Razzle Dazzle ‘Em
Well, folks, it’s Academy Award time again. I don’t know if that’s of any importance to you or not, but since movies nominated for Oscars are generally “big movies” and are talked about a good deal, it might be worthwhile to review one of those biggies. So let’s talk about Chicago.
Set in the 1920s, Chicago is a musical about Windy City women who have murdered their husbands or boyfriends and are waiting on death row. Not many of them will swing, though — at least not if they have the right lawyer to get them off. Renée Zellweger plays Roxie Hart, a young married woman who shoots the man she’s having an affair with because he wants to leave her. Catherine Zeta-Jones plays Velma Kelly, a woman who has killed her husband. Richard Gere plays Billy Flynn, the Johnny Cochrane-type lawyer who gets them off with his razzle dazzle courtroom tricks.
On the positive side: The movie is colorful and lively and full of strong performances. Catherine Zeta-Jones dances and sings her socks off and does a great American accent (She’s British.). Renée Zellweger does a creditable job with the role of Roxie. John C. Reilly shines as Roxie’s wimp husband, especially in his musical number Mr. Cellophane, about a man so unimpressive you can see right through him. And who would have thought that Richard Gere could sing and dance?
On the negative side: Besides a lot of four-letter words and the glamorizing of immoral behavior, there’s an emptiness at Chicago’s core. Most of the great movie musicals have a point of view and show some kind of moral transformation of a character. Con-man Harold Hill in The Music Man is redeemed by love. Prideful and arrogant Professor Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady is ultimately humbled by the poor flower girl he’s made a lady. The gang members in West Side Story learn about the destructiveness of their hate. Here, however, there’s no clear moral center and thus nothing uplifting. Roxie and Velma’s murderous exploits qualify them to leave death row and go on to star in a successful song and dance act. We might be tempted to say, “How far the musical has sunk!”
Redeeming values? A friend pointed out that Chicago makes a comment about our legal system and the issue of justice (to say nothing about the excessive power of the media). After all, one of the main songs is called Razzle Dazzle ‘Em. Do juries seek the truth, or are they just swayed by the better performance? What does it take to convince a jury? A good lawyer, basically. Maybe Clarence Darrow won the verdict in the Scopes trial because he razzle dazzled the jury better than William Jennings Bryan did. Maybe O. J. got off because of Johnny Cochrane’s razzle dazzle courtroom work. Chicago seems to say, satirically, that in America whatever you do is fine, so long as you can escape the consequences and perform well while doing so. That theme might make this movie worthwhile, but I’m not necessarily convinced. You can enjoy and greatly admire Chicago, but can you be uplifted by it? I’ll leave that up to you.
Film Rating: PG-13
My Rating: 3 ½ stars
Monday, December 12, 2011
Facing the Giants; One Night with the King -- November 2006
FACE YOUR GIANTS
There are two movies out there right now that reflect a Christian worldview and should please Christian audiences. Interestingly, a local secular reviewer gave Facing the Giants only a single star, and One Night with the King got two and a half stars. Actually, these ratings are probably good signs of the worthiness of the films’ content.
Facing the Giants has a simple, familiar, predictable but worthy plot. Grant Taylor is the football coach at Shiloh Christian School in Georgia. He and his wife Brooke are strong, committed Christians with daunting problems in their lives: Coach Taylor has never had a winning season in his six years of coaching, and a group of fathers is secretly trying to engineer his replacement. Besides that, he and his wife have been trying for years to have children, without success, because of a problem of infertility. Both Grant and Brooke struggle for a time before reaffirming their commitment to Jesus Christ. I won’t reveal the outcome here, but let me just say that it’s rare to see a commercial film that so unashamedly and explicitly honors Christ; The Passion of the Christ is the only thing I’ve seen that comes close to it. Coach Taylor inspires his team to rise to new heights by convincing them that playing on this football team is not about them but about God’s will for them – and that with God, all things are possible. Facing the Giants is unique in that it was made for about $100,000 by Sherwood Baptist Church in Georgia, using one camera, a leaf-blower to simulate wind, and amateur actors drawn from the congregation.
