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 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 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.

Airplane! (1980) - M2.8/E5

I needed something light-hearted at the end of the day to help release some mysteriously acquired stress, and this helped. It is one of the most bizarre comedies I’ve seen in a while, and I’m not sure why it’s praised as one of the all time funniest movies. It had its moments, but still fell captive to cheap laughs (offensive material) for a small portion of the film.

Don’t let the PG rating fool you, not only is parental guidance more than suggested, I wouldn’t even recommend it for parents,

The one thing Airplane did have going for it, and did remarkably well, was constant play on words. I loved the random actions that would result from a statement that was taken literally. Here are a few great examples:

Rumack: Can you fly this plane, and land it?
Ted Striker: Surely you can't be serious.
Rumack: I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

Elaine Dickinson: You got a letter from headquarters this morning.
Ted Striker: What is it?
Elaine Dickinson: It's a big building where generals meet, but that's not important.

Rumack: Captain, how soon can you land?
Captain Oveur: I can't tell.
Rumack: You can tell me. I'm a doctor.
Captain Oveur: No. I mean I'm just not sure.
Rumack: Well, can't you take a guess?
Captain Oveur: Well, not for another two hours.
Rumack: You can't take a guess for another two hours?

Ted Striker: I flew single engine fighters in the Air Force, but this plane has four engines. It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
Rumack, Randy: [together] It's an entirely different kind of flying.

In addition to the play on words, Johnny was by far my favorite character (with Dr. Rumack coming in a close second). While not always working with a literal play on words, he would take lines out of context and exaggerate them for some extremely funny moments:

Striped controller: Bad news. The fog's getting thicker.
Johnny: [jumps to an overweight controller and shakes his gut] And Leon is getting laaaaarrrrrger.

Reporter: What kind of plane is it?
Johnny: Oh, it's a big pretty white plane with red stripes, curtains in the windows and wheels and it looks like a big Tylenol.

Steve McCroskey: Johnny, what can you make out of this?
[Hands him the weather briefing]
Johnny: This? Why, I can make a hat or a brooch or a pterodactyl...

Johnny: The tower, the tower! Rapunzel, Rapunzel!

Johnny: Auntie Em, Uncle Henry, Toto! It's a twister! It's a twister!

Rex Kramer: All right, I'll need three men up at the tower. You, Neubauer. You, Macias.
Johnny: Me, John, big tree!

Ok, so it sounds like I enjoyed it more than I mentioned earlier, but the total funny scenes probably took up 70% of the movie, while the rest was either boring or offensive. As with most comedies, everyone finds different things funny, offensive, and boring, so if you’re pleased for half the film, the writers are probably pleased.

If you’re looking for great comedy go find an Abbott and Costello or Martin and Lewis film.

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.

Ghostbusters (1984) - M3.4/E7

This was a great movie, and believe it or not, I've never seen it in its 27 years of existence! It was a lot better than I had anticipated, and I had a lot of fun watching it in the theater. Bill Murray really made the film great, and Aykroyd and Ramis did a great job with the script and playing the most enthused and geeky parapsychology professors. I’m sure the purpose of the theater screening was to get us excited for Ghostbusters III coming out sometime next year. There’s still one more showing this Thursday, check your local listings for it.

I'm sure the main reason that I wasn't introduced to this movie as a kid is that it is not appropriate for young children, and if created today would probably garner a PG-13 rating due to a bit of sexual innuendo and coarse language.

This type of film is not meant to do anything but make us laugh. Laughter is healthy, but cheap laughs centered around sex are unnecessary for a great film.

Mao’s Last Dancer (2009)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

This was a great movie. I haven’t been to any ballet’s that I’ve particularly liked, but this film made me want to find one that I can enjoy. The last on-stage ballet was a little weird, and is probably the reason why I have a bad view of the art, so I should stick to the classics. Back to the movie, it told an intriguing story of a young boy who was fortunate enough to be brought in to a prestigious ballet academy that eventually led to his “escape” from China and refuge in America, though at great personal costs. This is a good historical-drama, with very few subtitles.

