John Wick (2014) - M0.0/E3

Somewhere I heard this was almost as much fun as watching the Matrix.  As much as I loved the first Matrix, this was nothing like it.  This is going to be very short.

The movie started off rather slow and I really wondered how the whole Keanu Reeves holding a gun was going to be relevant about 10 minutes into it.  A terrible tragedy happens, revenge takes hold, and everyone dies.  The end.

Don't waste your time.  VidAngel didn't help much here.  Sometimes bad movies are bad even without the swearing/violence/sex.  There was no redemptive value to watching this at all; it was just pure depressing.

If you want a more thorough review, check out ericdsnider.com.  He gave it a B+, and a lot of times I agree with his rating, but when there is no moral message, or even a negative morality to a film, it's very hard to find a reason to enjoy it.

Sicario (2015) - M5.8/E8

This was a very thought provoking movie.  One that can bring up some tense conversations from people on different sides of the political spectrum.   In essence, the government crosses some moral lines in order to maximize the saving of lives.  Is it ever OK to make such compromises?

While drawn from the train of science fiction and fantasy, two examples come to mind. In the book Ender's Game, the need to brutally and finally punish your enemies so that they can't seek out revenge on you is repeatedly brought up.  The following are some of the deepest lines of the novel and is an exchange that occurs between Ender and Valentine in chapter 13 of the book:

Ender: "In the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him. I think it's impossible to really understand somebody, what they want, what they believe, and not love them the way they love themselves. And then, in that very moment when I love them -"
Valentine: "You beat them." For a moment she was not afraid of his understanding.
Ender: "No, you don't understand. I destroy them. I make it impossible for them to ever hurt me again. I grind them and grind them until they don't exist."

Ender kills multiple boys and almost causes the genocide of an alien race.  The guilt he has to bear is insufferable. Is it OK to go so far too ensure the safety of oneself or one's family? One's country? Are the psychological, spiritual consequences worth it?

In Batman, we constantly see Batman's dilemma with confronting the Joker. If he's really such a violent criminal, shouldn't it be OK if Batman kills him?  Isn't he being irresponsible and contributing the deaths of so many by simply turning him over to the authorities?  The constant response is that if he did kill the Joker, how would he be any different from any criminals he has vowed to bring justice on?  Any different from the man who took his parents away from him?  The difference between willing to take someone's life for pleasure or to end it to ensure the lives of countless innocents that would otherwise die? There is a line that shouldn't be crossed, and it may be different for different individuals (a seemingly scapegoat statement). Otherwise, the world would be out of balance.

Was it for the benefit of the world that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed? Did it end up saving more lives in the end to end it so dramatically and brutally? Would doing so again send a similar message to similar, present-day antagonistic groups?  I don't know. I wish it were as easy as saying it's never worth it.  In the Bible, God commanded the demolishing of cities for the good of his people. Yet, on a smaller, family scale, beyond stern and occasional corporal punishment (hopefully infrequent and under control) for an out of control child, sometimes a parent has to wait out the craziness in love and patience. Granted not everyone should be treated as one's child, but it's worth thinking about, if anything, to keep us humane.

[Spoilers may follow...]

It's too easy to cross a line in the heat of emotion and give up your humanity.  In the end, the revenge killing of the man's family was wrong, but the overall operation would supposedly save so many lives.  Undoubtedly someone else would step in and re-initiate or continue the crimes committed by the drug lord.  But as also mentioned, this will continue (in part) as long as Americans use and crave illegal drugs.

Watched on VidAngel filtering out only f-words and blasphemy and it was still followable.  There are some graphic scenes of violence that could be filtered out without disturbing the storyline too much.

Noah

I really liked the way the movie depicted Noah receiving revelation from God. His dreams are clear enough for him to understand, but they aren’t as clear to us (though we know what they mean due to our familiarity with the story). He doesn’t get it all at once and it isn’t all clear to him all at once. He has to think on it and work it out in his mind and with those God has blessed him to better understand what it is he needs to do.

Contrary to many world standards and beliefs, the film comes out and equates happiness with being married and having children. The whole film circles around the importance of the family unit and the distress that comes with it breaking up, or not perpetuating.

[***Spoiler Alert...If you haven't seen it and plan to, don't read on (it's on Netflix streaming right now).***]

Two hours into the movie I was rather puzzled at how Noah’s raging lunacy was really tied into anything meaningful. It wasn’t until the conversation between Ila and Noah that everything fell perfectly into place. The movie had been quite the emotional roller coaster. Ham is torn from the possibility of having a family. Shem and Ila live under the cloud of the potential death of their child/children. Ham is on the verge of committing patricide. Ila gives birth to twins, which would satisfy the possibility of all of Noah’s sons having wives. Ila’s new born daughters are almost killed in her arms while crying, but she gets Noah to pause long enough for her to calm them so that they don’t die crying. Noah raises his dagger and almost follows through but can’t, kisses them and walks away.