One Night with the King is a new treatment of the Old Testament book of Esther. Based on the novel Hadassah: A Night with the King and produced by pastor and Christian author Tommy Tenney, the film takes some liberties with the story but doesn’t contradict scripture. It tells the story of the beautiful young Jewish woman Hadassah, raised by her cousin Mordecai in Susa, Persia, during the captivity. King Xerxes has removed his Queen Vashti for insubordination, and Hadassah (whose name is changed to Esther by Mordecai) is one of many beautiful young maidens selected to compete for the King’s affections. Guided by her faith in the Lord, Esther wins the King’s heart by her simplicity and sincerity. She also engineers the defeat of Haman, the archenemy of all of the Jews living in Persia, but in so doing she must face her own giant and risk her own death. One of the movie’s great moments comes with these lines of Esther (straight out of scripture): “If I perish, I perish.” One Night with the King reminds us of previous Biblical epics such as The Ten Commandments and The Robe. Like Facing the Giants, though, this film explicitly and unabashedly honors the Lord. That’s gratifying, to say the least.
You won’t go wrong with either of these films.
My Ratings: Facing the Giants: 3 stars (PG)
One Night with the King: 3 stars (PG)
There are two movies out there right now that reflect a Christian worldview and should please Christian audiences. Interestingly, a local secular reviewer gave Facing the Giants only a single star, and One Night with the King got two and a half stars. Actually, these ratings are probably good signs of the worthiness of the films’ content.
Facing the Giants has a simple, familiar, predictable but worthy plot. Grant Taylor is the football coach at Shiloh Christian School in Georgia. He and his wife Brooke are strong, committed Christians with daunting problems in their lives: Coach Taylor has never had a winning season in his six years of coaching, and a group of fathers is secretly trying to engineer his replacement. Besides that, he and his wife have been trying for years to have children, without success, because of a problem of infertility. Both Grant and Brooke struggle for a time before reaffirming their commitment to Jesus Christ. I won’t reveal the outcome here, but let me just say that it’s rare to see a commercial film that so unashamedly and explicitly honors Christ; The Passion of the Christ is the only thing I’ve seen that comes close to it. Coach Taylor inspires his team to rise to new heights by convincing them that playing on this football team is not about them but about God’s will for them – and that with God, all things are possible. Facing the Giants is unique in that it was made for about $100,000 by Sherwood Baptist Church in Georgia, using one camera, a leaf-blower to simulate wind, and amateur actors drawn from the congregation.
One Night with the King is a new treatment of the Old Testament book of Esther. Based on the novel Hadassah: A Night with the King and produced by pastor and Christian author Tommy Tenney, the film takes some liberties with the story but doesn’t contradict scripture. It tells the story of the beautiful young Jewish woman Hadassah, raised by her cousin Mordecai in Susa, Persia, during the captivity. King Xerxes has removed his Queen Vashti for insubordination, and Hadassah (whose name is changed to Esther by Mordecai) is one of many beautiful young maidens selected to compete for the King’s affections. Guided by her faith in the Lord, Esther wins the King’s heart by her simplicity and sincerity. She also engineers the defeat of Haman, the archenemy of all of the Jews living in Persia, but in so doing she must face her own giant and risk her own death. One of the movie’s great moments comes with these lines of Esther (straight out of scripture): “If I perish, I perish.” One Night with the King reminds us of previous Biblical epics such as The Ten Commandments and The Robe. Like Facing the Giants, though, this film explicitly and unabashedly honors the Lord. That’s gratifying, to say the least.
You won’t go wrong with either of these films.
My Ratings: Facing the Giants: 3 stars (PG)
One Night with the King: 3 stars (PG)
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian -- June 2008
FOUR REASONS WHY YOU NEED TO SEE PRINCE CASPIAN
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian just opened in theaters and is a very good movie. There are at least four good reasons you should go and see it, but before we get to those, some brief background about the story might be appropriate.