Moral Rating: 4 of 5

[Spoiler Alert] While it’s sad that Li was put in a situation that pressured him into getting married, it’s even sadder that that marriage didn’t last. Both Li and Liz were able to find the happiness they were looking for, not realizing that. ultimately, the highest level of happiness can only be achieved in a family - not pursuing personal dreams (a contrasting message to the Adjustment Bureau - review forthcoming). While you wish they could have worked things out between them, the marriage was formed wrongly in the first place, so is it O.K. to let it fizzle and die? Or should they (in an ideal world) have stuck it out, no matter the impact on their personal dreams?

Regarding idealism, the following quote presents an worthwhile parable. From a message from Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, “We are bound to be in trouble if a shirt is made from a shirt that was made from a shirt. A mistake or two in the first product—inevitable without a pattern—gets repeated and exaggerated, intensified, more awkward, the more repetitions we make, until finally this thing we’re to wear to school just doesn’t fit. One sleeve’s too long. The other’s too short. One shoulder seam runs down [our] chest. The other runs down [our] back. And the front collar button fastens behind [our] neck.” Even though idealism may sound like something never worth going after, since we are incapable of making perfect decisions all the time, if we don’t attempt to align our lives to a perfect pattern we will always fall short.

While we can’t and shouldn’t judge Li (or anyone) for their choices (not completely understanding their rationale), but was it right for him to put his family in danger to pursue his dream and enjoy freedom here in the US? It all ended O.K., but how much should we worry about what repercussions our actions might have on those we love?

Superman (1978)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

I don’t think I had ever seen this movie. I’ve seen the second one. The movie was well done, but a little long for me. The 154 minutes totally could have been trimmed down - particularly the 5-10 minute scene of the destruction of Krypton, all you see is a bunch of nameless people in white falling all over the place to their deaths; and then there’s the 5-10 minutes of credits at the beginning. Gene Hackman really doesn’t fit my image of Lex Luthor. He plays a smart guy (a genius), but he sure doesn’t look or act the part well. Hopefully the second reboot next year gets something right (though I think Kevin Spacey was a step in the right direction).

Moral Rating: 2 of 5

Superman is the embodiment of truth, justice, and the American way. I know he’s supposed to fall for Lois Lane, but his swooning over her made this more of a romantic-comedy than a movie that shows a decent battle between good and evil. There isn’t much more to say here. The movie is a classic, so it’s good, but definitely not great.

Megamind (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

Great humor; Will Ferrel did a great job. The story was a lot better than I had anticipated. I thought it would mimic the stale plot of bad guy versus good guy, bad guy never wins, good guy gets girl in the end, with occasional humorous moments. It was not stale at all, and the originality of it (as far as I can think right now, it’s original) was refreshing and engaging; and the humor was great. The music throughout the film rocked, pure classic rock.

Moral Rating: 4 of 5

Great message on the fallacy of fate. Our future is not already written for us. We don’t have to fit the mold people put us in. We need to become whatever it is that will allow us to reach our full potential as children of God. Megamind struggled with this idea of trying to fulfill his destiny, constantly going through the motions because that’s what he thought he was supposed to do. It wasn’t until he realized his potential for good that he actually became free from the bonds of fate.

I couldn't decide which clip to include, so here are a few more:

The Great Buck Howard (2008)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

This was a fun show, albeit a bit slow and not terribly interesting. Supposedly this show was based on the mentalist the Amazing Kreskin, who is one of the few magicians to have his own TV show for a while.

Moral Rating: 3 of 5

The romance between Troy and Valerie was typical Hollywood rubbish. They flirt, sleep together, and then try to decide if they want the relationship to last.

Buck Howard, as quirky and weird as he is, has the strongest moral character. He doesn’t try to be someone else. He knows who he is and doesn’t care what others think of him. The audience could be numerous or pitifully small, but Buck gave it his all.

