SOUL TREKKING
WITH 

PASTOR STEVE

AWARDS!!! - You are visiting an award winning site!  See them! 


 
 
 
 

MOVIE VIEWS AND REVIEWS


 
 
 
 

Page last updated 10-06-2008. 
See What's New for details.


 
  
  
 
 
 

MOVIE REVIEWS

 

More reviews...

 


 

National Treasure

Rating: * * * *

At the beginning of this movie, I was thinking that there was too much exposition and I had a hard time suspending my disbelief of the premise, but about the time they were stealing the Declaration of Independence, I found myself wanting to see what would happen next and I was laughing out loud at the jokes.  And, though the movie is over two hours long, I was never bored.  To the contrary, I was delighted, charmed, entertained, and intrigued and thought to myself, "This film could go on all day and I wouldn't mind a bit."  The leads generate real heat together in more ways than one, the comedy relief is hilarious, and the puzzles and situations are intriguing and often suspenseful.  This is a fun adventure movie that you could take the whole family to (unless very young children would find parts of it too scary) as there is nothing objectionable in it at all.  And, being from the Northeast, I absolutely loved all the settings and the feel of the film.  I hope it does great at the box office!


 

Garfield

Rating: * * 3/4 or * * * 

The first half of this movie has giggles aplenty for audience members of all ages as Garfield is his usual self-centered, sarcastic, gluttonous self in typical Garfield situations. The second half is a little bit of a letdown, though, as the fatcat is thrust into a Disney-fied plot where he has to travel into the big city to rescue Odie from an over-the-top, kid vid style villain.  However, the young children sitting around me enjoyed the slapstick and Garfield's animal friends rallying to save the day, so maybe I wasn't the intended audience for that portion of the film. Bill Murray does a phenomenal job voicing Garfield.  Forget the computer animation.  It's Murray who brings the cat to life.  The human characters have been changed somewhat from the comic strip.  The Jon of the movie is much less dorky and comes across more as a slightly out-of-step, likable, normal guy instead of a clueless, nerdy loser.  The onscreen Liz is approachable, friendly, and interested.  These modifications are so the film's creators can shoehorn a love story in where one isn't really needed.  Breckin Meyer does just okay in a thankless role and Jennifer Love Hewitt is gorgeous in a role that requires little else of her.  The real stars of the movie are the unseen Murray and all the Garfieldisms.


 

The Incredibles

Rating: * * * *

The only people who will leave the theaters depressed after seeing this movie will be the men and women who charged with bringing Marvel and DC characters to the big screen, because this is the best superhero movie since "Superman: The Movie," and "Superman II," and arguably the best ever.  It's hard to even imagine a future live-action movie topping this CGI animated film.  Perhaps superhero sagas work best as animation and as drawings on comic book pages where there aren't any budgetary limitations ont he creator's imaginations and when nobody has to worry that things don't look "real enough" when flesh-and-blood characters are doing impossible stunts.  Much as I loved the "X-Men" movies and "Spider-Man," "Daredevil," and "The Hulk," this movie simply blows them all out of the water.  Its fantastic storyline is rooted in humanity and morality.  It has the right mixture of satire and respect of the genre.  It offers us characters that seem so real and that we care about.  It provides real laughs, real suspense, real emotion, and imaginative superpowered action that puts you right in the middle of it all and even lets you feel, at times, as though you are living it.  This movie was made by people who love fun, adventure, families, and superheroes.  I'd love to see it again on the big screen and plan to be trekking to MacDonald's each week for my "The Incredibles" Happy Meal.  Hurry to your theater, but remember, "No capes, Dahling!"


 

Cellular

Rating: * * * 1/2

A good thriller that moves right along.  Here's a pastor's column I wrote about it for our local paper:

Could the story of "The Good Samaritan" work as a modern day thriller?  Yes!

I recently saw the movie "Cellular" in which a woman who has been taken captive by kidnappers must depend on an unlikely savior, a slacker beach boy whose cell phone number she randomly dialed.  (In the original parable a Jew was beaten by thieves and was in desperate need of help.  An unlikely savior, a Samaritan, whose people didn't get along with the Jews, took the time to get involved.)  In the movie, the police are no help as they are too busy with other things or too corrupt.  (Much like the traditional religious authority figures in Jesus' parable.)  So the woman's fate and that of her family rest on the shoulder's of the young man.

