might have on you at a given time in your life) with a movie. That's not to say that you can't make a movie that has the same effect, but I would assume that you would have to experience the movie first. In this case, I know that if I would have seen the movie instead of reading the book... it wouldn't have done much fore me.

I think more than anything, I'm just glad to see something made that at least tries to go a little deeper than many of the cookie cutter story ideas floating around.

[Jon Starr]

alright, well I've read the book... and wow... I guess I truly understand why some are saying it doesn't live up to the book. The book is obviously not the movie.

I read afterwards in the back of the book where Dan talks about the adaptation to the book and his role in it, and I read a bit more on the website. Seems that he wasn't completely happy with the movie, but was pleased as well. Seems like a lot was changed from his original first draft of the script, but he understood that he had to step back and let the screenwriters and director take control for it to ever get made. Seems like he was trying to get it made for many years. But It's funny how the main points of the film aren't really in the book. "there's always something going on" is from another of Dan's books, and "it's all about the journey" is sort of what the book implies, but in far greater detail and more in depth.

The main difference from book to movie is that the movie is a focus on 2/3 of the first part of the book, leaving out the larger more life changing part of the book. At the same time the movie has far more conflict and focuses mroe upon the underdog gymnist story. In the book, the gymnastics were just part of the journey, as the book was more about the path he takes.

But I really enjoyed the movie, and watching it before the book really moved me, and got me curious about the book, which is amazing on it's own.