While not an amazing movie, it’s a nice easy going film that will make you smile.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

I remember loving this show so much as a kid. While the fighting was rather laughable and the storyline a little corny, the film was still enjoyable. I don’t believe I’ll get my wife to watch Secret of the Ooze with me though.

Moral Rating: 2 of 5

Friendship and family are probably the two most important themes in the movie. By trying to supplant them with money or fun, sadness inevitably ensues.

Don’t watch this movie to get a moral lesson out of it, your kids are more likely to want to hit something and also learn some nice four-letter words rather than better understand the importance of family.

T-U-R-T-L-E Power!

Rio (2011)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

We had a choice of seeing Rio or Hop. Given the reviews on several websites, Rio was the obvious best choice. The show was fun, but I was a little annoyed at the humans in it. Their characters were weak and detracted from the vividness that Rio had to offer. I loved the music. The music was probably the best part of the show. Otherwise the main plot was to get two rare birds to mate, and get their owners/captors together at the same time. Judging by the critics my opinion lies in the minority. It was fun to see once, but I won’t be adding it to my collection. However, I’m extremely glad we didn’t see Hop.

Moral Rating: 2 of 5

Blu learns to believe in himself and his natural instincts. It’s rather odd that Tulio, the ornithologist, doesn’t recognize Linda until she’s 80% naked, wearing a bikini and some blue feathers...at least that’s the moment we see that he’s really interested in her. I don’t feel like going too much into detail here, there wasn’t a lot to glean from this film.

I will add this positive comment from commonsensemedia.org for those whose opinions might actually better align with the majority of viewers:

“The movie has plenty of positive messages about broadening your horizons, believing in yourself, helping others even when it's dangerous, and caring for the beautiful animals in our midst instead of stealing and selling them for profit. The subplot with Fernando also teaches viewers that no matter how difficult your life is, you can still make good choices and turn your life around.”

The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

This was a great recommendation from a movie buff friend of mine (whether he’s a movie-buff or buff friend, I’ll leave that to your imagination). Coincidentally, the rec came just before Netflix removed the film from its streaming library. While not a laugh-out-loud flick, it was fun and very well written and acted. The PG rating is accurate, some of the themes may be for a more mature audience. When you find yourself thinking that this is the type of movie you would want to see again before the movie is even over, that’s a good sign. Definitely check this one out, you can’t be disappointed.

Moral Rating: 4 of 5

[Spoiler Alert]

I was a little worried at first where the movie was going with the broken marriage relationship and how far they would show the couple violating their marriage vows. It was a little uncomfortable to see Cecilia pursue another man, but only because she is portrayed as a victim of a bad marriage relationship; while the fact that her husband was a cheat was easily accepted because her husband, Monk, was a jerk. This brings up an interesting thought: With Cecilia’s and Monk’s relationship as bad as it was (possibly unworkable), is it OK to leave the marriage?

The scene in the brothel was one of the best in the movie. Woody Allen (writer and director) did a great job humanizing the prostitutes through Tom’s perspective. This is particularly moving in the discussion between Tom and the prostitutes on the topic of giving birth and the important role women play in life. The prostitutes are flattered and offer him a free pass with them. This act could be dismissed as awful and immoral, but in reality these women are presenting something to Tom that is the only thing of worth that they think they have. In this scene Tom is first perceived to be totally naive with respect to the purpose of a brothel, but in the end we discover the prostitutes exhibit a deeper naivete than Tom’s because they didn’t understand what love really was - something that should be special between two committed (married) people.

More could be said in praise of this movie, but I’ll let you check it out take from it what you will.

The Young Victoria (2009)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

The beginning of the movie was a bit confusing with it jumping from one moment in time to another and introducing different people left and right; as the movie progressed things made much more sense and we found it very enjoyable. If you enjoy movies like Pride and Prejudice there’s a good chance you’ll really enjoy this one. The film might be classified as a romance, but that definitely is just a small portion of the movie. It is really about Queen Victoria’s maturing from a child into an adult and learning how to balance her high position with being a wife.

