"Ralph is a bad guy. Well, he’s not a bad guy, but… he’s a bad guy. In an arcade game called Felix Fix-It Jr. Ralph breaks a penthouse full of cute little people, Felix fixes it with his magic hammer and wins a medal. That’s how it’s been every single day for thirty years. Felix gets parties and cake and admiration, while Ralph lives in the dump and is shunned and hated.
One day, Ralph finally decides to change all this. He’s tired of being a bad guy, and wants to be a hero. He obtains a promise that if he gets a medal, he can live in the penthouse, and sets out to get a shiny, hero medal from the Cy-Bug-ridden Hero’s Duty game.
But after gaining the medal, his clumsiness sends him crashing into the candy-coated Sugar Rush racing game, where he meets an annoying but cute little girl who needs his help. Not to mention that Fix-It-Felix Jr. is being shut down without Ralph’s wrecking, and Ralph accidentally brought a Cy-Bug with him that’s going to eat Sugar Rush and then all the rest of the arcade if it can’t be stopped.
Can Ralph make the right choices in a world where the tweak of a code can change everything? Can he save the arcade and do his duty? And what really makes a hero, anyway?"
READ THE FULL REVIEW! includes info about "the fixed" "the wrecked" and the overall "gameplay" in the film.
I was given pre-screening access to this film, with the stipulation of writing a review. The film is currently in theaters and is yet to be released on DVD.
Synopsis:
Cowgirls N' Angels is a heartwarming movie that tells the story of Ida, a feisty and rebellious young girl, who has dreams of finding her father, a rodeo rider. While searching for her dad, she connects with the Sweethearts of the Rodeo, a team of young female rodeo riders run by former rodeo star Terence Parker. Recognizing Ida's innate talent for trick riding, Terence recruits her for their ranks. Accepted wholeheartedly by her new "family," Ida finds a new passion that redefines her life, and may also help her find the father she's been searching for.
Review:
Taking into consideration that I'm not really the demographic being targeted for this film, I was surprised at how much I actually enjoyed it. However, I am from the south, and can enjoy a good rodeo so maybe that helped!
The story centers around a 12 year old girl who joins the trick-riding "Sweethearts of the Rodeo" in an attempt to find her dad.
THE BAD:
While the film as a whole would probably be considered "clean" by most, there are a few things worth noting. Most of my concern revolves around a side-storyline where one of the riders falls in love with a young cowboy she meets while on the road. Falling in love isn't the problem, it's the scenes of flirting, kissing, and brief drinking that raised some cautions. Some of those issues are addressed, but not as satisfactorily as I was hoping. There is also a post-rodeo dance that takes place in a bar.
In a number of instances Ida has displays disrespect to her mother and in one particular instance has more than just "a bad attitude" and ends up saying some things she later regrets. During the film she readliy admits that "I'm no angel," as she has an on going problem with lying, stealing, and deception. She does recognize these character flaws and is trying to learn better habits.
Lastly, I wasn't all too surprised to find that a film about female rodeo riders brought along a herd of wardrobe concerns. Tight jeans, and tight/revealing shirts make a number of appearances throughout the movie. I know...I know...it's a cowgirl movie, but I still think a little more discretion could have been used at times.
THE GOOD:
In the film, Terence Parker and his wife started the "Sweethearts of the Rodeo" as a way to reach out to girls who needed a fresh start. He is an old man now, with a big heart and he some important words of wisdom for Ida about telling the truth.
Bailee Madison (who plays Ida) is the star actress of the film and easily steals the show! This is one talented young actress, who will have you laughing one moment and crying the next. It's hard not to chuckle at some of her accidents and more mischievous incidents, but it's the tender moments of the story that she can really bring home and that will endear you to her and her character. There is a lot of growth for her character in this movie and seeing some of those changes happen is very heart-warming!
A rodeo preacher is also part of the Sweetheart staff, and though his role in the story is rather minimal he does have one notable and encouraging scene about belief vs. trust in God.
I wouldn't call this film "preachy" or even overtly Christian by any stretch. A few characters wear cross necklaces and God and prayer are mentioned once or twice. I would say though that most of the lessons taught throughout are consistent with Christian principles.
Easily, the most memorable quote from the film comes from Ida, "I used to think of people as a big box of crayons that God would use to scribble into His book of life. Only, up until now, I thought my color was clear."
There's also a fair bit of rodeo action, and impressive trick riding as would be expected from a film like this, but in the end it's themes of love, forgiveness and trust that ride through to win the day.
