Last night, I watched, for the first time, the film 28 Days Later. An incurable infection spreads causing a rabid, inhuman rage within 10-20 seconds of exposure. One small pocket of the uninfected exists, consisting of a few military men and the story’s three main characters.

The military commander gives an interesting speech at one point, in which he explains that this current situation – infected humans killing everyone who remains – is as “normal” as the world has ever been. All he ever saw 28 days before, and 28 days before that, and 28 days before that, was “people killing people.”

And this military commander, who spoke such wise words, was about to give the two female protagonists over to his men to rape.

It’s a stark and ugly picture of humanity. The “uninfected” are just as awful as the infected, ready and willing to commit evil on the very few human survivors that exist. We don’t like these pictures, but I’m of the opinion that it’s better to face reality than ignore it (hence my love for fantasy, fairy tales, and the Gothic, where reality is explored better than in much “realistic” fiction).

While I have some theological disagreement with an All Saints vs. All Souls day (look – if the Corinthians were saints, we all are), there is something theologically powerful about the Hallowe’en —> All Saints and Souls Days progression. Hallowe’en gives us the Gothic picture of the Fallen world as it is – the imagination’s grappling with a world that we all know is a big mess. And after facing our fears on All Hallows’ Eve, we recall the departed and the life to come on Novembers 1 and 2.

I don’t think I could write a review that would do justice to the film Amazing Grace.  You just have to rent it and see it.  Just a few points to get you interested:

• The Christian message is clear, but not overbearing.  It’s not a “Christian” movie.  It’s a movie about a Christian, for whom dedication to Christ meant the abolition of slavery.  Those who continue to blame the followers of Christ for historical slavery would do well to note that revolutionary Christians were a fundamental part of ending it.
•  The use of John Newton’s story (author of “Amazing Grace”) was powerful.  There are too many great lines to pick a best quote, but this would be one of them: “Though I have lost my memory, two things I know. I am a great sinner and Christ is a great savior.”
• The movie provides an excellent commentary on the effects of war on civil rights, namely, that they are usually infringed upon under the guise of patriotism.

Here are some scattered thoughts on my viewing Superman Returns last night.

Characters
Let’s start with our cast: Brandon Routh is an interesting mix of Tom Cruise and Christopher Reeves. At times, he was almost channeling Reeves, which I don’t think is a very good thing, since Reeves was a lousy actor. I guess it provided some continuity, though, even though Routh, like all the other characters, look quite a bit younger than the first four movies, even though the movie takes place five years later. (nice sentence, that).

Gerry Betier’s snotty racist girlfriend is not Lois Lane. Still, I have to admit, I’m more pleased with Kate Bosworth’s performance than I ever expected. I don’t agree with most of the reviews I’ve read so far – it was a fairly decent performance. She’s just not Margot Kidder, who is Lois Lane and will always be Lois Lane.

Kevin Spacey I liked, and I think my favorite part of the whole film was when Luther forced Lois into trying to say, “Superman will stop you,” and he cut her off with that loud shout. Very intense.

Plot
The plot itself…well, cheesy, but it’s a Superman plot. I can’t complain too much about Lex Luthor trying to create an entirely new continent, made partially of kryptonite, that will swallow up the US and become his own country. Really, it’s the way Superman foiled the plan that was exceedingly anti-climactic. We’d already seen him super-strength the shuttle, the plane, and the boat. Having him super-strength the new continent out into space just didn’t do it for me. And having him “die” and come to twice in about 20 minutes was overkill.

Which brings us to the “Superman’s son” thing, because obviously the second “Superman on his deathbed” scene was done to set up the revelation that the little boy was Superman’s super-seed. In short, they should have come up with another, more dramatic way of doing this, rather than to repeat the death/resurrection thing again. The last 15 minutes were flat. I like the Superman’s son idea, and a lot of ethical tension is introduced by the whole thing; it just wasn’t written well as a plot point.

Despite the dialogue being the typical poor dialogue we find in superhero movies, there were a few good lines. Superman, to Lois, high above the city, said, “You wrote that the world doesn’t need a savior; but I hear them crying for one every day.”

Best line of the whole film: “Weren’t there two of those?”

All in all, fun summer flick, but you won’t be missing a ton if you decide to wait for DVD; there aren’t even any special effects that merit the price of the ticket. For me, the whole night was worth is just to see the new Spiderman trailer. In my opinion, with how well the Spiderman films have been done so far, Spidey is stealing Superman’s thunder and becoming America’s #1 hero.

Grade (0-10): 6

Since I’m not into boycotting movies and crap like that, I decided to go to DVC last night with my lovely wife. Really, really great film. Incredible dialogue, like the following:”Sophie, you are the last living descendent of Jesus Christ.”

or

Langon: “Sophie, did the argument you had with your grandfather have anything to do with your past?”
Sophie (shocked): “How did you know?”