Moral Rating: 5 of 5

There were a lot things we enjoyed about this movie, particularly because of its moral and educational value. The movie was mostly about Victoria’s maturing from a child to an adult and how she learned to take on her royal duties. She had to assimilate quickly to the life and responsibilities of a queen. At first she confused stubbornness with strength and used it to control her decisions by rebelling against those closest to her who tried to give her advice, fearing that they were using her as a pawn. Later, Victoria understood that being stubborn does not signify strength or wisdom, and her decisions needed purpose behind them so that the people could see that she ruled on sound principles, and not because she favored one person over another.

Through many mistakes and grievances Victoria learned who her friends really were. She was taken advantage of by the Prime Minister at first, because of her naivety; and due to her stubbornness it took a while for her to see it. Luckily the Prime Minister had a change of heart and realized his unrighteous influence and gave her some of the best advice regarding her duties as queen and wife.

Lord Wellington: My guidance has not always been faultless, and I am sorry for it. But I speak to you now truthfully.
Queen: I know
Lord Wellington: The prince [Albert, Queen's husband] is a good man, a better man than any of us knew. I know he does not think as well of me, but my vanity is not the issue here. He is able, he is clever, and he is faithful. Let him share your work.  [Up until this point the queen had a hard time letting anyone assist in her work.  She felt threatened that everyone was trying to take advantage of her and use her for their own selfish interests].

Lord Wellington then gives her one last task to help make the prince “feel truly welcome”: to get rid of the baroness who has served as somewhat of a nanny for the queen and had not treated the prince well; she was seen as somewhat of a threat to his rightful place as patriarch of his family. The queen takes the Prime Minister's advice (asked the baroness to leave) and had her husband’s desk moved in with hers, signifying to Prince Albert that she was going to accept the help that he had to offer, and would make the effort to overcome the confusion between her duties as queen and that of his wife.

Like any married couple, the film displayed some possible sources of contention between Albert and Victoria, but through them we see Albert’s good character, patience, and love for his wife, the queen.

Albert also exhibits a good work ethic and is not willing to just sit back and watch people do things for him. He had a great desire to change things (in his marriage, the palace, and the country) for the better.

This isn't a "knock-your-socks-off" film, but it is incredibly inspiring and well done.  It would be well worth your time to sit through and later reflect on the important lessons presented.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

The movie started off with some good potential. We enjoyed watching Dave learning about using his powers, but there ended up being way too much packed into the last half of the film. When a boy with a few days practice can defeat one of Merlin’s most powerful enemies, Morgana, when Merlin couldn’t (granted she was bodiless, so maybe weaker?) was a little too unbelievable. There was also little explanation as to all the other sorcerer’s imprisoned in the Grimhold.

While not a great movie, we had fun watching it. Don't forget to stay for the end of the credits as there's a secret scene that reveals something interesting.

Moral Rating: 3 of 5

If you step up to the plate, you will be surprised what you can actually do. This doesn’t mean you will acquire super powers or unearth your hidden wizardry destiny, but taking steps in the dark to do something you know is for the ultimate progression of good is an important element of faith.

Flipped (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

The trailer really sold me on this show. It had great music and what seemed to be a pretty promising story. The story was a little long, but told in a really cool way. We’re shown half of the movie from the point of view of a young boy and the other half of the movie is the same as the first (it’s broken up into more than just two halves), but told by a young girl who has a crush on the young boy and happens to live across the street from him. It was our Valentine’s day show, not terribly romantic, but a little lower key than what Scott Pilgrim might have been.

Moral Rating: 4 of 5

This was an easy going film, but at the same time presented some very deep issues. Beyond the awkward boy/girl relationships we get a good look at prejudices and heartaches from two different sides. A lot of times we only get the one perspective in a film (or in life), not multiple. We see that we can’t always lie or hide behind a lie; who we are will show through no matter what we try to do to cover things up. Bryce takes the whole movie to realize who he is and to be comfortable with it. He spends too much time trying to make other people happy (except Juli) and as a result he’s never really happy. Juli helps him (inadvertently) become the good guy he is in the end.

