GENRE: FANTASY/ACTION/ADVENTURE
RATING: PG
STUDIO: FOX
THEATRICAL RELEASE: FEBRUARY 12, 2010
DVD RELEASE: JUNE 2010
RATING: 4.5 OUT OF 5

I loved this movie. From the opening scene where a giant Poseidon traipses out of the ocean to the closing training sequence between the film’s main protagonists, I was in love. Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief is the heir apparent to the Harry Potter throne.

We should be frank about this, though. Percy Jackson is just like Harry Potter. Only, instead of witches and wizards, we’ve got demigods—the offspring of gods and mortals. In this case, the gods happen to be from the Greek pantheon. You know, Zeus, Hermes, Poseidon, Hades—those guys. Anyhow, the similarities abound. A child who does not know of his past. His past is, astonishingly, revealed to him. He is taken to a secret training ground for young demigods. He befriends a few people like himself. He is told the rules. He breaks the rules because there is some world-ending calamity that demands action. With the help of his friends—the serious one and the one for plucky comic relief—he saves the world from destruction at the hands of the gods. While he should be punished for breaking the rules, he is rewarded for breaking them and saving the world. The end.

Sound anything like Harry Potter? Oh, one more thing. The same guy who directed the first two Potter films also directed Percy Jackson.

Be that as it may, Percy Jackson manages to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the boy wizard movies. Where the Potter films have grown more dark and ominous, dragging children and adults into Harry’s increasingly muddled world of angst, Percy Jackson is bright, fun, and magical. The dialogue could use a little work, but this is the first of many films in a series, so the actors have time to develop their onscreen rapport with one another. The special effects are as good as any I’ve seen in a film, Avatar notwithstanding.

Bottom line: Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief is a great piece of escapism for the whole family. I highly recommend it.

GENRE: FANTASY
RATING: PG-13
STUDIO: WALT DISNEY
THEATRICAL RELEASE: MARCH 5, 2010
DVD RELEASE: JULY 2010
RATING: 2.5 OUT OF 5

Nonsense. That is what Tim Butron’s stab at Alice in Wonderland amounts to. From the dialogue to the storyline, this movie is proof positive that 3D IMAX is the gimmick many critics have accused it of being—using massive amounts of misdirection to make people forget that the film they’re watching has very little substance. Thankfully, I took in the film in plain old, “stick to the screen” celluloid.

From the beginning, Alice in Wonderland is difficult to understand. A lot is assumed of the viewer that likely shouldn’t be. A young Alice has nightmares, and it is alluded to that it might be of Wonderland—the Wonderland we all know and love from the Disney cartoon most of us grew up with. Then, just like that, it’s 13 years later, and we are treated to an older Alice who defies the conventions of her Victorian upbringing. She meets a number of prim-and-proper characters in the waking world that just beg for Wonderland counterparts. Viewers are not disappointed. Within moments, we are whisked to the strange and wonderful world of…well, Wonderland, familiar characters greeting Alice upon her arrival.

But, this is not the Wonderland we all know and remember. This is a slightly darker, slightly more broken Wonderland. And this is where the movie descends into “been-there-done-that” territory. Turns out, this isn’t Alice in Wonderland at all. This is Hook. This is Prince Caspian. This is Alice returning to Wonderland after the events we all remember from her childhood. Of course, viewers are given no knowledge of this from the start, leaving us befuddled as to what the heck is going on. When we are finally treated to a montage of familiarity—shown through a well-placed flashback—moviegoers are left with a choice. We are forced to choose between accepting this new reality or revolting against it. In the end, most viewers in the theater I sat in seemed to revolt against it.

The most difficult part of the film is the speed of dialogue. Given that much of Alice in Wonderland and Through The Looking Glass are nonsensical in nature, I can’t fault Burton for trying to stick to Lewis Carroll’s source material. However, there were several times throughout the film when something was said that was unable to be made out or understood, even if it was meant to be.