If you haven't seen the movie, I would encourage you to watch the trailer, and then I would highly encourage you take just 30min and listen to the audio review below. There are times to take note of what is happening in our culture and in our world, and I firmly believe this is one of those times.
It has been said, that what is shown on the screen will be reality in 10 years. The world, Christians, and even conservative Christians have been flocking to see this film, and then recommending it...it has become the #1 movie in the world. It has impacted millions and millions of people. As Christians, we need to be aware of these things and know what the Bible has to say about it! - I don't necessarily agree with the following reviews 100%, but they make some good points worth considering. Let's be people who don't just following the masses, or the popular trends, or Hollywood's latest "greatest." Let's be people who think, and seek to understand truth through the filter of God's Word.
If you have comments or thoughts about the movie or books, feel free to leave me a comment, I would be happy to hear from you!
It’s another blockbuster, and this time the children are going for it hook, line, and sinker. The Hunger Games netted $155 million in one springtime weekend! But what should a Christian father think about such a film? Kevin Swanson reviews the film with his daughter Emily, carefully examining the metaphysic, meta-ethic, gender roles, and ethical conundrums from the perspective of God’s Word.
...if you’re only going to watch the movie or read the books for entertainment (and have NO discussion of the ideas), then don’t do it. From things I’ve read from and about the author (Suzanne Collins), the series was meant to critique our “vulture-culture” that loves to see and hear about violence in the news, in stories, and in our own neighbors’ lives. (You’re probably guilty, too. Ever wished the person giving a prayer request at church would have provided just a few more details?) That was her intention. It saddens me to see all the entertainment hype surrounding the opening weekend of the movie, because that goes against the very critique of the book. But maybe it also illustrates a point. And that point may be this: That our society no longer knows how to watch a movie or read a book and be instructed or warned by it; a movie today automatically says “entertainment for a couple of hours” and viewers, figuratively speaking, shut their brains off. That is tragic to me. Why? Because one of the best ways to be instructed is through stories – stories of another person or society’s failure or triumph. Through those stories we gain knowledge and wisdom about how to live our lives, how to love well, and how to influence and understand culture.
The simple truth is, every story has a message. No movie or book is exempt. And if a person is mature enough to read or view a story with discernment and take instruction from that, then by all means, go read or watch. If a person doesn’t have the discernment to watch for a purpose other than being entertained, then please do not go see this movie, and do not read the books. In fact, I can’t think of very many movies or books you should read if your sole purpose is entertainment and you aren’t willing to think a little bit. As Christian viewers, we’re called to “take every thought captive” in every area of our lives. I don’t think this means we shy away from controversial issues, because our whole existence consists of controversial issues. Instead, I think it means we tackle them, know them for what they truly are, and use discernment in how to think about them.
...[Americans] are getting in line to watch the violent, emotionally stirring, ethically surprising, spectacle of a motion picture adaptation of a popular novel. Aren’t they cheering the very thing that Collins was attempting to make them horror-struck by? The “critiquing violence with violence” method doesn’t appear to have worked. Instead, people will file into the theater and shout approval: “let the games begin!”
The film is extremely well made, well acted, and has some salient points brought up in its story line. The characters are fascinating and well developed, the ideas treated are deep, and yet a faulty foundation of humanism has failed to provide the needed answers. This film will dazzle audiences hoping only to be entertained, will provoke thought (and disgust) from those willing to think, but desensitizing aesthetics will defeat the supposed good intentions of the makers when it comes to the majority of Americans.
Regardless of the conclusions it comes to, whenever a film peddles situation ethics to young people it is dangerous, as is any film without a rock-solid moral foundation (i.e. Biblical Christianity).
Are we better than the Romans? Are we better than the cheering crowds in the Capitol of Panem? I think Gale’s words in the opening scene of the film hit on the right thought, “What if everyone quit watching? They wouldn’t have their games then.” I’m not suggesting that we all need to quit watching films with violence or that you can’t necessarily enjoy a film like The Hunger Games, but at what point do we draw the line? Will we let Hollywood continue to push that forward so we can be entertained? At what cost? We need to pray that God would give us all the wisdom to discern even the most exciting of movies, or we run the risk of amusing ourselves to death.
