Cinema Discourse

  • Home
  • About
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy

John Lobell – John David Ebert

Movies as Theoretical Narratives


Cinema discourse looks at current and classic movies from a literary point of view. We also have top movie reviews, current movie reviews, film ratings, movie blogs and movie history.
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / Groundhog Day, revisited

Groundhog Day, revisited

September 4, 2012 By John Lobell Leave a Comment

Groundhog Day is one of those movies that I will watch any time I come across it on TV. I have been thinking about why.

Groundhog Day is a 1993 romantic comedy directed by Harold Ramis and staring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell. It was well received on release, but as is often the case with significant movies, it took a while to sink in. The movie critic, Roger Ebert, has raised his estimation of Groundhog Day; the literary critic, Stanley Fish, includes it as one of only two movies since 1958 on his top ten list; and spiritual leaders in several traditions use the movie in their teaching.

Harold Ramis states, “At first I would get mail saying, ‘Oh, you must be a Christian because the movie so beautifully expresses Christian belief.’ Then rabbis started calling from all over, saying they were preaching the film as their next sermon. And the Buddhists! Well, I knew they loved it because my mother-in-law has lived in a Buddhist meditation centre for 30 years and my wife lived there for five years.” Despite being made at the end of the twentieth century, it has become a defining movie of our emerging twenty-first century.

Bill Murray plays Phil Connors, an obnoxious, self-centered television weatherman assigned to go to the small town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania to cover Groundhog Day, the day when a groundhog emerges from hibernation and does or does not see its shadow, thus predicting when spring will come. Andie MacDowell plays Rita, his patient producer and eventual love interest.

For no reason given in the movie, Phil finds himself repeating Groundhog Day over and over. He wakes up each morning to find that it is not tomorrow, but once again February 2. He remembers “yesterday’s” February 2, but no one else does. He is at first terrified. He sees a psychiatrist. Perhaps he has a brain tumor.

Then it starts to get wearing. Sitting in a bar, he remarks, “I was in the Virgin Islands once. I met a girl. We ate lobster, drank pina coladas. At sunset, we made love like sea otters. That was a pretty good day. Why couldn’t I get that day, over and over and over?” Phil looks for ways to deal with his situation. He tries hijinks, stealing money, exploiting people, casual sex, conning his love interest. Then, in despair, suicide, again and again. But he keeps waking up on the same morning. The film does not specify how many times he repeats the day, but from what he eventually masters—playing the piano, French romantic poetry, ice sculpting, flipping cards into a hat, it is at least several decades. Finally Phil decides to use his situation to become a decent person. He finds joy, and on the culminating day, he rushes from place to place to help people. He plays piano and is the center of attention at the Groundhog Day evening party, wins the girl, and escapes the repeatedly cycling day.

The meaning of this repeated experience? Here is one thought. In his book, The Gay Science, Nietzsche asks: “What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: ‘This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more’… Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: ‘You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.’”

Nietzsche is not here concerned with some very different model of the universe, but with our universe, our lives, here and now. He is not saying, “In this theory, this is how your life works,” but rather “How would you live your life if it were to work this way.” If you were going to relive this day over and over forever, you would want it to be a very good day. A day of pleasure, as in “I was in the Virgin Islands once?” Perhaps. But maybe even better than that, the climatic day of Groundhog Day, a day of not only pleasure, but of joy over having done a decent job of creating yourself and your life. Nietzsche suggests that is how we should live every day, as though we were going to be living it over and over and over.

Steve Jobs put it slightly differently in his 2005 Stanford commencement address a year after being diagnosed with cancer and six years before his death when he said, “I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: ‘If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?’ And whenever the answer has been ‘No’ for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.”

The movie critic Roger Ebert, revisiting Groundhog Day, concludes his essay: “We see that life is like that. Tomorrow will come, and whether or not it is always Feb. 2, all we can do about it is be the best person we know how to be. The good news is that we can learn to be better people.”

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

 

CLICK-FOR-CULTURAL-DISCOURSE

 

CLICK-FOR-VISIONARY-CREATIVITY

 

Contribute

 

Giant-Humans-Tiny-Worlds book cover

 

Post-Classic-Cinema-book
clickforpromovideo

 

Catastrophe book cover

 

newMedia-book

 

CELEBS-ICONS-book

 

Ebert books

Recent Posts

  • Animation Artistry in the Alps ~ by Larry Ruppel
  • Animated Cinematic Innovation Celebrated in the French Alps ~by Larry Ruppel
  • On Annihilation
  • On Blade Runner: 2049
  • On American Gods

Archives

Site

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Resources

  • Articles
  • Books
  • Classic Movies
  • Contact
  • Cookie Policy
  • Data Access Request
  • Help Support John Ebert
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Being John Malkovich
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Inland Empire
  • John David Ebert Movie Review of Lost Highway
  • John Lobell on Myths and Movies
  • Privacy Policy

John David Ebert Videos

click for video

Heidegger's Being and Time

click for video

Jean Gebser's Ever-Present Origin

click for video

Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

click for video

Fichte's Science of Knowledge

click for video

Schelling's First Outline of a System of the Philosophy of Nature

click for video

Karl Jaspers' Origin and Goal of History

click for video

Spengler's Decline of the West

click for video

Walter Benjamin's Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility

click for video

Derrida's Of Grammatology

click for video

Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment

click for video

Deleuze & Guattari's A Thousand Plateaus

click for video

Deleuze's Logic of Sense

click for video

Deleuze's Difference and Repetition

click for video

Vattimo's A Farewell to Truth

click for video

Alain Badiou's Ethics

click for video

The Works of Paul Virilio

click for video

Peter Sloterdijk's Spheres

click for video

John David Ebert on The Age of Catastrophe

click for video

John David Ebert on The New Media Invasion

click for video

John David Ebert on Elvis Presley

click for video

On Carroll Quigley and Historical Cycles

click for video

Heiner Muhlmann's Maximal Stress Cooperation Theory of Culture

click for video

On Borkenau's Cycle of the Dead

click for video

John David Ebert interviewed on Kubrick, Gilgamesh and the Dangers of Technology

click for video

John David Ebert Interviewed by the Artist Jacques de Beaufort

 

Click for John Lobell's Website

© 2014 John Lobell & John David Ebert | Webmaster jbQ Media Web & SEO

Manage Cookie Consent
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}