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.

Pulp Fiction (1994)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

Hailed as one of the greatest movies of all time, I was a little disappointed. The story was inventive and well put together. I enjoyed the way everything slowly tied together from beginning to end, even though it all seemed like separate stories at first. While there was an over abundance of swearing, looking back at the movie (replaying scenes in my head) the language is not what I remember. Can’t say that I’d recommend this one.

Moral Rating: 2 of 5

The coolest part of the movie was Samuel L. Jackson. I’ve always been curious about this movie and my curiosity was increased after reading Thomas Hibbs Arts of Darkness. Hibbs states,

“Tarantino’s repudiation of linear narration suits a world out of joint where character development and unified story telling are impossible. The sequence of events in the film pivots around a remarkable chance event, the interpretation of which determines the destiny of the two central characters, Jules and Vincent.”

Matchstick Men (2003)

Entertainment Rating: 3 of 5

This was a fun con movie. A little slow for the first 80% of the film, but the speed picks up at the end. A great role for Nicholas Cage.

Moral Rating: 3 of 5

The content was a little iffy with one strip club scene (no nudity, but plenty of skin) and some language. The club scene added nothing to the movie, other than showing you the type of sleazy men these con-men often dealt with. The whole movie is based on people who think it’s OK to scam people out of their money. However, in the end we see Frank respond very well to being conned in his own game. Not only did he not get upset (or seek revenge), but he realized that his job as a con-man wasn’t making him happy. A family is what he needed to help him be at peace in his life and overcome some of his idiosyncrasies.

High Noon (1952)

Entertainment Rating: 5 of 5

This was a great movie. Gary Cooper did a great job, even if he isn’t your typical cowboy character. Even though the film only runs 83 minutes, they don’t waste a single second of it and executed it perfectly; we’ll definitely watch this plenty more times in the future. The Ballad of Frank Miller played throughout the film added a very nice touch.

Moral Rating: 5 of 5

We found ourselves constantly hoping that someone in the town would recognize all the good Marshal Kane had fought for and lend him a hand. Even though the climax occurs when the fight happens at the end, the crux of the movie is on the audience wondering and hoping that the Marshall is going to get someone to help him against the deadly quartet at the train depot. We found ourselves sickened by the townspeople’s lack of goodness.

We’re led to believe at the beginning when Kane gets married that the townsfolk have his best interest at heart and want him to enjoy his honeymoon. However, it turns out they were more likely tired of having to be good with him around. They missed the debauchery that existed when Frank Miller and his gang ran the town. Even though Marshal Kane helped convict a murderer and cleaned up the town so that women and children could feel safe there, the townsfolk didn’t seem to care - they almost seemed to think that Marshall Kane was the reason that Frank Miller would be coming back in the first place. (This last idea is very similar to Batman’s predicament - he gets blamed for all the crazy psychopaths that come to Gotham; if he weren’t there the Gotham citizens/PD would just have to deal with normal criminals).

While we didn’t feel happy or triumphant at the end of the show, it sure made us reflect on how much we sometimes don’t want the good around because it makes us feel guilty of the worldly pleasures we enjoy. We need to learn to give place to good and righteousness in our lives and be willing to sacrifice temporal pleasures for eternal joys.

Salt (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

This was a great movie! When the end comes (and it comes rather quickly) and you really don’t expect it to come but expect it to continue and want it to continue, that is a good sign. Angelina Jolie is great. The movie was originally written for a male lead and Tom Cruise was approached; when he backed out, the script was re-written for a female and Jolie filled it well.

Moral Rating: 3 of 5

[Spoiler Alert]

Salt takes a moral stand as she realizes what she’s been trained to do is wrong and does everything in her power to set things right. As talented and skilled as she is, she constantly risks her life to try and protect what those close to her try to destroy.

A Man For All Seasons (1966)

Entertainment Rating: 4 of 5

It seemed that this film probably used the same script the play used, so the movie wasn’t terribly visually engaging, but the dialog was intense. I wasn’t even aware of this film (unless it’s one that I fell asleep watching for English extra credit in high school) until I read Orson Scott Card’s list of favorite movies, and this one was number one. While A Man For All Seasons still isn’t better than On the Waterfront (still my favorite), it is pretty darn good.