As most of you know, I’m a pretty big fan of Steven Spielberg’s directorial ability. I also grew up loving Hergé’s masterful Tintin books, and have a lot of respect for Peter Jackson, so I approached the Secret of the Unicorn with great anticipation. Unfortunately, Spielberg’s project choices and story-telling motivations have declined in the last few years, Jackson’s filmography is more miss than hit, and Hollywood’s record of adapting older stories for newer audiences is pretty terrible, so I also approached the film with considerable trepidation.
Fortunately, I can now report that Tintin was brought to the screen without any of Crystal Skull’s franchise-breaking silliness or King Kong’s over-sentimentalized faux historicalism, adapting Hergé’s stories straight up and without too much theatrical mugging. Also, much of the franchise’s character survived intact.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the series, Hergé was a Belgian comic book author who, from the 1920s to the 1970s, wrote and illustrated 23 books about a young journalist’s adventures around the globe. Tintin and his dog Snowy faced down an increasingly realistic series of villains as they investigated lost treasure, counterfeiting rings, museum robberies, and political intrigue. Tintin’s friends, the tough sea-faring Captain Haddock, the brilliant but deaf Professor Calculus, and the often misguided Thompson and Thomson from Scotland Yard, usually ended up in the middle of gang wars, military invasions, lost tribes, scientific expeditions, and more.
Incredibly popular throughout Europe, the Tintin adventures aren’t known as well here in America. Part of that reason may be the content of the books. Tintin is an incredibly clean-cut young hero, but even though the above paragraph reads like light, fluffy Saturday morning cartoon fare, his adventures deal in a pretty no-nonsense way with murder, kidnapping, drug smuggling, and human trafficking, usually against a background of political revolution, totalitarian tyranny, or betrayal. Furthermore, modern critics often complain about Captain Haddock’s near-constant drinking, the inevitable gunplay, the many fatalities, complex moral dilemmas, and situations uncomfortably similar to world events of the time.
Studios tend to shy away from these issues in a children’s movie. A regular film adaptation of these books for 21st-century American audiences would probably remove the moral spine of Hergé’s work to make it “safe” for kids, or transform Tintin into a conflicted adult hero in a deeply depraved world.
Spielberg and Jackson wisely picked a few of Tintin’s blander books for this introductory movie, enabling them to preserve most of the aspects of the original vision. The film is a nice blend of exotic locations grounded in realistic dirt and smell, epic adventures tempered with real blood and exhaustion, and heroic idealism that is unfettered by the sarcasm, sefl-doubt, or existential darkness of most Hollywood protagonists.
Hergé’s World Spielberg managed this balance well in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but the ability to portray realistic situations in a fantastic setting, danger without wallowing in gloom, or fearless heroism without stooping to superhuman abilities (especially to a younger audience), is Hergé’s signature style. The universe that Tintin occupies is very much like our own, with actual political and moral situations simplified for young readers, but neither ignored or exaggerated into pure fantasy.
For example, when Tintin’s adventures take him to the Middle East, he visits fictional Islamic cities, but nevertheless gets a pretty clear-eyed look at backwards, conflicted Muslim culture. Glittering mosques sit right next to decaying slums full of beggars. European arms dealers sell surplus weapons to traditionalist, tent-dwelling sheiks. The reality of 1940’s and 50’s geopolitics is communicated without being exploitative or white-washed, without dwelling on the degrading filth of the beggars or overlooking the manipulations of imperialist colonialism.
This is even more true in the later books. Tintin’s first comic strips in the 20’s tend to be much less sophisticated, when the young Hergé sent his new Boy Scout character around the world for the amusement of Belgian school children. After his blunt criticisms of the newly-formed Soviet Union, contemporary writers labeled him a fascist, and modern readers who have seen Tintin’s Congo adventure have branded him a racist.
The first allegation is laughable, but the second is not as funny. Hergé’s first portrayal of African culture and Africans themselves is extremely condescending, and exacerbated by his early, primitive drawing style and a plotless reliance on punchlines. He matured quickly, however, growing as a social commentator, an artist, and a storyteller.
His stories developed better structure, inciting incidents, multiple plot lines, and became more cinematic in their scope. The humor became more subtle, and the melodrama became real drama. His setups and payoffs are brilliant, like a pickpocket who appears to exist only to offer comic opportunities for bumbling detectives but unwittingly steals important clues from the story’s main villain, thus tying all the plots together and providing new twists and setups.