As for the performances, Depp does an “okay” turn as The Mad Hatter, but I’m not exactly sure why he got top billing in the film. I know he’s a “name” and all, but he’s not in the film nearly as much as the previews would have you believe. Depp doesn’t seem much different in this role than he did in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, actually. In fact, this seems to be more of a vehicle for the severely underrated Helena Bonham Carter, who plays the Red Queen. She is in the film far more than Depp and does a much better job with her role. Anne Hathaway managed to butcher her role of the White Queen. Though, I’ll go out on a limb and give her the benefit of the doubt. She may have played the role close to what is found in the books. However, in the film, Burton seems to direct the role in such a way that, at several points throughout, the viewer is not quite sure as to whether the White Queen is as good as her “whiteness” seems to suggest. George McFly himself, Crispin Glover turns into an anemic caricature as Stayne, the Red Queen’s “Knave of Hearts.” Newcomer Mia Wasikowska does a fantastic job as Alice, but I feel as if the part didn’t require any particular depth. Still, she was engaging in the role, and I genuinely enjoyed watching and listening to her.

As a general rule, I am a huge fan of the Johnny Depp-sold-his-soul-to-Tim-Burton partnership. It has given us great films like Sleepy Hollow, Sweeney Todd, the wonderful Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and the classic Edward Scissorhands. However, if this film doesn’t grow on me over time, I’m going to say this is their weakest collaboration since the atrocious The Corpse Bride.

But, I know that no matter what I say, you’ll go see the movie because Johnny Depp is “so great,” and I’m just a sour critic, hiding behind the safety of his computer screen while Depp is getting paid millions to play the same role he always plays. Just know that, if you do see the film, and you dislike it as much as I did (or force yourself to like it just so you can disagree with me), then I reserve the right to tell you, “I told you so.”

It’s worth a watch…on DVD.

I recently got into a lively “Tweet Off” with author Jackson Pearce about, of all things, the $45 million payout Conan O’Brien is receiving in order to exit The Tonight Show. The debate didn’t center around the recently ended late night war between Conan and Leno. To be honest, I could care less about that. I prefer Letterman. Even then, I don’t watch late night television all that often.

Anyway…

Prior to finding out that Conan’s final stunts didn’t cost as much as he purported (by his own admission), I was indignant. Given the tragedy that had recently befallen Haiti and the ongoing problems in the world, it seemed to me, foolish and wrong to be spending a great deal of money on a flashy car to dress up like a giant rodent and a mink Snuggie for a horse. Whatever humorous point Conan was trying to make was drowned out by the staggering cares of the world. Then, he admitted that the stunts were fake and nowhere near as costly as he was making them out to be. He even poked fun at angry bloggers hitting their keyboards to write “Dear Internet” letters about just how angry they were. Of course, I had just released a slew of Tweets into the Twitterverse to that effect, so I felt a bit sheepish. Still…something didn’t quite sit right with me.

Forty-five million dollars is a bit excessive. Okay, well, it’s a lot excessive. When the President of the United States takes the time to sit down and write an article for Newsweek about “Why Haiti Matters,” hearing about some dude getting paid an ungodly amount of cash to exit a talk show seems like a lesson in misplaced priorities. Add to that the fact that the recent “Hope for Haiti Now” benefit (advertised heavily during Conan’s final telecast) raised 58 million dollars and it makes it seem downright sinful. NBC paid Conan O’Brien 45 million dollars. More than 33 million of that will go directly to O’Brien and the remaining 12 million will go to his staff. For those of you keeping score, that’s almost 60 thousand dollars a staffer. Take into consideration the seven months worked and that adds up to nearly nine thousand dollars a month per staff member. All total, the money paid to O’Brien and his 200 staffers is almost 78% of what was raised to help with the relief efforts for millions of suffering people. Let me put this into perspective for you, NBC paid 201 people 45 million dollars to leave a television program while others around the world pooled their resources in the midst of “the worst recession since the Great Depression” to raise money to help the poor and disenfranchised.

Ms. Pearce took issue with the judgmental tone my tweets took. “Aren’t you supposed to judge not?” was the initial question posed to me. From here, it spiraled into questions of excess versus poverty, luxury versus contentment, the nature of hypocrisy, and relative wealth. This is not the first time I have been called judgmental. And, to be honest, sometimes I have been Pharisaical in how I go about dispensing grace (as if it were mine to dispense). That cannot be denied. My human frailty often puts me on the wrong side of judgment. So, I would like to thank Ms. Pearce for the reminder that I am an agent of grace, not condemnation.