Prince Caspian is the second book in C. S. Lewis’s The Narnia Chronicles. The first film in the series, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, opened at the end of 2005 and was a big hit both with Christian and secular audiences. In Prince Caspian, the Pevensie children, whom we got to know in the first installment, have spent a year back in England and have been longing to return to Narnia, where they were once high kings and queens. This happens, not surprisingly, while they are waiting on a tube (= subway) platform to return to school for the coming year and are suddenly transported to Narnia. As they soon discover, though, the time is 1300 years later, and nearly everything they knew has fallen into ruin. The Telmarines, a human group, have occupied Narnia and have driven the Narnian inhabitants into the forest and mistakenly believe them to have become extinct. Many of the Telmarines are bad, though not all. Caspian, the son of the rightful king of the Telmarines, has been born and is now nearing manhood. Unfortunately, his uncle Miraz managed to usurp the throne by killing Caspian’s father and has so far tolerated Caspian’s existence, since he had no heir. Now, however, as the story opens, Miraz’s wife has given birth to a son, so it is incumbent upon Miraz to get rid of Caspian. The boy learns of this and manages to escape his uncle’s clutches, only to be linked up with the real Narnians (dwarfs, centaurs, fauns, heroic mice, badgers, and the like) and eventually with the Pevensie children. There ensues a battle royal for the soul and possession of Narnia.
Now to the reasons why you should see Prince Caspian:
1. Acting: It’s strong throughout. The same young people who played the Pevensie kids in the first movie reprise their roles, but they’re two or three years older. Liam Neeson is again the mellifluous voice of Aslan. Peter Dinklage and Warwick Davis play the roles of two key dwarfs with verve. Sergio Castelitto is abundantly evil in his role as the evil King Miraz. And British actor Ben Barnes does a fine job in the role of Caspian. Interestingly, Barnes says he modeled his quasi-Spanish accent after Mandy Pantinkin’s Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride. Pretty convincing.
2. Special effects: Normally I’m not a big fan of special effects, but they’re spectacular here. The CGIs (computer-generated images) look very realistic, and they’re certainly appropriate for a story from the world of C.S. Lewis.
3. Moral dimension and emotional level: The picture is filled with instances where the principals have to make difficult moral choices and learn from them. There are lots of goose-bump moments. Lucy chooses to follow the crowd and disregard Aslan’s advice, to everyone’s detriment. Caspian comes very close to selling out to the dark side but manages to avoid it.
4. Underlying Christian viewpoint: Make no mistake about it: The Narnia books are Christian books, and this is a Christian movie. The key theme expounded is the temptation to stray from belief. The Pevensie children (even Lucy to a degree) are tempted to move away from a belief in Aslan the Lion (who, it is clear, is a Christ figure). Similarly, the Telmarines have been taught that the stories of Narnia and Aslan are just fairy tales. Doesn’t this sound like what’s happening in our world today?
Douglas Gresham, C.S. Lewis’s stepson and co-producer of the film, was recently interviewed on Focus on the Family. Among other things, he said that, while The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is probably a better story, Prince Caspian is a better movie. I have to concur. Wardrobe was quite good, but Caspian is even more impressive.
Film Rating: PG
My Rating: 3 1/4 stars
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian just opened in theaters and is a very good movie. There are at least four good reasons you should go and see it, but before we get to those, some brief background about the story might be appropriate.
Prince Caspian is the second book in C. S. Lewis’s The Narnia Chronicles. The first film in the series, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, opened at the end of 2005 and was a big hit both with Christian and secular audiences. In Prince Caspian, the Pevensie children, whom we got to know in the first installment, have spent a year back in England and have been longing to return to Narnia, where they were once high kings and queens. This happens, not surprisingly, while they are waiting on a tube (= subway) platform to return to school for the coming year and are suddenly transported to Narnia. As they soon discover, though, the time is 1300 years later, and nearly everything they knew has fallen into ruin. The Telmarines, a human group, have occupied Narnia and have driven the Narnian inhabitants into the forest and mistakenly believe them to have become extinct. Many of the Telmarines are bad, though not all. Caspian, the son of the rightful king of the Telmarines, has been born and is now nearing manhood. Unfortunately, his uncle Miraz managed to usurp the throne by killing Caspian’s father and has so far tolerated Caspian’s existence, since he had no heir. Now, however, as the story opens, Miraz’s wife has given birth to a son, so it is incumbent upon Miraz to get rid of Caspian. The boy learns of this and manages to escape his uncle’s clutches, only to be linked up with the real Narnians (dwarfs, centaurs, fauns, heroic mice, badgers, and the like) and eventually with the Pevensie children. There ensues a battle royal for the soul and possession of Narnia.