Spielberg’s Style This ability to effortlessly condense and expand plotlines is also one of Spielberg’s greatest strengths. He likes to create miniature, self-contained story moments as a break from the main plot, but these almost-asides usually strengthen, rather than distract from, the main plot flow and his characters. He can easily switch characters from heroic to comedic and back without weakening them, and as such was the ideal director to bring Tintin to the screen.
Spielberg is also the best visual director for this job, and makes the most of his first animated film. With a virtual camera at his disposal, he uses framing and motion cautiously during action and boldly during dialogue, often mimicking Hergé’s setups from the books, but usually expanding shots and scenes to better fit the medium of cinema. Benjamin Botkin jokes that this film is his apology for the Crystal Skull.
The trademark Spielberg lighting elements are there, as are the use of reflections and atmospheric elements, sometimes exaggerated in ways only possible in animation. Characters are often seen reflected or distorted in bottles, bubbles, puddles, swords, or other objects that would be impossible to properly choreograph with live action props. It’s very fun, and fits the story well, even if it could be excessive for other films.
As much as I love the simple, strong claire ligné style of Hergé’s drawings, it’s hard to imagine them working in motion, and a live-action Tintin film, like the one Spielberg was planning in the early 80s, would have had other significant challenges.
A lot of credit needs to go to the art directors at Weta Digital. While other mocap films like Polar Express and Mars Needs Moms fall into the “Uncanny Valley” between cartoons and live action, where stilted animation and dead eyes repulse rather than attract audiences, Tintin and his friends work… for the most part. Snowy and Thompson and Thomson fare the worst in trying to combine realism and caricature with appeal, but they aren’t too distracting.
The reveal of each character is handled well, and played to the weaknesses of the technology. Tintin himself is introduced in silhouette during a 2D animated title sequence at the beginning of the film, but then seen only from behind as other 3D characters acclimate the audience to the look of the film. Tintin then has his caricature sketched by a digital cameo of Hergé himself as dozens of extras pass by. Only after we’ve seen many other people does the camera reveal our hero’s iconic features in 3D.
Likewise, Thompson and Thomson first “appear” while hiding behind newspapers, and Captain Haddock’s head is hugely distorted through a whiskey bottle for a line or two of dialog before his face emerges. It is very clever to introduce audiences to the new voices and faces of their favorite characters gradually, in stages.
Speaking of which, the actors did an excellent job, and were cast well. Captain Haddock does have an inexplicably Scottish accent for the heir to an upper-crust English title (especially since his servant-of-the-crown ancestor has the same exaggerated brogue), but otherwise Andy Serkis did excellent work.
Character Growth For cinematic purposes, Tintin’s main flaw is that he has no flaw. He cannot grow, and thus he cannot have a character arc. Fortunately, Captain Haddock does have a character arc, at least in the first couple of books. After he sobers up he becomes the same gruff and powerful seadog for the remainder of the series, continuing to drink but being only occasionally drunk. In many ways, The Secret of the Unicorn is his movie.
The film begins when Tintin, after having his caricature drawn, buys a model ship from an antique dealer. It is a model of the HMS Unicorn, commanded by Sir Francis Haddock in the 17th century. Complications ensue when this ship model turns out to be highly sought by various members of the criminal underworld in hopes that it contains some clue to the lost treasure of the Unicorn.
Long story short, it does, and after many thrilling action sequences involving guns, cars and dockyards, Tintin finds himself a prisoner in Act II, shanghaied aboard a tramp steamer on its way to north Africa, and reluctantly teamed up with Captain Haddock, the permanently inebriated descendant of Sir Francis.
Half a dozen narrow boat and plane escapes later, Tintin and the Captain beat the steamer to the African Coast, are rescued by the French Foreign Legion, and attend an musical event hosted by a prominent Arab leader, and things continue logically from there in another serious of big screen conflicts and adventures until the climactic finish.
Throughout all this, Tintin is chasing down the answer to the mystery, the villain wants the treasure, and while various clues pop up here and there, the real key to the secret of the Unicorn is in the memory of the drunken, useless Captain Haddock. In order for him to assist Tintin and thwart his nemesis, he must sober up.
As in the book that their meeting is based on, Tintin is the example that the Captain needs, and he begins to resist the temptation to drink. While temperance groups have criticized the Tintin books because of their regular depiction of alcohol consumption, Hergé handles alcohol abuse properly. Captain Haddock is Tintin’s closest friend and greatest ally – unless he’s been drinking. I can’t think any lesson against drunkenness as vivid as the Captain’s violently dualistic nature in the early books.
