unlimited

I've been watching a lot of shows lately. I watch the Simpsons, which is humorous. I watched Anastasia, which was classic Disney (though not, in fact, made by that Fox, which explains why I found the animation a little odd). I watched Magnolia, which was depressing.

The simple premise of the show is: ex-tennis pro Chris Wilton (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) falls for Nola Rice (Scarlett Johansson), the fiancee of his soon to be brother-in-law, Tom Hewett. They have a moment of passion, but eventually he marries Chloe Hewett, who loves him deeply. The fact that the Hewetts are exceedingly loaded and that the dad gives Chris a leg up in the business world certainly helped.



However, fate plays a part in bringing Nola and Chris back together, when he bumps into her at an art museum. The fires of passion are stoked, and he has a steamy affair with her. Passion has its consequences, however, and Chris contemplates out loud leaving Chloe "I'm not saying I don't love her, just not in the way I feel about this other woman... Maybe it's finally the difference between love and lust. ... I don't fool myself that I've not grown used to a certain kind of living. Am I supposed to give it up? For what?" BTW, the film is set in London, so it's more like "For wot?" British accents are cool =). And it does Meyers credit to see how much Chris comes alive when he's with Nola, but always a little detached when with Chloe.

The film's core is about greed, passion, and desperation. It is about consequences, and dealing with them. It kinda makes me wonder what kind of choices would I make, given a desperate situation. Which exerts the stronger force: greed, or honour? When push comes to shove, what would I do? I suppose we never truly know, even if we think we do. All we can do is try to forge our heart in the noble fires of virtue, and hope that when the time comes, we do the right thing.

It also made me wonder, would you choose someone who loves you deeply, whose personality is beautiful to you; or would you choose someone who would be the best of best friends, but who would always be strong and independent? Assuming, of course, that loving deeply and being independent are mutually exclusive? Hmm. I think assertive is a no-no. My mom is assertive in an obnoxious way. Imperfect I can deal with - I'm no deal myself - but there will always be dealbreakers. On the other hand, I've heard it said that it's not about finding someone you can live with, it's about finding someone you can't live without. It's probably a cliche, but see if I care =).

Digression aside, another central theme of match point is luck, and how our lives are shaped by it more than we care to admit. Its role is memorably pondered upon at the beginning of the film: "People are often afraid to realize how much of an impact luck plays. There are moments in a tennis match where the ball hits the top of the net, and for a split second, remains in mid-air. With a little luck, the ball goes over, and you win. Or maybe it doesn't, and you lose." Fatalism and nihilism are clearly present as undercurrents in the film.

Watch it! The twists and turns will leave you breathless, and the questions will remain with you. And if not, well, Scarlett Johansson's in it, so what the heck =P.

* - Since we're talking about -isms, I tend towards existentialism myself. Good ol' wiki has an interesting paragraph in the article about it: "Existentialism is not a philosophical movement per se, it is more of a 'tag' that has been given to group of philosophers who would actually dispute or renounce such a title... ...Perhaps the ‘existentialists’ only unifying truss is their distinctiveness as rather eccentric individuals who would completely refute practically all former (and later) philosophical thought." (emphasis mine) Eccentric. Heh. =)