Be that as it may, there is something troubling about the world we find ourselves in as Christians when it comes to the practice of judgment. Ms. Pearce’s response and many others like hers beg the question: Are Christians called to judge? What does it mean to judge? If I look at the situation and say, “That’s wrong on a fundamental level,” is that judgment, or it is something else?

Jesus says, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.” (Matthew 7:1-2, ESV) This is the verse that is often alluded to in order to bolster the argument for Christians not standing in a place of judgment over others. And rightly so. This is a great warning against Christians pronouncing other people guilty before God. Approaching other people’s lives and actions with a judgmental and harsh attitude results in God judging us in the same manner. But, it is not a proscription against judging altogether. Quite the contrary. Matthew 7:1-2 is the opening of Christ’s statements of how Christians are called to judge rightly.

The verse continues forward, “Why do you see the speck that is in brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” Here, we find Jesus using hyperbole to get a point about self-evaluation before evaluation of others. He doesn’t say, “Just judge yourself. Leave others be.” He says, “Judge yourself first that you may be in a better position to help another see where they might do better.”

But, “judgment” today is a far cry from what Christ was getting at. Better stated, any form of judgment—even necessary and good judgment—is viewed as unnecessary and harsh. Today’s culture operates with the unstated maxim that “fences make good neighbors/mind your own business.” We enjoy our autonomy, our vote, and our rightness in every decision we make. But, some decisions are wrong. Some priorities are misplaced.

When a multinational corporation like NBC pays out huge sums of money to a few people while simultaneously begging the world population (i.e. Americans) to “do their part” and give to the “Hope for Haiti” Benefit Fund, I grow a bit concerned that we have somehow missed the plot. When that same multinational corporation—owned by the elite few—is responsible for “developing” third world countries under the guise of “long term economic growth/investment” while simultaneously moving the urban poor further to the fringes, I grow a bit concerned. When multinational corporations cause conditions on a daily basis and then avoid filming it for fear of public outcry, I grow a bit concerned. Haiti has only been filmed and photographed and written about and blogged about because, currently, it is unavoidable. But, even now, the footage of Haiti is beginning to fade…

Last night, I live Tweeted the season premiere of LOST. A few days before that, it was the GRAMMYs. So, while I write this to you, please understand that I write with a preacher’s heart to myself. I have missed the plot. I miss the plot every single day in some way shape or form. As I use my laptop to write this treatise, am I inadvertently supporting some conglomerate that causes the very problems I am shaking my fist at? As I attempt to “judge rightly,” do I really care?

So, yes, I am being judgmental. I do not fear being judgmental. But, in the process, I am indicting myself for my own lethargy in regards to the matter in hopes of shaking myself from slumber along with the sleeping giant. I want to remove the speck and the log. It is right for me to judge that “NBC does not really care about Haiti. They can they do better.” It is even more right for me to judge that “I do not really care about Haiti. I can do better.”

So can you.

Blog used by permission from The Christian Manifesto.

GENRE: SINGER/SONGWRITER
LABEL: INDEPENDENT
RELEASE DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2009
RATING: 5 OUT OF 5

The Civil Wars is the brainchild of Christian pop songstress Joy Williams and the very Johnny Depp-esque looking John Paul White. And if their Poison & Wine EP is any indicator, they may be the best singer/songwriter that you’ve never heard of or listened to. Even with all the bands and albums I’ve heard about in the last couple of years, I just heard about them recently through an interview with Seabird’s Ryan Morgan…and then promptly forgot about them. My mistake. Thank God for people tweeting their suggestions for review material.

Anyway…

The Civil Wars’ Poison & Wine EP is a beautiful piece of poetry that speaks the language of so much brokenness dancing with pain and relentless love. It is strangely depressing and oddly hopeful at the same time. Title track “Poison & Wine” tastes of bitterness, longing, frustration, and faith. The lyrics flow over mournful acoustic strumming, “You only know what I want you to/I know everything you don’t want me to/Oh your mouth is poison, your mouth is wine/Oh you think your dreams are the same as mine/Oh I don’t love you but I always will…” These are the kind of lyrics that, melded with the perfect music, will cause a man or woman to weep bitterly and claim, “Those are the words I’ve been looking for, but could never find.” Love and loss held in tension.