The film handles the Captain’s rejection of whiskey very well, especially when all the setups pay off in Act III, but the lessons on temptation and self control are a little weakened by all the humor that is squeezed out of the Captain’s ongoing struggle. Some of the jokes are too broad, making the Captain more of a buffoon than he should be, but between his hallucinations while detoxing in the Sahara desert and a short relapse involving some medical alcohol, he begins to remember his family legacy.
This was my favorite part of the film. Watching Sir Francis Haddock single-handedly sink a pirate ship and nearly defeat the entire pirate crew easily trumps everything seen in all of the Pirates of the Caribbean films. Even better is the way that the Spielberg laid out the naval battle, Captain Haddock’s very active retelling of the history, and the transitions between the two scenes.
It’s a masterfully directed sequence, but it also sets up the Captain’s character. Up until now he has been either a comic or tragic figure, at best a hindrance to Tintin and at worst a serious liability. But now we see what kind of men his ancestors were, and we can’t wait for him to man up, kick his whisky habit, and smash the villain for good.
In film, it can be dangerous to reveal a character’s potential before he himself realizes it, and it is also important that audience not have to sit through too many scenes waiting for the character to become cool or useful. In addition, Spielberg had to make sure that Captain Haddock’s final showdown with his nemesis was no less cataclysmic than his ancestor’s duel with the pirate chief. In this he succeeded.
Lessons for Filmmakers
While I don’t believe that Spielberg is at the top of his game anymore, Spielberg in a slump is still the best. There’s a lot to learn from this film, mostly in how the camera is moved and how it is placed. With total freedom to position the camera, to frame any way and show anything, each shot is Spielberg’s ideal setup. I can’t wait to further dissect this film shot by shot.
There are also some valuable lessons in what could have been done better. The lack of an arc for Tintin is basically made up for by the Captain’s arc, but he doesn’t show up until Act II, so more emotional connection to Tintin would have been really helpful. Adapting Tintin for the big screen is challenging, since his character is pretty flat, mainly representing the reader’s own perspective, and Snowy isn’t quite a strong enough foil to support him during Act I.
Tintin and Captain Haddock express few emotions during the course of this journey; curiosity, wonder, indignation when experiencing the machinations of the villains, and a tiny, brief moment of discouragement when the “all is lost” moment occurs at the end of Act II. More emotional reaction would have resulted in a little more emotional connection with the audience, and provided some welcome pauses in the whirlwind action of the main plot.
Ultimately though, many of the lessons from the film come from Hergé’s storytelling ability, and the universe that he places his stories in. During WWII Tintin’s enemies were generic, non-political badguys, since Belgium’s Nazi occupiers ran the newspapers, but prior to the occupation Hergé had used his comics to criticize Fascism and the Anschluss in King Ottokar’s Scepter, and The Blue Lotus even had Tintin witness the actual 1931 Mukden Incident that led to the Japanese invasion of China.
After the liberation of Europe, Tintin’s adventures returned to a much more recognizable world and actual events. Later stories show the fictional but clearly Soviet-esque nation of Borduria stealing military technology from other nations, racing western superpowers to the moon, and initiating South American revolutions and Arabian wars. As Tintin books were translated into other languages, children around the world had complex geopolitics explained to them in a consistent, mature, conservative way.
Twenty-seven years after the extremely embarrassing Tintin the Congo, Hergé’s Red Sea Sharks adventure involves a slave ship in the Mediterranean. While his drawings of the black slaves still tend to elicit criticism, these characters are treated with much more dignity, and Tintin and Captain Haddock respond to the slave traders with fury, the act of slavery with horror, and the slaves with great compassion.
The Secret of the Unicorn hasn’t been as successful a film in the US as it has internationally, but at least one sequel has already been greenlit, to be directed by Peter Jackson. Even if the future films and characters don’t grow in maturity like Hergé’s creations did, I hope they can maintain the sunny-but-serious tone.
And even if Jackson and Spielberg miss out on an opportunity to depict real historical situations using this franchise, Christian filmmakers can still learn from Hergé’s example. When he avoided a totally fantasy world and refused to shrink from real issues, he managed to tell stories that still ring true with all ages and audiences, and also teach valuable moral lessons about a multitude of issues from drunkenness to nuclear espionage.
These lessons work because the situations are realistic without being defiling, exciting without being gratuitous. Modern entertainment tends to equate moral realism with pessimism and darkness, and even when it does place a protagonist in a politically-correct magical superhero world, he tends to be crass and whiny. Tintin is one of the last heroes to seriously confront real-world sin and corruption while remaining optimistic and pure-hearted. From his first adventure to his last, he remains a boy scout.
