Tag Archives: Movies

Discerning Entertainment

Suzanne Hadley wrote a thoughtful post at Boundlessline about our entertainment choices as Christians.

An important excerpt:

Sadly, I believe we have many among us who use the excuse of becoming culturally relevant to justify their unhealthy media consumption. These are Christians who claim that their knowledge about movies, TV shows, albums, and so on, helps them to witness. But does the exposure to pollution really enhance witnessing abilities?

In my experience, no. I’ve watched a few movies I shouldn’t have, and they’ve never provided a single opportunity to share Christ’s love with someone. In fact, I believe those who do not know Christ sometimes feel comforted by the innocence of a Christ-follower. It is a position on life that stands out.

Truth be told, many of the things we commonly watch harm us spiritually, whether we acknowledge it or not.  I hear lots of folks splatter all sorts of claptrap about wanting to be relevant to the culture, “why are you so uptight?” and “it’s just TV,”  but typically all that’s a cover…we just want to watch what we want to watch and we really don’t care what it does to us spiritually.  Neither do we care about honoring Christ in everything we do.

I’m seeing a significant number of my Christian friends not just take in something questionable every now and then, but imbibe a steady diet of this stuff.

I can’t count the number of Christian friends who fall over themselves watching sitcoms like Family Guy, movies by Jud Apatow (SuperBad, Pineapple Express) and The Daily Show. With F.G and J.A movies, they are so crass and vulgar that I seriously don’t see how anyone could deny they affect your mind and heart negatively.  With the Daily Show, I can see someone tuning in every once and a blue moon so that they can mindfully critique John Stewart’s hufflepuff, but being a devoted fan?  C’mon.  Let’s have a conversation and see what turns up in your thinking.  I’ll go to Vegas on the bet that your worldview and affections for the good are affected by it much, much more than you care to acknowledge.

On that note, I’m not just talking about all the sexual jokes, tiresome Bush-is-dumb shtic, and general liberal worldview subtly packaged as comedy.  My main focus is the irreverance.  It is the air John Stewart and his 20-something male demographic breathes.  I know many won’t view it this way, but I’m beginning to see that this irreverance, which is expressed all over the place in our culture (ever check out the top performers at Digg?), is a strong force keeping boys from shedding their Peter Pan tights.

Hey, I’m all for laughs and a good ol slapstick joke, but the type of humor these shows specialize in is a horse of a different color.

We Americans cling tightly to the notion of autonomy.  If we don’t want something to affect us, it won’t; that’s the attitude.  PHHHHH!  If that were the case, advertising wouldn’t be the billion dollare enterprise that  it is.

In addition, for those who watch Family Guy and such, could you see yourself plopping down on the couch with Jesus to watch those things?  Could you see yourself walking into the theatre with Jesus to see Sex Drive and SuperBad?

BTW, this isn’t legalism.  If you don’t think this has anything to do with your spiritual life, you are fooling yourself.  It’s all connected.  Everything is spiritual (to borrow a Rob Bell phrase.  Don’t agree with much of what he’s about, but I agree with that one), and the  human propensity for self-justification is ubiquitous.

Really, we just gotta be more honest with our motivations for watching what we watch.  We claim to follow Christ, but in this area, he doesn’t really factor into our choices…at all.  For people that fervently sing such passionate worship songs to Jesus on Sundays, that’s a bummer.

Coyote County Loser

I feel important; I actually went to a movie premier.

Last week I went to the premier of Coyote County Loser, an independent film by Roebuck Media.

This was a very funny romantic comedy with an excellent message about marriage.

**(SPOILER ALERT)**

The movie centers around two characters: Jack, a love-em-and-leave-em heart throb from LA, and Lauren, a down-to-earth country girl who demands high standards from men.

Lauren is a love advice-giving radio show host in (very, very) small town New Mexico.  The thing is that she gives horrible advice, coaching women to have a “non-negotiable checklist,” or NNCL, in the hunt for a mate.   What’s hilarious is what she coaches the women to put on the list.  Jesus wouldn’t even meet their standards!

Men are not grocery lists, and the search for a marriage partner is not like the search for buying a car (another analogy she uses frequently).  If I dated a woman with that attitude, I’d feel quite degraded.

Jack comes along.  He gets stuck in the one-horse town on his way to LA.  After listening to the show, he recognizes the silliness, and decides to challenge her on the air.  His advice is just as askew; he takes a “follow your heart” attitude, calling out the romantic in all of us.

Sounds good, until you realize that Lauren’s mother left her father when she took just such an attitude.  Dad, evidently, no longer made mom happy.  He no longer lit the romantic spark in her, so she was outta there. This wreaked incredible brokenness in Lauren, so much so that she went to a far extreme in an effort to protect herself.

