The Secret of Kells (2009)

 Nominated for best animated picture in 2009, this film takes a fantasy twist on the history of the famed Book of Kells, Ireland's most valuable artifact.

   I knew that "UP" would win the Oscar, it's Pixar, but "The Secret" is probably the most beautiful animated movie I've ever seen. Every frame is unique and drawn with such care, the music is crystalline, and the story is simple but drenched in historical significance and spirituality. The problem with that combination of simple and layered is that if you are not familiar with the Book of Kells, that history is lost on an audience. The Book of Kells is a beautifully-illustrated collection of the Four Gospels. If you don't know that, the book could be anything. Knowing that is the Word of God, the story of Jesus, makes it more understandable why the monks would be willing to protect those papers with their lives. However, the sheer beauty of the film overwhelms the weakness of the story. It's a beauty that doesn't take itself seriously, there is lots of humor in it, but never losing that feeling of sophistication. This is not "Cars." This is something deeper, something artistic. If I were an animator, this is how I would want to animate.

Blue Beard (2009)

Shot as a story within a story, two young girls read the gruesome fairy tale "Bluebeard" in the 1950's while the audience watches the action unfold in the 17th century.

   This is definitely a "WTF" movie. It's very short, not even an hour and a half, and it's beautifully-filmed, but I really did not understand the purpose of the film. The story is very straightforward, it's "Bluebeard," no question about it, but the last two minutes or so completely blow the movie into the bizarre and you're left feeling devastated and utterly confused. I have a feeling the director tried to be too....vague, maybe? Not necessarily artsy...I don't even know what was going on in her mind. I really liked Bluebeard and the young girl as a couple in terms of filming though, her smallness was exaggerated by large furniture and the giant who played Bluebeard who happens to wear like 100 pounds of clothing. There's a brilliant scene where they're eating breakfast side by side and he has this huge ostrich egg and she's eating these tiny quail eggs. He's very gentle with her, they barely touch in the movie, and he seems so devastated when he knows he has to kill her, I question the very foundation of the story and WHY he has to do it. In the original fairy tale, it's pretty clear he's just crazy, he gets really mad and drags her by the hair, but in this, he seems to rational and like he really loves her, it makes me think there's more going on than what the simple story portrays. Again, I feel this confusion is a shortcoming of the film itself.

Deliver Us From Evil (2006)

Using interviews with victims, their families, and Oliver O'Grady himself, this film chronicles the horror of a priest who is responsible for molesting children for over 30 years.

   This is probably one of the more disturbing movies I've ever seen. It's an excellent documentary. There is no voice-over and minimal text. Most of is pieces of interviews, images of newspapers, conferences, etc. It really grips you with absolute horror. This is evil. A man with a priest's title who can slide into your house and your heart, earning your trust, and then causing such damage...it's the stuff of nightmares.

   What is most disturbing is the long interview with O'Grady. His voice is completely normal, completely matter of fact. There is no tone of regret, nothing. He even laughs when he's describing going to confession and telling the other priest of an incident with a young boy. You are absolutely dumbstruck by this man.  

    One is also pretty shocked by how the Catholic Church dealt with it. The bishops and archdeacons were sending this man across California, switching from parish to parish, trying to escape the eye of the police. It's unbelievable. 

   This is not a movie for everyone. It pretty graphic in terms of describing of the actual incidents. However, it's a major issue, especially recently, and this is the documentary to see on this topic.

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.