Discerning filmmakers should carefully analyze how this is done, and build on what Hergé accomplished.
After his son's death, embittered police officer Mac McDonald loses faith in God and himself, but his new partner, part-time pastor Sam Wright, offers him friendship and sets him on the path to grace and redemption in this stirring Christian drama.
Movie Rating: PG-13 for Some Violence and Thematic Elements Content Review:Click Here Movie Trailer:Click Here Movie Website: Click Here
Disclaimer:Please note that some of the films listed may be too intense or contain other content that would not be appropriate for younger ages. I am also aware that everyone has unique standards and guidlines for their own families. Please take the time to examine these films and I hope the "Content Review" links will be helpful. Lastly, in case anyone is wondering, no the movies are not listed in any particular order.
"Four men, one calling: To serve and protect. As law enforcement officers, Adam Mitchell, Nathan Hayes, David Thomson, and Shane Fuller are confident and focused. Yet at the end of the day, they face a challenge that none of them are truly prepared to tackle: fatherhood.
While they consistently give their best on the job, good enough seems to be all they can muster as dads. But they're quickly discovering that their standard is missing the mark.
When tragedy hits home, these men are left wrestling with their hopes, their fears, their faith, and their fathering. Can a newfound urgency help these dads draw closer to God ... and to their children?"
Movie Rating: PG-13 for Some Violence and Drug Content Content Review:Click Here Movie Trailer:Click Here Movie Website: Click Here
Disclaimer:Please note that some of the films listed may be too intense or contain other content that would not be appropriate for younger ages. I am also aware that everyone has unique standards and guidlines for their own families. Please take the time to examine these films and I hope the "Content Review" links will be helpful. Lastly, in case anyone is wondering, no the movies are not listed in any particular order.
In the Roman province of Judea, Jews return to the city of their birth for the census. A bright star in the night over Bethlehem marks the birth of Jesus Christ. Years later, Roman commander Messala, who was brought up in Judea, takes command of the Roman garrison in Jerusalem. His Jewish boyhood friend Judah Ben-Hur (Charlton Heston) greets him. Messala is delighted, but when Judah refuses to name Jewish patriots, Messala sentences him to the slave galleys and imprisons his mother, Miriam, and sister, Tirzah. Judah vows revenge. Judah's search for his mother and sister and his quest for revenge intersects with crucial biblical events such as the Sermon on the Mount and the crucifixion. Among BEN-HUR's vivid dramatic sequences are an exciting sea battle and the famous chariot race that pits Judah against Messala in one of cinema's greatest action sequences.
Disclaimer:Please note that some of the films listed may be too intense or contain other content that would not be appropriate for younger ages. I am also aware that everyone has unique standards and guidlines for their own families. Please take the time to examine these films and I hope the "Content Review" links will be helpful. Lastly, in case anyone is wondering, no the movies are not listed in any particular order.
David, a 12-year-old, escapes from a Communist concentration camp with little more than a compass, a sealed letter, a loaf of bread, and instructions to carry the letter to Copenhagen, Denmark. David is thrust into the free world for the first time in his young life as he travels across Europe. His spiritual voyage of discovery, where David slowly loses his instinctive mistrust of humanity and begins to smile, share, trust and ultimately, love, addresses the cruelties, politics, and suffering of warfare while celebrating the resilience of youth and the unbreakable spirit of a child.
Movie Rating: PG for thematic elements and violent content. Content Review:Click Here Movie Trailer:Click Here Movie Website: Click Here
Disclaimer:Please note that some of the films listed may be too intense or contain other content that would not be appropriate for younger ages. I am also aware that everyone has unique standards and guidlines for their own families. Please take the time to examine these films and I hope the "Content Review" links will be helpful. Lastly, in case anyone is wondering, no the movies are not listed in any particular order.
This is the movie for children who need to learn the true meaning of forgiveness and reconciliation.
Filmed in the breathtaking Swiss Alps, Treasures of the Snow is a Christian film about a young boy named Lucien who makes a mistake, is rejected by his community, but is later befriended by an old woodcarver who teaches him a valuable skill.
In the end, anger and revenge are replaced by the love of Christ in a wondrously surprising conclusion.