Moral Rating: 5 of 5

The story is supposedly a little one-sided when it comes to historical accuracy (portraying Thomas as a saint, and not displaying any of his negative attributes); even so, I think we can learn a lot by focusing on the positive and not be distracted or discouraged by any negative truths that might make the history more accurate.  By trying to live our lives according to a pattern of perfection we can expect to become closer to perfect than if we attempt to live according to a skewed pattern of “less-than-perfect” truths. (For more on patterns of perfection check out this address.)  The same goes with only showing the virtues of somebody, instead of revealing his faults as well.  In some instances the faults make the person/hero more human, more able to relate to, while without faults or weaknesses the hero doesn't seem to be one of us or someone who we could ever dream of becoming like unto.  Only focusing on positive traits is good.

I don’t know that I can adequately summarize the plethora of moral messages presented in the film. The primary one expresses the importance of having standards and not bending them for anything or anyone, no matter the cost.  One of my favorite scenes occurs after Richard Rich leaves the presence of Thomas, his wife, daughter and son-in-law after the King’s “surprise” visit.  Roper, Thomas’s son-in-law, asks if Thomas is not going to prevent Richard from leaving back to the scheming Cromwell.  Rich could very easily cause a lot of trouble for More's family, but More doesn't have any proof that that is what will happen and so he can't really be detained legally.  Roper compares letting Rich go to letting the Devil go, and mocks Thomas’s defense of doing so because of the “law” (emphasizing the fact that there is no evidence for which to detain Rich). The following dialog ensues:

William Roper: [addressing Thomas] So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Another remarkable scene occurs earlier in the film when More tries to convince Rich (when More still had some influence over him) to become a teacher, worrying about his potential to be corrupted if he pursued a position with the State:

Sir Thomas More: Why not be a teacher? You'd be a fine teacher; perhaps a great one.
Richard Rich: If I was, who would know it?
Sir Thomas More: You; your pupils; your friends; God. Not a bad public, that.

Later, Thomas is approached by Norfolk, a close “friend”, who sincerely wishes Thomas to give in and accept the King’s marriage as lawful. Everyone in England has been required to sign a statement saying they support the King in his marriage or else be thrown in prison. Norfolk tries to appeal to a non-existent desire in Thomas to be accompanied by “friends” in tough situations.

Norfolk: Oh, confound all this.... I'm not a scholar, as Master Cromwell never tires of pointing out, and frankly I don't know whether the marriage was lawful or not. But damn it, Thomas, look at those names.... You know those men! Can't you do what I did, and come with us, for fellowship?
More: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?

I could go on with plenty more scenes I enjoyed, but you'll just have to take my word for it and treat yourself to an educational and enlightening movie.  Your local library should have a copy of it, or you can check Netflix.

Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010)

Entertainment Rating: 4/5

It’s hard not to compare any Batman movie to Christopher Nolan’s masterpieces, even if they are animated. This one had a good amount of action and a pretty cool storyline with it, providing just the right twists to it to keep you guessing.

Moral Rating: 4/5

[Spoiler Alert]

The last scene really sold the movie for me. Robin has the Joker at gun point, furious that Batman didn’t go after the Joker and kill him after he had killed Robin. Batman sagaciously responds that if he were to have killed the Joker, he would have become just like him. Robin then gives Batman the ultimatum that he (Robin) is going to kill the Joker, and that Batman will have to shoot him (Robin) if he doesn’t the Joker dead. Batman drops his weapon and walks away. What a cool scene. The resolve and conviction to do what is right, even in the face of seemingly impossible circumstances, is what we need in order to win the fight against evil. While Batman’s methods for enforcing justice are often questionable, his position against evil is not.

9 (2009)

Entertainment Rating: 4/5

This wasn't a very complex movie. However, the story seemed like it had so much background information that was only shared in bits and pieces of flashbacks that you feel wanting at the end of the 75 min. film.

Moral Rating: 3/5

9 is the last stitchpunk made and the one that helps the others realize their destiny. Some were content to just hide and avoid the evil that existed in the world, while others tried to learn and grow on their own. 9 actually brings everyone together, and only then are they able to realize their full potential and start the world progressing again (even if it is through implied non-creationism/evolution). We are all free to choose our own destiny. The final line of the movie nicely illustrates this by saying that the world is "what we make of it."