A “legacy marriage” couple provides the balance, though.  They have been married for 48 happy years.  The wife had no list; the husband, at first, was quite awkward at romance.  What did they have that Jack and Lauren overlooked?  Commitment.  They know that love means sacrificing for the other, and that has made their 48 years together more romantic than Jack could ever imagine, and stronger than any ingredient Lauren’s “list” mentality could ever provide.

Though we might mock Jack and Lauren in our minds, they reflect common attitudes about love, don’t they?  How many women have I run into with a NNCL?  Even if they don’t call it that, the things they require to even consider *one* date with a man are ridiculous.

Sure, having a few requirements is necessary: follower disciple of Christ, wants to embrace responsibility, wants to be a dad, etc.  But, geez, cut out the laundry list!  No wonder they are still single!

I admit: I used to have a NNCL myself.  I didn’t realize how degrading and stupid that was.

We also go the other extreme, throwing caution to the wind, dating and loving whomever we fancy.  If he is hot and you like him, go for it!  Who cares if he’s not a solid Christian; he makes you happy, and that’s all that matters.  He’s soooo dreamy, and there’s soooo much chemistry between us (translate: he’s great in bed).

Pardon me while I go wretch.

Strangely, many of us manage to have both attitudes at the same time.  I don’t know how we do it.

Yes, it is downright silly to compare a man to any list one may have.  Having an element of spontaneous romance is fun.

Yes, if all you think about is what will make you happy, you will end up trampling on others’ hearts and becoming quite a pit-i-ful creature yourself.  Relationships are serious business; there is no time for this “whatever makes you happy” claptrap.

Jack and Lauren must meet in the middle to find the truth; however, without the commitment to sacrifice for the other, any relationship is only doomed to end in smoke and rubble.

Go see the movie.

Check out the following related posts:

Movie review: Fireproof

A Boy Becomes a Man (Gran Torino movie review)

Seven Pounds

_________________________________________________________________________________

If you liked what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (RSS button at the top right in the sidebar).

Fireproof: One Man’s Modus Ponens is Another’s Modus Tollens

I felt embarrassed at moments during the movie.  Whenever there was a scene where the gospel was preached or God was talked about, I felt like making fun of the movie’s preachyness.

A great many people have had the same reaction.  One local radio station, KROC, ridiculed Fireproof as well for its weirdness.

We don’t like preachy movies.

But it occured to me that perhaps that says more about me and the culture than it does about the movie.  Why should we feel embarrassed at such an explicitly Christian movie?  Perhaps it’s not the movie that is wrong for it’s preachyness, but me and the culture that’s wrong for ridiculing such things.

Whenever I feel such embarrassment, I need to start turning the tables like that.

I look forward to the day when the culture is no longer like that.  That day will not come, though, this side of the eternal divide.

Movie Review: Fireproof

I just finished seeing Fireproof.

Acting: subparfireproofposterart2

dialogue: cheesy

Preachy?  Definitely

However, I liked it, you know?  I actually got emotional during the scene at the end between Caleb and his mother.  The movie really gave me something to dwell upon as I enter my own marriage.  I saw glimpses of my own selfishness in Caleb.  For example, I nitpick in my head over small habits my roommates have, but I myself do the same things.

The movie really sobered me up by showing me where that sort of selfishness could end.

Though it was overly preachy and the acting was terrible (besides Cameron, most of the actors were church volunteers, not professional thespians.  This is helpful to know up front.), there were a few powerful gospel scenes.  The biggest one, perhaps, was when Caleb kept pushing away discussion of God, then went on to vigorously complain about his wife constantly rejecting him no matter what he does for her.  While he reaches out (or so he thinks…he’s just going through the motions, really) to her, she “spits in his face.”  The parallel between that and his relationship to God becomes quite apparent soon after.

It was good to see a movie promoting marriage values, there were some very funny moments, and it was deep in places.  It really made me stop and consider my ways.  Hey, being “provoked to godliness” by a film is never a bad thing.