Movie Rating: Not Rated Suggested Ages: All Ages Movie Website: Click Here
Disclaimer:Please note that some of the films listed may be too intense or contain other content that would not be appropriate for younger ages. I am also aware that everyone has unique standards and guidlines for their own families. Please take the time to examine these films and I hope the "Content Review" links will be helpful. Lastly, in case anyone is wondering, no the movies are not listed in any particular order.
This is a film that I've heard a lot of controversy and debate over, so I was excited to see it for meself. Review, here I come- and *SPOILERS*, here I come as well.
The Worldview
The Good
Rapunzel's father and mother love their daughter and want her to return. When she does, we learn that she, basically, carried on her parents' vision for the kingdom.
Flynn, by the end of the film, has repented of his thieving ways and asked Rapunzel to marry him. He also gives his life for Rapunzel's freedom. Rapunzel, in turn, was willing to give her freedom for his life. "No greater love..."
We see Flynn go from a man who values the shallow, to a man who would give his life for the woman he loves- a decision, albeit, not made on The Foundation of God's Word, but the right decision, nonetheless.
I loved seeing Rapunzel doing all these homemaking tasks, and having a blast at them.
And we also get to enjoy a pleasant amount of good, clean humor. I am really enjoying the lack of crude jokes in the animations I've seen of late.
The Bad
Another film with magic in it. Drops from the sun and magic incantations to draw healing powers from Rapunzel's hair. And the sun emblem all over the city makes me think "sun-worship," even though we see nothing in that direction.
Rapunzel and mother Gothel could both use dresses that were a bit looser and a bit higher-necked up top. ("They're animation!" Right. So it shouldn't be that hard to animate a more modest top.)
Now for some less obvious issues.
The film creates a dangerous hypothetical situation that causes us to cheer for Rapunzel when she chooses to rebel against the woman who she believes to be her mother. Situational ethics, again. "Well, if she hadn't rebelled, since Gothel stayed ever-young because of Rapunzel's hair, Rapunzel would have been locked in the tower ad infinitum!" Yeah, see what I mean. Dangerous hypothetical. They're easy to create- Jack Bauer must shoot his (innocent) boss or the terrorists will blow up 2 billion people. His boss is a jerk- OK. Go for it, Jack! Well, Jack, what if it was 2 people? What if it was a choice between your daughter or 25 people? If we don't ground our choices in God's Law-Word, we're left to being lost in the labyrinth of our own depraved minds.
No. Rapunzel shouldn't have disobeyed the woman she believed to be her mother.
No. Jack shouldn't kill his boss. I don't care how big the threat.
Obey God, and trust Him to deliver.
I've heard the use of the tiara analogized to Rapunzel's virginity. I think it's a stretch, though one that is visible if looked for. Mother Gothel says that the tiara is all that Flynn wants and when she gives it to him he will leave her. Take that at face value and it sure sounds like a sermon for chastity- which is disobeyed with happy consequences when Rapunzel "isn't afraid" to give the tiara to Flynn anymore later on, and he tells her to keep it. But in the context of the film, they didn't play that up very much.
"When will my life begin?" Miss Rapunzel, your life has begun already. I understand the desire for advancing. That's good. So is contentment. This line in the song stated her theme very effectively, but was rather a downer in the midst of her celebration of homemaking.
The Disney Dream Theme drives me up a wall. Do you have a dream? What's your dream? Follow your dream! Will it be as good as I dreamed? And then I've heard Christians talk about how wonderful of a theme it is. I'm sorry, but I must respectfully disagree- you'll have to help me see how this is a redemptive message.
What's my dream? (I prefer vision. More manly.) To build The Kingdom of God. To have a family. To compose awesome and excellent music that testifies to The Glory of God. Ultimately, to conform my vision to be more like God's Vision for me.
Are those good dreams? I think so. But dreaming isn't good for dreaming's sake. And if all we are is dreamers who hope that everything turns out as well as we dreamed, then we've missed the point of investing our lives in Something Eternal that isn't subject to the fluctuations of our emotions. "Living your dream" isn't the highest goal in life, but I fear that that's what Rapunzel seems to think.
This brings up two other points:
1. Flynn. And his vision, or lack thereof. He's a vain, happy-go-lucky rascal who commits grand thefts and leaves his thief comrades to be caught by the king's soldiers. And when he meets Rapunzel, she's the one with the vision. He's her helper who helps her achieve her vision. She's the proactive hero- he's the guy who's stuck with her. Now, we've already discussed how he repents at the end- which is good! He learns to value deeper things than his beautiful nose. Nevertheless, he's still another example of the "Cool Bad Guy Syndrome".