Why put us through such a ride? How does this have anything to do with the traditional Bible story everyone is so familiar with? Throughout the film the theme of justice beat like drum, relentless and loud. It isn’t until the very end, when despair is about to win out, that the sweet melody of mercy softens the beat and lets us see how much the Creator loves us. The Creator gives us what we need to become like he is, the choices we have to make are difficult for a reason, but if faithful we will be guided to do that which is right. Before I go much further, let me present to you the conversation that tied everything together so beautifully, and without which the film would be so much more difficult to understand and probably wouldn’t have gained my approval.

Ila: “I have to know, why did you spare them?”
Noah: “When I looked down at those two little girls, all I had in my heart was love.”
Ila: “Then why are you alone, Noah? You’re separated from your family.”
Noah: “Because I failed Him [the Creator] and I failed all of you.”
Ila: “Did you? He chose you for a reason, Noah. He showed you the wickedness of man and knew you would not look away. But then you saw goodness too. The choice was put in your hands because he put it there. He asked you to decide if we were worth saving. And you chose mercy, you chose love. He has given us a second chance. Be a father, be a grandfather. Help us to do better this time, help us start again.”

Now the Bible says nothing of this choice that Noah was given, but is it that far fetched? Noah saw himself as human/weak/sinful as any of those who were left behind. He confesses that neither the Creator nor he sees himself as “good” but merely “someone who will complete the task.” Noah didn’t understand why the Creator had chosen his family to survive and the entire human race be destroyed. As good and humble of a man that he was, he was truly sorry for the fate of the world. I appreciated the depiction of the sorrow and guilt Noah felt for leaving so many of God’s children to such a death.

Noah was beginning to be at peace with the fate of his family (no perpetuation of the human race) knowing that their (and his) eventual death was not that far distant from that of all the people that were left behind to drown. God chose to save all the animals and Noah’s family, but as far as Noah knew, Ila was barren and so God really hadn’t intended for them to survive much beyond the flood. This weight on his soul was not lightened when he learned of Ila’s pregnancy, but weighed it down even more, due to the conclusion he had already arrived at and was trying to come to grips with. He is so distraught that he accuses his wife and grandfather of “undermining the Creator,” given their role in healing Ila’s barrenness.

After he thought he had failed in God’s eyes, he was lost in confusion and despair for his choice to let his granddaughters live. And then the dialog above occurs and light re-enters Noah’s soul. He chooses again, more resolutely and with peaceful assurance, to love and be with his family.

Noah was blinded so much by the weight of God’s justice that he didn’t recognize the full choice that he was given. He was so down about assisting in the death of the human race that he failed to see God’s merciful, outstretched hand to him and his family.

To be sure some things were exaggerated and changed to make a good story. But I found the story no less inspiring than what’s written in the scriptures*.

*The LDS religion has an additional book of scripture that adds some more information into the story of Noah that might make this a little more far-fetched (e.g., the Giants fought against Noah). However, as I’ve already mentioned several times, this is a good movie and goodness is there if you want to find it.

Hugo (2011) - M6.9/E6

One reason I was looking forward to seeing this film was the fact that there was quite a bipolar response to it.  Uncle Orson nay-said it, while other notable critics found it entertaining.  These types of responses are usually fairer to read beforehand, as they don't tend to bias one's opinion, therefore providing a more genuine response.  Though Card does have a negative review of the film, his points are well-made and I even agree with most of them, but still found a way to enjoy the movie overall.

In short, Card summarizes, "So the movie we were promised -- Hugo the orphan repairs a mechanical man to receive a message from his father -- turns into a movie we would never have paid to see: sad old forgotten movie director gets a round of applause."

The one character I actually hated and cringed at every time he came on screen was Sacha Baron Cohen playing a crippled policeman.  I probably won't choose to watch the movie again solely for him, though the fact that the movie was very slow might  also be cause enough.

The style of the movie reminded me a lot of Finding Neverland, and you might enjoy this film if you enjoyed Finding Neverland.  The music and scenery are amazing, and the story not terribly deep, but endearing.