Part of the suspense near the beginning of the film comes from wondering whether the young man will help or not and, as the costs to him personally rise, if once involved he will stay involved.  But he finally recognizes that lives are at stake and comes through like a hero.

I left the moive doing some more wondering.  If I were in the young man's shoes, would I have risked all that he did in order to help someone I never met and didn't know?  In this day of Internet hoaxes, phone scams, con artists ripping off churches, and motorists being car-jacked or mugged, would I have even believed the voice on the phone?  Are there people around me who desperately need my help and am I willing to sacrifice to give it to them?

We probably don't know anyone who needs to be rescued from brutal kidnappers, but what about from bullies?  And are there people around us who need a kind or encouraging word?  How about material or financial aid that we could provide?  Do some people need a listening ear?  To know that someone cares?  To know the God who cares?  The kidnapped woman in the film needed to know that someone was out there for her.  It's the hope that she clung to.

When people provide others with that hope, Hollywood calls it "heroism."  Jesus calls it "love."  And he calls on us to be as loving toward others as he was and is toward us.  A tall order to be sure, but then love isn't easy.  Just ask the young man in the film.  But those who love are guaranteed a happy ending by the time the credits roll.


 
 

Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow

Rating: * * *
This movie is more about capturing the look of Fleischer Superman cartoons, old movie serials, and 1930s and 1940s films, only with bigger budgets and better special effects, and about capturing the feel of old pulp magazines, and about celebrating the natural beauty of Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Angelina Jolie than it is about plot.  So it's always fun to look at and it reminds you of that feeling you had when you were 12 and found a paperback Sci-Fi anthology or a Doc Savage novel or a Blackhawks comic book in your uncle's attic.  Go to this movie to see a unique production and to remember younger, more innocent days, and to have a few chuckles.  But don't expect it to have any sort of abiding impact on you or to even care all that much about what you will happen next on the screen.


 

Collateral

Rating: * * *

Up until the Big, Shocking Secret is revealed near the end of the movie, this film is an intelligent crime story about an everyman cabbie caught up in a nightmare.  The acting is superior, the stylish and imaginative direction is superb, and the cinematography - well, let's just say that a city at night has never looked more enchanting, beautiful, mysterious, or dangerous and that Los Angeles itself is a main character in the movie.  Speaking of characters, every one of them is interesting and unique no matter how much screen time they have.  The literate script is interested in dialogue and the psychology of not only the characters, but also, what is happening between them and within them as the night progresses.  There is violence and action, but it doesn't usurp center stage from the adult portrayals and explorations.  And a set piece at a Rave puts all the "Sydney goes to a nightclub and shooting starts" moments of the TV series "Alien" to shame.  The movie isn't afraid of taking unpredictable turns and people's stories and scenes don't always end the way Hollywood has conditioned you to expect.  But then there's that Big, Shocking Secret, which in itself is an unbelievable coincidence, and all plausibility goes right out the window, along with our interest.  And from then on, the film also immediately degenerates into standard "summer blockbuster/action-adventure" fare where plot holes abound and the characters are suddenly capable of performing superhuman stunts.  It's as though the ending came from an entirely different movie and was just tacked on.  Most of the movie rates four stars, but from the Big, Shocking Secret on, it only merits about one and a half.  The film is worth seeing because when it's good, it is very,very good.  But when it's bad, it's horrid.


 
 

The Passion
 Of The Christ


Rating: Not Applicable  -- As this film is a cinematic meditation on the suffering of Jesus, I found that my "star system" was inadequate to summarize my reaction to it.

    For many hours after the viewing this movie, I was disquieted, but in light of its subject matter, this is not a bad thing.  And now, more than twelve hours later, I am still finding it difficult to get a handle on my responses to the film.  I normally go to the movies primarily for entertainment, but watching a Roman scourging and an execution by torture is far from entertaining.  This doesn't mean that the film can't be inspiring, but the inspiration comes as one wrestles with it and its subject matter.  You don't leave the theater feeling good with a song in your heart, nor with a sense of satisfaction or completion.  You may, as I did, exit in a state of shock and bewilderment, overwhelmed with emotions and thoughts and conflicting opinions that I can't even yet fully express.

