Reviews by Yo

Cinderella III: A Twist In Time

2007-01-30T07:48:00.000-08:00

note: I previewed this film at a theatre before the DVD release so I did not get a chance to review any bonus materials that may be available on the DVD

It's not often that I walk into a theatre and immediately want to walk out again. This reaction had nothing to do with the movie (although I will get to that), but rather it had to do with the fact that this theatre was full of princesses. Now you're probably wondering, "How is that a bad thing?" Well, they were all three feet or shorter, dressed in "cute" costume jewelry to emulate their favorite princess, and the excitement and anticipation of seeing a new Cinderella movie had these wee princesses in such a frenzy that walking into that theatre was like walking in an angry beehive…but with happy little princesses instead. Oh, and did I mention this was before ten am on a Saturday? Not the best way to start a weekend. In any event, my daughter and I found a seat and eventually the frenzy settled as the room darkened and Cinderella III began. That's right, I said Cinderella three. Officially it's subtitled "A Twist in Time", but it may well have been called "A Way of Retelling the Same Story to Make More Money Because Mickey Needs a Beach House in Malibu." As you can probably already gather, Cinderella III is not my favorite film, but I will say that it does have its entertaining moments and some important, if shallow, values to teach. Plus, my four year old daughter enjoyed it, and in the end, I guess that's what really matters.

I won't bore you with plot details because let's face it; they're really not important in a film like this. Suffice it to say that magic is used to rewind time back to when Cinderella put on the glass slipper and lived with the Prince happily ever after. Only this time, Cinderella's evil Stepmother uses the Fairy Godmother's magic wand to make the glass slipper fit Anastasia, and thereby disrupt the space-time continuum, sending temporal waves echoing through the centuries only to be picked up by the starship Enterprise who gets pulled back in time and must set things right before returning to their own time…okay, I made that last part up, but at least it would have made the film more exciting.

Perhaps what's most frightening about this film isn't the obvious ploy to milk a concept for every penny it's worth (although I do admire the marketing savvy it's taken to turn Disney Princesses into the powerhouse franchise it is), no the most frightening part are the values young, impressionable girls may walk away with from this latest adventure of Cinderella. I once had a professor who was horrified by the fact that Cinderella basically told young girls that if they believe hard enough in their dream of the perfect man, then someday that dream will come true and that's all they'll ever need. If she thought the message in the first classic film was a bit heavy-handed, the third time around that concept is enforced with the subtlety of two-by-four to the head. Cinderella continually repeats the fact that her marriage to the Prince solved all her problems and made life perfect. Now I know this is just a fairy tale, but the last thing I want is for my daughter to spend her life pining for the perfect man to make all of her troubles disappear. That doesn't happen. Jesus is the perfect man, but even when he is in your life problems don't disappear and life doesn't become bliss. However, Jesus does bring the strength, courage, wisdom and comfort into our lives that we need to face the darkest moments in our life and gives us true hope of a bright future; fairy tale-esque to be sure, but at least it's believable, especially compared to the pining in the sky attitude of Cinderella. On the plus side, Cinderella III does emphasize the concept that love is worth pursuing and even worth sacrificing for; a concept that can be readily seen in the Bible and therefore made a great talking point for my daughter and I after the film. Yes love is important, yes we shouldn't marry someone we don't love; but at the same time love isn't magic, it won't solve every problem, and as some wise authors once pointed out, marriage takes more than love…unless of course you're Cinderella and have mice friends to help you.

Cinderella III does have some small, entertaining moments; specifically with the Prince. I also enjoyed the development of Anastasia as a character. I was also moved when the King told her that everybody is worthy of true love; again something that's so very true – just look at John 3:16. However, there's no way the mice are getting paid enough for all they do for Cinderella, but I guess it's a good example of selfless friendship. Unfortunately, much of the contemporary sensibilities of the characters, especially the very modern attitude of Cinderella (you've come a long way in fifty-seven years, baby) spoils the classic feel of the film. While the character designs are very similar to the originals, the music, voice acting and the cartoonish sound-effects used (not effectively) for humor take a classic film and make it feel like a Saturday morning toy commercial. It's a shame, because I'll confess that I've always been a fan of the original. This third film really only serves to show just how far Disney has fallen from the pinnacle of its golden years.

For me, Cinderella III: A Twist in Time was a practice in tedium and test of my patience. I was shocked that there wasn't someone who cherished the original film enough to prevent such a thing as a third sequel from tarnishing the reputation of the original. But then I looked over at my daughter; literally sitting on the edge of her seat, paying rapt attention to all that was taking place on the screen, as were hundreds of other little princesses in that darkened theatre on an early Saturday morning. It was then that I was reminded that this film wasn't ever meant for me; it was meant for those with unbridled imaginations that yet dare to dream that the world can be a place full of bliss and happiness. While we all know that isn't the case, perhaps we should let them dream yet a little longer; and maybe even join them in the dream, at least for a moment.

Rocky Balboa

2006-12-14T10:49:00.000-08:00

Rocky Balboa is one of the most recognized boxers of all time, and he's not even a real person. That just shows the tremendous appeal this character has and the impact he's made on our culture. Now is back for one final round, and Rocky Balboa goes out the same way he came in; with heart and class.

Rocky Balboa is a very fitting swan song to the Rocky legacy. It's a film that reverently brings a close to one of the silver screen's most beloved underdogs. Throughout this film, there are faces from the past and wonderful memories to share. It very much feels like this movie is putting all of its affairs in order for a final goodbye. Sly recaptures much of what made the first Rocky movie so memorable his performance and direction, and he also reminds us that he's a very talented actor, bringing tears to my eyes in one key scene. Paulie returns to the character that we'll always remember him as, and Burt Young also puts in a solid and touching performance as Rocky's friend and confidant. While there are other new characters introduced, these are the two that really matter and the two the film most thoroughly develops and focuses on. While that's certainly fitting, it also causes some problems.

We meet Rocky's grown son, played by Milo Ventimiglia of Heroes fame, but it seems this character is only there for one key scene and the rest of the time Stallone wasn't sure what to do with him (Sly both wrote and directed this final outing). Another kid, sort of a surrogate son figure, is introduced but it's an introduction that goes no where, which is a pity because it was a side plot with a lot of potential. There's also a new challenger, Mason Dixon, and we're introduced to him with another touching scene that unfortunately leads no where with the character. At the beginning of the film I was intriguied at the possibility that this character would be as well-developed as the movie's namesake, but that turned out not to be the case. Again, a great opportunity not seized in the story-telling of this movie. In fact, anything not related to Rocky is pretty much left undeveloped and unresolved.

However, we all know this movie is supposed to be about Rocky, and fortunately it's where this film truly shines. This is the Rocky I remember from the first film. I'm not a huge Rocky fan, I've only seen two of the fifteen hundred movies based on the character, but I'm at least aware of what the essence of the character is supposed to be and Stallone recaptures that essence in a very heartfelt manner one more time. In fact, this isn't even really a boxing movie; it's more a movie that features a character that happens to be a boxer, and it's really about the character more than anything else. Yes there is a boxing match, but it's not what the film is about. In fact, I found the actual fight to be the least interesting part of the film. It's completely anti-climatic, but for some reason Stallone chose to use all sorts of fancy film and effects techniques for the sequence to make seem bigger than it really is. It's almost as if he knew this part of the film lacked a certain intensity from the characters and tried to interject that intensity with fancy visuals. Instead, it's just distracting because it's so unnecessary. But that's okay, because as I said, the movie isn't about that, it's about Rocky and one final lesson learned by the legendary fighter.

What Rocky learns, and also what he imparts to his progeny, is that it doesn't matter how hard you hit, what matters is how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. Rocky points out very bluntly that life is hard, and I think we can all attest to the truth of that statement. Movies (other movies), TV shows, books and especially advertisements all tell us that life should by idyllic and enjoyable (which is obviously made possible with the right products). However, we all know that isn't true. In many ways, life is a lot harder than it should be. Life is often unfair and cruel. It can beat us down. We can hit back as hard as we want, but that rarely makes a difference. There is another option however, the option Rocky chooses, the option to take the hits and keep moving forward. The question is, where are you going to find the will, the inspiration, the strength to do that. A character like Rocky? This is his last movie, so that isn't going to last. In fact, anything we rely on in this world won't last. If we truly want to find the will, the strength, the inspiration to take the hits that life metes out and still keep moving forward, there's only one source, one Person we can turn to that won't ever let us down; Jesus Christ. He suffered more than any of us will ever know, and yet he kept moving forward. Now he wants to help you do the same. He wants to lend you his strength to take the hits, his will to get back up, and his inspiration to keep moving forward.

Yes I left Rocky Balboa inspired. I left feeling like I had just said "so long" to an old friend. But I also left unsatisfied with everything left unsaid and unresolved. I don't like being introduced to people and stories that I don't get any closure with. I don't like not knowing if this experience affected anyone else other than Rocky, especially not knowing how it affected his opponent. Still, Rocky Balboa had enough heart to get me past all the flaws so I could enjoy this final outing with a boxing legend who isn't even real, but he feels real, and that's what great movie making is all about. Rocky always had heart, and his heart really shines through in the final film. It made me feel warm. It made me feel good, and as my friend said, it makes a forty-year old feel ten again. Who wouldn't want to go to a movie like that, especially during this special Christmas season?

The Nativity Story

2006-11-28T11:28:00.000-08:00

The Nativity Story is the anti-Christmas movie of the season. That's not to say that it's against Christmas, but rather it's the complete opposite of what just about every other Christmas movie is. Whereas most holiday films are bright, colorful, frantic, hyper, shallow pieces of feel-good fluff that leave you feeling like you've eaten too much sugar, The Nativity Story is gentle, understated, deep and thought-provoking; it will prod you to really consider why you celebrate Christmas and whether or not you really understand what it (the holidays, life, our purpose) is truly about.

As with any movie that uses scripture as the inspiration for a story, there's bound to be a lot of skepticism from both sides about the quality of said movie. Well, those who hold the Bible to be dear and sacred, and who might have been concerned that the movie would not treat the source material with reverence can rest easy. The Nativity Story is very respectful of the Bible, with much of the dialogue coming straight from scripture. It helps bring to life familar passages with beautiful portrayals of events depicted in scripture. It literally fleshes out the story, and challenges one to think of those familar scriptures in a new light. As for those who think the Bible is a crusty collection of old wives tales and any movie based on its stories are bound to be cheesy and lame can also rest easy. The makers of The Nativity Story were smart enough to know that liberties have to be taken when translating a book to screen in order to make a good movie; and that's no different with the Bible. This is a well made movie that presents some intriguing insights as to what may have happened between the lines of what we're told in scripture.

That's not to say this movie isn't without its flaws. Unfortunately, some of the “Bible movie” stigma seeps into the dialogue where actors mistake reverent and holy sounding with stiff, emotionless and awkward sounding. In fact, one of the weakest links of the film is its portrayal of Mary. I say its "portrayal" because I don't think that the performance is necessarily the problem. Keshia Castle-Hughes is a talented actress, and I'm sure she did the best with what she was given to work with. While there are some shining moments where we get to see Mary as an actual, real human being, most of the time she's so reserved that she feels more like an unapproachable, stoic figure. I'm sure the filmmakers wanted to be careful not to step on anyone's toes in how they portrayed Mary, but they have erred too far on the side of caution and made Mary both uninteresting (hard to believe) and boring (which I think ismuch more offensive than being "too human").

However, despite these weak links, there's a lot in this movie that's excellent. Oscar Issac brings a life and depth to person of Joseph that makes him one of the highlights of the film. It's fascinating to watch this man struggle with the unimaginable; that he will be a surrogate father to God in the flesh. Little is written in the Bible about Joseph, but much of how he reacts and thinks and feels in this movie rings so true that it isn't hard to imagine that this is probably very close to what that man was like. The Wise Men are also a bright spot in the film, bringing some much needed levity and adding an outsiders perspective to one of the most amazing events in all of history. Indeed, the Wise Men are central to one of my favorite scenes; as they arrive where Jesus was born, we see them try to come to terms with the fact that they are in fact seeing God in the form of a small baby. The gamut of conflicting emotions that's silently portrayed on their faces perfectly reflects what we would probably all go through if we really stopped and considered the implications of God being in the flesh as a baby. It's a priceless scene that chokes me up every time.

In fact, I got choked up far more in this film than I ever did during The Passion of the Christ. That may be because I have a heart of stone, but I think it's more likely that while I could readily tell that my emotions were purposely being manipulated to reflect a certain mood in The Passion, The Nativity Story moves in such subtle, sublime ways that you may find yourself tearing up without really knowing why. This is where it succeeds and so many other Christmas films fail. Without having to brazenly blast its audience with some trivial message about the meaning of Christmas surrounded by lights, elves, and hyperactivity, The Nativity Story gently causes us to pause and reflect on the quiet side of Christmas. It takes a moment to softly point out that two thousand years ago, just as it often does today, the real purpose of Christmas was missed by all but a handful of sheppards, a few wise men, an unsure young father, and a frightened but faithful young woman. With constant noise of the latest high-tech, high-def gifts to buy, the great sales happening througout the holidays, the noisy competition at the box office to thrill and wow audiences, it can be extremely hard to focus on the fact the core of Christmas is a small, quiet moment that changed the world forever.