Now to the reasons why you should see Prince Caspian:
1. Acting: It’s strong throughout. The same young people who played the Pevensie kids in the first movie reprise their roles, but they’re two or three years older. Liam Neeson is again the mellifluous voice of Aslan. Peter Dinklage and Warwick Davis play the roles of two key dwarfs with verve. Sergio Castelitto is abundantly evil in his role as the evil King Miraz. And British actor Ben Barnes does a fine job in the role of Caspian. Interestingly, Barnes says he modeled his quasi-Spanish accent after Mandy Pantinkin’s Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride. Pretty convincing.
2. Special effects: Normally I’m not a big fan of special effects, but they’re spectacular here. The CGIs (computer-generated images) look very realistic, and they’re certainly appropriate for a story from the world of C.S. Lewis.
3. Moral dimension and emotional level: The picture is filled with instances where the principals have to make difficult moral choices and learn from them. There are lots of goose-bump moments. Lucy chooses to follow the crowd and disregard Aslan’s advice, to everyone’s detriment. Caspian comes very close to selling out to the dark side but manages to avoid it.
4. Underlying Christian viewpoint: Make no mistake about it: The Narnia books are Christian books, and this is a Christian movie. The key theme expounded is the temptation to stray from belief. The Pevensie children (even Lucy to a degree) are tempted to move away from a belief in Aslan the Lion (who, it is clear, is a Christ figure). Similarly, the Telmarines have been taught that the stories of Narnia and Aslan are just fairy tales. Doesn’t this sound like what’s happening in our world today?
Douglas Gresham, C.S. Lewis’s stepson and co-producer of the film, was recently interviewed on Focus on the Family. Among other things, he said that, while The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is probably a better story, Prince Caspian is a better movie. I have to concur. Wardrobe was quite good, but Caspian is even more impressive.
Film Rating: PG
My Rating: 3 1/4 stars
A Christmas Carol -- December 2009
GOD BLESS US, EVERY ONE
It’s Christmas season, 2009, and it’s Ebenezer Scrooge time once again. Consider this quotation from I Samuel: “Then Samuel took a stone and set it between Mizpah and Shen, and named it Ebenezer, saying, ‘Thus far the LORD has helped us.’ ” (I Samuel 7:12)
Have you ever read this passage and wondered about a possible connection between the stone called Ebenezer and Ebenezer Scrooge, the skinflint protagonist of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol? Well, there’s definitely a connection. “Ebenezer” means “stone of help.” It seems Dickens knew his Bible well and had a clear reason for giving his main character this odd name. We’ll see later how it figures into the story.
Before this year there were at least eight film versions of A Christmas Carol, and now there’s a ninth, produced by Disney and currently playing in the theaters. It doesn’t quite measure up to the classic 1951 British version with Alastair Sim as Scrooge, but it’s worth a look. Here’s why:
Production values: Overall they’re very good. Disney’s animated version of Carol has lots of excellent color and well-drawn backgrounds.
Acting: Superb. Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman do the voices of several characters each, very effectively. There’s none of the usual Jim Carrey flippancy here.
Faithfulness to the story: It’s remarkable how well Disney’s version of Carol sticks to the original story (and to the 1951 version). All the characters are there: Scrooge, Marley, Bob Cratchit, Nephew Fred, Tiny Tim … and the rest.
Emotional impact: Powerful. It’s impossible not to tear up at key moments. Of course we could also say that Dickens’ tale is so good that it would be almost impossible to ruin it.
Christian message: A Christmas Carol is the quintessential story not only of Christmas but also of salvation. Marley’s ghostly visitation of Scrooge on Christmas Eve comes just in time; Scrooge’s heart has been hardened, but not to the point of no return. The story forces us to look at ourselves as Scrooge is forced to look at himself – and while we may not have sunk as far as Scrooge, we may not like everything we see within.