“Go” is the most whimsical piece on the album. In the hands of lesser artists, I think it might threaten to throw off the feel of the overall venture. But, given that it is an EP, if one views it as a foretaste of more to come, it is forgivable. But, I don’t see it as a mistake to be forgiven anyway. It conjures visions of running through meadows with dreamlike abandon and flight of the imagination.

“Pressing Flowers” is a fantastic and haunting piece that I could imagine making any number of indie film soundtracks. William’s and White’s voices complement each other perfectly ear, recalling the darker work of Out of the Grey. This is a brooding song about holding one’s secrets and hopes in confidence: “Meet me in the garden where the grass grows tall/Down by the gate/I got a secret that I might tell/It’ll give me a way/Oooooo whatever you do/Oooooo keep it with you…”

“Tip of My Tongue” is what the other songs on this short project seem to build to. Ultimately, love wins. Not some ethereal, fleeting romantic feeling. True love that has been fought for through the tension. The duo sings, “You’re a red string tied to my finger/A little love letter I carry with me/You’re sunlight/Smoke rings and cigarettes/Outlines and kisses for silverscreens…” Again, I cannot comment enough about how stellar the writing is here.

The thing about this album is that the lyrics would be nice as just poetry. It conjures images of a smoky poetry corner, complete with berets, a stool and a spotlight, and snapping fingers. But, at the same time, something would be missing. The music adds a layer of complexity to their words that takes the listener from a state of confusion to a state of their soul being laid bare.

And somewhere amidst this beautiful mess is God…

Review copy provided courtesy of sensibility music.

GENRE: COMEDY
RATING: PG-13
STUDIO: 20TH CENTURY FOX
THEATRICAL RELEASE: JULY 10, 2009
DVD RELEASE: NOVEMBER 3, 2009

I gotta say…I feel stupider for having watched this film. It was an hour and a half of mindless drivel that I never once laughed at. So, as a comedy, it fails. Even as mind-numbing entertainment it fails. I’d rather watch Transformers 2 over and over and over again than ever have to watch I Love You Beth Cooper ever again.

From the pointless plot (if you can call it that), to the terrible acting, to the no-laugh comedic antics, this movie falls on its face from the get-go. The previews showed all of the parts that had any potential of being funny at all. Unfortunately, those parts never panned out.

Truth be told, the only reason I even bothered picking up this mindless drivel was because I like Hayden Panetierre. Needless to say, I’m sorry I did and I can’t believe she even did this movie. Did she even read the script? Was there even a script to read?

Sometimes I love to hate a movie. If that movie has been overhyped, yet tells the same old story we’ve been told before, yeah, I enjoy taking it down a notch. However, I don’t love hating I Love You Beth Cooper. I just hate Beth Cooper. Maybe if I were a Neanderthal high school student playing World of Warcraft in my parents’ basement with Cheetos covered fingers I might find some of this movie amazing. But, even a Neanderthal high school student playing World of Warcraft in their parents’ basement might be a little too sophisticated for this movie.

And don’t even get me started on the poor attempt to add a “message” to this film. Really? Really? Are you seriously going to try to preach a message of “acceptance” and “transparency” in a movie like this one? Really? How dare you.

I’ve done you all a favor by watching this movie. Now I can tell you not to watch it.

Don’t watch it. It’s stupid. You’ll be stupider for watching it.

Review copy provided courtesy of 20th Century Fox.

Review used by permission from The Christian Manifesto.

The dock feels empty now.
Lone cross in the distance.
Somehow, the swan’s song is not as beautiful as it once was.
Trails thin as winter sets in.
My coat pulled tight ‘round, visiting the fallen oak.
Cold air biting at earlobes and chapping lips.
Eyes burn, vision and judgment blurring.
Such hope.
Such.
Sweet.
Passionate.
Hope.
Appetite for love now pained knots.
Flittering butterflies now unmoving stones.
Lengthy epistles now few words.
Stolen moments now history lessons.
Knowing glances now avoided contact.
Warm smiles now awkward.
Lingering embraces now a gulf between.
Sunlight seems dimmer somehow.
I.
Cannot.
Breathe.
Without.
You.
Are.
My.
Heart.