Although The Nativity Story is obviously targeted towards Christians as it doesn’t give a lot of background on events and assumes that viewers are familiar with the story already, it’s a film that holds meaning for any who will view. During the Christmas season, that’s a rare gift indeed as so many people want more than anything to simply find meaning; for the holidays, and for their lives. The answer to that desire was provided in the form a baby, born in the lowest place imaginable, surrounded by unremarkable people, unnoticed by the world at large. This is what The Nativity Story and ultimately the Christmas story is truly all about; and if you're willing, it can also be what the story of your life is all about as well.

Casino Royale

2006-11-20T09:41:00.001-08:00

Anything I say about this movie will just be add more noise to the tremendous hype it's already received, so all I will say is see the movie; it's the best Bond has been since the Sean Connery years. Casino Royale isn't just a great Bond film, it's just flat out a great action film; regardless of whether or not you're a James Bond fan. I used to watch Bond films and afterwards would wish I was Bond, but I haven't felt that way for a long time. Daniel Craig in Casino Royale surprisingly resurrected those feelings within me, and it was like welcoming an old friend back home.

Casino Royale takes us back to the beginning, much like other recent re-boots such as Batman Begins. We get to see how Bond became a double-oh, where he got his trademark tuxedo look, and why he's never really allowed himself to care for or trust anyone. It's this exploration of the roots of Bond, the discovery of what made him who he is that's so fascinating and so poignant. In fact, James Bond is really a representation of a lot of people in today's society. We've become a cynical and distrustful breed in today's world, especially when it comes to the church. Why? Because we feel we've been betrayed, because we've been let down and disappointed by people we thought we could trust, by people we thought we could love. So instead of loving, instead of trusting, instead of giving ourselves to anyone, we zealously guard our real selves as we create a façade for the rest of the world to see. It's a hard lesson to learn, even for James Bond, but the simple fact of the matter is no matter whom you trust and who you love; they will let you down, they will disappoint you, and although it may not be cruelly intentional, they will betray you. So what are we to do? Become cold narcissists like Bond; enjoying what pleasures we can as we try to get through life with a minimal amount of risk to the emotional damage that comes from loving and trusting? It's a bleak, and ultimately a hollow way to live. Even Bond acknowledges that. I do have some good news, however. There is Someone you can trust who will never betray you and never you let you down. He was the only perfect person to ever walk this earth, and He came to this planet just for you. Though you may roll you eyes when I say this, His name is Jesus Christ and He is truly the only person who is totally trustworthy and who will never betray your love. In fact, there is great freedom in this realization, because once we realize that we can have trust and love that won't even be betrayed, we're free to try and share that and experience that with others knowing that even if a person let's us down, we'll always have the love and trust of Jesus Christ instead of a hollow, empty life devoid of anything lasting and worthwhile.

Well, as I said, there's little I can say that will add to what's been written about Casino Royale, so let me just say that it has great action scenes, tightly written dialogue and superb direction. It does lag a bit in the middle, and I think some of the elements of the ending were mishandled. Were it structured differently, I think it would have had much more of an emotional punch than it does. Still, this film has one of the greatest endings of a James Bond film in a long time. I've been a Bond since I was about thirteen, so to say that Daniel Craig effortlessly matches any of the Sean Connery outings is rather difficult for me to admit to. Believe the hype; Bond is back, and he's back in fine form. I'm really looking forward to future outings of the world's most famous and awesome super-spy.

Deja vu

2006-11-09T11:00:00.000-08:00

If you're looking for a trip, then Deja vu is the movie for you. It's rare to find a film that has such an intricately woven plot with precise pieces that all fit together, but this year we've been fortunate to have two of them. Like The Prestige, Deja vu takes you on a journey that when it concludes, everything finally makes sense and you want to watch it again to see all the stuff you might have missed the first time before you really knew what was going on. Be warned, though, this is not a sit-back-and-enjoy-your-popcorn kind of movie. To get the most out of it, you need to pay attention; an investment that may be more than most audiences are willing to go for.

Deja vu actually has a lot in common with Tony Scott's other film Enemy of the State, so much so that at times I felt like I had deja vu. You have the high tech gadgets and amazing satellite imagery with fancy zooms on computer screens and the like. However, this movie introduces some new, distinctively sci-fi elements that really sets it apart from Enemy. These sci-fi elements really stretch one's suspension of disbelief, but they're handled in such a way that make them seem somewhat plausible. Regardless of whether or not you understand all the techno-physics-quantum theory-geek-babble that's used to try and explain what's happening, if you can just accept the fact that these things exist as a interesting device to create a unique and twisting plot, you’ll understand enough to enjoy yourself; though if you've ever seen Back to the Future 2 or certain episodes of Star Trek, you'll have no trouble following where this film is going.

Deja vu is a story that's entirely dependent on its plot, so fortunately the plot is well written and interesting enough to carry the film. It starts with a terrorist act that is difficult to watch, especially considering the current events occurring in the real world, but the opening has enough of an impact to make your really care about what happens throughout the rest of the film. When you add in solid performances by Denzel Washington, Paula Patton, Val Kilmer and Jim Caviezel along with the usual deft touch of Tony Scott, you get a tight, intense techno action thriller. While most of the characters are really mere caricatures, they service the plot well enough that their shallowness isn't a distraction. They're just there to helps us figure out what's going on. It's the event that really matters in this film, and if you're looking for a trip then Deja vu is the movie for you.

The core question of this film is whether or not you can change something that's happened. Is there such a thing as destiny? Are events predetermined to unfold only in certain ways, or can our choices affect the outcome of those events? These are pretty heady questions for what many may take as a simple action flick, but Deja vu is much more than just a simple action flick. Yes there is action (including one of the most unique and mind bending chase scenes I've ever seen), but there's much more going on that just stuff blowing up. This is a discussion of our right to choose versus the perception that God is in control of everything and determines what happens to us. We hear all the time, especially in moments of tragedy and crisis, that God is in control; but if that's true, than our choices must be meaningless; which can make us (quite rightfully) feel distraught, angry and hopeless. But what if choices really mattered? What if we had the right to decide if we were going to fulfill a destiny or change it? And what if it was God who gave us that ability? How would that affect our lives and the choices we make? Well, let me just say that you don't need a lot of fancy monitors and high-tech gizmos, gadgets and computers to find the answers to those questions. In fact, all you need is an ancient book that still provides relevant answers. It’s called the Bible, and within its pages you'll find your destiny, but you'll also find that it's up to you to choose to fulfill that destiny.

Deja vu is signature Tony Scott, and regardless of whether or not that's something you like, I think that it's a film that's intriguing enough for just about anyone to enjoy. Granted, it asks a lot of its viewers; a huge amount of suspension of disbelief, a high demand to pay attention, and you need to overlook its lack of resolution of certain paradoxes or its lack of character background. Deja vu also fails to resolves some minor plot lines, but most of these details fall by the wayside as it sweeps us along for the ride. All in all, this is a mediocre movie that was turned into a pretty good movie because of the skill of the director, the solidness of the performances, and especially because of the strength of the story. If you're looking for a trip, then Déjà vu is the movie for you…that's funny…I feel liken I've said…nah.

The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause

2006-11-03T09:34:00.000-08:00

Is it really that time of year again? The time of year when we shell out ten bucks a head to buy tickets to go see a Christmas movie that tells us that Christmas isn't all about money while studio executives anxiously wait to see how much money they make at the box office so they can determine if they should make another sequel to get us to pay more money to learn about the fact that Christmas isn't about money. It must be, because Tim Allen is back in the red suit for his third (and depending on the box office, final) outing as Santa in The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause.

Now let me just say that I've never been a fan of this franchise. I enjoyed the first film when I first saw it, but like a joke that gets worn out, I enjoyed repeated viewings of it less and less; especially as it became further removed from the hey days of Home Improvement. The Santa Clause was never a Christmas classic in my mind, at least not on the level of A Christmas Story and the like. I never even bothered to see the second one, so there were a few surprises for me as I viewed Santa Clause 3. The first thing that struck me was the identity of Santa’s wife. I was astounded. Didn’t Santa know this woman is Juliet from Lost? She’s evil! She’s not to be trusted! How could Santa be married to her? It took me awhile to separate the two very different roles, and when I finally accepted Elizabeth Mitchell as Mrs. C, I was able to get on with the rest of the film. The other shock was how old Charlie was. I couldn’t believe it! It’s been twelve years since I first saw The Santa Clause and now Charlie is a surly teenager? That took some adjusting to as well. Once I finally settled in after these initial shocks, what I found was a movie that knew exactly what kind of film it was, and despite being the third outing, was still fun to watch.

Much of the fun, however, comes from the character of Jack Frost; gleefully and mischievously portrayed by Martin Short. Short was the sole reason I was curious to see this film, and he was well worth it. His portrayal of Jack Frost is the best part of the movie, and I sorely missed him when he wasn't on screen. He's such a delightful character, they could conceivably make a spin-off film all about him. Although Short is the stand-out in the cast, that isn't to say the rest don't do well. Tim Allen (who could probably do this role in his sleep by now, but thankfull still gives it his all), Judge Reinhold, Ann-Margret, Alan Arkin and the rest of the recognizable cast all look like their having a lot of fun. No one has any delusions about what sort of film this is. They're relaxed and just having a good time which adds some energy to what could have otherwise have been a tired entry in an unnecessary sequel. Still, if you go to see this film, make no mistake that Martin Short is the star.

One of the funniest parts of The Santa Clause 3 (and I’m sure it was entirely unintentional) was how it talked about what the meaning of Christmas is. After Jack Frost brings his evil scheme to take over Christmas to fruition, Scott Calvin tries to convince Jack that Christmas isn't about the toys, the stuff, the commercialism or the money. I found that to be hilarious considering this was the third film in a franchise that quite frankly never should have been a franchise. The fact that these three films have been using Christmas to bring in a big box office to assure more sequels seems to fly in the face of the Scott's heartfelt message to Jack. Even more tragic, however, was the fact that this film didn't offer any real clue as to what Christmas really is all about. It touched on family and love, but it was such a quick mention that I almost felt as though I was being told "Christmas isn't about money, it's about something else, probably family and togetherness and yadda yadda yadda this is the third time we've talked about this so you know the drill." If you want kids to know that Christmas isn't about crass commercialism, I think you need to be a bit more convincing than that. The sad thing is I think this really reflects the place we've reached in society. Christmas has become so incredibly hollow that people deep down know that there must be more to it than this, but have no idea what that may be. We simply can’t remember what the reason for the season is. I guess we need the great theologian Linus to return to the stage to remind us that "Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord" and "that's what Christmas is all about Charlie Brown." There is more to Christmas, you can be sure of that. It's all about the greatest gift this world has ever known; a gift that has been given to you. We are a visited planet for Christmas marks the day that God came to live among us, and that is what makes Christmas the truly glorious holiday of love, peace, warmth and light that it really is.

The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause presents more of what audiences loved about the first films, and successfully introduces enough that's new to help it feel fun and energetic. This is a movie that knows who its audience is, knows what they want, and doesn't ever take itself too seriously. It's a fun family Christmas outing, but whether or not it's worth the king's ransom necessary to see it in the theatre is up to you. I would say wait for next year's DVD. The Santa Clause 3 is by no means any sort of Christmas classic, but perhaps more of a Christmas diversion. It's fun, it's entertaining, but it isn't really satisfying if one truly wants to experience what Christmas is all about.

Unidentified

2006-10-30T11:02:00.000-08:00

Are the reports of UFO sightings, abductions and encounters genuine, a hoax, or are they something more sinister and evil? That’s the question that's raised in the new movie Unidentified, and there are some intriguing possibilities presented here that may spark some interesting conversations. However, the question of whether or not this is a movie that has mass appeal is an entirely different subject.

Rich Christiano, director of Unidentified, is a very outspoken Christian and as such he has made it very clear that he believe movies should honor God first and everything else is secondary. That philosophy can certainly be seen on screen in his latest film. Unidentified contains all the elements that might be considered necessary to make a good Christian film, but there are also some elements missing that would have made it a more compelling movie to watch. Like Peter Jackson did with King Kong, Christiano introduces some characters whose story arcs aren't followed through to a satisfactory conclusion. One of the premises of the film is that these alien abductions are really demonic activity designed to deceive people to the Truth. One of the characters who first encounters this phenomena is tormented by the events that are taking place and is desperate for them to end. When he's told that the only way to find solace is to turn to Jesus, he eventually does so. This is all fine and good, but what happens when he does? Do the alien visits stop? Do the voices go away? Does he find solace and peace with Jesus? We're never told, and are left to make our own assumptions. This conversion seemed to me to be a key point to the plot, especially considering the message of the film, so it's an oversight not to offer a more complete conclusion to this particular story arc.

Despite the lack of any name recognition among the actors, the performances are uniformly solid in Unidentified. They aren't going to win any oscars, but no one really embarasses themselves either. The main roles performed by Jonathan Aube and Josh Adamson are done well-enough, with Adamson playing the part of the skeptic that’s easily antagonized rather well. The sole recognizable name among the cast is Rebecca St. James, and while she is solid in her acting debut, her role is one that's completely expendable. I'm not sure if there was a need to have someone people would recognize in the film, but Ms. St. James is unfortunately wasted in a role that has little or nothing to do with the story. Still, she does well enough and I could certainly see her doing more acting in her future, hopefully in more key roles. The one part that I felt was either miss cast, poorly written or miss performed was that of the Christian which is portrayed by Michael Blain-Rozgay. His portrayal of a solid, Bible believing Christian is a joyless, intense, antagonistic person; exactly the type of Christian you would want to avoid. Even in moments of levity, his character always has some serious, intense point to make that's designed to rebuff or otherwise challenge others. While as a Christian I applaud his willingness to stand firm in what he believes, I didn't appreciate the fact that he always seemed out to pick a fight. After Aube's character finally realizes his need to decide for sure what he believes, he and a mysterious old man that shows up later in the film were much better representations of Christians.

The production values for Unidentified reminded me a lot of what Christian movies made by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Society looked like in the late eighties and early nineties. There's nothing here that's on par with Hollywood, but this would have certainly have made a good TV movie of the week or a solid direct-to-video film selection. Perhaps what's most disappointing about Unidentified is how much we are told as to how much we are shown. Perhaps it's due the restraints of the budget, but just about everything that happens in this film happens through dialogue. Now I love a good dramatic film that’s carried mostly through what characters say - if it's done well and the subject material lends itself to such a thing - but when you're dealing with alien and demonic activity, especially in a movie, audiences want to see something more than vague clouds and beams of light, especially when the film reaches its climatic resolution. There are a lot of intriguing ideas in this film that would have had much more dramatic weight if we weren't just told about what’s happening through talk all time and actually got to see some results, some clues, and some findings instead of only hearing about them. In fact, if we had seen some resolution to this story instead of being left to make our own assumptions about how things were resolved based on conversations by key characters its conclusion would have been much less ambiguous.

Unidentified has some fascinating theories about the UFO phenomena, many of which tie into our society's fascination with the paranormal and supernatural. Personally, I'd have to side with C.S. Lewis on this issue when he pointed out that even if there is alien life elsewhere in the universe, that wouldn't for one moment change the fact that we are a race in the grip of evil that's in desperate need of a savior. The existence of aliens won't erase the existence of sin on this planet; the only one who can do that is Jesus Christ. In fact, it may be because of sin that our planet is quarantined from the rest of the universe to prevent that taint from spreading. Unidentified presents a different theory for aliens and UFOs, and it's one that could have been quite dramatic if developed more thoroughly. There was even a point near the end where I thought this film was really going to make a lasting, dramatic impact, but even that was underplayed and undeveloped. There is a great story buried in here, worthy of the X-Files/CSI/Left Behind, however, with its use of a lot of Christian jargon, an assumption that people will know certain things about Christianity and its basic tenets, Unidentified is merely a good Christian movie. Whether or not other audiences will be entertained, or more importantly from the filmmakers perspective, changed by it isn't a sure thing. Still, there are some challenging ideas here that can provoke some great discussions, especially as we consider what our role is in the universe and whether or not we have a purpose, and if there’s forces out there that want to prevent us from fulfilling that purpose.

The Prestige

2006-10-23T08:03:00.000-07:00

"It is mine to avenge, I will repay." (Deuteronomy 32:35) Just about everyone knows that the Bible says vengeance is the Lord's, but have you ever wondered why? The Prestige provides us with an answer. This dark tale of lies, deceit and vengeance shows just how destructive these tendencies truly are. Despite it's less than uplifting story, however, The Prestige is one of the most tightly written, well preformed and intriguingly tricky films I've seen this year. I may not have gone home with any sort of feel good feeling, but my mind was still examining the twists and turns as I tried to figure out any clue I might have missed long after I left the theatre, which for me at least, makes for one fun time at the movies.

The key to making The Prestige so intriguing is the reveal at the end (which, by the way, I will not reveal to you.) I say reveal for a very specific reason. It's not so much of a gotcha kind of twist ala Shamalyan, but it's really a revelation of what had been taking place all along right in front of your eyes. It's kind of like when you find out how a magician has been pulling of a particular trick. You say, "Ohhhhh, that's how it was done" and then you want to see the trick again in order to watch for what you now know is really taking place; you want to see if you can spot the sleight of hand. So don’t let anyone spoil the secret for you before you see this film.

Aside from Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan is known for well-crafted stories that seem to be made up of many disparate pieces that actually all fit together perfectly. The Prestige is another such story. As the story unfolds, its many layers and parts may seem completely unrelated, but by the end, you look back and realize it all fit together perfectly, you just had to know where to look while Nolan pulled his cinematic sleight of hand. Part of makes all of this trickery and deceit work so well is the performances of the cast. Christian Bale puts in another solid performance, and the always reliable Michael Caine brings some refinement and class to this dark story. The true stand-out, however, is Hugh Jackman. Any trace of his Wolverine persona is completely gone, and in its place is a man who goes on a journey that changes him in subtle, dark and complex ways. I've never been a Hugh Jackman fan as I've never really felt that he’s been able to establish himself beyond the character of Wolverine, but after seeing him in this role, that perception was completely erased. Jackman is an extremely talented actor who uses his skills with perfection in a movie that needed nothing less to make it work.

Although the intrigue and twists of this film are a lot of fun, I have to warn you, you aren't going feel good when you leave the theatre. As I said earlier, this is a dark film. There aren't really any heroes in this film, or any characters that you can really feel any real sympathy for. The characters continually make choices that take them further and further down a path of destruction. The true tragedy is that no matter what horrifying event happens to these characters, no matter how much destruction surrounds these people, they never learn. They never come to a point where they step back and look at what they’re doing in order to assess if this is a journey they want to continue; until it's too late. As I watched, I couldn't help but hope that the audience I was watching with would take notice of what was happening and apply it their own lives. How many of us find vengeance to be sweet? However, if we go too far, and we might end up like the characters in The Prestige; or worse, if that were possible. How many of us have been obsessed, especially with something that someone else had that we felt we deserved. In fact, how many of have destructive tendencies that constantly linger beneath the surface just waiting for release? The Prestige shows us what happens whenever we pursue these paths; they lead to destruction, not only in our own lives but also in the innocent lives of people around. The characters in The Prestige never stop to consider this, and that's what makes this film so dark. It is a dramatic, visual parable of the Proverb “There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.” (Proverbs 14:12 NIV) That’s exactly what the characters in The Prestige experience, and if we're not careful, we could also fall into the same trap.

The Prestige is moody, dark, complex and intriguing. This is a film that you will need to pay attention to if you really want to enjoy it, and more importantly, learn from it. After I left, I realized that I would need to go back and watch it again to make sure I caught everything and that I knew exactly how all the pieces fit. After a summer of mindless blockbuster popcorn films, I'm glad that the fall is bringing back films that not only entertain audiences, but engages them as well. So is The Prestige a good film? Absolutely. Is it a film that will make you feel good? Absolutely not. It's up to you, then, to decide if the journey, the revelation and most importantly the lesson will be worth it.

The Guardian

2006-09-27T08:32:00.000-07:00

There's this game called Lifeboat. In the game, you imagine that a ship you were on sunk and now you're in a lifeboat with four other people. The others are something like a doctor, a lawyer, a crippled child and a sanitation engineer. The problem is the lifeboat can only hold four people, not five, so you have to decide who gets kicked out of the lifeboat. The game is supposed to reveal who we value in society or something along those lines, but I really think that's a farce. There's only one right answer to that game, and it's an answer that's readily displayed throughout The Guardian.

Kevin Costner has been on the comeback trail for quite some time now, without much success. I don't know if I would call this film a "comeback role" for him, but it's definitely one the best roles he's had in recent years, and one of the better ones of his career. He brings an edge and gentility to his character that's truly engaging, and for the first time in recent memory, it doesn't seem like he's bored with what he's doing. I've never really liked Ashton Kutcher, and I had a hard time seeing him as anything other than the doofus from That Seventies Show, and at first it seemed his character in this film was just another version of that role. However, a little more than halfway through the film there's a seen that totally reversed my opinion and I suddenly realized it wasn't just the usual Ashton Kutcher on screen, but a talented actor bringing to life a complex character.

The Guardian is a film that's driven by the characters and their dialogue, which means that the leads roles absolutely have to work, and they have to work well together. Costner and Kutcher do a solid job of carrying this film. Their characters are well developed, and not only do we care for them, but we also empathize with them; a rare feat in today's flash-bang film industry. The story of The Guardian is fairly simplistic, and in many ways entirely predictable. However, it's the characters that carry this film, and they're developed in such a way that a simplistic and predictable story becomes surprisingly emotional and engaging. Add to that some beautiful cinematography, some nice use of unique filming techniques by director Andrew Davis, solid special effects, a solid soundtrack and a great supporting cast, and you have the makings of the one of the better films released this year.

Earlier, I alluded to the game Lifeboat and the fact that there's really only one right answer to that game. That answer is on display, and indeed is the central theme, in The Guardian. The motto for the rescue swimmers of the United States Coast Guard is "So that others may live." The new recruits are repeatedly told that they have to be willing to give their lives to save another. That is their mission. That is what they train for. That is what they serve for. The right answer to the Lifeboat game isn't who else you choose to get out of the lifeboat, it's you are the one to get out; so that the others may live. That's not an easy choice to make, nor does the film make it seem it's something that always comes natural to the new recruits of the rescue swimmers. Our natural tendency is to cling to life, our own life; not to give up our life in order to save someone else, let alone someone that we don't know. And yet, that's what the brave men and women of the United States Coast Guard do on a daily basis; but even the best of the best can't save everyone. The truth is we are all drowning, although we may not realize it. The boat we're sailing through life on may not have sunk yet, but it is taking on water. For some of us, the boat has already sunk and we are flailing about in the waters of life, trying to keep our heads above water, waiting desperately for someone to come rescue us. It may reach for us on the sunny decks of a ship not yet capsized, or it may reach for us in the darkest moments of life's worst storms, but there is a nail-scarred hand reaching out for all us, urging us to grasp hold so that we might be pulled out of death and into life. That hand belongs to the one man who truly died so that others might live, the only one who can save everyone, but only if we choose to be rescued. He doesn't just rescue for a moment, but for all eternity. He is the epitome of self-sacrifice, of getting out of the lifeboat for all the others, of the motto "So that others might live." However, to be rescued, we have to take that nail-scarred hand. We have to grab hold and cling to it for our life, and once we do, He will never let go. There is hope in the stormy seas of life, there is rescue from the chilling depths of death, but it is our choice whether or not we accept that rescue. We are thrilled when we see stories of such self-sacrifice on the big screen. We think it heroic and noble, but the fact is we are all in such story, and it's up to us to decide what role we will play; will you be one who inexplicably chooses not to be saved or one who chooses to be rescued so that you too might become someone who helps the rescuer.

The Guardian isn't without its flaws. There's a scene at the end that seemed like it was added perhaps after test screenings revealed that audiences wanted a happier, more Hollywood ending. It's not necessarily a bad scene; it just didn't seem to fit. There were a couple other moments that seemed added on to help with exposition that felt oddly placed, but by no means disrupted the film. Despite its very few flaws, The Guardian is a rousing movie, causing the audience I viewed with to burst into applause on several occasions. This can be solely attributed to the adept story-telling that blends humor, drama and tragedy in just the right proportions and to the wonderful portrayal and depth of the characters. It's also a film that will have you asking the question just how much a life is worth and how much you might be willing to sacrifice in order that others might live.

Flyboys

2006-09-20T08:28:00.000-07:00

According to Wikipedia, there are only fifty-seven verified veterans of World War I still living; two of them live in the United States. We live in a generation that is truly forgetting The Great War. We have tons of reminders about World War II in the form of countless movies, TV shows and of course video games, but as for the first World War, it is fading into obscurity, myth and legend. That's one of the reasons I enjoyed Flyboys, simply because it was about The Great War, and I haven't seen many films in recent years that focus on that tragic and horrifying period of history. It may be a flawed film, but Flyboys has such sincerity and heart that it still manages to shine through the tarnish of its flaws.

One of the biggest problems with the film is that it's all so predictable. Flyboys is a typical outcasts/misfits overcome their shortcomings and fears as the bond together to become heroes/champions. We're told that the events were inspired by a true story, so I can't really say how much of it is Hollywood formula and how much of it really happened, but Flyboys treads a familiar path regardless. However, despite being so familiar in structure and so predictable, it executes those familiar conventions so well that it's still very enjoyable.

The other thing working against this film is the music. Instead of adding to the tension, drama, action or romance, it becomes far too revealing. The music is dangerous when someone is in danger, it's ominous when the bad guys are on screen, it's heroic when someone is heroic and it gives all of this away before you see any of it on screen. Music shouldn't forecast what's about to happen, it should enhance what's currently taking place. The music for Flyboys reveals far too much and adds little.

There are also several smaller dramatic moments that would have fleshed out this film nicely that aren't resolve after being introduced. I found that very disappointing because despite really not having a lot to do with the overall plot, I was curious to see how some of the minor story lines might have been resolved. Instead they're left to the side, and the film feels less complete because of it.

Although there are plenty of flaws in Flyboys, it's still an extremely enjoyable film. What really carried the film for me was just how much heart it had. Flyboys genuinely wants to show us how the aviators of the first World War were just as much heroes as any soldier from any other conflict, and it's hard not to get caught up in its simple sincerity. There's also a wonderful romance that's so sweet and innocent that it's impossible to resist. It really becomes the heart and soul of the film. Jennifer Decker carries these scenes beautifully as the French maid from the country-side who maintains her innocence despite experiencing personal tragedy in war. The tenderness, genuine love and let me use the term yet again, unabashed sincerity of this romance is wonderfully refreshing and touching in a cinematic climate that equates love with steamy love scenes and lots of skin. The love story of Flyboys is tender and heart rending, and it made the experience all the more worth while…but I'm a sucker for good love stories.

The rest of the cast is solid, if not remarkable. There isn't a lot of depth to the characters, but we get to know them well enough to at least be concerned about them, and by the end of the film, I wound up caring for them more than I really should considering how much (or really how little) depth they were given. I almost feel bad, however, for Jean Reno - who is excellent as always - because it seems whenever a film needs a French guy, he's the French guy they go get and he'll always be remembered as The French guy in movies.

One of the best parts of the film is the dog fighting sequences. The filmmakers use every technique in the book to give us a feel for just what the war in the air of The Great War was like. I'm glad that they didn't just rely on CG for all of these sequences, but that they also used models and blue screens and what appeared to be actual planes in many sequences. My only complaint is there were one too many dog fighting sequences, because by the end of the film they all started to feel the same. Chalk that up to all the planes looking alike and it being hard to tell who's flying which plane when the characters are in their aviator gear with the big goggles, caps and grime all over their faces. The emotional intensity of these scenes would have been significantly increased even if they were trimmed down by one. Still, it's one of the most spectacular parts of the film, and well worth seeing on the big screen. In fact, most of the cinematography is so lush and rich and that this film is definitely a visual treat.

I was also pleased to see that the token Christian character wasn't treated as a joke, but as one of the squad. In fact, much in the same way the Christian character in Saving Private Ryan was the only soldier who slept well at night, the Christian in Flyboys is the only one in the squad who is peaceful before and after each mission as he reads his bible and prays. As the other characters struggle to find a source of courage, and more importantly meaning, in the midst of the horrors of war, how telling is it that the Christian character is the only one with a ready supply of courage, peace and meaning. As we face a modern world that is daily plunging into darkness far greater than any previously seen, people are more and more desperate for meaning, purpose and peace. Perhaps we should take a hint from the way some of these films portray Christians. Not as jokes or cowards, but as the only ones who aren't lost in the midst of chaos. Don't wait for another war to break out before you seriously look for true meaning in life and a constant source of peace; begin looking for that today, and may I suggest you start with the Bible. If you start there, I can guarantee you won't have to look anywhere else.

In the end, Flyboys is not a Saving Private Ryan, but it is an enjoyable and at times surprisingly emotional film. It may lack depth, but with so few alive that actually experienced the horrors of World War I, it's more important than ever that we don't forget, hence the need for more films like this. I admit that a big reason I enjoyed this film so much is simply because it is set in WWI, but it’s also hard to deny the big heart it wears on its sleeve. And who knows, perhaps if this film is successful, we'll see more follow on the big screen, small screen and in video games. We may be almost a century removed for the events of The Great War, but we must not forget it or the lessons it taught us.

Snakes on a Plane

2006-08-21T07:55:00.000-07:00

Gratuitous. That’s the word I would use to describe Snakes on a Plane. Everything about this film is gratuitous; and yet, it works. Snakes on a Plane knows exactly what kind of film it is, and never tries to be anything different. It’s a standard, B-grade action/horror/disaster flick that follows the conventions and clichés of those genres to the letter and thereby ends up being a guilty pleasure. Snakes on a Plane is a fun film, but you’ll probably feel kind of dumb for thinking so.

A lot has been made of Snakes on a Plane and its internet marketing. It was an unusual way to push a film - to let the internet buzz be the driving force behind the marketing – and it doesn’t look like it’s going to pay off. After taking in a slightly tweaked fifteen million plus for the weekend, SoaP wasn’t nearly the success the hype would have led us to believe it would be. Much like the far superior Serenity, it seems that movies can’t be a success based on an internet fan base alone. But then again, it’s not like SoaP was trying to be a good movie. This isn’t a serious piece of film like WTC, or a summer blockbuster epic like Pirates of the Caribbean, SoaP is a throwback to those classic films that were so bad they were good.

Now I’m not saying that this was a bad film, perse, but then it also isn’t trying to be a really good film. SoaP takes the standards and conventions of the genres it emulates and follows them exactly. In fact, it adheres to these standards so closely that you can pretty much guess who will survive and who will be snake food as the characters board the plane; and therein lays the fun. You already know what’s going to happen – the title of the movie reveals it all – and you already have a pretty good idea of who it’s going to happen to. Now that may sound like you know too much, but it’s that fore knowledge that turns this film into a good time. As events unfold exactly as you know you would, there’s a certain giddy pleasure and comfort in the familiarity of it all. Every character in this film is a cliché, and the film does a good job of setting them all up and clearly defining them from the beginning. With just a few lines of dialogue, you know that this guy is the snobby, know-it-all jerk who’s going to be snake food, this single-mom lady will inevitably yell out, “My baby! Where’s my baby!”, and this amorous couple will find some place private for some fun that won’t end well. Yep, all the stock characters are here, and their fates unfold just as they should. You know, the sad thing is we can often make these same kind of snap judgments in real life as well. So often, we just glance at a person and already we have them pegged in a certain category in our mind. However, life isn’t a movie, and people aren’t caricatures of certain stereotypes. We need to learn to get past our preconceptions and take the time to really connect with people. Jesus did this better than anyone else. He saw past the stereotypes and looked into a person’s heart to see who they really were; to love them as they really were. It’s such an amazing realization to know that no matter how people might classify me, no matter what cliché I fit for others, Jesus will always love me just as I am; just as He has loved everyone for who they are, not who they appear to be. It’s nice to be more than just a cardboard cutout of a character, which is basically what everyone in SoaP is.

However, don’t get the impression that SoaP is some sort of spoof or camp movie. This is a serious action film…at least as serious as you can be about snakes on a plane. The movies doesn’t mock itself, nor does it have the sly insiders wink wink, nudge nudge kind of attitude. Although it may adhere to the all of conventions and clichés of disaster/horror films, it does so with serious intent. It’s not mocking those conventions; it’s using them to tell this particular story. It’s obvious that Samuel L. Jackson and the rest of the cast had fun making this kind of movie, but at the same time you can also see that they were very serious about it. Everyone commits fully to their role, and because they take it so seriously it helps the audience set aside all the things that don’t make sense and enjoy the ride. Sure the movie is funny in parts, but that’s because it wants to be funny, not because it’s so bad it’s funny.

As I left the theatre, I wondered why I went to see Snakes on a Plane. It’s not like it looked like it was going to be a great movie, and I wasn’t really expecting it to be all that good, so why did I bother to go? Why would anyone bother to go? It doesn’t have a lot of substance, there aren’t many surprises, it doesn’t always make sense, and it’s pretty much over the top in every way possible. But then I realized that I was grinning as I left theatre. I had a big, stupid grin on my face after watching a stupid movie about badly computer animated snakes terrorizing a bunch of stereotypical cliché characters around a 747 flying from Hawaii to L.A. That’s when I realized why I went; I thought it would be fun, and it was. Sometimes, movies are just fun. Snakes on a Plane is such a movie, and it doesn’t try to be anything else. It just wants the audience to have a good time. I can’t say I’d recommend going to see such a gratuitous film, but if you do happen to see it, odds are you’re going to have fun; and you’ll probably feel guilty for doing so. But then, that’s what a guilty pleasure is.

What Every Parent Needs to Know About Video Games

2006-08-14T10:02:00.000-07:00

Video games have received a lot of press of late on just how destructive and harmful they are. One might think that this genre of entertainment could singly handedly undermine modern civilized society as we know it. But is that really the case? Are video games the bane of humanity that they’ve been made out to be? Richard Abanes tackles these issues in a very even handed manner in his book What Every Parent Needs to Know About Video Games. In fact, if you’ve been wondering what the big deal is about video games and why there’s so much controversy surrounding this subject, Richard’s book is a great way to get your feet wet as an introduction to the gaming world.

Like it or not, gaming is a major part of our culture, and we can’t remain oblivious to it any more. Games like Grand Theft Auto, Mario and Pac-Man have become a part of our collective consciousness. Not only that, but Hollywood and the gaming industry are increasing becoming partners in the entertainment arena, with the lines between the two industries becoming more and more blurred every year, and who can blame them? Video games are big business, raking in billions of dollars worldwide and bringing in more than the Hollywood box office (excluding DVD sales) on a regular basis here in the U.S. Despite all of this, a lot of people are still oblivious as to what video games really are. Very often they’re still viewed as just kids games that shouldn’t be taken seriously, which often sets up a serious backlash with parents and political leaders discover what sort of content some games contain. Still, those controversial games are just a small segment of this industry complex industry.

What Every Parent Needs to Know About Video Games is a very straight forward guide that introduces novices to the gaming world and helps readers come to grips with both the pros and cons of gaming. The book gives simple explanations to the various genres of gaming, the ratings system used to rate games and it explains why games are so appealing to so many people; kid, teens and adults. Richard then goes on to explore the controversy surrounding video games and he does an excellent job of explaining the position of both sides of this volatile subject. Although he’s a gamer, Richard is very balanced and honest about the hobby of gaming, presenting both the positives and negative effects that gaming can have. Yes, I did say there are positive effects from gaming, and you’ll discover what they are and how they benefit people when you read this book. Best of all, the book doesn’t use a lot of jargon or complex terms and it isn’t all that long and can easily be read in a weekend but will equip you with a lot of information.

The title sums up exactly what this book is all about. What Every Parent Needs to Know About Video Games is an excellent introduction to the gaming world for anyone unfamiliar with it, and it’ll also fill you in on the basics of the controversy surrounding video games without trying to sway you to one side or the other. Regardless of whether you’ve never picked up a controller or can’t put one down, you’ll come away from this book with a better understanding of the next generation of modern entertainment.

World Trade Center

2006-08-14T07:46:00.000-07:00

“Now listen, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will got this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business, and make money.’ Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.”* If there’s one thing I took away from Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center, it was to make every day count. I know that sounds trite or cliché, but if there’s ever been a day that has proved just how valuable each day is, and how uncertain every tomorrow is, it was September 11, 2001.

World Trade Center starts off so normal, so ordinary that the first several minutes of it might even be described as ordinary. People get up, they go through their morning routine, they get into cars and subways and ferries to go to work, they get their assignments and go about their day just as they have every other day. This ordinariness, the routine builds in the audience such a sense of dread because we know how that day turned out. However, when I think about it, the start of my day on September 11, 2001 was pretty ordinary as well, as it probably was for all of us. How could we know that it would turn into a day of unimaginable horror? We couldn’t, and hence the reason to make every day count. We can never take for granted that this day will be like every other day, a point that’s been driven home once again by terrorists who were plotting yet another attack that would have turned an ordinary day into a nightmare. This time they were foiled, in 2001, they succeeded. So again, the message is; make every day count and make sure that if this day were to be your last, you wouldn’t have any regrets. More importantly, make sure you know where you will spend eternity should this day be your last.

Oliver Stone treats the subject matter in World Trade Center with kid gloves, and I’m thankful that he did. Most of what happens happens off screen. We never see the planes hit, we only hear of the Pentagon and United flight 93 through TV and new reports. We see the collapse of the first tower from the inside, and hear the collapse of the other buried beneath the rubble with the two Port Authority Officers portrayed by Nic Cage and Michael Pena. We catch glimpses of the building crumbling again through TV news casts, but none of it is recreated with modern special effects, and why would it need to be? We have all had those images burned into our collective consciousness from that horrid. Few of us have forgotten what it looked like, so we certainly don’t need every detail recreated and portrayed on screen. However, thirty to fifty years from now, we probably will. Just as Saving Private Ryan had to recreated D-Day and the beaches of Normandy in extreme and bloody detail in order to help a new generation understand exactly what it was like, someday we will need all the details of 9/11 recreated in order for us to truly remember what that day was really like. But not now; it’s still too fresh, and fortunately Oliver Stone seemed to understand that.

Still, this is a dramatization, and unfortunately that fact is often much more apparent than in United 93, especially during the domestic scenes. Many of the scenes with the wives and family waiting to hear about their husbands come off as a bit flat, and quite honestly, these scenes often feel a lot like filler material to help the movie fill out its two-hour running time. They do have some moving moments, but the movie is really more about the two officers trapped in the rubble, and this is where the movie really shines. Stone helps capture the claustrophobic and helpless feeling of being buried in the rubble, and Cage and Pena do some talented acting, especially considering their limited movement and being covered in grime.

The one thing that really confused me is why when they two trapped man see Jesus brining them water, why is Jesus wearing a cross around his neck? I find it kind of hard to believe that Jesus would wear a representation of the device that killed him, so I’m assuming it’s there so the audience understands who this image is. But one the characters says who it is in a later scene, so in the end I just found in confusing, but I guess that really doesn’t have anything to do with the film.

World Trade Center is a moving reminder of the heroism and unity we all felt on September 11th. It’s also a stark reminder of why we should never take our loved ones, friends, or even each day we have for granted. At the end of the film, subways, ferries, and streets are empty. The ordinariness of the day was shattered by great evil, and yet in the midst of that darkness we found that humanity is also capable of great acts of self-sacrifice and unconditional love. This isn’t a great film, but I think the nearness of the event makes it so much more moving than it might otherwise have been. Those memories and emotions are still so fresh, Oliver Stone didn’t have to work too hard to make a moving reminder of way September 11, 2001 was an ordinary day that no one would ever forget.

*James 4:13-14 (NIV)

Barnyard

2006-08-02T08:37:00.000-07:00

When you think of Barnyard, think of The Lion King except with cows. No, think of The Lion King except with cows that look like people in cow suits. No, that’s not quite it…ummm, ok, think of all that stuff I just said along with one of those little Playskool barnyard sets with the barn door that goes mmmmrrrrraaaawww and has all those little round characters and whatnot and then I think you’ll have a pretty good idea of what Barnyard is all about. If you’re still confused, just know that Barnyard is a lot of fun; a bit unbalanced, fairly cliché, but still fun.

Some animals are just funny, and cows are one of them. There’s just something about cows that for some reason tickles the funny bone. This is something Gary Larson understood when he was penning The Far Side, and I think some of his work must have inspired Barnyard ‘cause where else would you get the idea of having cows standing around on their hind legs talking to each other? It’s a great gag, but it’s a gag that’s hard to sustain for a full-length film, which is probably why the creators of Barnyard attached that gag to a well-worn, cliché yet familiar plot. It’s a story about a young cow that must learn to grow up and accept responsibility as a leader after his role model and father is suddenly taken from him…just think Lion King with cows and you have the basic plot. This isn’t really a detraction because the fun of seeing cows walking around and the energy of the humor helps differentiate Barnyard from its obvious inspiration…though not by much.

There was one thing about this film that really bugged me, however, and maybe someone can help me out with this. Do male cows have udders? I’m watching this movie that has these male cows, one of them voiced by the very manly Sam Elliot, and they’re walking around on their hind legs with udders jiggling around on their front. I found it disconcerting and confusing because I thought only girl cows had those while male cows or bulls were not so equipped. Granted it was a funny - although vaguely disturbing - sight gag, but I just couldn’t get past the fact that I thought boy cows didn’t have udders.

Well, if you can get past the whole udder thing, you’re in for a good time at the Barnyard, and who doesn’t like a good time? In fact, our lead cow Otis – voiced competently by the always affable Kevin James – is all about having fun. It’s his one purpose in life; to have a good time. Responsibility can wait, or so he thinks. In many ways, a lot of us are lot like Otis the cow. We may not have udders, but we do like to put off certain decisions until later so we can enjoy ourselves now. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard people say that they’ll get around to looking into the whole Christianity thing after they’ve had all the fun they want to have. However, just as Otis discovered, life rarely keeps to our schedule. The time we think we have isn’t nearly as long we might believe. Sooner or later, life will interrupt our so-called fun and than we’re suddenly left with an eternity of regrets and if onlys. If there’s one thing we learn from the cows of Barnyard, it’s that we can avoid responsibility only so long; sooner or later it will be thrust upon us. So, we can either accept it on our own terms or be at its mercy; the choice is ours…but only for so long. Don’t be like Otis and wait until it’s too late and it costs more than you can afford. You may think you have plenty of time to come to Christ, but then Simba…I mean Otis, also thought he had plenty of time to party while his dad Mufasa…I mean Ben, took care of the responsible stuff.

That’s a pretty heavy theme for a kid’s movie, I know, but that’s one of the problems of Barnyard; it’s a bit unbalanced. Don’t get me wrong, this is definitely a kid’s movie; the animation style, the silly animals and the manic humor is all aimed squarely at kids, and one would expect nothing less from Nickelodeon. However, it also tries to work in some material for adults to enjoy as well, but it doesn’t really blend these two elements together quite as well as Pixar did in films like Finding Nemo or Monsters Inc. As I said, the gimmick of talking cows partying on their hind legs can only go so far, hence the need for some dramatic elements to move the plot forward from gag to action to gag. Smoother transitions between these scenes and better blend of the kid/adult elements would have gone a long way to making Barnyard more than just a Lion King imitator.

Still, Barnyard is a lot fun, and definitely the most kid-centric of the animated films to come out this summer. Despite the Lion King de-ja-vu I had, I found the adventures of Otis and his friends a lot fun. I laughed more than I did in Over the Hedge, but missed the greater depth of character and emotion of the Pixar films, including Cars. The cows may look like people in cow suits (complete with udders) and the animation may look a little plastic (which may be intentional), but the important thing is Barnyard is a lot of fun and it’ll put a smile on your face no matter what age you are, and you can’t ask for more than that from a kid’s film in the summer.

Justice League: Season Two

2006-07-17T10:58:00.000-07:00

After doing three successful shows based on two of the greatest superheroes ever known, what do you do for an encore? You make a show about the greatest superhero team, of course; The Justice League. Unfortunately, season one was not the homerun everyone was expecting. It wasn’t what the fans were hoping for, and interestingly enough, Bruce Timm, Paul Dini, Alan Burkett, Glen Murakami and the rest of the crew that brought us the superb Superman, Batman and Batman Beyond shows felt the same way. They knew there was something decidedly lacking with their new show Justice League, and fortunately for fans, they did everything possible to fix those problems for season two. Their efforts certainly paid off, as this is one of the best action/superhero shows on TV. It doesn’t quite live up to the legacy of Batman: The Animated Series, mind you, but then it isn’t really trying to. This is a completely different show, and it’s a lot of fun for geeks and non-geeks of all ages.

One thing that’s immediately evident as you watch this set is just how big these stories are, or should I say epic? Granted, when you put together seven of the greatest heroes in comics, you have to go big, but to say that and to accomplish it are two completely different things. Best of, this time around the show’s creators didn’t rely on Superman getting beat up all the time to convey just how dangerous the situation is (oh no, they took down Superman, our strongest, most invulnerable hero. This is a serious situation/villain/alien species/threat or whatever. It’s kinda like what Star Trek: The Next Generation did with Worf. Every time Worf the Klingon - the strongest member of the crew - was taken down, you knew the villain/alien was really strong and really dangerous). This time around, the writers were more creative. From a team-up between Darkseid and Braniac to a very personal conflict and betrayal to an alternate Justice League called the Justice Lords, the stories in season two are epic and fun. There are also some very nice personal moments that help flesh out the characters. There’s a heartwarming Christmas episode, and several romantic moments between GL (Green Lantern) and Hawk Girl. We also get a hint of romance between Batman and Wonder Woman. Crazy! Without giving anything away, let me also say that the three part season finale is one of the most epic, exciting super hero stories I’ve seen. It plays out like a major motion picture, topping many of the recent live action super hero films to grace the big screen.

The other cool aspect of Justice League is the team aspect. It’s one thing to see these heroes operate solo, but Justice League shows us that even the strongest of heroes needs a little help from their friends. Superman may be the greatest hero the earth has ever known, but even he finds himself in numerous situations where he has to rely on his friends for help. Batman may be the ultimate loner, but even he discovers the value of being a part of a team. No matter how strong or smart we may be, we can never truly go it alone. Despite the great connectedness we have in our modern society, so many people still feel completely alone or like they have to do it all on their own, but that’s not the case. The Bible tells us two very encouraging things: one; God will never leave us for forsake us, so we never have to feel alone, and two; when we follow Christ, we’re surrounded by a huge family made up of the sons and daughters of God who, like the Justice League, will always be there to support us in our time of need. If Superman needs help from his fellow heroes every now and then, who are we to think that we could be any different?

Justice League Season Two contains the same meager extras content as any of the other sets from Batman to Superman, but what little we get is still pretty good. Voices of Justice takes us behind the scenes with the voice actors of the show in a discussion of what it’s like to work on Justice League. We also get an interesting round table with the producers where they talk about how the worked to make season two of Justice League into the show they all know it could be and should be. There are a couple of commentaries spread throughout various episodes, and again, although these commentaries are nice, like with the previous sets, it would be better if there were more of them. Justice League was the first of these shows to be made in the digital era, and it definitely shows. The picture is sharp and clean, and there are some cool CG effects in the show as well. The sound is also top-notch, which is a good thing because it goes a long way in establishing the epic nature of these adventures.

Justice League Season Two does an excellent job of recovering from its so-so first outing, and it ends with a bang. The stories, the action, and to some extent even the drama is all bigger, better and more exciting. If it seems from recent reviews that I find these animated shows more enjoyable than some of the live-action, big-budget movie versions of these heroes, well that’s because I do. In live action versions, it’s always harder to suspend your disbelief at a hero’s amazing feats because its believability is dependent on the special effects. With animation, my mind isn’t constantly gauging whether or not special effects are good enough, it just enjoys the show. Plus, the team that has brought us these shows over the past decade and a half really understand these characters. Of all the geeks that watch the show, they are the geekiest, and it pays off with versions of these beloved characters that ring true. Yes, Justice League is a cartoon, but it isn’t just for kids.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

2006-07-10T06:56:00.000-07:00

So matey, what is the price of your soul? Aye, that’s what I said, how much is your soul worth? For you see, that is the question Jack Sparrow (excuse me, Captain Jack Sparrow) must answer in Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest. In fact, that’s a question we all must face at some point, but a more pressing question is whether or not this Pirates sequel is any good.
Well, let’s examine the facts. First of all, it’s a movie based on a theme park ride. Second of all, it’s a sequel to a movie based on a theme park ride; so does it really have any right to be any good? No. But it is. Much like it’s predecessor, Dead Man’s Chest may surprise a lot of people. I’m not saying that it’s the best film ever made, mind you, nor is it necessarily better than the original, but it’s really much better than it has any right to be.

The entire crew has returned for this outing - from director to writers to producers to stars to co-stars; even the dog with the keys - and they all seem very comfortable in their roles. Of course, the character that holds everything together is Captain Jack Sparrow, and once again Johnny Depp does a marvelous job with this original rogue. However, everything in this second outing of Pirates has a darker and more serious edge to it. Whereas the first adventure was light and fun and never really took itself too seriously, this time around the adventure is still there, the action is big and fun, the humor is still around, but there’s more at stake, the themes are more serious, and the villains much darker than last. This also true of Sparrow. Although he’s as goofy, sly, deceptive and bit off as ever, he also displays a more serious and contemplative side as he struggles with a very personal conflict in Dead Man’s Chest. This change may be disappointing for fans, and I’m still not sure what to make of the more serious tone of this sequel. I enjoyed the film, but missed the much simpler, lighthearted, swashbuckling ways of the first. Still, Pirates does work as a more serious adventure, it just feels like a different film from the first which never really took itself too seriously.

Part of the reason Dead Man’s Chest is darker and more serious is because of the key to the plot. This time around, the pirates aren’t after treasure like in the first (cursed treasure to be sure, but still merely treasure). No this time Sparrow is on a quest for freedom. Not the freedom one finds with a ship, but freedom from a debt that he owes; a debt he owes to Davy Jones, the debt of his soul. Sparrow tries to swindle, con, buy, manipulate and otherwise pay or manage this debt on his own terms, and as these efforts make up the bulk of what takes place in the movie, I won’t go into any more detail about those efforts except to say they reflect the efforts of us all. We all owe a debt to evil. Just like the crew of Davy Jones, we owe a debt of servitude to evil that we have to pay. However, we won’t be able to talk our way out of it, even if we are as sly or slick as Captain Jack Sparrow, and all the gold of the seven seas wouldn’t be enough to even make a down payment on it. Your soul is priceless, the most valuable item in all the cosmos, which is why evil wants it so much. The good new is, however, that although we may never be able to pay the price we owe, God paid it for us. In fact, the Bible says when Jesus died on the cross and rose from the grave for us, He paid double what was owed on our behalf. That’s how much God loves you, and just how valuable you are to Him. So stop looking for a way out of the debt you owe on your own terms, and just accept the gift of freedom that God has paid for your. I think you’ll find life in the service of righteousness to be far preferable to an eternity of servitude on the crew of Davy Jones and his evil minions.

Despite the darker, serious tone of Dead Man’s Chest, I still found it to be one of the best movies I’ve seen this summer. Granted it runs a bit long, and the lighthearted, let’s-not-take-this-too-seriously fun of the first Pirates is missed, Pirates 2 is still a lot of fun. The action is spectacular, and in a summer that’s thus far been filled with some pretty amazing special effects, the effects in this movie have impressed me the most. The make-up and effects done for Davy Jones and his crew is so good you don’t even notice it, and the creature effects for one of the biggest action scenes is absolutely stellar. Industrial Lights and Magic have really outdone themselves this time around. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest has everything you’d expect from a sequel - bigger action, more Jack Sparrow - and few things you wouldn’t - more serious tone, much darker edge to it. It’s really the Empire Strikes Back of the series. In fact, it pretty much follows the plot outline for that movie verbatim. While it may not be any sort of milestone in film history (as most of the reviews have illustrated thus far), it’s still much better than many have given it credit for, and it’s much better than any sequel to a movie based on the theme park ride should. Like the ride, it’s a lot of fun and good time, but this time it really wants to be taken as a serious adventure. While Pirates does work as a more serious film, I miss the let’s-just-have-fun attitude of the first. Still, I’m looking forward to how this wild ride will end next year when our heroes journey to The Ends of the Earth. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead’s Man Chest ups the ante in every way possible for a sequel and throws in a few new twists, turns and wrinkles as well. So is say, go ahead and sign on for second tour with Captain Jack Sparrow’s crew; I don’t think you’ll regret it.

Superman: The Animated Series Vol. 3

2006-07-06T07:54:00.000-07:00

This is Superman at his best. Superman: The Animated Series Volume 3 has some of the best Superman stories and action you’ll see anywhere; small screen, big screen, or on the printed page. After the first two seasons, the producers fine tuned all the minor problems and enhanced all the things that worked to create one of the best animated shows on TV. It doesn’t quite live up to Batman, but it still outshines just about any other super hero cartoon out there. With Superman enjoying a sudden resurgence in popularity thanks to the new movie, the timing for this release couldn’t be better, and hopefully super-hungry fans will dive in and experience Superman at his best.

Producers Bruce Timm, Paul Dini, Glen Murakami and the rest of the crew that were responsible for the bringing us the excellent Batman: The Animated Series went all out for this final season of Superman. The stories were edgier, the action more intense, and the whole show was much more serious. It didn’t become darker, perse, for Superman isn’t a dark character, but there were definitely some dark moments that help set a new standard for Saturday morning cartoons. One of the first on-screen deaths takes place in this set, a moment that forever redefines the character of Superman. We see Superman pushed past his limits by one of Darkseid’s schemes, and the repressed relationship between Superman and Lois finally bubbles to the surface. This set also has some of the most fun episodes of the series. One of my favorites has Batman missing and Superman comes to Gotham to help find him. To do so, he has to impersonate Batman. Seeing Superman dressed in the costume trying to find the right pocket on his utility belt is great fun. We also get to see some sweet guest stars as the seeds are planted for the future Justice League show. Aquaman and Green Lantern make an appearance, as does
Batman and Robin, and of course we get our introduction to Supergirl in this season as well.

One of my favorite parts of the Superman Animated Series has always been its portrayal of Clark Kent. He isn’t the bumbling baffoon as he was portrayed in the Movies, but rather he’s just a genuinely good guy; nice but otherwise unremarkable. I think this works extremely well for the character. Much has been made of Clark’s simple disguise; after all, how could a pair of glasses be enough for anyone not to recognize Superman. What I think the animated show does a good of demonstrating is why the disguise is so effective. In the animated show, Clark is so normal that it would be incomprehensible for one to believe that he’s Superman. After all, Superman is a god-like being who has almost unlimited power, why on Earth would such a being choose to masquerade as a normal human being. That’s the genius of the Clark’s disguise, and especially when his character is a kind, average, unassuming person, it is truly effective. In many ways it reflects the same reason many people can’t accept Jesus as God. Why would immortal God lower Himself to the state of mortal being; even to the point of allowing said mortal beings to kill Him? It’s completely irrational to our minds. But unlike Superman, Jesus wasn’t God trying to disguise Himself, rather He was trying to reveal Himself to mankind; a difficult concept to be sure, but one that ultimately leads to freedom and life.

Unfortunately, Vol.3 follows in the footsteps of previous sets by not offering up enough extras. While we do get some excellent commentaries from the producers, I would have enjoyed a few more on episodes such as “Knight Time” where Superman dresses up as Batman or on the episodes where we get a glimpse of some of the other future League members. “Superman: Behind the Cape” is an enjoyable roundtable discussion with the producers in a comic shop (geek heaven) and it gives some great insights into the direction the show’s creators wanted to take with this final season. We also get some brief excerpt from the new documentary Look, Up in the Sky from director Bryan Singer, but seeing as how this extra is on just about every Superman release in the past month, it doesn’t really feel all that special. We also get a preview of the new direct-to-video Superman movie Brainiac Attacks, which quite frankly shows just how good this show is when compared to other efforts.

Compared to some of the early Batman sets, Superman: The Animated Series Volume 3 looks pretty good. The picture is much cleaner than in previous sets, and some of the animation looks pretty amazing considering this was still before the time of digital effects. The set is also presented in Dolby Digital, so it sounds great. From explosions to punches to dialogue, everything sounds crisp and clear.
.
Although most people are currently enamored with the new movie version of Superman, it would be a shame to dismiss Superman: The Animated Series 3 as not being worth the time to view it just because it’s a cartoon. As with the Batman series, Vol 3 of Superman shows that an animated show can be apart of the Saturday morning line-up without necessarily being just for kids. Fans of all ages will enjoy this Superman who, in my mind at least, is the defining standard for every other interpretation of Superman.

Superman Returns

2006-06-27T10:17:00.000-07:00

The world doesn’t need a savior…until something like 9/11 happens or when a hurricane like Katrina devastates the country. Then the savior we didn’t need goes from non-existent to scapegoat. We ask where was he, why didn’t he prevent this, how could he allow such suffering and pain. We don’t need savior, as long as life is good; but when things go wrong, then we need someone to blame – and perhaps, deep inside of us, we long for someone to come and rescue us and make the world right again. Perhaps, even though we don’t want to admit it, we really do need a savior. Yes, when tragedy strikes, it looks like a job for…
Superman Returns is a story of what happens when messiahs come back, or so says director Bryan Singer. The new film features a world that has learned to live without Superman, and in fact, has convinced themselves that they never really needed Superman in the first place. At least that’s the premise, but in watching Superman Returns, it seemed to me that the only one who felt like she’d learned to live without Superman (or at least tried to) was Lois Lane. Now, perhaps the rest of the world had moved on, but we’re never really shown that; which is just one of the many minor things about this movie that hinder it from achieving true greatness. However, where X-Men was shallow, Superman is a meaty feast, but there are definitely some missed opportunities for drama; like what would it be like if Superman had to regain the trust of an entire world and not just one heartsick and bitter reporter. Still, considering the unwieldy project that Bryan Singer undertook in finally brining the world’s greatest superhero back the big screen, he’s done an excellent job.
So much has already written about this movie that I’ll try not to waste much time covering what others (more capably) have already done, but we still need to address the big question; can Brandon Routh truly be Superman. Well, I think he did a very competent job. He emulates a lot of what Christopher Reeves did with Clark and Superman, but also adds a subtle edge to the character. However, Routh’s Superman lacked the gentle confidence and self-assuredness of Reeves’ Superman and unfortunately, the Clark Kent character comes off as a mere after thought in this film. Routh does an admirable job with what he’s give to do, again mirroring much of what Reeves did, but the character just doesn’t have a lot to do with the film. It almost feels as if the director and writer knew that in a Superman story Clark Kent had to be in it somewhere, but they weren’t entirely sure of what to do with him. So yes, I think Brandon Routh was a good choice to play Superman, although he needs to grow into the part a little bit, and he definitely needs more to do as Clark Kent.
As for Kate Bosworth, well, she just doesn’t feel like Lois Lane to me, and it has nothing really to do with how young she looks. I’m not sure if it was the writing or the performance, but this Lois Lane was a bit flat. The supposed tension between Lois and Superman over his disappearance didn’t resonate quite as strongly as it could have because Lois wasn’t as strong of a character. As for the romantic chemistry, it’s there, but it lacks the spark and electricity found in the original.
Then there’s Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor. He brings a darker edge to the campy Gene Hackman role, and it just feels right. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a whole lot of screen time, and much of his scenes felt somewhat detached from the rest of the film and even a little rushed (of course he was only available for six weeks of shooting, so that may explain it). Lex’s showdown with Superman also lacked a certain punch, which is unfortunate because it’s one of the scenes we really anticipate through the whole film. I don’t know if it was to preserve the PG-13 rating, but when Lex faces off against Superman, I thought it could have been a bit darker and more brutal and thereby much more emotionally powerful. I’m not saying it was a bad scene, but it feels as though Singer and company held back. Spacey doesn’t quite steal the show like I thought he would, but he does a great job embodying one of Superman’s deadliest foes.
Now, there’s been a lot of buzz in the media of late about the parallels between Superman and Jesus, and Superman Returns doesn’t downplay this aspect of the character. Although the messianic references aren’t overly blatant or preachy, they’re unabashedly obvious. While one might think that the message of this movie is that we really do need a savior, that conclusion is left in doubt at the end of the film. Despite everything that happens, despite all that Superman does to save the day, at the end of the film we see Lois Lane - the person who was most jaded at Superman’s departure – sitting at her computer writing an article entitled “Why the World Needs Superman.” The page, however, is blank, and Lois is unable to write anything, suggesting perhaps that even after all that’s happened, she’s still not ready to accept her need for a savior. How like all of us that is. After 9/11 and hurricane Katrina, we wondered where God was and why He didn’t do anything, but the truth is, even if He had miraculously intervened, it still wouldn’t be enough for some people. You see, our need for a savior goes far beyond just needing someone to get us out of trouble. We need a savior who will be there all the time, not just when we’re in trouble or facing a crisis, and not even Superman can do that. We need a friend; a friend who will always be there. One who doesn’t only save, but also guides and comforts and assures and loves. Superman returned to world that said it didn’t need him, and yet when he listened, all he could hear was a world crying out for a savior. Our world is doing the same, and some day our Savior will return, but until that day, He’s available right now to meet each every person, to meet with you and be with you on a daily basis. Only one person, one Hero, one God-man can meet that need; so this looks like a job for…
If you’ve seen the trailers, you pretty much know what this movie is all about plot-wise, but unlike many films where you learn everything you need to know from the previews, Superman Returns is definitely worth seeing. There are some spectacular actions scenes, amazing special effects, and the movie definitely brings back the awe of Superman. It could have been shorter by eliminating some totally unnecessary scenes, and dragged on at the end, so it doesn’t have much of a punch and instead just kind of fizzles. The one thing I really didn’t like was the introduction of the kid. He was obviously a plot device, but he didn’t do much for the plot and the device never really did anything. It was pointless, and it adds a new wrinkle to everything that left me wondering what they’re going to do with it in future sequels. I think they may have written themselves into a corner with this little twist, and as a Superman fan, it just didn’t feel “right” to me to begin with.
Ok, so after all of that, you’re probably thinking that I didn’t like Superman Returns, right? Not true. I though it was a really good movie. DC has once again put out a movie that isn’t just a good comic book movie, it’s quite simply a really good movie that happens to be based on a comic book. It definitely aspires to be among the greats such as Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins (which I still think is better, but I’m biased) or even the original Superman film, and for the most part it fulfills those aspirations. There were such high expectatiosn for this film that it would be impossible for it to live up to them. It's not the let down like Stars Wars Episode I, but it's also not quite the success like Batman Begins. It's more like Narnia, it's good but it could have been and should have been better. It brushes the edge of almost using too much from the original film and it doesn’t quite seem sure of how to leave things at the end, but there are some awe inspiring moments and it definitely demonstrates why we think of Superman as the world’s greatest superhero. Superman Returns is a spectacle that you don’t want to miss on the big screen; so look, up on the screen…

X-Men: The Last Stand

2006-05-24T08:44:00.000-07:00

—1. Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads

*Note: the following review is spoiler free, but if you really don’t want anything spoiled, just see the movie before you read anything.*

Wow. The X-Men’s last stand delivers exactly what one expects from a summer movie. Once, action films officially marked the beginning of the summer movie season, but now movies with super powered heroes officially herald it's start. If you’ve been disappointed with this year's summer “event” movies so far (Poseidon sank, Da Vinci was a snooze, and although M:i:III was solid, it wasn’t quite “big” enough), try X-Men: The Last Stand; it doesn't disappoint.

When a film has a title like The Last Stand and the hype claims it as the last of a successful franchise, it has to be epic, big, and satisfying. X-Men: The Last Stand delivers on all counts. This is the most action packed of the series, and the action moves the story forward. The action scenes don't just look cool, they are cool. The violence is intense and visceral, and the overall tone of the film is darker than the previous two, befitting a final film. (Take note, Star Trek: Nemesis, this is how to properly end things.)

X-Men fans will be pleased with the slew of new characters and though their screen time is limited by the huge cast, it’s still fun to see them. This final film covers a lot of X-Men history, and let me just warn fans that you may be disappointed with how brief and undeveloped the X-Men mythology is. But with a lore as rich and deep as that of X-Men, it would be difficult in a movie to properly develop those stories. Although most of this film is about as thin as the skin on soup left sitting too long, it’s still enjoyable to watch. In fact, because they didn’t squeeze in a bunch of explanations, the film flows smoothly. And even with its lack of depth, fans and non-fans will get a kick out of this film.