What the…?

Seriously, the movie was utterly baffling. It was really, really bad. I’m a little bit disappointed, in fact. If it were good, there might just be a likelihood of some amount of dialogue. Instead, as we were walking out I kept hearing words like “boring” and “eh…ok.”

I keep hearing that the movie was faithful to the book. If by faithful to the book you mean, “The book was really bad, and so was the movie,” sure, it was faithful. The changes made to it, though subtle, were a bit interesting. The promoters of the movie have been pushing the idea of dialogue in order to get Christians to go see it. In a fascinating twist, Langdon’s character was turned from being entirely convinced of all the theories about the Priory and the early history of Christianity to the skeptic about Teabing’s theories, actually arguing with him during his little middle of the night lecture. In the end, Langdon turns out to be a mushy, “It only matters what you believe” kind of silliness that I guess is meant to be the final word on the debate.

But there is no debate to be had. To say there will be reasonable and helpful dialogue and debate over DVC is like writing a book that claims that the Buddha was really a staunch proponent of cross-dressing and modern drag and trying to have serious “debate” about that.

A poorly written, directed, and acted movie based on a poorly written book. Seeing McKellen as Teabing spouting those nonsensical lines almost makes me not want to see X3 this coming weekend.

Almost.

iMonk has written on how the Mystery Science Theater 3000 guys could have improved this film.

Amy Wellborn has my favorite line of review yet:

WHERE IS MARY MAGDALENE’S TOMB? WE’VE GOT TO RACE AROUND EUROPE, KILL PEOPLE, RACK OUR BRAINS TO FIGURE OUT STUPID PUZZLES, STAND AROUND IN RESTROOMS AND VILLAS TALKING FOR HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS ABOUT WHERE IN THE WORLD MARY MAGDALENE’S RELICS ARE. WHY HAS THE CHURCH HIDDEN THEM? WHY DON’T THEY WANT US TO REVERENCE HER? WHERE IN THE WORLD IS THE SUPER-SECRET SPOT WHERE PILGRIMS CAN FLOCK TO HONOR HER?

Er…never mind.

Obviously, every Christian website and blog in the world is reviewing Narnia.  I’ve read very few reviews at all, so if this is all repeat for you, forgive me.  I’ll keep it short and sweet! 

First, I think I’m going to a “rating” system.  I’ll use a Zero-Ten scale, and I’ll give Narnia an 8.5.  Now, on to the specifics.  We’ll do the good, the bad, and then a summary. 

The Good

The Talking Animals: Unquestionably, these were going to be hard to pull off.  But Disney did it well, I think.  It seemed quite natural (even though it shouldn’t have) to see animals walking and talking next to humans. 

Mr. Tumnus: He was younger-looking than I expected, but he did an excellent job of catching the playfulness of Tumnus.  Nicely done.

The Beavers: As comic relief, they were very humorous, though there was something a little too “Disney” about them.  I have some bad stuff to say about the Beavers as well, but I did enjoy their banter. 

The Pevensies: Especially Edmund; he was terrific.
Jadis, the White Witch: Easily the best performance of the movie.
The Stone Table: The death of Aslan was chilling. 

The Bad

Aslan: I think perhaps if Liam Neeson’s voice was not so
recognizable, I may have been a bit more pleased.  But if I’m looking
at Aslan and thinking about Liam, it hurts the movie.  I really think
they needed to find an unknown to do his voice.  The even greater
problem with Aslan was his normalcy.  There was little to no buildup to
his appearance, it seemed, in terms of striking a mix of awe, fear, and
wonder concerning this name they keep hearing.  While Mark may have posited a good reason for removing that dialogue to the end of the film
(and I think he’s on to something in this post, so it’s worth the
read), I think it ultimately took away from the buildup to the meeting
with Aslan.

The Beavers: These two make it into both categories.  The use
of the Beavers for only comic relief is what really hurt the buildup to
Aslan.  It is they who unveil the story of Aslan and the prophecy to
the Pevensies, and at this point, we should have become filled with a
great expectation of the coming story.  Instead, it’s couched in so
much humor and banter between Mr. and Mrs. that we lose the story a
bit. 

Peter Pevensie: Overall, I thought he was done well.  What
was lacking was a significant change in Peter’s resolve, courage, and
ability to be king and command an army after he killed Maugrin.  Taking
out the battle planning scene with Aslan also contributed to this
problem.

Summary

A great adventure film; a faithful retelling of Lewis’ story; and a
tremendous reference to Christ on the big screen.  You just can’t be
too upset about that.  Indeed, it could have been better.  But it could
have been much, much worse.  That company that makes the Left Behind movies could have picked up the idea after the obvious success of Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter.  Let’s all be thankful they didn’t. 

I may change my mind about some of this upon subsequent viewing, but
I’ll probably forget to post about it.  My recommendation would be to
not wait for DVD; it’s worth it to go see now.

Be sure to check out La Shawn Barber’s new Fantasy Fiction for Christians blog, where she’s gathering lots of good stuff on Narnia, as well as last week’s posts from Common Grounds Online, all centered around Narnia.

I finally got out to see Batman Begins last night, and I was quite impressed.  There’s been a chorus of praise for the movie from everyone and their maternal figure, so I will not bore you with another review like that. 

Rather, I want to turn your attention to the glimpses of the gospel that jumped out at me as I watched the movie.  I’ll address two instances in particular: the running theme of justice and compassion, and a scene from the climax of the movie.

The basic plot tension throughout the film was the contrast of two view of justice.  On the one hand, espoused by the Ras a’Ghul and the League of Shadows, was a concept of justice that gave what was fair and deserved – if a city fell too far into corruption, that city was destroyed for the preservation of the goodness of society as a whole.  Rome and Constantinople had gone too far, and this League of Shadows, having existed for centuries, caused their respective falls; and Gotham was next on the chopping block.  "Balance" had to be restored to the world by the merciless eradication of what was evil and seemingly hopeless.

On the other hand, we have the view of justice held by Bruce Wayne/Batman, who refuses to join the League on account of his desire to extend compassion, even to the guilty.  Wayne believes, though he has experienced great suffering himself and at one time would have murdered his parents’ killer, that salvation will not come to the city by its destruction, but by the proper administration of a justice that holds deeply to principles of compassion and mercy.  Wayne’s view of justice and salvation was optimistic – you do not bring salvation to a people by murdering them, and the city can indeed be redeemed, even from its desperate state.  Gotham is as morally corrupt as any city on earth, and in terms of what it deserved, was ripe for judgment; but Wayne found hope even still and was willing to sacrifice himself to see that hope come to fruition. 

I couldn’t help but think of the harsh view of God that Jesus turned upside down during His ministry.  Certainly the Pharisees awaited God’s coming destruction of the wicked and vindication of the righteous.  Sinners had no hope, for they had broken God’s law and would not be saved.  Jesus saw Jerusalem as ripe for destruction, predicting its fall and declaring the temple desolate.  Yet coming destruction was not Jesus’ final word, for hours after He gave His teaching on Mt. Olives, He suffered and died, taking judgment upon Himself for all who would believe.  Believing that mercy was at the heart of salvation, He fulfilled within Himself all Israel was intended to be and then took her judgment upon Himself, being brutally murdered by Rome and opening wide  salvation’s doors.

In the movie’s climax, there is a chilling scene in which, as Batman presses onward to save the city, he is held up by the very people he is trying to save.  Gotham’s citizens, deluded by the poison they have inhaled, can see in Batman only a terrifying figure, and a mob attacks him, preventing his progress.  This, obviously, brought to my mind the delusion that gripped so many, crying out for Jesus’ crucifixion, turning on Him as He headed towards His death.  "He came to that which was His own, but His own people did not receive Him." 

Now, why and how would the gospel find its way into a Batman movie, of all places?  Surely the movie’s director did not deliberately intend such?  Well, probably not. 

Then how did a totally depraved person manage to communicate a glimpse of the gospel?  Aren’t you just delusional, Travis?  Well, hopefully not. 

Pascal wrote about the God-shaped hole (a phrase that’s become far too cliche for my liking).  Augustine penned, "Our hearts are restless, until they find rest in Thee."  I think they were spot on.  I have what I would call a strong view of human depravity, but I do not think the image of God is erased from us entirely.  Being as such, whether we realize it or not, our hearts resonate with the message of love conquering what is evil, the message at the center of the gospel.  At the same time, without the powerful work of the Spirit, our hearts hate the One who alone carries the message perfectly, and indeed is the message.  But glimpses of the gospel call us away from our hatred and to the wonderful love of Christ.  Would that more of us, including myself, kept our eyes open for the gospel in stories and myths we all tell to each other.  We might hear, more often, our need for our Savior.

***WARNING: Movie reviews at this blog may contain spoilers***

Ok, so it wasn’t boring.  But it wasn’t good either.  After movies like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, one would expect more from Spielberg.  If you saw the first half hour, you saw the rest of the movie, really.  How many times can you watch the main characters almost get killed by aliens and then narrowly escape before you start thinking that taking a break to get some popcorn would not be such a bad idea? 

On top of the fact that an alien movie is bound to be "unrealistic," all sorts of incredibly silly things happened.  My favorite was when a crashed plane managed to destroy an entire block, but the van was spared (and there was a convenient little path through the wreckage for the van to drive out).

On a more positive note, Dakota Fanning gave a tremendous performance.  There were some cool special effects.  And Tim Robbins was kinda freaky.  But that’s about it.  I’d recommend waiting for DVD and saving that ticket money for multiple viewings of Goblet of Fire and Chronicles of Narnia come winter.