If you're looking for something short and sweet, check it out. I'm not sure why it was rated PG-13, it's definitely a mild PG-13 if anything but could be a bit scary for younger kids.

V for Vendetta

Entertainment Value

Rating: A

This was a great semi-political thriller. Why is it that deep political thrillers are R? I don't think ratings mean a whole lot anymore, other than to try to market the movie to a particular audience. If you're an adult you want to see more violence and sex and hear more profanity than a 13 year old would want to see. Makes sense, right? WRONG! That is a rather odd perspective if you ask me.

I had read the graphic novel of the same name (which the movie was fairly closely based on) and was very much impressed and excited to see the movie. This movie was a better adaptation than Watchmen was. Not because it was a closer adaptation, but because the director made it a bit more his own, he made the movie more powerful and moving than Watchmen (which could have to do with the general themes of each of the original stories - V was less "graphic" and more inspirational, while Watchmen was more nihilistic).

Moral Value – Failure to Communicate?

Rating: 4

There was a strong message that an idea is more important than a hero. Once a person gets outside him or herself and realizes that living life is more than just making sure we get through everyday or are ahead of everyone else, that person is truly free.

Watchmen

Entertainment Value

Rating: B

I've really come to enjoy this story. I read the graphic novel and was quite impressed by it, even though it does present very mature themes. I don't know that I'd recommend the movie to anyone, if you're interested in the story go for the graphic novel first. The movie doesn't integrate the sub-story "Tale of the Black Freighter" which adds a lot to the meaning of the main story; for this reason it's not as good as it could be.  If you were to watch the edited version of the film (like we did) you will miss out on a lot of information.  The novel is less explicit than the movie (as far as I can tell by reading the reasons why this is R) - the swearing is not as heavy, there isn't any explicit sex, but it is still rather violent/disturbing.

Moral Value - Failure to Communicate?

Rating: 4

Overall message: Don't leave the saving of society to the "heroes." We may not have super heroes in our society today, but we do have politicians who believe they are super heroes. If we leave the correcting of society to those in power and do nothing ourselves, our society will end up like that in the Watchmen, quite terrifying. The saying came up quite frequently in the movie, and even more so in the graphic novel, if the Watchmen are keeping society in check, then who watches the Watchmen?

Cool Hand Luke

Synopsis

This is the story of a man who fought against the system. Lucas Jackson gets thrown into a work camp for "destroying municipal property," and even while there continues to fight against anything that gives him rules to follow. The men in the camp admire him; and even Dragline, the assumed leader of the prisoners, gives Luke his respect. Luke gets tired of being the only one who seems to care about breaking free, even God seems to have abandoned him. Read on to find out why this is one of my favorite movies.

Entertainment Value - A

For the longest time this was my absolute favorite movie and it still ranks among the top ten. Paul Newman's and George Kennedy's performances are awesome. The multiple attempts at escape from the prison never get boring. You never get tired of the constant change and rebellion Luke introduces to the prison. Some people can't seem to make it through the first part of the movie, and I can't understand why! Mostly people who have a hard time watching anything that isn't newer than the 1980's (though that's even pushing it for some!).

Moral Value - Failure to Communicate? - 5

Why is this movie the theme for our blog? For one, it was one of my favorite movies and "Cool Hand Critics" had a nice ring to it. From there, we were able to introduce other elements of the movie into our reviews (World Shakers, Nights In The Box, etc.). Here are some of the reasons why it is among my favorite movies:

Unwritten Rules

At the beginning of the film, when Luke first comes to the camp and the other prisoners are playing cards, he makes pretty clear his disdain for rule makers. Dragline and the other prisoners are explaining all the "unwritten" rules of the prison and that Dragline is basically the king of the coop. Luke just laughs and when confronted, he responds that there just seem to be "a lot of guys laying down rules and regulations."

Unwritten societal rules (e.g., might makes right, herd mentality, etc.) sometimes keep us from progressing, whereas true rules (i.e., commandments, covenants, etc.) should help us in our progression as human beings and children of God. This isn't the case for all unwritten rules (e.g., etiquette, chivalrous manners, etc.), but we need to do more than just follow someone blindly like most of the prisoners ended up doing with Dragline and later with Luke. We need to live/know for ourselves and understand what impact our decisions and actions have on our spiritual and physical well being.