2. The pub full of ruffians that Rapunzel transforms into a group of loving, singing, joyous brotherhood-of-man types. 'Cuz they, too, have a dream. (And I gotta say, I loved all the stuff about concert piano-playing. Though Mozart lived in the 1800s, so that threw me for a second...) Well, I find this interesting modeling as well. We already know that mother Gothel says Rapunzel can't handle herself in the real world. And we also know (this is Disney, after all) that Rapunzel is perfectly capable of handling herself in the real world. Right?
Well, if the real world is that a restaurant full of low-lifes can be transformed into an ecumenical meeting hall for dreamers of all shapes and sizes by a girl singing- she sure can. But that's not actually the real world. Rapunzel wouldn't last long in the real world. Sure, it allows for some hilarious stuff. But your average 18-year-old girl who sets out to pursue her dream today may find herself in a lot more trouble than Rapunzel does. Criminals aren't really just loving people who haven't ever been able to express their dream.
The haircut at the end. It was a great twist in the story, but a horrible twist in the worldview, in the eyes of yours truly. Rapunzel now looks like any 2011 teenage girl who happens to be stuck in a dress. Why does it rub me so wrong? Did Flynn do the right thing? I think so. It just grates on me, because of our culture, I guess, that they gave her such a modern, egalitarian haircut in the end- after seeing her with yards and yards of gorgeous, feminine hair the whole film long. Modeling, again.
(Quick question with regards to story consistency- why hadn't the dead brown hair grown any since it was cut when she was a baby?)
And while we're talking modeling, I think probably my biggest issue with the film is that we have one young, handsome, fiendish guy and one beautiful, childish, naivë girl hanging out together day-in day-out in all kinds of secluded spots. Problem.
The Art
The Good
The story. Very well told. Very exciting, wide-ranging emotionally, fulfilling, classic Disney. The twist at the end was a great story point.
The animation. It was good. Maybe not great- I still like Pixar better, and Owls still takes the cake- but it was good. The hair looked beautiful.
Another Snyder rule- "A Limp and An Eyepatch". They gave the minor characters that would be tough to keep track of certain things that made them readily identifiable. Very smart. Be it a hook on the concert pianist or an eyepatch on one of the twins, I didn't struggle with remembering who was who.
The score. Mr. Menken did a great job with the mickey-mousing, and the score on the whole was enjoyable.
The Bad
Couple of things. First, this film broke one of Mr. Blake Snyder's Immutable Laws of Screenplay Physics- the Double Mumbo Jumbo Law. I can swallow one piece of magic per film. Sun-drop causing magical golden hair? Fine. I'll take it. Carry on.
But wait- this magic tear thing at the end? Where'd that come from? They broke the Double Mumbo Jumbo Law, and the result was a less satisfying climax as well as a scene of Velveeta.
It was a great twist that led to Flynn's death, but I think the story would have been better, albeit sadder, if he had stayed dead. Or something. Yeah, him staying dead would have gone over like a lead balloon for all the kids in the audience. Granted. But bringing him back from death by her tears was a stretch that was painful for this viewer.
(It is worth mentioning that the original story does involve Rapunzel healing her husband's eyes with her tears.)
The other thing that really bugged me was the use of non-fitting music. "When will my life begin," regardless the lyrics- why do we have a pop song in a fairy tale again? Why did they do the music like this? Knights (well, a thief, actually), castles, a beautiful maiden in distress, and electric guitar. Odd one out? Howzabout a drumset?
They did another montage later. And then there was the credits. "That was really super. WAIT! No, it wasn't..."
I don't like musicals, from a story perspective. It's odd. It's unrealistic. And it's telling, not showing. I love musicals from a musical perspective- when the music is good and fitting to the film. The pop songs in Tangled disturbed me "on a number of levels".
I don't like the title, either. I know there's a connection between "Tangled" and "Long Hair", but that appears to be where the connection stops. My little sister suggested "The Lost Princess", and I think that title does a much better job describing the film in a way that makes me want to see it.
Conclusion
So this film was OK. If you're watching it for fun, it's fun- plenty of laughs. Don't shut your mind off, though. There's more of the same tired old bad worldview, and there are also some good things we can pull from it. I wouldn't consider it anything amazing one way or t'other. - - - - - - - Review by: Gabriel Hudelson
Post a Comment