Michael Brown has a helpful review here.  Particularly helpful were the following two “con” points about the film:

  • Presents Christianity as the solution to a bad marriage.The reality is that there are plenty of unbelievers who are happily married (relatively speaking). This is because marriage is a creational, pre-Fall institution that belongs to the realm of common grace, not redemption. Marriage (that is, a lifelong, monogomous covenant between one man and one woman) is for all people, not merely Christians. Chances are there is an unbelieving married couple on your street who have a pretty good marriage, due to their relationship being marked with mutual service, love and devotion. Conversely, there are plenty of Christian marriages that look like the one depicted at the beginning of the movie (i.e. characterized by selfishness, unforgiveness, anger, and bitterness), due to the Christian couple refusing to get over themselves and grow up. So, this is very misleading. And unbelievers are not so stupid that they can’t pick up on this. Just read the reviews of this film.
  • Presents a theology of glory. More of the above. Unfortunately, the message preached (and I mean preached) in this movie inevitably comes across to say, “Become a Christian and the circumstances of your life will improve.” Well, that is a) not true and b) not a valid reason for becoming a Christian. Read 1 Corinthians 15. The only valid reason for becoming a Christian is that the message of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ is TRUE, not that it offers the spiritual magic to have your best life right now.

Candace Watters at Boundless provides another review that balances out Michael’s review here.

I’m easy to please, and perhaps that’s why I liked it.  It’s good to see strong Christians in the film-making business, and I hope we can keep that up while improving the quality of our films at the same time.

Check out the following related posts:

A Boy Becomes a Man (Gran Torino movie review)

Seven Pounds

A Boy Becomes a Man

I never thought I’d laugh so hard just from seeing an old guy grunt.

Clint Eastwood gave me good comedy like only Clint Eastwood can. In the movie Gran Torino, he plays Walt Kowalski, an old-school war veteran with a bit of a chip on his shoulder. He can’t relate to his sons or grandchildren (who don’t care a lick about him anyway), and all he does to the new Asian neighbors next door is scowl, grunt, and spew racist names at them.grantorino

All this brings heavy laughs at moments, but Gran Torino is no comedy. It probes deep themes.

On the surface, the movie appears to be about racism and reaching across culture barriers. Walt thinks that he has nothing in common with the Hmong neighbors next door, but this starts to change after a few run ins with local thugs. Through no initiative of his own, Walt ends up befriending young Thao, who early in the movie attempts to steal his prized car.

The movie does deal with racism, but that is a penultimate theme. Gran Torino’s two biggest foci are on Thao’s venture into maturity and manhood and fixing brokenness.

In the beginning, Thao’s grandmother complains, “who will be the man of the house?” After a male relative mentions the young boy, the best encouragement she can offer (In front of Thao, no less. One can imagine how emasculating it was to hear these words.) is, “No way…no way. He only does what his sister tells him to do. Look at him!” He is quite socially awkward, has trouble standing up for himself, and refuses to look others in the eye.

After the pair find themselves linked together against their wills, Walt becomes a reluctant mentor of sorts to Thao. He teaches Thao about fixing things, finding a job, wooing the ladies, and “men talk.” Through all this, the young boy acquires a voice and confidence. For example, when Walt solicits his help in lifting a refrigerator from the basement, Thao insists that he gets the heavier portion of the job. After Walt insinuates otherwise, Thao puts him in his place, saying defiantly, “You asked me to help you! Either I lift it at the front or I’m outta here!” This surprises the old buzzard, but he falls in line.

Walt’s ideal of masculinity is flawed in spots (For example, when he takes Tao to the barber to learn how to “talk like a man,” the first thing you see in the shop, even before you see the barber’s face, is a page out of a porn magazine.), but he gives something the young boy desperately needs. The women, though they love him very much, cannot teach Thao to be a man. The other males in the neighborhood are, for some reason, unwilling or unable to step in.

This movie underscores an unfortunately controversial truth: men are necessary. Without a strong man mentoring Thao, he would either remain in his passive state, or become a predator with the gang thugs in the neighborhood. In fact, Walt unknowingly intervenes at the exact moment when Thao faces such a temptation. Were it not for the Vet’s initiative, the kid would have become another blight on the neighborhood.

Only a man like Walt could stand up to the bullies and stare them down. He had the chutzpah to give them a bloody nose. The gang thugs would not listen to Sue’s demands to leave them alone; even though she was one tough cookie, she was not speaking their language.

The last scenes show another necessary aspect of manhood: self-sacrifice. This is the most important lesson Thao learns from the dying Walt.

Walt is a flawed man. That is an understatement. He is adept at fixing things, though. Whether its a leaky faucet or broken ceiling fan, his acquired knowledge and skill comes in handy to those in the neighborhood. He starts out fixing the physical aspects of the area, but soon finds himself attempting to fix something he’s far less knowledgeable about; human beings. This is a venture that cannot be done via drive-by. His sons and grandchildren think it can, but look at how their lives turned out.

No. Fathering hearts is something that takes significant time, energy, and sacrifice. Much like taking care of a prized Gran Torino, it must be nurtured and cultivated. This is the key to Thao’s growth, Walt’s transformation, and his budding relationship with the community around him.