"Nothing Can Be a Real Cool Hand"

Luke and Dragline had a boxing match and even though Luke was very badly beat-up, he never gave up; in fact he told Dragline, "you're gonna have to kill me." Luke later ends up winning a poker game with a hand of nothing and states that, "Sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand." Dragline admits that he was beat in the fight with nothing just as Koko was in the poker game (meaning even though Luke didn't beat Dragline physically, Luke sure didn't lose).

Sometimes by just standing your ground, no matter what the odds are against you, you can come out on top. This constancy exhibited in one's faith and conviction of principles or standards can define a person's being.

"Get Out There Yourself!"

After one of the many times Luke escapes the prison and is brought back (bloody and beaten) all the men can do nothing but comment on what a grand ol' time he must have had while he was out (particularly because Luke had sent them a picture of himself between two attractive ladies, revealed at this time to be a phony). Exasperated he yells, "Stop feedin' off me! Get out there yourself! I can't breathe!"

How often do we live our lives through other people's experiences instead of getting up/out and doing things for ourselves?

Later on, after Luke has been "broken" by the bosses (forced to labor to the point of physical exhaustion and beaten brutally in the process) and enters the sleeping quarters where all the prisoners (who sat and watched the breaking process) are gathered, he collapses. Not a single person went to him to help him out. They were disillusioned by the breaking of the high and mighty man they once esteemed as their hero. Luke was never a real person in their eyes; they invented a person who was invulnerable, a superhero that could never break. When he broke they became the selfish, brutal, despicable creatures men tend to be when they see good men fall. They were too weak (too smart?) to try to break out of prison themselves, to push the rule makers to the limit, to discover who they really could be, making them all the more happy to see strong people fall. It makes them feel good about themselves, even if they aren't truly happy (still locked up, never having attempted to get out in the open).

Failure to Communicate

During Luke's last escape attempt, Dragline can't help but come along with him. Dragline's as giddy as a school boy to see that Luke was "never" broken. But Luke corrects him and tells him he was as broke as anybody could have been. After Dragline starts planning all the world shaking he, Luke, and Koko are gonna do when they're all out Luke says that he's "done enough world shaking for a while." At this news Dragline doesn't know how to react, he begins to regret ever leaving the camp realizing that he only had a few years left if he would have stayed put. (The disillusionment sets in again.)

Luke approaches a church and decides to enter it and that it's time he has a talk with God. He wants to blame God (not angrily but questioningly) for his situation. Luke feels that God has things "fixed" against him and at the same time made him like he was, so how was he supposed to fit in? When does it all end? What does God have in store for him? What should he do now? Luke then gets on his knees to ask and concedes that he's a hard case and ends up supposing that he'll have to find his own way (not having received any communication from God).

This failure to communicate comes up a couple of times in the film, and is up there with some of the best known lines in cinematic history. There seems to be a lot of failed communication, a lot of "unwritten rules" that seem to catch people off guard left and right. You could argue that it wasn't God that was messing up the communication, but Luke. He never wanted to submit to any kind of authority, and he was constantly running away from it or flat out pushing back. Even Luke says "there ain't a whole lot worth listening to" (specifically referring to all the rules and regulation being put out). How many times do we say we want an answer but do nothing to make sure we are prepared to hear what we need to be told?

With regards to this movie review site, I hope we can communicate some of the insights we receive on the quality and moral value of films that we see. We in no way assume our ideas and interpretations are the only way to view the content of the films, but invite others to comment and help us mold our philosophy in a non-threatening way.

You've Got Mail

Synopsis

This is the second remake of The Shop Around the Corner (at least that I'm aware of). A small bookstore owner, Kathleen Kelly, and a multimillion dollar discount bookstore chain owner, Joe Fox, are in love online (choosing to keep personal information unknown to each other), but enemies in the professional world. When, through email, they decide to meet, Joe discovers who his pen-pal is without her knowing. While Joe's first impulse is to throw in the towel and give up on her, he ultimately realizes that he had fallen in love with the person who wrote the emails to him, and that he needs to try and win Kathleen's affection, getting her to look past her prejudices and see him for who he really is.

Entertainment Value - A

This is my favorite version of this story and also one of my all time favorite films. Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks are perfect together in their roles. I love the soundtrack.

