House of Sand and Fog

[Metella]

Just watched this .... I know I have lost my tolerance for some things .... I can't/don't watch horror flicks anymore ..... perhaps I am getting soft .....

but I was actually sobbing in a part of this, the one scene was just plain got to me. I don't expect it would ring with everyone - but wow - I had to grab a tissue.

[LOCIfan]

Metella, I read this book and found it so gut-wrenching a read that I've never been able to watch the movie. If the movie packed even half the punch of the book, you're not soft at all -- portions of the story are just devestating! Now you've got me curious about the movie. The next time I need a good cry, I'm going to grab a box of tissues and rent this!

[Metella]

I say rent it - the guy that played the older father - I forget his name, he did such an excellent job - you could see the good and the greed and the nobility and the pain in face so clearly.

I had no idea of the story line - so I was just watching it & it HIT ME OVER THE HEAD. KaBam.

[Cassie]

Ben Kingsley played the man, Jennifer Connelly the girl. I remember seeing this movie when it first came out on DVD. it’s a sad story. But I think one that needs to be told. The tagline on IMDB is “some dreams can’t be shared” which says a lot about what the story is about.

What I did like, is the deck he built on to the home. I don’t know, I just remember thinking how cool it was having that ramp going out to it.

[Metella]

I'm a perching person - so I also would have loved that deck.

The only thing I didn't like about it was the very first and very last scene - flashback or what? I did get the significance and the wording - but they just didn't fit with how the rest of the movie was directed. Small thing - powerful movie.

[mimi1802]

I watched this movie with a bunch a friends and we liked it because it raised a good debate afterward. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and bring the debate here.

Who do you think was more deserving of this house, and why?

Don't cheat and say both!

[Metella]

I think definately the older family.

1) the young girl ignored the warnings, she had many different steps along the way to address the situation - just because she was "depressed" is no excuse

2) the young girl has an extened family she can lean on (well, force herself upon, but that is still more than many who find themselves on the brink of homelessness)

3) the older couple did everything according to law, they did not abuse, use, or ignor

4) the older couple tried to extend help when they saw how desperate the girl was

I think that if the girl addressed all the notices etc at the proper time, she would have retained her father's home - and that is how it should have gone.

It may seem I am all one sided, & it may be when it comes to the final decision - BUT both the girl and the family had my sympathy and tears

[Cassie]

It’s been close to a year since I have seen it. So I may be way off. From what I remember, I too, feel that the home belonged more to the man then the young girl. She had a collection of past due envelopes on her front porch, growing everyday. She had plenty of time to get her act together.

There is something about the man, that I can’t remember which made me feel, his attitude was wrong on some things. I remember feeling bad for him, because he didn’t share his struggles with his wife. (she didn’t even know what he did for a living) He seemed to go out of his way to protect her. I believe that was part of their culture. I wonder too, if things would have turned out differently for them if they both shared the responsibility of the marriage.

After the holidays if they still have it at Blockbuster, I will rent it . I may see things in a different light.

From what I remember the movie reminds me of ….Oprah Winfrey’s famous words……
“How high of a price are you willing to pay to be right?”

[Techguy]

It's been a while since I've seen this movie too. But based on my recollections, if I had to choose who was more entitled to the house, I would also have to vote for the Behrani family. My decision is based on how emotionally invested the family was in the house, and most especially what it represented to the Ben Kingsley character.

He and the Jennifer Connelly character Kathy might both have legal and moral claims to the house. But Kathy neglected the tax notices and warnings and didn't really become interested in the house until it went up for auction and the Behranis bought it. On the other hand, given the cultural significance to someone like Behrani who lost everything when the Shah of Iran was ousted, the house represents a deep emotional investment the Behranis have of rebuilding their lives in America. On this basis, I feel they deserve the house more than Kathy does.

Having said that, I also believe the differences between Kathy and the Behranis could have been resolved, if not for the reprehensible actions of the deputy sheriff. Maybe my identification with Det. Goren is showing here, but I have issues with a weak and amoral man who's willing to leave his wife and family. The deputy's interference, and his ill-advised (and illegal?) promise to Kathy, are ultimately to blame for the tragic turn of events in the story. Love and loyalty mean nothing to this deputy, but they mean everything to the Behranis.

And misfortune, tragedy and suffering result, and lives are destroyed in the process, proving how the road to hell is indeed often paved by the good intentions of good people.

[mimi1802]

I raised the debate maybe I should join in!

I, too at first thought the Behrani's were more entitled to the house than Connelly's character. I also based my arguments on the legal aspects of it. But what makes a house special; what makes it a home is the people who live in it.

It was more than the girl's house it was where she sought refuge. She wrapped herself around this house to get the confort she needed in a dark time in her life. Yet, she didn't love this house enough to take care of it and realized its true sentimental value when she lost it.

On the other hand, Mr Behrani's intentions towards the house wasn't to live in it. It was to make a profit in order to get closer to the social statut he was ripped off in Iran and most importantly to assume his responsabilities as the provider of his family. And to do that he did the exact same thing that his country's politics did to him: he ripped someone out of her home.

Another element that plays against the Behranis is the fact that the wife doesn't even want to live in it (even if it's temporary). She wants to go back to Iran, she misses her old life and was expecting her husband to bring her back to this life.

So, at first I thought Mr Behrani was worthy of this house; then I changed my mind and said that the girl was more worthy of it.

Now, I think that none of them were deserving (I know, I broke my own rule!!!!).

I think to deserve something, you don't take it for granted when you have it, nor you demean its genuine worth for your personal benefit.

