MUSIC - Legacy Baptist Promo

I went with the epic choir sound on this one:

Click here to view/hear

REVIEW: The Prestige

I'm going to begin this review with the most concrete content issues, because if you haven't seen the film and plan to see it, watch it before you read my review. The twist in this film is crucial to the impact thereof. I'll list the content issues first, so that you can decide if you wouldn't want to see it anyway. It is definitely not a family (with little kids) film.

- a few shots of a man without a shirt
- multiple appearances of women who are not decently clothed- mostly in the form of magicians' assistants, also one or two nightgown shots. This consists of low cleavage and high skirts... I spent a lot of these shots using peripheral vision or simply watching our back door.
- semi-graphic violence- bloody fingers, screams, a shooting, etc.
- people drowning/drowned in glass boxes- very disturbing, and reoccurring through flashbacks, and through happenings, a few times, though it isn't something that we see the whole film long.
- somebody is buried alive- he doesn't die, he's rescued, but it's a scary thought...
- a woman hangs herself
- probably more stuff too...

For a more detailed review, see here: http://www.kids-in-mind.com/p/prestige.htm
Also, for our family policy on questionable films, please see here: http://allauthority.blogspot.com/2011/02/questionable-films.html

If you might still be interested in seeing the film- watch it first! Then read my review. I'll be spoiling the end, and it's a big spoil in this film.

That said, on to the review.

The Film
The Prestige is a fascinating, mind-bending, and disturbing film. The plot centers around two professional magicians, each attempting to be better than the other. Note- by magicians, I mean illusionists, not wizards. No, they aren't dabbling in the supernatural.

It was an excellently done film. Very well mood-controlled, great directing by Chris Nolan (The Dark Knight, Inception), great acting by Christian Bale, and all together simply a well done film.

The score was great for the film, though it wasn't anything special on its own.

The story is what really makes The Prestige worth watching. Chris Nolan's non-linear (not- well, not in a line. Showing things out of order.) storytelling style makes it tough sometimes to understand what's happening. That said, the non-linearity in Prestige was, in my opinion, much better handled than that in Inception, which I thought was a little forced. In fact, the whole story in this film seemed more solidly handled than that in Inception- but I digress.

At the end of the film we learn that (I didn't get this the first time) one magician was actually two men all along- two twins. What a wowing moment for the viewer! Then comes the next twist, made all the eerier by Michael Caine's excellent and monotonous narration- the other magician had been scientifically duplicating himself to create the ultimate magic trick- and then murdering the duplicates.

Other than the pop song in the credits (WHY?), this film was very well done, and from a filmmaking standpoint definitely ranks very high.

The one other thing that bugs me is- why didn't Michael Caine's character just open the trick lock when the girl was drowning, instead of smashing through the case?

The Worldview

The twist at the end has huge implications for the worldview of the film.

Overall, the film is pretty miserable. Neither of the magicians, the whole film long, are really very nice characters. And for that we may be grateful- the film tells a story, but we don't really have someone to cheer for. We like Christian Bale's character a bit more, but only at the very end do we realize that we can actually justify doing so.

When we find out that, all along, "Freddie" was actually two men, we realize that one man was the hot-tempered and violent one, and the other was the cool-headed one who didn't want to prolong the troubles. We find out that, all along, while Freddie's wife thought he was committing adultery (as did the woman he was committing adultery with), it was actually the two twins- one man loving one woman, and the other man another. We see here the consequences of deception and the consequences of a man working with a woman who is not his wife as his helper, though by the end we see that the real husband did stay faithful. (Kinda- but if they're both playing both roles... that presents a problem.)

We also have the issue of- if a man duplicates his body, would his soul be duplicated as well? I don't think so... ultimately, God gives life to every person. Mess with atoms all that it may, science cannot give life.

So, it's a fascinating film to ponder morally...

A very potent, and perhaps the most obvious moral of the film is that obsession brings only misery.

So in summary of the worldview- it was pretty bad, but wasn't really modeled as a good thing that it was bad. We don't really find ourselves cheering for either magician wholeheartedly (at least I didn't) until we discover at the end that the one brother, faulted though he be, is truly noble-hearted. The other two got their just desserts.

Another thing I like about the two Nolan films I've seen- in both, family is treasured! What a great thing!

Recommended for mature viewers, especially those who want to study storytelling. 4/5

Pictures from February

My beloved sister Moriah and I have recently joined a photography group taught by a very skilled photographer who attends our church. As I take pictures for homework, I plan to post them here- perhaps add some color to my blog. :-D

This month we learned about refraction and the pinhole camera- studying the behavior of light. God's creation is awesome.

There's a story in this one somewhere:
















If you look closely in the second one, you can actually see the front end of one vehicle, the top of a house, and the back end of another vehicle, upside-down in the drop.

("Are you watching closely?" Oh, wait, that's from a film I'm planning to review soon...)

Review: Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole

A WWII film set in Middle-Earth featuring owls and with a Chronicles of Narnia flavor to it.

Yeah. Whoa.