Moral Value - Failure to Communicate? - 4

At first sight, it might seem that displaying two relationships where neither couple is married but still live together can't be constructive. Similar to the play The Importance of Being Earnest where marriage is made light of and food is taken seriously, I think this is a commentary on the importance of marriage. We see both live-in relationships as unhappy, neither couple is in love with their significant other. As Joe and Kathleen's relationship matures (without any sexual encounters!), we see that the ultimate goal will be marriage. You don't see a marriage take place, but Joe mentions that had the issue of their professional differences not existed he would have asked her out..."for as long we both shall live", a direct reference to marriage.

Other elements that support this are that Joe's family is completely dysfunctional and is even mocked as being an "American family". Joe has a brother who is probably 30 years his junior and and an Aunt that isn't much older than his brother. Joe's father's fiancee (probably no older than Joe) hits on Joe and ends up running off with another woman, which is what his own father has done in his previous 2 or 3 relationships. These extreme relationships are exaggerated to emphasize the importance of a solid marriage between a man and a woman, the only union that can bring true happiness to the human family.

In addition to advocating marriage, the same message exists here as in it's two predecessors (Shop Around the Corner and In the Good Old Summer Time): you can't judge a book by it's cover. Judging too quickly can prevent good relationships from forming, and is ultimately breaking a commandment; Jesus commanded that we judge not unrighteous judgment.

24: Season 1

Synopsis

A Senator who is close to making it into the White House is the target of an assassination attempt. CTU Agent Jack Bauer's family is kidnapped and he must try to rescue them as well as stop the assination. Meanwhile, an affair that he had frequently comes back to haunt him.

Entertainment Value - A

One of the most intense shows I have ever seen. I got so tense in every episode that I would actually start shaking! The experience is very much like reading a book, except for the added visual stimulus. The acting in it was better than most movies I've seen; and to keep you intrigued and guessing from beginning to end is a sign of great talent.

Moral Value - Failure to Communicate? - 3

We also just finished watching season 2, so I'll tie in some of the messages that came from it as well, since they overlap a bit.

Jack Bauer is nothing less than a modern day super hero. He is very similar to Batman in that he is mortal, but can fight off almost anyone/thing, and puts himself above the law. Jack is constantly at odds with his superiors and co-workers with regards to how he obtains the information he gets (mostly because there is no other way and the catastrophe at hand would multiply in scale if he doesn't do whatever it takes - torture, murder, etc. - to win.)

Which brings up an interesting question, is "whatever it takes" ever okay? I think there is a higher law to follow when man's laws are obviously flawed. It helps to have the kind of superiors that will cover up everything you do to keep you in their employ, but this power could easily go abused. For this reason, these type of extreme actions (e.g., torture) are probably best prohibited, but if the person going against it has the courage and initiative to, the outcome will more than likely prove if he was right or wrong.

Senator Palmer is the most awesome character I can think of. In the face of so many people telling him to not do what's 100% right he defies them by sticking to his morals. Though he loses a lot of people he loves, he's able to rest assured that he has done what is right and has not compromised his morals.

Some specific moral dilemmas presented include:

• Jack being faced with having to kill someone in order to protect his family...never plans on doing it, but cuts it close several times


• Jack's going against superior orders when he knew something was right, willing to get chastised for something that will bring about a greater good.

Somebody Up There Likes Me

Synopsis

Rocky Graziano is nothing but trouble for his family and the community, and works his way into several prisons and work camps. His future becomes brighter when he realizes (with the help of a few mentors) that he has good potential to fight professionally and legally. He straightens up his life, gets married, has a child, and eventually completely turns over a new leaf and realizes what things are most important in his life. Starring Paul Newman.

Entertainment Value - B

Great movie, probably Stallone's inspiration behind Rocky, very similar story line (shady character turns to fighting as a more legitimate profession and marries a shy girl who doesn't like to see him fighting). Paul Newman did a great job, though I like Stallone and Crowe a little better as boxers.

Moral Value - Failure to Communicate? - 5

Norma had a great role. I liked the part where she corrected his manager by telling him that he can't turn a blind eye to Rocky's past. Doing so was dishonest and in no way helping Rocky accept who he was so he could genuinely turn over a new leaf (not the leaf of some imagined self). By accepting his past, Norma was able to accept Rocky for who he really was and help him get to the point where he had nothing to worry about. (He states that he knows that he'll lose his title someday, but that doesn't bother him; what's most important is what he has right then - his family.)