We're shown the importance of family and the fruits of hard work as we see Hugo lose his father and then take us with him on his quest to remain connected to his father.  We also see him work tirelessly (without pay) to keep the clocks running in the train station, which keeps him out of more trouble than he already gets into, and allows him to stay a little closer to his deceased father.   Through Hugo's courage and intellect, he brings hope to a man who's dreams had been crushed and in turn gains the friendship and love for which he'd been longing.

Watch it if you're in the mood for something easy going, but I wouldn't recommend buying it; go for RedBox or you check it out from your local library.

Rango (2011) - M7.4/E8

I almost didn't see this movie.  The only reason I ended up seeing it (and so soon) is that it is currently on Nexflix Instant!  I'm glad I saw it too.  Despite the negative reviews from others (including Uncle Orson), I really enjoyed this movie, though would not recommend it for young kids, even though it is an animated PG-rated film (again, no thanks to the MPAA for consistency).

[Slight Tangent: How do movies like Kung Fu Panda, Despicable Me, How to Train Your Dragon, and Tangled get mixed up with movies like Rango and Shrek (1,2,3,4) - all rated PG?  Well, for one, there's never a clear line between one rating and another other than the types of swear words allowed, and that seems to be it. (I know Shrek didn't have much, if any, swearing; but the bathroom humor and off-color jokes were rampant).]

Rango has it's fair share of swearing for a PG-rated animated flick as well as some inappropriate comments for younger kids; but for those of us desensitized or mature enough, there's plenty to enjoy.  The number one thing I loved about Rango was the musical score provided by the mariachi owls.  I just might go out and buy the soundtrack.  It's not filled with popular music, but a vivid latin/mariachi sound that really draws you into the story and brings you right a long for the "riiiiidde".

I struggle with writing about the morality of movies.  People don't go to a movie to be educated or morally uplifted, they go to be entertained.  Hopefully the people that actually read my posts are looking for more than entertainment, but are actually looking for ways to deepen their movie watching experience.

There's a big difference in being entertained by a sporting event or the circus and watching a movie or reading a book.  The latter two have a lot of power to influence our lives for good or bad.  The spectrum of evil and good in these media is so much greater than in any other venue for entertainment.  This spectrum of Good and Evil is necessary to help us learn, it provides a laboratory where our thoughts can see the consequences of good/evil without us actually experiencing the consequences (providing the director/screen writer/author are competent enough to do this).

So, back from another tangent, there were a few quotes that really helped the movie make a lot of sense in my mind and really brought the "ride" to a point.  Of course, it all comes when Rango has hit bottom; he's been revealed for who he really is, just a lonely lizard who never had any real friends and not a gun toting sheriff.  He finally meets the Spirit of the West and is taught some important lessons that are not just trite platitudes, but really bring all the events of the story together.

The alabaster-carriage-driving Spirit says to Rango, "No man can walk out of his own story."  Rango's experience in Dirt wasn't an imaginative experience, even though he was acting the majority of the time he was there.  His actions and confidence touched real people and made real differences, it wasn't just one of his plays he rehearsed back in his lonely terrarium.  He needed to realize that.

Secondly, Rango's told that the people saw what they needed to see.  They needed a hero, so that's what they saw in Rango.  He filled that part well, even if he didn't believe he was a hero from the start.  Sometimes we need to get outside ourselves and be there for people in need.  When we stop lamenting about how pointless our life is and try in some measure to fill the voids in others' lives, we actually become somebody. (I'll have to watch the movie again to figure out exactly what was said and to whom it was said, but I think this covers the gist of it).

Last word, check it out, you might enjoy it.

The Hunger Games (2012) - M6.0/E7

I had been wanting to read the book, and had even checked out the audio book from the library, but it ended up being badly scratched about 20 minutes into the book, and I never got a chance to give it another go; and now, having seen it, I probably won't be reading it. I dislike it when good movies are made about good books. Reading one or watching the other will always make it less desirable to watch or read it after having done the other.

I really enjoyed the movie. It was suspenseful, had decent character development, and the choices the characters made and the situations the characters were placed in were realistic (serious injuries actually hurt and debilitated the victims instead of being played off as "merely flesh wounds").

One particularly interesting and thought provoking part of the movie was a short dialog on how hope was the reason that the orchestrators of the Hunger Games needed to produce a winner. Basically, a very small amount of hope was necessary to keep the people in the various districts in submission; no hope or abounding hope would give cause for rebellion. The irony in this thought is that hope can only be diminished or controlled if the people submit to fear. So, weak people would be affected by imposed fear, but the strong ones (the ones that need watching) will let their hope drown out their fears.