A couple of reservations:
Special effects: They’re overdone to the point of tediousness. Just because the technology is available doesn’t mean it should be used to excess.
Effect on younger children: Some of the scenes are scary, perhaps too much so for younger kids.
Why the name Ebenezer?
The Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Come shows Scrooge a tombstone with his name on it. Scrooge asks, “Are these visions of things that will be, or that may be?” In other words, Scrooge wonders whether he still has a chance for redemption. The tombstone is his “stone of help.”
Recommendation: You won’t go wrong in seeing this picture, but do yourself a favor and also get the DVD or video of the 1951 version.
Film Rating: PG
My rating of the new version: 3 stars
My rating of the 1951 version: 3 ½ stars
It’s Christmas season, 2009, and it’s Ebenezer Scrooge time once again. Consider this quotation from I Samuel: “Then Samuel took a stone and set it between Mizpah and Shen, and named it Ebenezer, saying, ‘Thus far the LORD has helped us.’ ” (I Samuel 7:12)
Have you ever read this passage and wondered about a possible connection between the stone called Ebenezer and Ebenezer Scrooge, the skinflint protagonist of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol? Well, there’s definitely a connection. “Ebenezer” means “stone of help.” It seems Dickens knew his Bible well and had a clear reason for giving his main character this odd name. We’ll see later how it figures into the story.
Before this year there were at least eight film versions of A Christmas Carol, and now there’s a ninth, produced by Disney and currently playing in the theaters. It doesn’t quite measure up to the classic 1951 British version with Alastair Sim as Scrooge, but it’s worth a look. Here’s why:
Production values: Overall they’re very good. Disney’s animated version of Carol has lots of excellent color and well-drawn backgrounds.
Acting: Superb. Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman do the voices of several characters each, very effectively. There’s none of the usual Jim Carrey flippancy here.
Faithfulness to the story: It’s remarkable how well Disney’s version of Carol sticks to the original story (and to the 1951 version). All the characters are there: Scrooge, Marley, Bob Cratchit, Nephew Fred, Tiny Tim … and the rest.
Emotional impact: Powerful. It’s impossible not to tear up at key moments. Of course we could also say that Dickens’ tale is so good that it would be almost impossible to ruin it.
Christian message: A Christmas Carol is the quintessential story not only of Christmas but also of salvation. Marley’s ghostly visitation of Scrooge on Christmas Eve comes just in time; Scrooge’s heart has been hardened, but not to the point of no return. The story forces us to look at ourselves as Scrooge is forced to look at himself – and while we may not have sunk as far as Scrooge, we may not like everything we see within.
A couple of reservations:
Special effects: They’re overdone to the point of tediousness. Just because the technology is available doesn’t mean it should be used to excess.
Effect on younger children: Some of the scenes are scary, perhaps too much so for younger kids.
Why the name Ebenezer?
The Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Come shows Scrooge a tombstone with his name on it. Scrooge asks, “Are these visions of things that will be, or that may be?” In other words, Scrooge wonders whether he still has a chance for redemption. The tombstone is his “stone of help.”
Recommendation: You won’t go wrong in seeing this picture, but do yourself a favor and also get the DVD or video of the 1951 version.
My rating of the new version: 3 stars
My rating of the 1951 version: 3 ½ stars
To Save A Life -- April 2010
GOT TIME TO SAVE A LIFE?
There’s a new movie out now that’s pretty close to remarkable. Run, don’t walk, to see To Save a Life. You’ll be glad you did.
Here’s what it’s about: Best friends Jake and Roger, two 11-year-old boys, are crossing a busy street when Jake is almost run over by a rogue motorist. Roger saves Jake’s life but incurs some serious injuries, including a pronounced limp he’ll never recover from. Flash forward six years or so. Roger walks into his high school, pulls out a pistol, and shoots himself. His erstwhile friend Jake is present and witnesses the suicide. At Roger’s sparsely-attended funeral, Jake meets Chris, a youth pastor who is doing the service. Chris offers Jake some words of comfort and tells him he’s available to talk if Jake wants to.