In the end, Walt becomes a man that no one, not even himself, thought he could be; this is the beauty and gift of a life of sacrifice.

Check out other related posts:

Why Guys Need God

Movie Review: Seven Pounds

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Seven Pounds

***Warning: Spoilers ahead***

Wow! What a movie. You need to go see it if you haven’t already.sevenpounds

This is not an action-packed thriller, nor will it garner Oscars for its special effects. Seven Pounds does not spell everything out for you; you will have to really be paying attention at times to follow it, because certain key parts are subtle. If you are the ADD movie-going type, you might be easily bored.

It’s not a feel good movie either.

Why am I still going ga-ga about it, then? It makes you think, that’s why. Even though I called the ending pretty quickly, it kept throwing me curve balls to make me doubt my guess.

While watching Ben Thomas make the ultimate sacrifice, I wondered: would I have the courage to do the same for someone I love? At first glance, I thought “of course!” After it really sunk in, though, the question really gave me pause: would I really? I won’t ultimately know until and unless I’m confronted with such a choice. Cowardice and self-centeredness often lurks in hidden corners until just the right time.

Thinking about that question really made me take stock of my character and backbone.

There are other questions the movie addresses that it leaves unanswered. Why, ultimately, did Ben give so much for seven strangers? Was it guilt? Or, in the end, was it love? Just how much redemption does Ben achieve? Does his own sacrifice bring him emotional peace? The answers are quite ambiguous.

The movie is a true gut-wrencher. Seeing Ben (Tim) constantly sacrifice his well being for the sake of others he doesn’t know stirred my soul. Even though his efforts are awkward and stalker-esque at times, I shed tears, which doesn’t happen too often at the movies. Even though you won’t walk out of the theater gushing with joy, Ben Thomas’ sacrifice, on some level, is truly beautiful and inspiring.

Many reviewers have knocked the film for its unrealistic nature. My thoughts: meh. As one commenter noted, unrealistic is the currency of Hollywood. We buy a vigilante billionaire disguised as a gigantic bat, but we can’t buy Ben Thomas’ quest? Need we be so fickle?

I’m not that hard to please. Just have some decent acting, avoid pounding me with an uber-liberal sermon, and avoid setting fire to straw men in said sermonizing, and I’m satisfied.

Ben is a man wrestling with demons. I mean this guy is in torment. In the end, as a way to find freedom (or, as I alluded to earlier, was he acting out of love at the end?), he willingly lays down his life so that another can live. He literally gave his heart to a woman in need. I couldn’t help but think of Christ in this. He, too, laid down His life so that His beloved can live in eternity. We have bad hearts in need of replacement. Not just repair, mind you: our hearts are dead. Only heart replacement surgery will do. In the act of faith, His heart becomes ours.

The analogy is imperfect, yes (Ben: sinner looking for redemption. Jesus: sinless, only giver 0f redemption. Ben: gives based on merit. Christ: while we were yet sinners, He died for us. And there’s that whole resurrection-defeat-of-death-and-sin thing.), but a likeness is there.

Another question the film brought up is, “how do you react to loss and trauma?” Ben and Emily react to the trauma in their lives in very different ways. Unlike Ben, Emily still has joy. Thus, in their relationship, even though Ben gives the ultimate sacrifice, Emily enriches Ben’s life in a subtle, yet significant way. She, too, has a gift to give.

At bottom, Ben is searching for two things: redemption, and goodness in others. Is he successful in his twofold mission?

That depends. Ultimately and eternally, of course, he doesn’t redeem himself. In God’s court, no good deed, no matter how big, can erase our debt. We already owe God goodness, and you can’t pay for your rap sheet with what you already owe. Only Christ can eradicate our debt.

But was Ben searching for salvation? No. I didn’t get the sense that he was searching for divine forgiveness. He was merely trying to find peace with himself. The guilt he carried from literally wrecking seven lives drove his mission to give back.

Still, though, first things first: peace with oneself and with others starts vertically, not horizontally. Thus, there would be no better place for Ben than the foot of the cross.

Ben was also searching for some good in others. This is something he ultimately found in the likes of Emily and Ezra. One need not embrace the idea that we are born good in order to see this. Were we to ask Ben, for instance, I’m sure he would readily acknowledge that humans are quite flawed.

The divine spark, though dimmed by sin, still resides in us, though. We steep to such great depths, but we are also capable of so much good. That is part of the imago dei. Even in a dark, fallen, and evil universe, it still shines brightly. Ben found that in a unexpected and unassuming place.

Lots of questions. Few answers. Go see it anyway. We need that sometimes.

Check out these other related posts:

The Gospel of Will Smith

If you like what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (button at the top right in the sidebar).

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook