This is the fifth movie in the series, and is the first movie since the full return of Voldemort in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. If somehow you missed GoF, both the book and the movie, then you should know that it is the book where the series begins to take on a darker tone. The movies (especially, but even the books) are not for younger children. Parents are responsible for defining what "younger" is, but I would think no less than a teenager.
As the movie begins, Harry is having a run in with Dudley and some of Dudley's "friends." One could easily get the impression that Dudley's friends are like Voldemort's friends, merely partners in crime. Dementors show up and attack the two boys, and Harry is forced to defend them with his patronus (the dementors are one reason this movie is not appropriate for younger viewers - they are well done and could easily cause nightmares).
This leads Harry to be expelled from Hogwarts, to meet the Order of the Phoenix - Dumbledore's cadre to oppose Voldemort, and to undergo a trial at the Ministry of Magic. Through this Harry learns that the ministry is denying Voldemort's return and suspects Dumbledore of plotting to overtake the ministry. What follows is perhaps Harry's most difficult year at Hogwarts. Even many of his fellow Gryffindor's suspect him of lying about Voldemort.
Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint once again portray Harry, Hermione, and Ron with faithfulness to the books presentation of the characters. Ralph Fiennes and Jason Isaacs play Voldemort and Lucius Malfoy with the proper amount of malice and terror. Imelda Staunton's Dolores Umbridge reminded me of a cross between the worst traits of two of my grade school teachers, which nearly gave me nightmares.
This movie is a good addition to the series. While probably not the best in the series, it is a definite "see at the theater" movie.
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Monday, July 9, 2007
1408
Have you stayed in room 1408 at the Dolphin? Of course not - it's fictional. First in a short story by Stephen King, now as a motion picture starring John Cusack. One of my favorite authors and one of my favorite actors. When I saw it roughly a week ago, I was hopeful that it would be that rare thing - a good adaptation of a Stephen King story - and was not disappointed.
King is not, by his own admission, a Christian so to try to compare his work with CS Lewis or J.R.R. Tolkien may seem unfair to some. My impression is that King would get a lower favorability rating than JK Rowling by most conservative Christians. But while he does not fall within the same religious foundation as a Lewis or Tolkien, King deals with a lot of the same themes. 1408 is about unbeliever confronted with true evil. It is not, though some may take it that way, a "ghost" story. It is more like Christine, or From a Buick 8, or Black House in that the room, a supposedly inanimate object, is the villain of the piece.
I'm sure over time I will have more to say here about Mr. King and his work. But if you like scary movies at all, I put 1408 in the "see at the theater" category. One other ranking criteria, though probably obvious for this film: it is not a "family" film. Do not take immature (you determine what that is for your) children.
Sidenote 1: When, on the occasion that I have seen a movie and chose to rank it, my rankings (high to low) will be:
Sidenote 2: Many King stories don't translate well to cinema. Movies like Stand by Me and The Shawshank Redemption made the transition well, but many of the more stereotypical Stephen King stories have not faired so well (don't get me started on Hearts in Atlantis, which was actually a terrible version of "Low Men in Yellow Coats" and not "Hearts in Atlantis" proper at all). Why this is might be a good discussion topic for a future date.
King is not, by his own admission, a Christian so to try to compare his work with CS Lewis or J.R.R. Tolkien may seem unfair to some. My impression is that King would get a lower favorability rating than JK Rowling by most conservative Christians. But while he does not fall within the same religious foundation as a Lewis or Tolkien, King deals with a lot of the same themes. 1408 is about unbeliever confronted with true evil. It is not, though some may take it that way, a "ghost" story. It is more like Christine, or From a Buick 8, or Black House in that the room, a supposedly inanimate object, is the villain of the piece.
I'm sure over time I will have more to say here about Mr. King and his work. But if you like scary movies at all, I put 1408 in the "see at the theater" category. One other ranking criteria, though probably obvious for this film: it is not a "family" film. Do not take immature (you determine what that is for your) children.
Sidenote 1: When, on the occasion that I have seen a movie and chose to rank it, my rankings (high to low) will be:
- See at the theater
- Rent the DVD (or pay per view if that is your preference)
- Catch it on a premium channel
- Watch it on basic cable (you'll enjoy the breaks)
- Don't waste your precious time
Sidenote 2: Many King stories don't translate well to cinema. Movies like Stand by Me and The Shawshank Redemption made the transition well, but many of the more stereotypical Stephen King stories have not faired so well (don't get me started on Hearts in Atlantis, which was actually a terrible version of "Low Men in Yellow Coats" and not "Hearts in Atlantis" proper at all). Why this is might be a good discussion topic for a future date.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
The Boundary of Imagination
An off-hand comment tonight got me thinking about an old Twilight Zone episode called "Kick the Can" that was also included (as a remake) in the theatrical version of the show. If I had to list one TV show as my all-time favorite, The Twilight Zone (TWZ) would probably be it.
There are a number of reasons, not the least of which was the quality of most of the episodes. Like many TV shows, some episodes are better than others, and the disparity in TWZ episodes maybe more so than others. They covered a wide range of subjects and genres, unlike Rod Serling's follow on project, The Night Gallery, which was primarily a horror anthology. Even a comparison to the science fiction anthology The Outer Limits would not be appropriate.
TWZ had genuinely scary episodes, like "Twenty-Two" and "The Hitch-Hiker" but they were the minority. It also had some true science fiction episodes, like "Back There" (a time travel story starring the Professor - Russell Johnson - from Giligan's Island), "To Serve Man" (a first contact story), and "Number Twelve Looks Just Like You" (a look at life in the year 2000). Again, these are more the minority. The shows covered the fringes of horror and science fiction, focusing more on characters, surprise endings (who are the invaders in "The Invaders"), and the question of what it means to be human.
Some episodes, like "The Encounter" about a WWII soldier and a young American of Japenese descent (Sulu - George Takei - from the original Star Trek), were too controversial for repeat airings. "The Howling Man" deals with the reality of the Devil and "The Obsolete Man" deals with individual faith versus a totalitarian state atheism. A few were more or less comedies (e.g. "Hocus-Pocus and Frisby").
If you are going to watch television, and have never seen The Twilight Zone, I strongly recommend it to you. Whether you catch repeats on The Sci Fi channel or buy a DVD (just make sure you get the original series circa 1959-1964) it is arguably as good as TV gets.
There are a number of reasons, not the least of which was the quality of most of the episodes. Like many TV shows, some episodes are better than others, and the disparity in TWZ episodes maybe more so than others. They covered a wide range of subjects and genres, unlike Rod Serling's follow on project, The Night Gallery, which was primarily a horror anthology. Even a comparison to the science fiction anthology The Outer Limits would not be appropriate.
TWZ had genuinely scary episodes, like "Twenty-Two" and "The Hitch-Hiker" but they were the minority. It also had some true science fiction episodes, like "Back There" (a time travel story starring the Professor - Russell Johnson - from Giligan's Island), "To Serve Man" (a first contact story), and "Number Twelve Looks Just Like You" (a look at life in the year 2000). Again, these are more the minority. The shows covered the fringes of horror and science fiction, focusing more on characters, surprise endings (who are the invaders in "The Invaders"), and the question of what it means to be human.
Some episodes, like "The Encounter" about a WWII soldier and a young American of Japenese descent (Sulu - George Takei - from the original Star Trek), were too controversial for repeat airings. "The Howling Man" deals with the reality of the Devil and "The Obsolete Man" deals with individual faith versus a totalitarian state atheism. A few were more or less comedies (e.g. "Hocus-Pocus and Frisby").
If you are going to watch television, and have never seen The Twilight Zone, I strongly recommend it to you. Whether you catch repeats on The Sci Fi channel or buy a DVD (just make sure you get the original series circa 1959-1964) it is arguably as good as TV gets.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
A Persepective on Hollywood and Christians
Tim Challies has posted some thoughts on why Evan Almighty has flopped after being marketed to Christians. Tim's comments are sparked by an article on the FoxNews.com. That article concludes with the following:
Despite the bomb that was Evan Almighty, millions of devout Americans are still waiting to be invited into a theater to see a film that is entertaining, affirms their values and doesn't trivialize their deeply held religious beliefs. If Hollywood continues to create films like Evan Almighty, millions of traditionalists may grow to rue the day when Hollywood, with dollar signs in its eyes, began courting them with wilted flowers and stale chocolate.
Mixing religion and entertainment has been long avoided for a reason:
It's difficult to do well. But if the result of this grand new experiment is films that are neither faithful nor funny, millions of traditionalists will likely find less expensive ways to be entertained and inspired.
A Visit to Vanity Fair
A Visit to Vanity Fair is a book of essays by Alan Jacobs. Jacobs calls them moral essays, subtitling the book "Moral Essays on the Present Age." I recommend this book to you. The book, in my second listen through its audio form from Mars Hill Audio (near the bottom of the page), is the inspiration behind this blog.
While I'm not sure I will be writing what Jacobs' calls "moral essays" I will be providing some critique on the culture. By using "Vanity Fair" (Vanity is a town in John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress where a year long fair was held, hence the full title of "A Pilgrim in Vanity Fair") I am announcing a critical (or counter-cultural) spirit in examining the zeitgeist of early 21st century America.
If the blog has a tag line, it would probably be from Harry Chapin's "There Only Was One Choice" where Harry sings, "Harry, Can you honestly believe that the country's getting better when all you do is let her alone."
I'm not sure how frequently I will post here, or what all I will post on. One thought rattling around in my head is to start by touching on at least some of the essays in this blogs inspiration, but I've not committed to that yet.
I want to close with something that should go with out saying, but still needs to be said. The contents here are (generally - I will be posting quotes, etc. from time to time) my own rambling thoughts. Do not blame Alan Jacobs or anyone else for what I write. While the content will be very dependent on what I hear and learn from others, realize that it has been filtered through my brain which may or may not return faithful and/or agreed to conclusions from the source material.
While I'm not sure I will be writing what Jacobs' calls "moral essays" I will be providing some critique on the culture. By using "Vanity Fair" (Vanity is a town in John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress where a year long fair was held, hence the full title of "A Pilgrim in Vanity Fair") I am announcing a critical (or counter-cultural) spirit in examining the zeitgeist of early 21st century America.
If the blog has a tag line, it would probably be from Harry Chapin's "There Only Was One Choice" where Harry sings, "Harry, Can you honestly believe that the country's getting better when all you do is let her alone."
I'm not sure how frequently I will post here, or what all I will post on. One thought rattling around in my head is to start by touching on at least some of the essays in this blogs inspiration, but I've not committed to that yet.
I want to close with something that should go with out saying, but still needs to be said. The contents here are (generally - I will be posting quotes, etc. from time to time) my own rambling thoughts. Do not blame Alan Jacobs or anyone else for what I write. While the content will be very dependent on what I hear and learn from others, realize that it has been filtered through my brain which may or may not return faithful and/or agreed to conclusions from the source material.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