What happened to Jake and Roger’s friendship in the intervening six years? Well, Jake fell victim to the demon of popularity. In one heartbreaking scene, Jake tells Roger he’s headed to a party. Roger is enthusiastic about going along but is wounded when Jake tells him he’s not invited. After that, the boys’ friendship is essentially over. Jake becomes a basketball star and a fixture among the beautiful-and-popular set whose superficial and worldly lives are characterized by sports, dating, parties, and beer-pong. Roger’s life begins its downward spiral. The thing is, though, Jake’s life is turned topsy-turvy after the suicide. Unable to shake the feeling he was at least partly to blame for Roger’s death, Jake goes to the church where youth pastor Chris is employed. After a rather lengthy and painful process Jake accepts the Lord and is baptized in the Pacific Ocean. But that’s when his problems really begin.
To Save a Life was written by youth pastor Jim Britts of New Song Community Church in Oceanside, California, and is in more or less the same vein as Fireproof, Faith Like Potatoes, Flywheel, and similar films. Its actors are professionals, albeit mostly non-famous ones. It deals squarely with serious problems: suicide, teen pregnancy, drug use, and marital infidelity. Those are highly significant issues, of course, but at its core the picture is about being our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers. As we are reminded in James 4:17, “to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.” Many of us may have good intentions, but are we willing to take the time and summon up the courage to do the right thing? Someone’s life may be at stake.
To Save a Life is devastating in its impact. It’s not for younger children and is perhaps questionable even for younger teens. It has a positive ending, of sorts, but not the “and-they-all-lived-happily-ever-after” kind.
Film Rating: PG-13
My Rating: 3 ½ stars
There’s a new movie out now that’s pretty close to remarkable. Run, don’t walk, to see To Save a Life. You’ll be glad you did.
Here’s what it’s about: Best friends Jake and Roger, two 11-year-old boys, are crossing a busy street when Jake is almost run over by a rogue motorist. Roger saves Jake’s life but incurs some serious injuries, including a pronounced limp he’ll never recover from. Flash forward six years or so. Roger walks into his high school, pulls out a pistol, and shoots himself. His erstwhile friend Jake is present and witnesses the suicide. At Roger’s sparsely-attended funeral, Jake meets Chris, a youth pastor who is doing the service. Chris offers Jake some words of comfort and tells him he’s available to talk if Jake wants to.
What happened to Jake and Roger’s friendship in the intervening six years? Well, Jake fell victim to the demon of popularity. In one heartbreaking scene, Jake tells Roger he’s headed to a party. Roger is enthusiastic about going along but is wounded when Jake tells him he’s not invited. After that, the boys’ friendship is essentially over. Jake becomes a basketball star and a fixture among the beautiful-and-popular set whose superficial and worldly lives are characterized by sports, dating, parties, and beer-pong. Roger’s life begins its downward spiral. The thing is, though, Jake’s life is turned topsy-turvy after the suicide. Unable to shake the feeling he was at least partly to blame for Roger’s death, Jake goes to the church where youth pastor Chris is employed. After a rather lengthy and painful process Jake accepts the Lord and is baptized in the Pacific Ocean. But that’s when his problems really begin.
To Save a Life was written by youth pastor Jim Britts of New Song Community Church in Oceanside, California, and is in more or less the same vein as Fireproof, Faith Like Potatoes, Flywheel, and similar films. Its actors are professionals, albeit mostly non-famous ones. It deals squarely with serious problems: suicide, teen pregnancy, drug use, and marital infidelity. Those are highly significant issues, of course, but at its core the picture is about being our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers. As we are reminded in James 4:17, “to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.” Many of us may have good intentions, but are we willing to take the time and summon up the courage to do the right thing? Someone’s life may be at stake.
To Save a Life is devastating in its impact. It’s not for younger children and is perhaps questionable even for younger teens. It has a positive ending, of sorts, but not the “and-they-all-lived-happily-ever-after” kind.
Film Rating: PG-13
My Rating: 3 ½ stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)