Hugh Jackman's portrayal of Wolverine is definitely a hit. Although I’m not a die hard fan of X-Men, I’ve always enjoyed the comics and cartoons and I think Jackman has done an excellent job of portraying Wolverine. The feral ferocity, the fierce individualism fighting with the need to be a part of team, and the quips and barbs are all there as a fan would want. Of course Patrick Stewart found himself another iconic role as Professor Xavier, and he’s at his best in this film. Not only does he look a lot like the Prof, but in this third film Stewart really becomes the character. Ian McKellen has already had a success this year with his role in The Da Vinci Code (his part was one of the only interesting parts of the film, the rest is a bore), and he continues his success with X-Men. This time I think he, too, finally embodies the character he portrays. The writers finally make Magneto the fearsome, awe inspiring, powerful presence he’s supposed to be. Halle Berry’s Storm finally has something to do in this film, and the rest of the cast put in great performances. Although I wasn’t a huge fan of the make-up, Kelsey Grammer really is the Beast. (By they way, Beast’s fight scenes are really cool).

It's interesting that X-Men was released on the heels of Da Vinci because both films feature a group of people separated from society by differences the society wants to “cure” so they can be set free. In The Da Vinci Code, we’re told that if people knew the “truth” of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, then the oppression of Christians worldwide would finally be lifted. In essence, the truth would be a “cure” for Christianity. In X-Men, the so called “cure” for mutation is also a way to conform them to society. Is the timing of these films a coincidence? Probably. But a war could be coming, and movies like The Da Vinci Code and X-Men suggest that lines are already being drawn. Storm tells Wolverine that time for sitting on the fence is over; “If you’re going to be with us; be one with us.”

Like the X-Men, Christians have been transformed (or perhaps you could say mutated by Jesus Christ), and though they stand apart from the world, they still fight to save the world that would persecute and hate them. You might even call Christians the Ex-Men, for Jesus has made them into something new. Jesus brings freedom, redemption and eternal life, making all who accept Him into a new creation, a new person free from the past and free from sin. Soon, however, the choice to accept that mutation might be gone. Regardless of your beliefs, know this: if the battle comes, and a last stand has to be made, it may already be too late to choose sides. It's worth thinking about now. What would you rather be? Man or Ex-Man?

X-Men: The Last Stand is a great comic book film, but it is still just a comic book film. It doesn’t transcend the genre like Superman: The Movie or Batman Begins, and it doesn’t quite reach the lofty heights of Spiderman 2; but it’s close. One thing's for sure; it’s a fun, satisfying ride. The type of ride you immediately what to ride again. Summer is officially here.

— Overview

The Da Vinci Code

2006-05-20T14:49:00.000-07:00

—1. Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters (Tom Hanks)
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads

Why did I like this book? I mean, I’m pretty sure I remember enjoying this story when I read the book. It wasn’t a literary masterpiece or anything, but it was a brisk adventure with some thrilling moments. Sure the overall story was pretty silly, but still, I had fun following the clues and seeing the characters solve the puzzles. But here I am, sitting in this darkened theater, watching a movie that follows pretty closely to what took place in the book, and somehow I’m finding it all a bit...dull. Where are thrills? Where’s the intrigue? The adventure? The mystery? The awe of discovery? Somehow from book to screen it’s all been lost, and now I can’t quite remember, why did I like this book in the first place?

These are thoughts that crossed my perplexed mind as I watched Ron Howard’s screen version of the mega best-selling book The DaVinci Code. After all the hype and controversy, I find it ironic that the one thing no one anticipated from this movie is that it would turn out to be so bad. Of course, how could it? It has such a high caliber of talent; Oscar winners both behind the camera and on the screen. There’s even an Oscar in the closet of the screenwriter, so surely this would be the summer event movie of the year, right? Well...not so much, and perhaps the real mystery of The DaVinci Code is how a story that seem to be perfect for the big screen, put together by some of the best in Hollywood, could turn out be such a dud.

There’s no denying that Tom Hanks is one of the best actors today, and perhaps in movie history. However, in The DaVinci Code, he just seems lost. Some critics have said that he seems bored or uninterested or asleep in his role, but to me he seemed confused. It was like he didn’t quite know what to do with the material he was given, like he was unsure of exactly how to deliver his lines. The movie itself seems to believe it’s a very serious and profound look at the fundamentals of Church and history, but Hanks seemed unsure of just how serious or profound he should act. In the end, I don’t think it was boredom that contributed to his wooden performance; it was uncertainty.

Another problem was the fact that Hanks’ character was changed. In the book, Robert Langdon firmly believes in the whole Grail/Magdalene/conspiracy story and therefore was truly motivated to pursue the clues and puzzles to find the Grail. In the movie, however, Langdon is a skeptic who isn’t quite sure what to believe about the events he’s caught up into. This uncertainty of the character almost undoubtedly contributed to the uncertainty with which Hanks portrayed him; and the results is a muddled mess. Add in the fact that he has zero chemistry with his co-star Audrey Tautuo (you almost wonder if they even liked each other, which I’m sure they did because everyone says Tom Hanks is such a nice guy), and the core component of the film, our two protagonists, become the most uninteresting part to watch. In fact, the only ones who really seem to be putting in any effort are Paul Bettany and Ian McKellen. The only interesting parts of the film were when they were on screen, but even then, I was hard pressed to follow along with McKellen’s verbose expository soliloquies; they made me feel like I was in school again and I was actually relieved when Bettany’s character jumped out on screen and attacked Hanks. Finally, I thought, someone got punched in the face. No really, I was that bored. How Ron Howard was able to take something that was fun to read and turn it into something you find hard to watch is quite an accomplishment. Perhaps this is because his heart wasn’t really in it, or at least that’s the way it feels as you watch. While Dan Brown enjoys a good conspiracy and while his characters had a passion for their pursuits in the book, all such passion is missing from the film version.

There have been entire books, several in fact, published on all the inaccuracies both historical and scriptural when it comes to The DaVinci Code, so I will not waste the time here to cover that which has been covered ad infinitum. The film and the book are about the search for the truth of who Jesus Christ is, and this is a quest that we all take part in, whether we realize it or not. We all have an opinion about Jesus Christ, and a film like The DaVinci Code will either confirm or confound those opinions. The question is; why do you believe what you believe? Have your opinions about Jesus been formed by the opinions of others; such as authors like Dan Brown and filmmakers like Ron Howard? Or are your opinions about Jesus the result of your own careful investigation into His story? Whether or not you agree with the claims of the book and/or film, let me suggest that you at least take the time to investigate these claims for yourself. There is no more important question in all of humanity than that of "Who do you say Jesus is?" Begin your own quest for truth and see where it leads you. If you truly follow the clues, I think you’ll find that it will lead you to surprisingly different conclusions than those of The DaVinci Code.

The DaVinci Code is a movie full of lofty ideas wrapped in the excitement and intrigue of a spy thriller...or at least it wants to be. As I watched, I felt as though this movie was desperately crying out for me to see just how seriously profound, deep, insightful and enlightening it was. My response however was, "...zzzzttt...what’s that? Oh, I’m sorry, I nodded off again. You were saying something you thought was important? Go ahead I’m listeni...zzzzz?"

— Overview

Poseidon

2006-05-14T15:43:00.000-07:00

—1. Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters (Ships)
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads

I don’t think Mother’s Day is the best day to watch a boatload of people die. That thought kept running through my mind as I sat through Poseidon. There I was, watching a film where literally hundreds of people are dying in disaster (and I’m sure most of them had mothers), and I’m there on the day we’re supposed to celebrate the gift of our mothers. There was just something incongruous about the whole situation. I thought it was even weirder that apparently a lot of people thought this would be a good gift for their mom. My theater was filled with people who thought taking mom to the movies would be a good idea, though why they choose this film I don’t understand. But such is the draw of the summer event film; you don’t need to understand it to enjoy it.

Poseidon is basically Titanic without the exposition, character, drama, or romance. The film skips the ususal time setting things up and basically gets right to it. Once the wave hits and the ship flips over, which is a pretty impressive sequence effects-wise, the film is very efficient in going through all the steps and scenes necessary for a disaster film. You don’t really get much more cliched or paint-by-numbers than this. However, I was left with the distinct impression that perhaps this movie was a little too efficient in getting its job done; in so far as it really kind of felt that all it was doing was getting the job done. Wolfgang Petersen can make this kind of film with his eyes closed, and it feels like he put in just about that much effort with Poseidon. I don’t know if perhaps he had some bills to pay or what, but it just feels like he was cashing a check with this film. Now that isn’t to say the movie is bad, Poseidon is enjoyable as a summer popcorn flick, but just don’t expect much more than the standard vapid summer adventure film.

Perhaps I would have found this movie more engaging if it would have elaborated more on a theme that Kurt Russell’s character mentions when he says there’s nothing fair about who lives and dies. That could have been a very profound, very moving statement if we cared about any of the characters in the first place. However, since we barely have a passing acquaintance with most of them, and since the film doesn’t really give us any time to get to the know them (I can’t even remember their names, or if they had names beyond "leader guy" and "heroic father figure guy"). We don’t really care so much about who survives so much as how they survive. I felt almost clinical as I pondered how the group of survivors would get past the various obstacles in their path without having much concern about who would or wouldn’t make it. Still, it’s a sentiment we’ve all felt at some time, especially in times of crisis. We sometimes truly believe that life and death aren’t fair; that heaven and hell aren’t fair. Well, the simple fact is that although it isn’t always fair who lives and dies, it’s very often left up to us to choose one or the other. Just as the few who survived their adventure on the Poseidon were the few who choose to look for a way to survive, so it is with us. Those few who will actually enjoy eternity are those who chose life. Let’s be very clear, God does not send anyone hell. People choose to go to hell when they reject God. Just as all the people who thought they would be safe by not doing anything after the ship capsized eventually perished, the people who decide to do nothing with Jesus Christ will eventually perish in a life that has capsized without Him. These are, admittedly, fairly profound things to ponder after seeing a film like Poseidon, especially considering the fact that the characters certainly never stop to ponder such things and the fact that after seeing this movie you’ll probably won’t be pondering much of anything except whether or not that was really worth you seven bucks.

Audiences today have learned not to expect too much from the summer films, after all, they are supposed to be fun escapes from reality. Films like Poseidon deliver exactly what audiences expect. Theirs is nothing that really stands out about this film. The performances are functional. The direction competent, if without heart. And although there are a couple of noteworthy scenes that are fairly intense, there isn’t much emotional investment required for viewing this film. In fact, this movie really felt more like a rental. Sometimes a summer film can be shallow but worth seeing on the big screen because of the money shots and the special effects. Poseidon does have some great effects, but nothing that really would make it necessary to see on the big screen. In the end, the question really comes down to whether or not one wants to waste Mother’s Day, or any other day for that matter, watching something they probably won’t waste the time trying to remember later.

— Overview

Mission: Impossible III

2006-05-08T07:02:00.000-07:00

—1. Overview
—2. Cast and Crew
—3. Photo Pages
—4. Trailers, Clips, DVDs, Books, Soundtrack
—5. Posters (Tom Cruise)
—6. Production Notes (pdf)
—7. Spiritual Connections
—8. Presentation Downloads

What would the TV show Alias look like with a bigger budget, longer running time, and a male lead? The answer: Mission Impossible 3. Take Alias, add in a generous helping of True Lies, and you know all you need to about the latest outing for IMF agent Ethan Hunt and his team. This isn’t to say that M:I:III isn’t fun; it is, in fact, quite fun. But you may be hard pressed to differentiate it from last week's adventure with Sydney Bristow.

J.J. Abrams does a competent job with his directorial debut (which is good news for Trek fans, as he’s slated to direct the next film in that franchise). However, he played it too safe in using so much of what he already knows. This mission was more of a team effort, befitting the Mission: Impossible name, but it felt like a longer episode of a TV show - which, ironically, is exactly what these films have always been. Is this because Alias owes so much to entries in the spy genre like Mission: Impossible, or is it because Abrams is so familiar with the flow and structure of his show that he had a hard time getting away from that for his big screen debut? Still, M:I:III is a solid summer action film. The stunts are cool, the action sequences are fun, there are a couple of intense moments between the hero and the villian, and it’s all wrapped more authentically than the second film.

But I prefer the Ethan Hunt of the first film. He was driven, intense, focused, and had no time for distractions. Since then, each subsequent director softened Agent Hunt; ostensibly to make him more relatable as the hero. In the second film, Hunt attained a debonair suaveness that gave him, and the film, a Bond like feel. In this outing, he has attachments. Agent Hunt has settled down and left field work in order to establish a normal life. Of course we all know that won’t last; mainly because we’ve seen the trailers with Philip Seymour Hoffman threatening Hunt’s loved ones. This version of Agent Hunt is more Tom Cruise than the others. I miss the real Agent Hunt from the first film. Hoffman is excellent: his cold, merciless villain plays strongly against the softer Agent Hunt. Ving Rhames finely reprises his role as Luther, and it’s nice to see that his character hasn’t changed much over the years. In fact, the entire cast is solid, including Michelle Monaghan whose only real purpose is to give Agent Hunt someone to care about so that the villain can threaten her.

This could be the biggest weakness of the film. The central conflict is how Hunt’s job can never allow him to have a normal life as long as someone he cares about can be exploited by his enemies. And Luther also points out that it’s impossible to have a normal relationship when you’re constantly lying to the one you love (which, by the way, is sage advice). But Julia is nothing more than a plot device. Her role would have worked just as well if she had been named Love Interest, but that would be too impersonal I guess. Still, she’s only there to drive Hunt to the edge as he tries to rescue her from a fate he can't prevent. Along the way there are plot twists (none terribly surprising), exotic locales (all exotic but completely unneccessary to the story) and of course lots of action. Though fun, it’s by the numbers and doesn’t rise above the best episodes of Alias.

You know, call me crazy, but as I watched Hunt’s attempts to save Julia from the vindictive Davian, I was reminded of how God put everything on the line to save us. We’re His love interest, and Satan knows it. When Satan realized he would never defeat God, he decided to do the next best thing: hurt the ones God loves most. So he tempted humanity in Eden, caused us to fall into the death trap of sin, and generally set out to utterly destroy us. Of course God wouldn’t allow that and so, not unlike agent Hunt, God risked everything - He sacrificed His only Son to save us from the bad guy who wanted to destroy us out of spite for God. Doesn't that sound similar to M:I:III? That may be a stretch, but you might be surprised at how many movie plots are similar to Bible stories.

The bottom line is that M:I:III is a good time at the movies, without giving you much to hang on to after you leave. It’s fun, if not particularly memorable. And, as I reflected on how God’s mission to save humanity is similar to this latest Mission: Impossible, I realized that a summer action film isn’t nearly as exciting as real life; if we’re willing to accept the mission.

— Overview

United 93

2006-04-29T08:31:00.000-07:00

Where were you on September 11, 2001? Where were you when the world changed? As you watch United 93, the memories of that day will return in a flood of raw emotion that will make it seem like the unthinkable happened yesterday, and perhaps that’s why it’s important that this film was made, because we should never forget what happened that day.

There has been a lot of debate ever since United 93 and the other 9/11 movie coming out this year, World Trade Center, were announced. The question is; are we ready to see these events depicted on film? United 93 will not answer that question. In fact, United 93 really doesn’t answer any questions, or make any statements; it just is. This is a film that simply, concisely, and realistically documents the events that took place during one of the most tragic moments in our nation’s history. There are no major Hollywood stars to distract us. No huge special effects to wow us. No love interests to woo us. Just the story of what happened to about forty people who saw an average day inexplicably become their last. This is the beauty of United 93. You are not watching a movie, you are watching history. The film is shot so authentically thourgh the use of handheld cameras and a documentary style of apporach that the viewer becomes a fly on the wall; an unseen observer who cannot alter history, no matter how much we would like to as we watch the events unfold. We are all familiar with what happened on September 11, 2001, so I will not bother recapping the plot of this film, all I will say is that this is probably as close as we’ll ever get to seeing and knowing what took place on the one plane that did not reach it’s target, and as you watch, you’ll feel like you’re living that day all over again. You also get to see some of the other details of that day that may not have been as well known; the process of putting together what was happening, the military’s hampered effort to respond, and the air traffic controller who did their best to somehow avert disaster.

Part of what makes United 93 so difficult to watch, and part of why it works so well as a film, is that we know what is coming. As we watch the people on screen slowly begin to piece together the horrors that await them, we await with dread what we know is coming. The film’s pacing is perfect as the tension gradually mounts until it reaches a breaking point when the passengers of United flight 93 do what they knew had to be done. As you watch flight control officers, military officers and all the others who were involved that day try to figure out what’s going on, you want to shout out information to them, help them by reaching through what appears to be a portal into history in order to prevent the loss of life that occurred that day. But of course you can’t, for this is only a movie and not some sort of magic time portal, and you can only watch as the people on screen slowly come to realize what you already know. In many ways, that fact that we know what happened makes it that much harder to watch it unfold a second time.

Perhaps the most heartbreaking moment in the film is when the passengers of United 93 finally realize that they will perhaps not survive this day, and so they begin to call their loved ones to tell them one more time that they love them. As passenger after passenger makes their final call, some of them sharing their cell phones with those who don’t have one, it’s hard not to think of what it would be like if you had to make that call. I’m sure none of the people on United flight 93 ever imagined that when the door to their plane was closed and sealed they would never again leave that plane. It’s a powerful reminder to never take any day fore granted, to never forget to cherish those who are close to, and that we can never truly count on tomorrow. September 11, 2001 was just another day for everyone, until the unexpected altered that day forever.

The true brilliance of United 93 lies not is what it does, but in what it doesn’t do. It does not paint the terrorists as soulless villains, nor does it apologize for their actions. It does not assign blame for the slow response, the mistakes and the paralyzing inaction that took place that day. It does not politicize. It does not preach. It does not spiritualize. It does not dramatize (at least not in any sort of melodramatic, sweeping epic of an emotionally manipulative sort of). United 93 simply tells a story of what happened, and in doing seems to plead with us to never forget; exactly as it should. I, for one, will not forget. You may not want to ever see this film ever again, but you should see it.

Batman Beyond: Season 1

2006-04-18T12:05:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite activities used to be coming home, plopping down on the couch and turning on the TV to watch cartoons. Yes, after a hard day at work, I found it very relaxing to snuggle up with my wife every afternoon and watch my favorite hero in action. But this was a new version of my hero; a new vision that retained many of the core aspects that made his previous shows so successful while changing the formula enough to make it feel fresh and exciting. I’m talking of course about Batman, and in this particular case Batman Beyond. After receiving the first season set recently for my birthday, I was astounded by the reminder in the commentaries that this show is already almost ten years hold. Was it really that long ago that I was enjoying my favorite after work ritual? Apparently so, and thanks to the magic of DVD I can relive those halcyon days all over again.
Batman Beyond followed in the footsteps of Batman: The Animated Series, Superman: The Animated Series and The New Adventures of Batman and Superman, also known as Gotham Knights. The same excellent team of producers (Bruce Timm, Alan Burnett, Glen Murakami, and Paul Dini) who put together those other shows and the successful Justice League shows were also behind Batman Beyond, which is immediately evident upon viewing any of these episodes. There’s a very nice continuity between this future version and the original Batman cartoon. Of course it helps that Kevin Conroy once again brings Bruce Wayne to life, but more importantly, the elements and spirit that made Batman: The Animated Series so enjoyable for fans is maintained in this future version of Batman. Better yet, the producers didn’t fall into the trap of updating all the old villains (with the notable exceptions of Mister Freeze in one of the best episodes in this set and of course the Joker in the Batman Beyond movie). Instead, they created all-new adversaries for Batman to face. Granted these new villains were cut from the same cloth as those of the classic Batman rogues gallery, but these new villains still provided a fresh yet familiar challenge for our young Batman. Will Friedle does an excellent job of voicing the new Batman, Terry McGinnis; a young, troubled high school student who falls into the Batman legacy by accident. While this new, younger Batman has some shades of Peter Parker in how he’s constantly trying to balance his social and school life with his super-hero alter ego, the stories are all pure Batman.
I think my favorite part of this new Batman series was the theme of redemption that ran through the show. Terry McGinnis is not a kid one would peg as a hero. Hot-headed and often in trouble, he comes from a difficult past that includes time spent in juvenile hall. It’s a past full of anger and mistakes that led him down the wrong path. As Terry says to Bruce, he’s the type of punk Bruce wouldn’t have wasted a second punch on back during his Batman days. But then he accidentally stumbles into the life of Bruce Wayne and the batcave, and suddenly Terry sees a chance to change all that. As Batman, he finds a chance to set right the things that he’s done wrong, to protect people and help those who can’t help themselves, to find meaning and perhaps redemption for his life. In many ways, that makes him the perfect successor for Bruce as The Batman. Bruce spent his entire life working for redemption, only to end up bitterly disappointed and alone; a destiny one can’t help but to wonder awaits Terry as well. The truth is, we’re all searching for redemption. We may not put on a suit and fight crime, but we all seek for ways to make things better, to somehow make-up or pay for things that we’ve done wrong. However, like Bruce we often find that our own efforts are merely frustrating, because no matter how much we do; it’s never enough. Enter the greatest hero the world has ever known; Jesus Christ. He accomplished for us what we could never do on our own. We no longer have to strive for redemption, we only have to accept it; and in doing so we can accomplish what The Batman never could, salvation both for ourselves and the people we help save.
Batman Beyond: Season One contains some excellent shows that not only have some pretty cool actions scenes, but they also retain the gravitas and drama of the original series. If anything, this show is much darker and more “adult” than the previous incarnations, which is rather ironic considering the WB approached the producers about the idea because they wanted a more “kid friendly” Batman show for their network. That’s just one of the few gems of information you glean from the few commentaries and interviews contained on this DVD set; which once again is one of the weaker aspects of the collection. As with the Superman and Batman sets, there are only a couple of commentaries and one main featurette. While there’s some interesting info contained here, it’s not nearly enough to satiate fans or to give insight on how such a unique take on the Dark Knight came about and eventually became so successful. I would say that we might be able to look forward to more details on future sets, but after the six previous sets of Batman and Superman contained about the same amount of scarce commentaries and interviews, I know better than to get my hopes up.
Overall, the transfer for this show looks pretty clean. Believe it or not, but they were still working with film back when this show was being made, so there are some signs of dirt and dust on the transfer. Still, the animation is solid, the colors (most of them dark) are vibrant, so there’s very little to complain about considering the age and source for the transfer of the show. The sound for the set is solid, but don’t expect any sort of THX demo track quality here (it is, after all, just a “kids” show.)
If you’re a fan of Batman or a fan of the original animated series, you owe it to yourself to check out Batman Beyond: Season One. It’s as good as any other Batman show or movie out there.

Tomb Raider: Legend - Impressions

2006-04-13T08:13:00.000-07:00

I have never been an avid Tomb Raider fan. I tried parts of the first two games just to see what everyone was talking about, and although I had fun, I wasn’t super impressed. While it was fun to explore tombs filled with traps and whatnot ala Indiana Jones, the rest of the game play was fairly average. After that, I didn’t pay much attention to the franchise, and from what I’ve read it wasn’t really worthy of attention any way. After the debacle of the last game, Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness, it seemed the series was destined to disappear forever. What a difference a developer can make. Crystal Dynamics was given the reigns of the series in a last ditch attempt to revive the much derided franchise, and they’ve done a pretty good job. Looks like Lara Croft will be around for the next generation after all.
After playing the first three and half levels of Tomb Raider: Legend, I can tell you this much; the game is actually pretty fun, and as we all know that’s the most important thing to get right for any game. Crystal Dynamics has done an excellent job of recapturing what made Tomb Raider a cool game to play; exploration of vast, ancient ruins filled with traps and puzzles. Sprinkle in a little combat here and there and you’ve got a pretty decent game. Best of all, Lara isn’t restricted to that ancient grid system from all the other games. She moves fluidly and freely about the environments. It’s not exactly Prince of Tomb Raider, but it’s close and it feels right for this game. I will say however that I thought the physics were a little off. Everything feels a bit lighter than it should, especially during the motorcycle sequence. The bike just didn’t feel like it had any weight at all. When Lara does her leaps and jumps about the various cliffs and ledges, she seems to float a bit, which takes a little getting used to but by no means ruins the games. Once you get used to the fact that everything has a bit less weight than it should, you probably won’t even notice.
On the X-box, Tomb Raider looks pretty good. It’s not the prettiest game on the system, but it’s no slouch either. Lara is rendered in a decent amount of detail, although the enemies look a bit blah. The environments may not wow anyone graphically, but they still look good and have some nice lighting and bloom effects. There’s a decent amount of draw distance, and thus far I haven’t encountered any lag in the frame rate, although I’ve read that can be a minor problem. On the X-box 360, this game really shines. Everything is rendered beautifully and smoothly. If you really want to see the Tomb Raider: Legend in all its pristine, high definition glory, 360 is definitely the way to go.
The sound for the game is decent, although it seemed a bit muted on my admittedly un-state-of-the-art surround sound system. Most times I could barely hear what my colleagues were saying over Lara’s headset. Again, it was a bit distracting but once you get used to it you won’t really notice. The voice acting is solid, and the music blends in well to the background and does a decent job of adding to the intensity or drama of whatever is taking place on screen.
All in all I was fairly impressed with my first couple hours of the latest Tomb Raider game. The story, while a bit out there, seems fairly intriguing. It has something to do with the Arthur legend somehow, and I got the merest taste of some of the spiritual/magical aspects of the game towards the end of my first run, so I can’t really comment more on those elements until I play further. Of course most Tomb Raider games, like the Indiana Jones movies, have some sort of occultic/spiritual/magical elements to them, so I was taken by surprise when I came across them in this game. I think Tomb Raider fans will be very pleased with what Crystal Dynamics has done with this addition to the franchise, and gamers who enjoy a good adventure game like the Price of Persia series will also find a lot to enjoy here. Although the game doesn’t break any new ground, it fixes what was broken and improves on what worked to create a solid game that’s fun to play.