We also see Katniss and a few other competitors as compassionate human beings, while other competitors were more selfish and animal-like in their quest for survival. Even though the selfish group banded together and hunted the others, in the end it was the more compassionate competitors that won. While not always the case in real life, where compassion doesn't always win, it does show that compassion brings happiness, while selfishness brings sadness and destruction.

There is quite a bit of violence, some language, and little to no sex/nudity. Being how violence is one of the main themes of the movie, they do an excellent job of filming violent scenes without overwhelming the audience with blood and gore (which would have resulted in a more severe MPAA rating). There are some instances where the filming could cause some strain on eyes (particularly when there should be no extraneous camera motion).

The Lorax (2012) - M3/E5

I tried to go into this movie with no expectations, though I had read what the general response was from the critics.  I knew it was a movie about caring for the environment, but still remembered loving the story growing up.  After getting through 10 minutes of commercials and 25 minutes of trailers (with my daughter asking me each time a new trailer came up if it was the movie actually starting), the movie finally started, and I was hopeful.

It ended up being far from great, and will more than likely just disappear from my memory as a rather uneventful experience.  The movie was a fun kids show, lots of colors, and fun creatures; but the songs were less than memorable and the characters were not very interesting or deep, and the villain was completely annoying.  Why is it supposed to be funny to cast the villain as a mean, angry, short person? (My kids loved it, so I guess that's what they were going for.)

We are taught the same lesson that the book and the earlier animated feature teach us, that "unless" we take action and defend the trees, no one else can or will.  A much stronger moral (and the one my wife remembered from the book) was that "unless" we do something ourselves, we can't ever expect anything to get done - not only with respect to caring for the environment, but in every aspect of our lives.  Carpe diem!  Act now!

[Spoiler Alert]

The movie ends on a silly, corny, but positive note.  A movie suggesting action, is often better without offering a resolution (like what we're given in the original book/movie); giving the reader/viewer the opportunity to decide for him/herself what actions they need to take.  Instead we're given a crazy chase with the angry, tiny man trying to destroy the last truffula seed and the townsfolk changing their disdain for the boy with the seed to disdain for the tiny, angry man when they see what he's hidden from them (a dark and dreary wasteland).

Wait for this to come out on DVD to see it, and you will probably only enjoy it if you have small kids that you can watch it with.

The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) - M6.2/E8

I haven’t read any Michael Connelly books, but I’m guessing they fit right in there with Grisham’s best legal thrillers (of which I’ve only seen the movies). This was a well done movie and even more enjoyable as I’m just being introduced to the TV series the Firm (even sharing Josh Lucas with this movie).

I’ve always wondered about defence attorneys. How can someone defend a person who has committed awful crimes? This show made me remember (along with the Firm) that we believe in innocence before proven guilty. That proof is offered in court and often decided by a jury. Even the alleged criminal deserves justice, and shouldn’t be labelled a criminal until decided in a court of law. (It could be argued that not all criminals are caught, and thus not “alleged,” but that’s not the point of this short insight.)

We tend to sympathize with the victims of crimes, which can easily cause us to demonize those who defend their aggressors. But I like the thought that everyone deserves a fair trial. Our justice system was created with the thought of “innocent before proven guilty.” Which is why, for example, it’s unlawful to target American citizens for assassination without a fair trial. Our laws and justice system aren’t meant to prevent bad things from happening, it is a reactive system. If we want dangerous people off the street, we need to figure out lawful ways to bring them to justice and prevent them from pursuing more evil.

Back to the movie, Mick Haller isn’t the noble lawyer that Mitch McDeere is in The Firm, but his nobility does shine through his sleaziness as he gets entwined in his new client’s case. When what he values most is in danger (his and his family’s lives) he straightens up and is able to put evil in its place. His gratitude shines through as he offers to work pro bono for one of his shadier frequented clients who’s team of motorcycle buddies do Mick a huge favor. The resolution may not come as much of a surprise, but it’s the journey, not the end results that make the movie a fun, worthwhile experience.

Mick and his wife appear to be separated, though not totally distant.  However, all that they end up going through and Mick realizing how much he loves his family, makes it possible to believe that they'll try harder to make things work.  This isn't really a main point of the movie, but another good thought that adds to its value.

Do be aware that there is some strong language and a few scenes of violence, but the overall content is extremely mild considering the rating this show received.

Chronicle (2012) - M6.8/E7

This is a story about three high school teens who gain telekinetic powers. As they attempt to strengthen and control them, they soon realize that having special powers doesn’t really change who you are, it doesn’t make you popular or likeable; and in some instances can amplify your true feelings.

This was a cool movie. Even though it was purely filmed by a hand camera, it was not headache nor nausea inducing. While it did get a little annoying that they had to keep reminding us why everything was being videotaped, it made the story more real (even though it’s based on some fantastical events). The filming wasn’t the only thing that made it feel real, the acting and interactions of the main characters was really believable. That being said, I didn’t feel as fulfilled or entertained as I did after watching something like Mission Impossible 4, where you have a well polished, produced movie with outstanding special effects, that was meant to take you away from reality into a fictional realm.

I think I enjoyed the first hour or so of the movie the best. We see the boys just recognizing and experimenting with their powers. Each new surprise is a surprise to us, and makes it feel like we’re there sharing their experience with them. The pranks they pull are pretty funny, too.

Andrew’s character was the most intricate one in the film. We understand his pains, not necessarily because his pains are common, but because we’ve come in contact or can remember someone just like him from high school. One scene that really made sense, but at the same time was really frustrating was when Andrew gets after Steve for being his friend only because they now have something in common. Why else would you be a friend with anyone? Andrew is very self-deprecating and wants people to like him for who he his, not because they have something in common with him or because of some freak accident.

His dad (step-dad?) is constantly berating him and telling him what a loser he is, and it’s almost as if Andrew accepts that as his reality and any attempt at others to genuinely care for him is seen as merely fake.

We all have a desire to be loved, and not loved out of pity, but because others value who we are intrinsically in spite of/because of our many faults and weaknesses.

Due to the filming style, this show may not be for everyone, but we really enjoyed it. There is quite a bit of language, some violence, and talk about sex, but no nudity or explicit sexual scenes (contrary to what the trailer shows).

Midnight in Paris (2011) - M6.4/E7

I was looking for a DVD to spend my free Valentine’s Day promo code from Redbox. It had to be something semi-romantic, just for tradition’s sake. The choice was between Midnight in Paris and Captain America. A Woody Allen flick is easily passable, but I have to say that Captain America had probably one of the best/most realistic movie relationships ever depicted (at least as well as can be depicted in an action flick). Midnight won out, and it was a well spent 90 minutes of our evening.

Don’t let the PG-13 rating fool you, this is as tame as any PG movie I’ve seen. The trailer was a little puzzling, it really didn’t go much beyond saying that something magical happens at midnight in Paris, and then flashes some images of women not seen earlier in the trailer...hinting at some sort of infidelity. While there is some sleeping around, it’s completely off screen, and not even really implied.

Gil is a writer in search for meaning in his life. He thinks he’ll be able to work things out by going to Paris with his fiance and future in-laws (very unlikeable characters). Out of desperation, boredom, and just getting plain lost, Gil somehow finds himself in 1920’s Paris with the likes of Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Salvador Dali, Gertrude Stein, Picasso, Cole Porter, and more. We see a common trend of people unhappy with living in the present, and it’s made clear that even if we were to live in the era of our dreams, that era would soon become the present and we would wish we were somewhere else again.

The only other Woody Allen film I’ve seen is The Purple Rose of Cairo, and it is very similar to this one; both are well worth watching. No strong moral message, but definitely not a negative one. It’s just a feel good story that depicts a lost character finding his true happiness by shedding the less important things in his life that keep him from it.

Real Steel (2011) - M3.8/E6

No real surprises here. The entire plot of the movie can be easily derived from the trailer. Even still, the fight scenes were pretty cool and the father/son bonding was nice (though a little contrived and unoriginal). At first I really liked the kid actor, but as the show went on it seemed that there was a little too much overacting.

Fathers should shoulder responsibility for kids they help bring into this world. This show didn’t make that strong of a point, since it pretty much showed that 11 years of absence from his son’s life was made up by a summer of attending some fights. How many loser-father’s are really brought back into contact with children they sired and then abandoned? I guess that makes this more of a fairy-tale than inspirational.

Again, it’s worth the $1.25 at Redbox, if you’ve got nothing else to watch. There is some violence, though mostly robot vs. robot; language and sex are minimal. Other than the main character getting beat-up for never repaying his debts, this show is probably alright for most audiences (even under 13).

Crazy Stupid Love (2011) - M7.4/E9

Don’t be fooled by the trailer. If you enjoyed Date Night or Dan in Real Life, you’ll probably like CSL. The trailer made it seem like there would be a lot of sex and raunchy humor, and while there was plenty of implied sex and some coarse humor, it was totally in support of good relationships and striving to make marriages last and not giving up on your spouse (or the one you love). The only reason I pursued watching this was because of Orson Scott Card’s glowing review of the movie.

Cal and Emily’s relationship has reached a potential breaking point. Jacob helps Cal realize that one of the main reasons he “lost” Emily was because he lost his manhood. He had forgotten what was required to be a husband, a father, and ultimately a man. While this fact was very true at its roots, Jacob twisted it and suggested that the solution was to become a tomcat, like himself. Basically, that manhood is nothing more than knowing how to treat women as objects for your own gratification. Jacob’s character may seem very offensive to some, but it’s so obviously satirical, that you can’t take it at face value.

Cal follows Jacob’s advice and does end up reinvigorating his manhood, but knows that anything more than focusing on trying to win his wife’s affections again is unimportant. Amazingly Jacob ends up coming to the same conclusion, though through no searching on his own...it kind of just comes at him like a big, wet kiss. Jacob’s transformation, possibly because it’s so radical, is one of the most inspiring moments of the film. As he’s able to trust someone else with details about his own life, we see the wild tomcat tamed and domesticated.

The pining of the 13-year old for his 17-year old baby sitter was a well created, typical middle school crush (though a mere kiss at the end would have sufficed, those pictures should have been destroyed). I enjoyed how most of the truth and goodness in the movie came from the 13-year old and his faith that his parents would end up back together (and mostly that his father would do anything to get his soul-mate back.)

As mentioned before, there is a lot of coarse dialog and language and some scenes that weren’t necessary. That aside, this is easily one of the best films I’ve seen in the last year.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011) - M5.8/E7

I wasn’t sure who to really believe about how good this movie was going to be. It’s hard not to have any expectations when waiting so long to see a popular movie. I was getting bored about 60% into the movie and was really hoping something interesting was going to happen. Thank heavens it did (and the urban camouflage was pretty awesome).

Right around the time of the chess game between Moriarty and Holmes everything starts to unravel, a little too late for my liking. I remember the previous movie had more hints and clues as to what was going on throughout the film, the clues left in A Game of Shadows weren’t useful at all and didn’t help you try to deduce what was going on. It was less of an intellectual joy, but still entertaining. I believe it will still be worth a second watch.

No real moral dilemmas stood out in this film. Moriarty is proud, ruthless, and greedy; his end goal of power and wealth justify mass murders in his eyes. Yet because of his pride/ego, he underestimates Holmes, and gets “done in.”

The rating is primarily for violence. There’s little language and a potentially uncomfortable, partial nude scene that was more comical than offensive.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011) - M3.6/E7

This was a good movie, though perhaps a little too complex for maximum enjoyment.  The story was well told, and not terribly confusing (considering all the flashbacks), and probably is deserving of a second watch to iron out all the details. The trailer shows the movie moving a bit faster than it actually does (though I never wondered when it would be over).

We're taken along in an investigation of top British Intelligence agents to discover who is leaking information to the Russians at the height of the Cold War.  While a good movie, I imagine that reading the book might prove to be a better experience.  Nothing in the movie made me think more about how I could be a better person or inspired me to think more on God's goodness, as indicated by the low morality score it received.

There isn't a whole lot more to say.  The filming was good, not crisp and digitized, but was reminiscent of a 70's style film, perfect for the era in which it took place.

Before checking this out, be warned that there is some coarse language, violence, and sexuality - nothing terribly explicit, but present nonetheless.

The Next Three Days (2010) - M4.3/E6

I was told this would be a movie with an interesting moral dilemma, and though we are shown that the main character contemplates this dilemma, the dilemma shouldn't have existed in the first place.  This was a pretty intense thriller, more suspenseful than action packed, and worth a watch on Netflix if you subscribe to their streaming service.

A happily married couple's family is torn apart when random, coincidental events make it appear that the wife brutally murdered her boss. The husband, knowing she is innocent, resolves to do whatever it takes to get her out of prison.  He first exhausts all legal means and realizes that there is nothing that can be done to free her.  He then resorts to breaking her out of prison and undertakes some serious preparations to do so.  This is where the supposed dilemma exists.

John Brennan (faithful husband) forces himself to be willing to do whatever it takes to get his wife out of prison, and ends up falsifying medical records and killing people and committing arson (though those involved were drug dealers).  Initially he is extremely hesitant to commit these illegal acts, but forces himself into the mindset to follow through with his plan.  During the process, his relationship with his son and wife (even though in prison) is  stretched pretty thin and he almost loses his wife during the break out.

Is it really a measure of a husband's love for his wife to go to any end in order to rectify something wrongly attributed to her?  If my wife were innocently put in jail, I, too, would exhaust my legal resources; and if the law could do nothing to help her, what happened next would be in God's hands.  Being a firm believer in Divine intervention, I believe God would be able to help both me (my family) and my wife through such a trial of faith, and if He felt it necessary, could even change the hearts and minds of those falsely accusing her so that she would eventually be let out (though this would not be very likely).  Our relationship could continue to grow, and one day we would be reunited.

This may sound trite given that I've never been (nor will likely ever be) put in this situation; but I honestly believe that adherence to God's law and faith in God and His Son Jesus Christ is the most anyone can do to receive the maximum assistance in the most dire of situations in which we may find ourselves.

The Muppets (2011) - M7.8/E7

I know it's bad to go into a movie with any expectations.  Doing so can ruin the overall experience and limit the ability to fairly assess it.  I had seen most of the older Muppet movies and remember enjoying them.  From what I heard this was the Muppet of all Muppet movies, and I probably agree.  I enjoyed the movie, but was anticipating something a little more amazing than it actually was.  For one, it wasn't meant to be amazing, it was meant to be entertaining, and it was.

Thinking on back on some of the random songs sung through out (Muppet of a Man/Manly Muppet was great) and the interactive humor with the audience (pretty well done, considering that it wasn't performed live!) make me smile.  Though, my younger preschool age kids didn't seem to enjoy it as much as I did, I think there was enough slapstick humor and music for them to at least not dislike the film.

The overall plot of the movie (trying to bring the Muppets out of obscurity and back into the 21st century) seemed a little contrived, but from what I remember from other Muppet movies, not too far off from previous stories.

One interesting element in the story was the relationship difficulties between Gary and Mary and Kermit and Piggy - definitely over the head of preschoolers, and possibly a little too sentimental/emotional for my liking.  The film does try to do a decent job showing that when you know you love someone, it's foolish to let them leave your life.  Staying together means sacrificing some of your interests and desires and putting the interests and desires of your loved one above yours.  Interestingly, you don't lose your identity by doing this, you put faith in someone else to do it for you, which can do nothing but increase their love and concern for you.

Beyond romantic relationships, friendship is also brought up as we see Kermit and Walter try to round up the old Muppet gang and find out that they all wanted to be back together again, they just needed someone to initiate the process. 

I'm not sure how much longer this will be in the theater, but I definitely recommend looking for it to come out on DVD, and then make an effort to at least rent it, it's 98 minutes of well spent time.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (2011) - M5.4/E8

I have to say my initial desire to see this on opening night at an IMAX theater 45 min. away was for the prologue of the Dark Knight Rises, and it was well worth it.  I'm even more excited to see it this summer, and I was pretty stinking excited to see it in the first place.

Mission Impossible 4 on an IMAX theater was pretty amazing, and a lot more intense than it would be in a regular theater (which I loved, but my wife did not).  The opening sequence with breaking Ethan Hunt out of a Serbian prison was mind blowing and had enough neck cracking and bone breaking to set anyone on edge.  The follow-up credit sequence and theme song by Giacchino was excellent.

I liked the fewer corny lines in this one compared to MI3 (Dunn provided a good balance of comedy); and there were a lot fewer cliche Mission Impossible scenarios going on here too.  The missions up to this point seemed to be pretty much the same.  It's introduced as an unthinkable mission (breaking into the CIA, or some other top secret place), and everyone is flabbergasted at the thought, and then Ethan says something like, "It gets much worse..." and then he goes on and explains the unbelievable security that they'll have to breach, and then they do it.  This one had similar elements, but the unexpected circumstances under which they were required to operate made the film more engaging and interesting.

[***Spoiler Alert - Read on if you've already seen the movie, or don't plan on seeing it***]

I was a little bothered at first when it was insinuated that things didn't work out between Ethan and his wife.  The entire third movie was based on their love for each other and willingness to die for each other's safety.  I was very relieved when we find out what really happened with his wife (the second revelation, not the fact that she died, though even that would be better than just leaving her).

The team work that resulted from a haphazardly assembled team was very well portrayed.  Everything didn't just work, they had to work out differences, learn how to work together and trust one another in order to accomplish their mission.  Ethan did a good job as the team lead by not forcing people to cooperate or penalizing them for not working well; he just did the best he could and expected them to follow suit.

Definitely worth seeing in the theater, try IMAX if you have the option.  No sex/nudity, language was better than a lot of PG-13 shows, violence was the main contributor to the rating.

The Beaver (2011) - M4.6/E4

This seemed like it would be a movie with a positive message to it. The previews made it seem like there was a husband/father who had fallen out of step with his family who went to drastic/silly means to bridge the barrier that was created. I like feel-good movies that promote the importance of family. This was not a feel good movie and was not a strong proponent of positive family life.

Walter is a depressed individual who is basically asleep for 2+ years, becoming a horrible burden on his family and company that he runs. He hits rock bottom and through several attempts on his own life a part of his inner being (that really wants to change) makes itself manifest through a hand puppet Walter places on his hand in a drunken stupor. Remarkably this puppet (a beaver) allows him to break the psychological barrier between his depressed self and the part of him that really wants to change. As Walter seems to improve, we see him struggle most with his family. A puppet can be something that can be lived with/accepted more easily in the workplace where emotional intimacy isn’t needed, but at home, children need a father and a wife needs a husband. Walter shouldn't have expected to be able to hide behind his hand puppet for as long as he did.

This struggle in the family made perfect sense to me. Walter was broken and was in the process of fixing himself. While his family situation wasn’t the greatest, they needed to support him in his quest to repair himself and get out of the rut he’d been stuck in for such a long time. While most of the family members tried to exhibit patience, we see that Walter’s improvement becomes more about himself than about being the father and husband he should be (evident when the Beaver seems to be in control).

I loved the underlying story between Porter and Norah. This was perhaps the one redeeming part of the story that didn’t leave us depressed. Porter helps the seemingly perfect Norah (cheerleader, valedictorian, etc.) come to the realization that we shouldn’t hide from the truth. As part of the graduation speech Porter inspired Norah to write, she says,

“I'm not okay, not at all, the truth is, I'm missing something. The thing I loved the most, the face I wish were in the front row right now, the brother I'll never get back. So what do I do with that? What do any of us do? Besides lie. This is what I believe, right now, in this auditorium, there is someone who is with you, someone who is willing to pick you up, dust you off, kiss you, forgive you, put up with you, wait for you, carry you, love you. So while everything may not be okay, one thing I know is true, you do not have to be alone.”

In the last few minutes we do see Walter get his family back. His estranged son accepts him, and life is happy, but this is only in the last few minutes of the movie. The underlying symbol of a roller coaster suggests that life is full of ups and downs, and while we may not know how long the downs will last, better times are bound to occur. We had to wade through close to 85 minutes of oppressive turmoil to get to this semi-inspirational message, and it wasn’t worth the wait.

Puss in Boots (2011) - M9.2/E7

I did not have high hopes for this show, especially not being a fan of the Shrek franchise (I stopped having a desire to watch them after Shrek 2). We got some free passes for a pre-screening and thought it would be fun to go as a family. Oddly enough not all of our kids enjoyed it, but my wife and I really enjoyed it. We were spared of bathroom/juvenile humor rampant in the Shrek movies, and were given a clever, inspirational animated movie, worthy of multiple views.  We saw it in 3-D, but there was nothing spectacular meriting paying extra for glasses, if anything it made our kids want to talk more during the movie.

The moral messages presented were much more complex than is typical in a children's feature. One particular event shows one of the characters being betrayed by a close friend and accused of breaking the law. This character, instead of seeking revenge or running from or fighting his captors, lets justice take its course to potential exoneration through the help and friendship of others. This is a topic I've been trying to comprehend myself. It seems cowardly to not step up and let people know they are in the wrong and that you are right, yet examples are plentiful in the scriptures of prophets (especially Jesus Christ himself) that are restrained by the spirit to not say anything to their captors/betrayers, knowing perhaps that whatever they say would be falling on deaf ears. This is what meekness truly is, it is not weakness by any means.

Beyond the events previously mentioned, we see further betrayal and revenge, beyond the simple "I'm upset at you and am not going to talk to you anymore."  These actions eventually turn into guilt and sorrow and a realization of what true friendship and brotherhood really is.

Hanna (2011) - M3.1/E6

This is nothing like a Jason Bourne movie, though that is what it seems like from the trailers. It's actually an interpretation of Grimm's fairy tales (the twisted original stories of the sweet Disney stories we're told as kids). There is no real resolution, and mysteries presented are revealed rather abruptly. Even with these short comings, it was so intriguing we hardly knew that two hours flew by.

There’s little to offer on a moral level. The violence was rather gruesome and didn’t contribute to any positive message in the film. This is just a story about how an ex-CIA operative shelters his daughter and trains her to be an assassin so that she can kill the one person they’re hiding from. It’s a little deeper than that and artistically appealing, so we think it might be worth at least one initial watch if you’re looking for an action flick and don’t mind a few bloody scenes. The featured user review on IMDB is worth reading after you’ve seen the film.