Juli was a very good girl, who had a strong character and really knew what she wanted in life and got it (at least as far as her influence reached, Bryce was a little harder to “get”). Bryce on the other hand was a lot weaker and struggled with knowing when to stand up for something that was right. A lot of the differences between the two could be seen in their families’ lives and how they treated each other and how they spent time together at home. While the mothers of Bryce and Juli shared something in common, the two fathers were quite opposite and had a lot of influence on how their families behaved.

The overarching symbol of the Sycamore tree added a nice touch to the overall flow of the show. We can choose to see life and the world from a broad, reaching perspective or be content to live our own lives in our own little world and never try to learn about or love others.

There was a little more language than in most PG movies, probably similar to the Sandlot and some dialog that contributed to the rating, but overall we enjoyed it.

Despicable Me (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

This was not as fast paced of a movie as I was expecting. It was rather slow and easy going. The musical score was awesome, it fit the movie to a “T”. The humor was good, but I remember the movie more for Gru’s emotional development than for it’s humor.

Moral Rating: 3 of 5

Gru isn’t your typical heartless villain, and if heartlessness is a measure of villainy success this explains why he does not make a very good “villain.” His own mother doesn’t show her love to him until he’s put the villainy aside and made the effort to learn to love (and she admits she wasn’t as great of a parent as Gru has turned out to be). All in all, this is a fun show, worth sharing with your young kids.

Temple Grandin (2010)

Entertainment Rating: A

This was a great movie following the life of Temple Grandin who had autism and helped the world understand how to help those with autism succeed like she did.

Orson Scott Card summed up our feelings well:

“Last year might have been financially good for the movies, and films like ALICE IN WONDERLAND and holdover AVATAR might rule the box office this year. Films by directors whose hands are always distractingly visible might win the accolades of the cognoscenti. But TEMPLE GRANDIN is, without pretension, the finest artistic achievement in filmmaking I've seen in years; it easily elbowed its way into my lifetime top ten movie list.

It's an emotional rollercoaster, this movie. I laughed and cried so often I thought I had lived an extra year by watching it. Yet this was not because manipulative filmmakers juiced things up; on the contrary, the writers, director, and performers used amazing restraint. This movie never bludgeons us with something that can be conveyed through nuance alone.”

Moral Rating: 5

A lot can be learned from this depiction of the life of Temple Grandin. Even though her autism made her different (not less) than the average person, she learned how to exercise self control, how to hone her skills and apply them productively, and she wasn’t afraid to share her knowledge with those around her.

Her method of giving herself a hug was rather interesting, but demonstrated her desire to exercise control over her emotions and ultimately over her autism. We should all exerted the same effort to control our own emotions, instead of looking for ways to victimize ourselves and complain to or at others.

With the help of a loving family and her school teacher, Temple was able to realize what her strengths were and actively pursued avenues that enabled her to ultimately change the world: She re-engineered the cattle industry and opened up the eyes of the world to autism.

Go out of your way to check this film out.

Karate Kid (2009)

Entertainment Rating: B

This was a fun show. The fight sequences were particularly well done, especially for a bunch of middle school kids. I didn't care for the fact that it stuck so closely to the original story. There was no surprise at the end, you knew what was going to happen. Jackie Chan didn't do much for the story, he was a rather serious character - none of his good-natured humor was displayed. My guess is that some influential people didn't want anyone to overshadow Jaden Smith's first star role.

Moral Rating: 3

The original Karate Kid also had a lot more gems of knowledge taught by Mr. Miyagi. Mr. Han in this one had one or two, but nothing I really remember. We're presented with the same conflict with the boy who's recently had to move and gain new friends, and how Kung Fu is about making peace, not punishing your enemy.

I think the first hour or so dragged on a bit too long, there's no reason this movie needed to be longer than 2 hours, but the breath-taking views of China make some of that extra time worth watching.