GENRE: ACTION/ADVENTURE/DRAMA
RATING: PG-13
STUDIO: WARNER BROS.
THEATRICAL RELEASE: DECEMBER 25, 2009
DVD RELEASE: MAY 2010

Director Guy Ritchie has struck paydirt with Sherlock Holmes. Smartly filmed, smartly acted, smartly directed, this movie is as smart as it is fun. Let me be clear: Sherlock Holmes a great bit of escapism, but you won’t feel dumber for having “left reality” for the two hours the film takes up.

Here’s what I keep telling people. You know the movie The Prestige, right? Of course you do. If you’re reading a site like this, The Prestige is one of your faves. Anyhow, that’s beside the point. You know how in The Prestige you had to pay close attention to every little detail and how at the end all those little details came together to reveal a really intricate tapestry that you felt stupid for not realizing sooner? Well, Sherlock Holmes is just like that. Only, throughout the film, while you have to pay attention to the little details, Sherlock is solving little mysteries along the way. So, not only do you get a big payoff at the end, you also get a bunch of tiny payoffs throughout. So, even if you “didn’t see it coming” at the end, at least you had fun putting other puzzles together as the film progressed.

Robert Downey Jr. continues to scintillate on the screen, taking everything that made Iron Man’s Tony Stark eccentric and ratcheting it up a notch. Having never seen any of Downey Jr.’s pre-meltdown films, I have only caught his performances in Iron Man, Tropic Thunder, The Soloist, and now Sherlock Holmes. He continues to impress me, and I look forward to seeing him in more films. The on-screen chemistry between Downey Jr.’s Holmes and Jude Law’s Watson is great. You get the sense that these men have been friends for a long period of time and that the friendship has been tested by fire. It is a theme that undergirds the film. Holmes, brilliant though he be, needs Watson in his life, even if he would never verbally admit. Though, his actions are more than telling.

I am generally a fan of Rachel McAdams, but I feel like her performance in this film as Holmes’ love interest Irene Adler falls a little flat. She’s a pretty face, yes. But, she doesn’t infuse her character with the qualities that are said to take Holmes off of his game. I guess there’s only so much you can do with the script as it’s written, but I felt like this was a bit of a miscast.

Mark Strong plays Lord Blackwood, and he’s got the classic bad guy vibe going on. It’s not original, but it’s fun for the viewer to see him plot because we know that Holmes will figure things out in time to save the day. We just want to see how. I figured out things with Lord Blackwood pretty early on, but I’ve seen a gazillion movies. In many ways, unfortunately, it is used as a vehicle for the planned sequel, which will feature Holmes’ archrival Dr. Moriarty. It is rumored that Brad Pitt will be stepping into those particularly dark shoes. If those rumors are true, I’ll be the first in line to grab my tickets.

That being said, Sherlock Holmes is good in a lot of ways, and the bad points are forgivable.

Review used by permission from The Christian Manifesto.

GENRE: ACTION/DRAMA
RATING: PG-13
STUDIO:
THEATRICAL RELEASE: DECEMBER 18, 2009
DVD RELEASE: APRIL 2010

Okay. The hype machine has done all that it can. The paid critics have done all that they can. Now, James Cameron’s epic sci-fi/drama/romance Avatar must stand on it’s own two feet. Massive crowds have taken in the film, and it is upon their words that friends, co-workers, and family members will now decide for or against spending the money to go see it. So, I write this review not just as a pop culture critic, but also as a fan of movies.

Should you go see Avatar? Absolutely. Is it everything the hype machine has made it out to be? Not exactly.

Here is what I liked about the film.

First, it is as expansive and fully-realized as any great sci-fi film or book I have read, recalling Star Wars or a great Robert Jordan epic. From the very start, the viewer is immersed in this alien world of Pandora with its lush environs, rising peaks, varied animal life, and indigenous people groups. Taking the film in as a 3D experience truly enhances all of these features. It is a proverbial feast for the eyes.