I was pleasantly surprised with this film. I went into it with low expectations- the trailer reeked of cheese. And the film delivered some cheese, I must admit. I can appreciate a story about talking animals, that’s OK, but the film often takes itself too seriously and makes the main owl too awesome a few times. The slo-mo and epic music were a bit much. (But, the slo-mo might have looked amazing in 3-D. I dunno. And I also know that some people really liked it... oh well. It took me out of the story.)

There was also some magic in the film.

That said, Owls had surprisingly, refreshingly original character arcs, and a remarkably good overall worldview. The story took me by surprise when what I thought would be the main goal of the film actually was more of a catalyst to the real challenge.

I thought their journey to get to the guardians would be the meat of the film, but it only took a very short amount of time, surprisingly. It wasn’t a boring film, either.

I'll break this review down into two parts- my thoughts on the film as such, and my thoughts on the worldview behind the film:

The Film

Legend had some of the most amazing animation that I have ever seen. I was amazed by the realism and the downright gorgeousness of this film. The detail in the eyes, the suppleness of the feathers, the ability to make the main character’s features memorable when they’re all owls- I was very impressed.

The sound-design and music were OK. It seemed a little rough to me- perhaps at a few parts the levels could have been tweaked better. The score was not one of my favorites, especially with the over-the-top wailing in some parts. It had some neat dulcimer, though.

The story was the big weakness of the film. This could have really been an excellent film if they had spent more time developing character and simply letting the audience take in the story. A lot of it happened too fast and/or too randomly. I could feel that something just wasn't that great when I first saw the film- many thanks to friend and fellow filmmaker Aubrey for unpacking a lot of the why behind what I felt. Maybe I'll be able to pinpoint it better next time. But, to analyze this in-depth is not the purpose of this review- suffice it to say that the story could have used more work.

The credits- another pop song. WHY? WHY OH WHY? *grrrr*

This is a pet peeve of mine. Of all the things to NOT let the composer score, why would you withhold from him this chance to rhapsodize on the themes from the film? And why would you want to leave the audience with a pop song? Give them something grand and deep to walk out of the theater to.

The Worldview

The worldview of this film, though imperfect, was very refreshing.

The brother who honors the father and his stories is the good guy, the one who dishonors his father is a bad guy and ?dies? in the end- or at least almost dies.

Family is portrayed as good. The legacy of the forefathers is portrayed as good (pointed glance at Fiddler on the Roof). Good big brother loves and protects his little sister- bad big brother doesn’t. Good big brother respects mom and dad, bad one doesn’t. Good big brother treasures the tales of the past, bad big brother doesn’t. Good big brother honors the heroes of days gone by. It does bother me that he didn't go home after being lost and talk to his parents, though. Maybe we can say he had no choice? Or perhaps he knew that that was what his father would want him to do.

The two brothers disobey their parents once- a very overused tactic for getting kids into places they shouldn't be- and good big brother also disobeys orders twice later at the revelation of new information. That said, good big brother obeys, on the whole, even when he doesn't want to- he's not the young guy who ignores the older warrior's exhortation to remain home.

One owl in the film talks about how there is no glory to war (where I disagree with him), but the refreshing part about it was that, instead of doing the trendy “war is bad” sermon, the wise old owl continues by explaining that we fight because it is right, not because it is glorious. That amazed me- I loved it.

There is a severely underdeveloped romance between two owls in the film.

The jokes were, overall, very clean. The word “hell” was used to describe war.

The “pure ones” (bad guys) were a stark parallel to the Nazi regime- powerful stuff.

Altogether, I’d definitely recommend this film, especially on a worldview basis. 3/5

MUSIC - The Story Machine

On a more light-hearted note (har har) than some recent posts...

A semi-recent composition by yours truly for a promotional video filmed by a fellow Christian Filmmaker:

The Story Machine

Fiddler On The Roof

Wow. Wow. Wow. One of the most dangerous and disturbing films I've seen in a long time. And I thought The Music Man was bad.

I need to review a film that I liked soon. :-D

This film objectifies women. It glorifies rebellion and impurity. It mocks God-given authority. It models men who are pious, kind, and wimpy (the tailor), old and stuck-up (the devout Jews), likable and underhanded (the father of the family that the film focuses on), or handsome, irresistible, and wicked (the husbands/boyfriends of the two younger girls). It models women who are unhappy and rebellious, who don't have enough character to see right through the hot guy who looks into their eyes and talks softly. And it makes a mockery of God's Law, and indeed of God Himself.

The film lays out the destruction of a family heritage- and portrays it as a good thing. The first daughter marries a good, devout Jew- she just doesn't do it the proper, traditional way. The next girl marries a radical Jew, and doesn't ask her father's permission- though they do want his blessing. ???

By daughter number three, she marries outside the faith. For a while, papa's strong on the issue, and won't give his blessing- he won't even speak to her. But of course, he bends there, too, by the end of the film.

How sad! How twisted! The modeling that a father can't say "no" to his daughter. "Look at her eyes... she loves him..."

If a father truly loves his daughter he will put weight to his words. Love doesn't mean giving someone what they want- but a person who acts in true love will give someone what they need.

Now, mind you, I'm not one who says that "tradition" is the standard. May it never be! Scripture is The Standard. God's Word trumps the word of any other- including my earthly father. BUT. My Heavenly Father has given me my earthly father and the traditions and heritages that I receive from him and others. Those traditions should be honored and respected, just as my father should be honored and respected by myself. If the traditions violate Scripture- may they be abolished! My father would say the same. May they never be placed on par with God's Word. But let us receive and honor those traditions which are rooted in Scripture with joy!

Yet, even if I am to abolish traditions, I must do it in an honoring way- not a brash, cocky, and irreverent one. In stead of confronting my father by tearing down his traditions in front of the whole town, it would be far better to speak to him in private! (Not only for Scriptural Principles' sake, but also so that if he ties me up in knots with the good reasons behind the tradition, I'm not so embarrassed. :-D)

Fiddler on the Roof basically lays precedent for rebellion, and for, really, the elevation of some sort of mushy, humanistic "love" over the love that God defines for us in His Law-Word.

Perhaps films like this are why we now think it's cruel for a father to refuse to attend the wedding of a Christian child to a pagan, or for a family to ostracize a homosexual child, or for a church to practice church discipline on an adulterous Sunday-school teacher. But where did Scripture give us a basis for this concept of love?

I said the film objectifies women. I want to elaborate. By abolishing patriarchy, by promoting a woman free to marry and "fall in love" and so on, by removing the God-given protections of a young woman's heart, the film, instead of freeing the woman, makes her a slave to the first dark-eyed and smooth-tongued teen-idol who comes her way. Is this freedom? Why can we not see that the young Russian who saves the young Jew from the men who were teasing her is far, far more dangerous to the girl than the men he saved her from ever were? They caused her discomfort for a moment- he destroyed her purity, her faith, her family, her future.

Interestingly enough, good ol' Hollywood always portrays the hot and radical young men who coo "I love you" as actually being faithful men of good character who would lay down their lives for their women. What a lie! The man who will steal a girl's heart most likely won't treasure it later. If he has no desire to protect your purity now, what makes you think that he will want to protect you when it really counts- when true love manifests itself? 20 years later, when you are not so pretty and have had a few children and a few years and a few pounds, do you think that he will treasure the heart that he stole on a whim?

Hollywood says yes. Methinks Hollywood be wrong.

Why do we see this as freedom for women?

(Sidenote- kinda like how the man who opens a door for a girl is upholding an oppressive patriarchy or an old-fashioned ignorance, but a guy who pins her in a wrestling match is promoting liberation for women... I applaud this young man)

The score was absolutely gorgeous. Break my heart, Isaac Stern.

It also had a very powerful ending and some very impressive filmmaking techniques- the silhouette dancing was fascinating and beautiful, some of the shots were great, and "Sunrise, Sunset" was like to make ya cry.

Also, one of the powerful lessons that we may take from this film is that we must not pass on tradition as such. We must pass on traditions along with the reasons behind them.

Nevertheless, because of the worldview... I'd have to give it 1 of 5, and I would only recommend it on the basis of it being a cultural classic, a great study in how not to live- worldview analysis-, and a very beautiful experience musically.

(Also, parental warning- there's a pretty scary scene for little kids where the father is recounting his dream of ghosts rising from their graves.)

Questionable Films

My mom mentioned that it may be wise for me to mention some of our policies on film-viewing, seeing as how I review films that some may find inappropriate. I praise God for a wise mother!

There is a website at which you may read detailed review about the actual content of many modern releases. This site has been very helpful. However, as the descriptions given are detailed- the profanity is denoted tastefully, but violence and nudity are described as shown in the film- I would recommend that it be used mainly by parents, and certainly with discretion: http://kids-in-mind.com/

I would also like to mention that we like to purchase films that have been edited for content:

http://www.clean-edited-movies.com/clean_flicks.htm

I have also heard good things about Clear-play: http://www.clearplay.com/

The convictions of a household on what to watch and not to watch are ultimately the responsibility of the head of the home as well as of each individual as he walks with The LORD.

In our home, nudity is the big no-no. Language is something that we really don't like, especially when they are irreverent with The Name of God.

Violence is something that my perspective has changed drastically on.

I don't any longer believe that violence in films is bad. Gratuitous, excessive violence, perhaps. But violence is a fact of life, and something that can be used to lend gravity to a subject that requires said gravity. We, especially as men, should be able to handle it.

Usually, anything questionable is first viewed by our parents. I thank God for that shield of our innocence.

There are some things that I want to watch because they are a kind of cultural artifact- The Music Man being one of them!- that I might not watch otherwise. They have shaped our culture and are referenced all the time. Other films have are edifying on the whole, though junk was added for flavor. Blech. Braveheart, my favorite film (which we own edited, by the way), is an example of this.

I desire to remain pure of heart and mind, to take every thought captive, and to be able to learn from the amazing works of art which are great because they conform to God's Order, though they don't obey in every way.

I hope that clears a few things up. Ultimately, let us meditate on things that are pleasing to God. Let us think on the "true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, and praiseworthy" things. And don't you go watch something, regret it, and blame it on me. :-D