    Let me try to approach "The Passion of the Christ" from several different angles to try and give you my honest, "fair and balanced"/ "no spin zone" appraisal of it:

1.  As a statement of his faith and of devotion to The Christ he feels saved him, Mel Gibson's movie is a crowning achievement, and I commend my Christian brother's courage for putting his vision out there and leaving himself wide open to the persecution that will always be the lot of a disciple of Jesus.  I am grateful that the grace of God has touched Mel and that he wanted to respond to it.

 2.  As a movie, "The Passion Of The Christ" has both undeniable strengths and some unfortunate weaknesses. 

There are many scenes that are incredibly powerful.  For example, Jesus' last words from the cross have never hit me as hard as they did when Gibson placed them in the visual, "You are there," context of all that Jesus was going through.  No wonder the Centurion believed and exclaimed in the Bible, "Truly this man was the Son of God!"  And Gibson's flashing back to Jesus' teaching and The Last Supper from the cross was masterful and meaningful.  And I will never forget Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene fearfully reciting the words of the Passover as Jesus is being arrested, nor Mary's wonder at why Jesus is letting himself be humiliated and tortured as she asks when and how her son will free himself, nor the way Jesus pronounces, "It is accomplished" (which is a better translation than "It is finished"), nor Jesus saying to a group of imperfect mortal humans like me, "You are my friends." 

Yet there are also scenes which fall flat.  The morphing demonic characters and the sterotypical maniacal laughing of many of Jesus' tormentors and Barabbas were over-the-top.  They and some of Satan's appearances served to remind me that I was only watching a movie and took me out of the story, as did several of the slow motion sequences such as God's teardrop setting off the earthquake, and the "Lord of the Rings" shot of Satan's defeat.  Also, I recognized several of the actors as having appeared in other films and on television, and Pilate is played by an actor who looks like Harry from the television series "MI-5" in a toga.  All of which, again, took me out of the story. 

The acting itself is uneven, with some artists clearly more at home in costume dramas and with speaking Aramaic than others.  James Caviezel and Maia Morgenstern are outstanding.  But Caviezel's American looks made it hard for me to accept him initially as Jesus.  However, his acting won me over by the end of the film. 

The makeup is incredible, but unfortunately, perhaps as an escape from the violence, I found myself during the film wondering, "How did they get those effects?"  This is not what I want to be thinking about while I'm contemplating the death of Jesus.  Be warned that the violence is brutal and the film is soaked in blood.  Part of me feels that the cruelty and gore were justified as we modern audiences don't know what a Roman scourging and a crucifixion were like (they are accurately, painfully portrayed in the movie) and the film is about the "Passion" (from the Latin word for "suffering") of Christ, after all.  But part of me notes that while the Bible tells us that Jesus was whipped, it doesn't describe or dwell on every blow.  And while Isaiah prophesies that people will turn away from Jesus, the New Testament doesn't detail exactly how Jesus was disfigured.  And the Bible spends the majority of its time on the meaning, impact, and result of the suffering, rather than on the suffering itself. 

So I am torn.  I can see why Gibson felt he had to take the approach he did in order to convey the depths of what Christ went through.  And there is justification for it.  Yet I can also understand why some critics have said that Gibson made (unintentionally, I believe) a "theological Slasher Film." 

One criticism I can't understand is the charge of anti-Semitism.  In the film, while a group of Jewish leaders is instrumental in getting Jesus executed, other Jews support and aid him and Jesus himself teaches love for one's enemies and asks God to forgive Jews and Romans alike.  Anyone truly familiar with what the New Testament, as a whole, promotes, realizes that hating the Jews because of the crucifixion of Jesus is ludicrous. 

However, it was a familiarity with the story which also hampered my involvement with the movie at times, as there were scenes which bored me and had me saying, "Yeah, yeah, can't we just move on and get to the next thing we need to get through?"  And this is not always the case with movies that have familiar storylines.  I knew the American hockey team was going to win in "Miracle" and I had read the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, yet I was still engrossed in those films.  The fact that, at points, "The Passion" is less than engrossing means that, for me, the film is simply not as good as those others, its subject matter notwithstanding.


