Jesus Camp (2006)

An indie documentary looks into a charismatic camp where young children and teenagers are taught to be "warriors" in the battle to reclaim America for Jesus.

    This was an interesting movie to watch as a Christian. Part of me thought that the documentary was unfair as it was of course biased in some way, but the other part was absolutely horrified that this sort of thing goes on in churches.

    Religion should not be mixed with politics. That is not something I will back down on. No where in the Bible does it say that Christians should be taking over government. Jesus didn't do it. These kids are being taught to battle against "extreme liberals," they pray over a cardboard cutout of George Bush, and they are all home-schooled by their mothers, free from an environment where some of their beliefs might be tested. Indoctrination is the only word for it. The minister who leads the Jesus Camp of the film, Becky Fischer, openly advocates for indoctrination in the movie while debating a radio host. I was deeply troubled by her statements.

    The only other thing that bothered me was the use of "tongues." The children are told, "Come on, we're going to speak in tongues now." They then begin speaking illegibly, weeping, and waving their hands. I have nothing against passion for Jesus. I know that people speak in tongues. But children of this age? Upon command? I'm not convinced. I just don't think that an eleven-year old, an eight-year old, a five-year old, can possibly comprehend the nature of spiritual warfare and be fluent in tongues. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's no way to tell when people like Becky Fischer are instructing them so intently. 

    This movie is hard to understand if you are not a Christian or a Christian who leans more toward the charismatic. There were a lot of things that I noticed and I thought, "Oh, I do that. It's really not that strange." But when you're on the outside capturing it through a film lens, it can look strange. 

Devil (2010)

Five strangers are trapped in an elevator. All of them have corrupt pasts. One of them is the devil, seeking their souls.

*Contains minor spoilers* 

    This was a fascinating movie. It took what is best about M. Night Shyamalan (his ideas) and got a director and screenwriter who could do it justice. It reminded me of "Signs" with its use of religion as a story thread but was much more like "The Happening" and "The Sixth Sense" with its gore and suspense. It is certainly a step up from M. Night's past three films. Having separate people write the screenplay and direct seem to a good idea for M. Night.

     I loved how this was filmed. Many of the shots are highly symbolic and besides being just visually "cool," as a viewer with a religious background, bursting with meaning From the beginning upside down sequence to the ending right-side up sequence, you enter the movie with a tingling sense of "something being wrong," and then it is resolved at the end. There are random shots of cross-shaped objects, such as the top of the elevator during the opening credits. There's at least two places where the name "Bethel" is used, which means "House of God" in Hebrew. The idea of the absence of action is used perfectly - the elevator is often flung into complete darkness and the audience can only hear what is happening. When the lights come on again, we face the aftermath of what occurred. 

     The writing was quite good. It was generally very natural and not overly-dramatic. The only character in particular I had a problem with is one of the security guards, a Hispanic man, who has to play the part of the "religious guy." His lines are pretty shallow, he gets to sound crazy most of the time.  There were a couple of lines that really hit me. When the devil is finally revealed at the end, the dialogue is strikingly but also subtly religious, one character says, "Take me instead." The devil responds by shrieking, "STOP SAYING THAT!" It stroke me because that it what the devil hates to hear because it is what Jesus did when He died, He was a replacement for mankind. The last line of the film is also very powerful. I won't print it here, but I will say it offers hope during an otherwise terrifying movie. 

    As a Christian, this movie affects me differently than it will a non-Christian. I am not terrified of the devil, but I appreciate the movie addressing him as he is to a non-believer: terrifying. He is very real. He comes in many forms. However, there were people in the theater who chuckled at the speeches about the devil taking revenge. There were people who proclaimed loudly, "That was dumb." One couple left during the climax. I think your personal beliefs about the devil and God will affect your opinion of the movie. I thought it was well-done and powerful because I do believe in the devil. I believe in God. I don't expect everyone to see the movie the same way.  

The Name of the Rose (1986)

An intellectually nonconformist monk investigates a series of mysterious deaths in an isolated abbey.

    First of, do NOT eat dinner while watching this movie. It was surprisingly stomach-turning, but excellent. The atmosphere was perfect, lingering on the edge of pure terror. It reinforced the fact that the 1300s was an awful time to live, and was chock-full of commentary and symbolism.

    I disagreed with a friend of mine when he said he thought Sean Connery was the most handsome alive. However, upon seeing this film, I changed my mind. I have no idea where they got so many ugly people, or at least, makeup artists so skilled as to completely transform a man's face. The presence of such physical imperfection creates a sense of fear and mistrust instantly when our heroes William and Adso ride up on their donkeys. William (Connery) has a intelligent, dignified, and rugged handsomeness while his young novice Adso (Christian Slater) is beautifully-featured and innocent. The monks with their warts, humps, impossibly long and rotten teeth, and frightening eyes are such a contrast you know instantly that something is wrong in the abbey. And you would be right to think so. Monks begin dying mysteriously, each with a blackened finger and tongue. 

     The film explores a lot of religious issues of the time, most notably the role of "secular" reading such as Aristotle in the church. One monk goes so far as to forbid his inferiors from laughing, saying, "Christ never laughed." Homosexuality and temptation is initially a big part of the plot, as an albino library assistant eyes Adso shyly across the dinner table, and Adso himself is captivated by a beautiful but animal-like peasant girl. William finds himself battling his fellow monks as they insist the devil is at work, while he believes a mysterious book written in Greek is the reason for all the murders in the abbey. What will win out in the end? Knowledge? Or spirituality? Is logic truly the enemy of faith? 

The Other Guys (2010)

Two mismatched New York City detectives seize an opportunity to step up like the city's top cops whom they idolize -- only things don't quite go as planned.

    I liked this movie. I thought it had a good balance between smart, random humor (how priceless is Mark Wahlberg referencing "Touched by an Angel?") and the usual sex stuff that most people expect from guy comedies. It fell into an odd group of movies - the genre parody. In this case, it was the buddy cop movie, and it was done very well. 

     Wahlberg was not the best actor in this, his strangely soft, high voice reminded me painfully of his terrible role in "The Happening," but that just meant Will Ferrell works twice as hard and we reap the benefit of that. An early sequence involves Will Ferrell shutting Wahlberg down by spewing off a long explanation of why he, a tuna, would destroy Wahlberg, a lion. It reminded me a lot of something Dwight from the T.V. show "The Office" would say. Eva Mendes was also pretty funny, as Ferrell's adoring, "scalding hot" wife. I've only seen her in dramas, and she is AWFUL. She should stick to comedy if at all possible. Michael Keaton has a good role as the police captain, and he was probably one of the highlights for me. Although I was initially shocked by how he's aged, I eventually saw that he actually has aged well. He has a funny gag involving TLC references. 

   What saved this movie from being a bad parody was the writing. It was like a combination of Fox's "American Dad!" cartoon, "The Office," and Hollywood comedy writers. As mentioned in my intro, it had smart jokes, satirical jokes (the best example is when Ferrell and Wahlberg are surprised by an exploding building and collapse in agony) and sex humor to please the guys (Mendes' mother is forced to walk back and forth between Mendes and Ferrell, delivering intimate messages). This was parody done well. A very fun, worth-9-bucks, summer movie. 

House (2008)

    Struggling couple Jack and Stephanie's car breaks down, leaving them stranded at an old inn with another couple. There's something strange about the family that lives there, but strange turns to terrifying as a masked killer known as the Tin Man vows to kill them unless they produce one dead body before dawn. The supernatural begins to emerge as the house itself turns on the two couples. Based on the novel by Christian horror/thriller authors Frank Peretti and Ted Dekker.  

First of all, the book wasn't even that good. It was fast, it was freaky, but it was one series of cliches strung together in a row. That fact is made even more clear in the film.
     It's seriously Texas Chainsaw Massacre meets Silent Hill. There are creepy Southerners, a guy in a mask, a disappearing/reappearing little girl. There are sudden thunderstorms, strange water, turning handles, screaming women, and frightening one-liners like, "I'm home." Hello? That was already done, much better I might add, in The Shining. Also copied: sheets of paper shoot out of a printer all with the same words written on it. Wow.
    The acting is not good. The first three minutes were super awkward and things only got better when all our heroes had to do was scream. That's not that hard to do.
    The one thing about the book that makes this movie slightly better than a lot of others, is that it's based in Christianity, so the concept of sin and redemption are strong throughout, more so in the book, but copied vaguely in the movie. It becomes kind of like Dante's Inferno, where one's punishment is tied to the sin, making it ironic. Also, oddly enough, as the film on, it starts to resonate. After all, we all have a house. We all are tortured by the things we've done wrong, it's an internal prison. And light will destroy darkness. House stands out as one of the few horror movies (though not the most well-done) in which good triumphs over evil. 

Clash of the Titans (2010)

The remake of the 1981 film tells the mythological story of Perseus, son of Zeus, and his quest to defeat the Kraken, a powerful titan who threatens the city of Argos and its beautiful princess.

     This movie made me laugh it was so bad. The acting was strange. Sam Worthington tried to hide his Australian accent, but by the end of the movie, he had just given up. The women were all straight-faced and tried to sound mysterious, the men were over-the-top, especially Ralph Fiennes as Hades, he was certainly in rare form with his smoker voice, and Liam Neeson obviously just phoned it in. That's the only explanation for his overwhelmingly shiny body armor. The story was entertaining and had potential, but there were so many plot holes, nothing seemed to make much sense. The worst part though were the video-game graphics. Seriously, it looked like the animators had run out of time and sent their film off half-finished. This movie tried so hard to be epic, but it was just campy. A good laugh, though. 

Inception (2010)

In a world where obtaining information through dreams has become possible, expert mind thief Fisher (DiCaprio) assembles the perfect team to conduct a seemingly impossible mission. 

   First of all, I felt this movie was a little deceiving in how it seemed eerily similar to "Minority Report" with Tom Cruise. The tagline seemed to capture that film perfectly, "Your mind is the scene of the crime." However, the movies are actually very different - while "Minority Report" was about murder and catching crimes before they happen, "Inception" is about stealing information right out of people's dreams. 

    It's a bit too earlier to say, but this movie could very well be Christopher Nolan's masterpiece. We know he was a good filmmaker; his recreation of the Batman saga was nothing short of brilliant, but that wasn't an original film. "Inception" is. The story is very complex, with just about every detail carefully considered so as to create a seamless plot that can be traced beginning to end and back and make nearly perfect sense. There are a few interpretations of the movie, which I think adds to the creativity of it. It's not a cut-and-dry sort of film. Like dreams, there are many answers. 

    The actors were well chosen. Nolan uses a few of his "Batman Begins" cast, including Ken Watanabe (who gets a much better part in "Inception" then he did in "Batman"), Michael Caine (only in "Inception" for about seven minutes of screen time), and Cillian Murphy, who all add interesting layers to the plot. The real stars are DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard. My respect for DiCaprio has grown over the years, he was never a "bad" actor in my mind, quite the opposite, but he just never really stood out. Once I saw him in "Shutter Island," he was cemented in my mind as a very intense actor, even if he's not terribly versatile. He has piercing eyes, a furrowed brow, and a dedication to his character that many actors lack. You really believe him in this movie. Marion Cotillard was perfect. She was addicting to watch, whenever you see her come into the frame, your blood runs cold and you know something big is going to happen. She's absolutely beautiful, as well. Ellen Paige was in it, which was a little odd. It felt too much like an indie actress just wandered on the set. She wasn't bad, but watching her wasn't comfortable, it didn't feel like she "belonged" in the movie. 

    This is an epic movie, I'm not sure to call if it should be called sci-fi or fantasy, or some combination of both, but at 2.5 hours with almost no breathing time, it's definitely a ride. It's complex, it's thought-provoking, it's fascinating to watch...one of the best films of the summer.