Additionally, the special effects are as good as advertised. The native people, called “Na’vi,” look as real as their human co-stars. There is never a moment in the film that did not feel genuine. This is, quite simply put, the most majestic use of motion capture technology the film industry has ever seen. Before long, actors may become an afterthought for studios attempting to maintain a tight budget. Truth be told, when looking up the actors in the film, a majority of those playing Na’vi, I had never heard of. Third, there is an emotional depth to the Na’vi so emotive, that it translates on a number of levels likely not intended by the director or actor.

So, Avatar is breathtakingly beautiful and a treasure to behold. But, it’s not perfect. Not by a long shot.

For starters, while I spoke highly of the emotive nature of the Na’vi people, the characters are still rather one-dimensional. I suppose most people attending a film like this aren’t looking for depth of character, but still. The good guy follows the standard fare monomyth (i.e. hero’s journey), the bad guy is evil for no apparent reason other than that he enjoys carnage and destruction, and the love affair between the film’s two main characters is taken right out of classic literature (i.e. star-crossed lovers from different worlds who won’t let impropriety keep them apart). In a sense, James Cameron has given us Titanic with giant blue aliens.

Another difficulty with the film is its desire to preach several different messages, which serves to minimize the impact of all of them. It is bad enough that the film preaches environmentalism so strongly as to not flow organically from the story itself—an interesting irony if you think about it—but it seemed to me as if Cameron wasn’t exactly sure what he wanted to say. In addition to the environmental message, discerning viewers will hear echoes of September 11th, Blackwater Ops (i.e. soldiers of fortune; mercenaries) in Afghanistan and Iraq, forced displacement, colonialism, and capitalism—the Na’vi serving as substitutes for any number of people who have been mistreated during our planet’s storied history. Heck, if you listen even closer, you can hear echoes of the fall of Jerusalem and the spiritual impact it had upon the Hebrew people. However, each message clanged so loudly in my ears, that I could not make out what was being said, nor could I figure out exactly why Cameron thought I should care. By competing for my attention, no one was heard.

There is also the issue of nature worship. I know. I know. They’re aliens on another world, which calls into question the nature and veracity of the Christian story in the first place. But, as this is the world we have and know, and as the Na’vi serve as substitutes, the colonialists are portrayed as greedy, thoughtless, godless, capitalists while the Na’vi are connected to Eywa, the goddess of Pandora. Everything on Pandora is connected through a massive roots systems, including memories of ancestors long since dead. It’s problematic, given the amount of people who are susceptible to choosing to worship the created rather than the Creator. (I only find this bothersome because of the Na’vi substitution motif and the subtle lie it inserts into the lives of viewers.)

Lastly, I feel as if this story could have been told in a far shorter period of time. Now, lest you think I am one of those people with an attention span shorter than the average sitcom, I assure you, I am not. Certain films take time to tell a good story. I would never seek to shorten films like Braveheart, Gladiator, or even Titanic. But, I think that for many directors “epic” translates as “lengthy,” which shouldn’t be the case. Cameron could have told an equally amazing story in 2 hours, rather than in three. And given that the characters were so one-dimensional, dragging things out over 3 hours only served to annoy me.

All that being said, I still believe Avatar will be successful at the box office. I still think it’s worth seeing. Nevertheless, I think word-of-mouth and multiple reviews will serve to slow down the hype machine, cut a little of the film’s luster, and allow people to approach the film honestly.

Excellent film. Not as excellent as some are making it out to be.

GENRE:CHRISTIAN LIFE
PUBLISHER: DAVID C. COOK
PUBLICATION DATE: AUGUST 2009

We’ve all met “garage Christians”—those who believe that simply because they go to church or say the right words, they’re actually following Jesus. But, when pushed or tested, we find out they’re really not. They love Jesus, but not the Church. They think Jesus is God, but they don’t trust that the Bible is inerrant. (Of course, that makes no sense as the Bible is the witness to Jesus’ divinity, but whatever, right?) Essentially, these are people who are Christians. But, there’s the flip side of that coin. There are those who love Jesus, love the Church, know he’s God, believe the Bible, yet are running on the treadmill of cookie-cutter faith.They’re Christianish.