3. As an accurate portrayal of the biblical accounts and a presentation of Christian theology, the movie once again is a mixed bag.  Some sequences and scenes are taken almost word-for-word right out of the scriptures.  Others are modified and some scenes are added for dramatic effect.  Some of the added stuff is undeniably cool, such as Jesus stomping on the serpent in the garden and Mary's one joke (and it's a good one) in the entire movie and Mary remembering Jesus falling as a child, but it's not exactly canon.  And some of the additions are hokey, such as Jesus standing up, Rocky-like, after abuse.  I waited for him to yell, "Adrianne!"  Protestants viewing the film may find themselves often asking, "Where did Gibson get that from?" not realizing that Gibson is an old-school Roman Catholic and, for him, church tradition is just as authoritative as holy writ.  So tradition, and even legends, are included in the movie.  And the Blessed Virgin gets nearly as much screen time as Jesus, though she barely appears in the Gospel accounts of Jesus' trial and execution.  Theologically, the film is "right on" in its insistence that Jesus willingly went to the cross ("embraced it" as one character marvels) and that the cross was God's plan to accomplish our redemption and take away the sins of the world.  Jesus' suffering has significance - for us!  Both Jesus' humanity and divinity are kept nicely in balance in the film.  And Jesus and Simon carrying the cross together reminded me that Christians partner with God in carrying out his purposes even today and that we all, in various ways, are called on to "take up our own crosses and follow Jesus."  The movie makes the point that it was love for God and for us which compelled Jesus to pick up the cross.  And there is a resurrection at the end of the film.

 4. As an evangelistic tool, the film is of some use - up to a point.  The movie doesn't explain how or why Jesus' death healed us from our sins, nor the necessity of the sacrifice.  (To be fair, this is beyond the scope of the film.)  And if one is unfamiliar with the Bible, one may wonder who some of the characters are and what is really going on in some scenes.  Several of the flashbacks, such as Magdelene's rescue and the Triumphal Entry may be incomprehensible.  And, this is not a film which will lead your friends to "give their hearts to Jesus" before the end credits are finished rolling.  But it may lead to some great discussions.  This is my point: Don't count on the movie to convert anyone.  Discussion and follow-up will be needed.  But if your non believing friends are at all squeamish, DON'T TAKE THEM TO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!  And to the squeamish and non squeamish alike, you had better have an explanation ready as to why a defining moment of the Christian faith was an act of barbarism, butchery, and injustice, or even why we worship a God who planned all that.  You may even have to wrestle with such questions yourself.  As well as the question of, "If our sins demanded that kind of punishment, why is it that we can take them and The One that paid the price so casually?"  And, "If Mel and his cast and crew celebrated Mass together every day as they made this film, why do we sometimes find it hard to give God an hour once a week?"

So, do I recommend the movie?  If you are led to see it, or are curious because of all you have read or heard about it, then go.  If you don't feel that it is for you, then don't.  One's own devotion to The Christ doesn't depend on a decision to attend, or not to attend, a movie.


 
 
 

My Pet Peeves With The Professional Critics

I once heard a reviewer trash "Jurassic Park III" because it had "dinosaurs chasing people around."  Excuse me, but what did this person expect from a Jurassic Park movie?  I've also seen critics reviewing Star Trek movies by starting off with, "I'm not a Trekkie and never watched any of the series."  They then go on to say that they hate the films.  I remember a critic whom I normally greatly respect trashing the movie "X-Men" by saying, "Superhero stories should be light and funny."  Obviously he hasn't read very many current comic books, has he?

Critics, if you don't know anything about a genre or absolutely hate anything that comes out of a specific genre, maybe you should excuse yourself from reviewing certain films!  Or let a fan take over for a column or two.  But don't chastise a film for being true to its own premise and for reaching out to its own fan base.


 

SOUL-TREKKING WITH PASTOR STEVE

My home page with links to my Buffy, Popeye, Olive Oyl, TV/Movies, Beliefs, and other pages.

BACK TO TOP

Return to top of this page.


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

BOOKMARK ME!!!


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

This page was created using Corel Word Perfect Suite 8 and Netscape Navigator Composer. All characters and images are legal properties of their respective companies and are used here without permission for entertainment, review, and informational purposes only. All other material is copyright 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 by Steve R. Bierly.