The great moral dilemma comes when he's about to contact the evil..shady? replace "shady" above with "troublemaker"(need better word) Frankie Peppo to do some business with him. At a very opportune moment his friend, a soda jerk, tells him that when he orders a soda he has to pay for it, teaching him he needs to face up to the truth and take responsibility for what he's done and promised to do. He then runs into another friend who wants to start a flower shop (but really wants money to buy a gun and pay someone to hold someone up with the newly acquired gun for the money for a flower shop so he can run a bootlegging joint...). Rocky tries to talk some sense into him, but realizes he can't force the guy to change.

Rocky's reconciliation with his father was touching as well. Their frank discussion helped both realize the true state of their circumstances and allow them to finally see eye to eye. Rocky's father breaks down and says that all he wants for Rocky is to be the champ he, as a fighter/father, never was. Rocky says "Don't worry about a thing!" and the rest is history.

If you're looking for an original (in that it came out before Rocky), inspirational sports story, check this one out.

Gladiator

Synopsis

Maximus, general of the Roman army, declines to serve the new Emperor and ends up a slave/gladiator fighting for his life and for the entertainment of others.  When he is brought to Rome and fights before the new Caesar he eventually realizes his power, even as a slave, to turn the people against the evil emperor.

Entertainment Value

The movie was pretty violent, but the story is a lot deeper than the cool fight scenes.  A very tense plot unravels as we see the good emperor overthrown by his evil son along with the possible passing of the crown to the worthy general of the Roman armies.  I highly recommend this if it comes out on TV, or you happen to have a way to edit the grisly R version.

Moral Value - Failure to communicate?

[Spoiler Alert]

In the beginning, when offered the empire, Maximus declined the honors of becoming Caesar because his first priority was returning to his simple life with his family. There's a good chance he would have accepted the offer if things hadn't gone the way they did.  Maximus realized the reason that the dying emperor chose him was because of his adherence to dignity and virtue - the only one who could combat the corruption that existed in the Senate.

Maximus is a man of very high morals and trades them in for nothing; he loves his country and will do anything to help keep his fellow countrymen free.  Similar to Karate Kid, though Maximus's foe was much more evil, Maximus was able to challenge his enemy in an "official" or accepted arena, showing that there are appropriate ways to conquer the enemy, even to the death.

The loneliness Commodus brought on himself because of his ambition and treachery is very well portrayed.

Dick Tracy

Dick Tracy is a movie of vivid cinematic art that compares to the great visual talent by the creator's of Hero. Dick Tracy is a great example of moral character and is still human enough for us to relate to.  Even in the face of diverse temptations he couldn't betray his character and what he stood for. His love for Tess was virtuous; he didn't have to live with her (or sleep with her) to show his love for her. Tracy showed love and respect towards the kid by trusting him and providing good fatherly judgment by making an effort to keep him out of danger, but at the same time he didn't hide his appreciation when the kid showed up with needed assistance.

Tracy seems a little flabbergasted at Ms. Mahoney's forwardness which causes some emotional interference between him and Tess. Eventually he's able to sort out his thoughts and feelings and realizes he loves Tess (though this happens after Tess leaves him). Tracy probably let Breathless get a little too close to him. Had he recognized the effects of this temptation on his and Tess's relationship earlier he wouldn't have put himself in the predicament that makes the rest of the movie happen (to our enjoyment).

As for the last scene, I think Tracy ultimately pitied Breathless - whether or not his move was appropriate is disputable. It (this is ambiguous on purpose) could have been more of a thank you, because she ultimately brought Tess back and helped get rid of Big Boy; or it could have displayed some true emotions he might have actually had for Ms. Mahoney.

Either way, this is a classic show with a good message. By today's standards probably should be thrown in the PG-13 category as some elements are not appropriate for a younger crowd.

One Night with the King

Rating: 4 

The Bible is full of so many wonderful stories, it's a shame that more directors don't try to create films based on them.  I'm sure the Bible has had some influence on a lot of films, but it's nice to be able to sit down and see a movie solely dedicated to a Biblical story and have the scriptures come to life.  This wasn't a particularly well acted film, but the story was represented faithfully, and the message of courage and faith in the face of death was very well portrayed.

The film provides a good depiction of what could have happened, connecting the events as best it could.  As mentioned before, the acting and cinematography was a little amateurish, but good enough to hold our interest.  Carr read the entire story right after viewing the movie and confirmed that the film stayed close to the Bible story.  It's quite incredible to imagine the courage Esther must have had to put her life on the line to save her people.

Gulliver's Travels

Rating: 5

I started reading the book and ended up getting about three-fourths of the way through it.  I can't remember why, I just felt like it was taking an eternity to finish it, so I set it down.  After watching the movie again, I think I have enough desire to pick the book up again and if nothing else, at least finish the last quarter of it.

This story has tons of lessons through it.  Most of them are political, as that was Jonathan Swift's purpose in writing it (as far as we know), but I think the comparison's he made to humanity several hundred years ago are still quite applicable today.  Human nature doesn't seem to change much, just the circumstances in which it exists.

After watching this I have a greater desire to be involved with what is going on in the political world, since that's the group that tends to run things in our lives.  The movie accurately portrays the type of resistance that we can expect from trying to discover errors in current processes and that it really takes the faith of a child to penetrate the clouded intellect of grown men.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Rating: 3

I went to the movie not expecting much, just another comic book action film.  It was pretty much that.  Some pretty crazy action scenes and a lot of killing.  I definitely did not have a greater desire to do good afterwards, more like a desire to leap tall buildings and destroy anything in my way.  There is quite a bit of confusion between what is good and what is evil throughout the movie, though it's made a little more clear who's on which side at the end, but not entirely.

[Spoiler Alert] Wolverine's 6 year relationship with Kayla is supposed to make you feel sorry for him when she gets killed, and you do, but just not as much as you would had he decided to get married and really live a life different than what he did in the past.  His past is clouded with memories of killing (granted it was in war) and who knows what other type of atrocities (his brother is seen almost raping a woman and revelling in his murders).  Wolverine just never really turns into "the good guy" in this movie.  At various moments Wolverine finds himself on the edge of becoming like his brother, but something always seemed to stop him from finishing the fatal act.

Perhaps this is a good example of man's struggle to find out who he really is and where he belongs.  So many people don't know who they are or where they come from or why they are here, those in Hollywood probably falling entirely in this category.  I realize this is a form of art and everyone interprets it differently and it's really irrelevant what the author's purpose was in including everything in the film, so we've got to make a decision as to how it is to us.  I'd be interested to hear if anyone else got anything more out of the film.

I would not recommend this to someone who doesn't enjoy full-blown action movies, but if you enjoyed X-Men it's cool to see how Wolverine came to be, at least according to the director, Gavin Hood.

Update

After thinking more about this show and seeing it a second time, I really do like it.  There is a strong moral message that I didn't seem to pay much attention to.  Wolverine ends up leaving his family (brother) because what he and others do does not sit well at all with him.

Gandhi

Rating: 5 

We watched this movie a while ago and fortunately took notes during and right after viewing it.  This was a great movie!  Though many of Gandhi's teachings and beliefs were good, I'm not sure I agree 100% with everything, but I'll let you decide where you stand.  Plenty of lessons worth remembering were taught, and we hope this list will give you insight into a small portion of the good this movie presents.

• Love and truth will always prevail
  
• Noncooperation with evil is necessary
• Gandhi fasted until noncooperation with Great Britain stopped.  Gandhi realized the people weren't ready to live this "higher law", they weren't motivated by the right desires (sounds strangely familiar to multiple stories from scriptures)
• No compromise, disgust for alien powers - alien powers don't know who they rule, they don't understand the culture or way of life.
• Gandhi understood that to lead the people he had to understand what they did and how they lived, so he renounced the status his schooling brought him and became one of the people.
• "I've traveled so far and I ended up back home." (It only matters what you become)
• Gandhi was willing to stand up for what's right, was never worried about what others think
• "All battles ought to be fought in our own hearts."
• "Tyrants and murderers at times seem invincible, but in the end they always fall."
• The Indians had to love Gandhi for his fasting to death to mean anything.

This is a long movie (about 3 hours), but I'd recommend it to anyone who hasn't seen it.