Following the trend of authors speaking directly to a Christian audience, Mark Steele’s Christianish challenges readers with the question, “What if we’re not following Jesus at all?” Instead of “going through the motions” and settling for looking like we’ve had true life and heart change, Steele calls believers to stop being passively hypocritical about faith in Jesus.

One of the things Steele says at the end of the title sticks with me. He writes, “So, our lives indeed have sharp edges. They hold the ability to perform life-altering surgery while retaining the risk of inflicting massive wounds.” While this line doesn’t capture the totality of the book, does communicate an important theme that undergirds the title. The changes suggested will require “life-altering surgery” for many readers. The question is, will Christianish resonate loudly enough to move people to action—rather than quietly moving to the next challenging book without making a single change.

What makes the book work is the anecdotal stories that are peppered throughout. Steele is open and honest about his own life, communicating effectively that he is on the same journey as the rest of us. Sometimes it is downright hysterical. Sometimes it’s painful. He does not reach the literary heights of writers such as McManus or Miller, but he shows great potential.

While anyone can pick this book up and read it and be challenged, I think Christianish would best suit a small group study or Sunday school class. The questions included at the end of each chapter don’t allow the reader to walk away thinking, “That’s nice…for somebody else.” It brings it home for each of us, making us examine ways in which we’ve allowed our faith to become lukewarm or synthetic.

GENRE: DRAMA/ROMANCE
RATING: PG-13
STUDIO: SUMMIT ENT.
THEATRICAL RELEASE: NOVEMBER 20, 2009
DVD RELEASE: MARCH 2010

I may be the only reviewer who appreciated Twilight not for what it was, but rather for the person who directed it. There wasn’t much about the film that appealed to me, but Catherine Hardwicke’s body of work has intrigued me. However, of her films, Twilight was the weakest. Yes, even weaker than The Nativity Story. But, much to the delight of moviegoers and critics alike, Hardwicke was not at the helm of the newest installment in the Twilight Saga, New Moon. That job fell to Chris Weitz, who gave us the craptastic film known as Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist. What does that mean for this film? It means it was better than the first…but that’s not saying much is it?

Kristen Stewart’s turn as Bella has the emotional range of a cardboard box. From the first film to this one, I’m still not sure why she loves Edward (Pattison) and why he loves her. There is simply no depth of love communicated between the two. It’s almost like Stewart and Pattison don’t even like acting together. Edward tells Bella that he is leaving and that she cannot be with him. She doesn’t shed so much as a tear. Now, she does have unbelievably annoying night terrors, but we’re given no glimpse as to what they are or what is causing them. Then, of course, in Edward’s absence, she falls for Jacob. But, again, you can’t really tell.

And why did Jacob feel it necessary to run around for ¾ of the film with no shirts on? I get it. You’re buff. That’s cool. But, sitting in a theater full of prepubescent girls who screamed every time Jacob and his werewolf buddies came on screen was a bit much. It’s never explained. Apparently, in that part of Washington, it’s totally natural for Native American teenaged boys to walk around with their shirts off.

None of the characters in this film are developed. There are vampires. There are werewolves. There’s a creepy, aristocratic vampire clan who rules with an iron fist. And in the middle is Bella (and a police officer father who apparently doesn’t call out S.W.A.T. when his daughter disappears for days on end). It’s as if the filmmakers figured, “Well, they’ve read the book. Character development can take a back seat to really bad storytelling.” The point of a book-turned-film, is to connect with both types of viewers—those who have read the source material and those who have not. This film chose option C: Neither.

The Twilight Series is poorly written literature. Now, it is poorly written literature that has been modified into poorly adapted film making. The dialogue is dreadful; the make-up is admittedly better, but still cheesy; the digital affects were hit-or-miss, and the story crawled at a snail’s pace, only to end abruptly. If you’re a fan of the series, I’m sure you’ll find something to like about it. You have to. You’re kind of invested. The tag line for The Twilight Sage: New Moon was “The Next Chapter Begins.” However, when The Twilight Saga: Eclipse rolls around on June 30, 2010, I’m hoping and praying that another TCM reviewer will suffer through it. I really am done with this series. This is the last chapter for me.