This movie is so layered that it is bound to raise a great discussion. There's also, like Cassie mentioned, a cultural approach to this movie. The cultural contrast between the Occidental perspective and the Near-East perspective regarding marriage, family, man-woman-children's roles, etc. is done in a very well-manner.

[Cassie]

Thanks , I forgot why I wasn’t too crazy about the man. His motives where selfish, in the fact that he only wanted to make a profit on the home. I have been thinking how could these two people could have compromised in this situation. Having the girl buy back the home, sure, that was the man’s intention to sell the home for a profit. But, the more I think about it, she lost that home forever the day Ben and his family moved in. Whether his wife wanted to make it her home or not. The work that was done to this house, the fancy deck, painting, whatever. It changed Kathy's home of her youth. There could be no going back into that house, and calling it her family's home again.

How many of us have driven past a home where we used to live, and look at the work that the new owners have done and cried out loud “What’s that crap that they have up on the roof, it looks like they are getting ready to blast off and go to the Moon. Where’s the tree I used to climb?” Kathy, (the girl) should have been thinking as the deck was being built, "it’s not my home anymore"

[Metella]

yes, once someone begins to "nest" a new home, the whole character usually changes.

Yes the man has SOME selfish motives; but who does not want to work hard (which he did! and with no complaints) and to better their standard of living by that work? Sure, he also wanted his daughter's family to see him in a better light than he was now standing - not too bad a problem. He was mannerful, hardworking, diligent, frugal, honest. He did loose sight of what should take priority & why; but that is a condition of humanity I think.

I do feel sorry for the girl, for only in so far as I felt her longing for her home, for her wanting things to be what they were in her "good old days" .... but even christians have a saying for this situation "god helps those who help themselves" and this seems so appropriate for her situation. I bet that even after the night as a hostage, the man would have let her make payments to him to buy the house; at that point he was ready to stop the fight and see that she lived in that house.

ok - since many have seen this I will not hold back spoilers; it was the scene in the hospital when he was on his knees crying out to his god that got me, but good. I was actually / actively crying - wow did Ben sell me on that scene. whew.

[Techguy]

Yes, and that's why I think Kathy and the Behranis could have worked out some arrangement for her to buy back the house so that she would regain what she had lost, and the Behranis would make a profit--if not for that deputy sheriff.

[Cassie]

I saw the movie last night. Funny what sticks in your mind, and what you forget. I completely forgot about the Deputy Sheriff until Techguy brought him up. No, he wasn’t a Goren was he? I lost all respect for the guy when he encouraged Kathy to have her first drink in 3 years. And I also feel for both Kathy and Mr B. I know when I first saw the movie, it bothered me for days.. And thinking back to the movie, I always think of Oprah Winfreys words. "How high of price are you willing to pay to be right?" But neither Kathy or Mr B where wrong in fighting for what they believed in. When I say that Mr B is selfish. I guess, its not so much that he is selfish, but he didn’t love the home, and he saw it as a profit maker. I just didn’t feel he was worthy of the home, because he wanted to make a profit off it. Was he wrong, no, he was looking out for his family. But he didn’t love the home, like Kathy.

"god helps those who help themselves" is not a verse that comes from the Bible, I have heard many people say that line in books and movies, when they are getting ready to rob someone.. The New Testament, shares with us that the Lord helps those who cannot help themselves. The verse that comes to my mind is “what so ever you do to the least of my brother, that you do unto me” Matthew 25:40. Although the Behrani Family is Muslim not Christian, I believe that they followed the same philosophy. After Kathy tried to take her life. Mr. B said to his son. “A bird has flown into our house she is a broken one, we must take care of her. Your grandfather used to say when a bird flies into your house its an angel.” from the book of Hebrews 13.2 “Don't forget to show hospitality to strangers, for in doing so, some have entertained angels without knowing it” Like most faiths, different views, but same values. Sorry, I do not have a Koran handy, but I am sure if I did I would find similar text. However, Mr. B’s version is beautiful.

Did anyone notice that Kathy *gave up* the home the following morning. She didn’t want it anymore. And Mr. B *was willing* to make whatever arrangement could be made. For Kathy to have the home. Which reminds me of the story of King Solomon, the two mothers and One baby. Solomon issued his verdict: "Bring me a sword. Divide the living child in two, and give half to one, and half to the other" The two mothers' reactions were worlds apart. The first mother pleaded with the king: "O my lord, give her the living child, and by no means kill him!" But the second mother's words were chilling: "Let him be neither mine nor yours, but divide him" 1 Kings 3:24-26. By the following morning both Kathy and Mr B. where willing give up the home to the other. Which I feel makes the home jointly theirs.

It was the crazed Deputy Sheriff who insisted on taking Mr. B and his son to the courthouse ...

I think there are two guilty parties for the tragedy. Of course the Deputy, what was his problem anyway?? I do think the only way he would have ever left his wife, was by finding another woman to take care of him. If it wasn’t Kathy. It would have been another babe. But the County, they screwed up big time with the taxes, So they should have paid Mr. Behrani the cost of what the home was worth, after his repairs. It would have been far cheaper for the County to pay Mr. B then to have Kathy sue the County for a cool million or two. Like Mr. B had suggested to her.

And Mr. B. always the gentlemen, when it comes to his wife. She never learned about her son. But she did dream of him that morning.


Sorry for the long tangent...but you guys got me a thinking

[lyra]

I just added this movie to my netflix list. I thought I might have seen it, but sounds like I'd remember. I've just skimmed comments here so as not to spoil it for myself, so I'll be back to comment once I've seen the movie.