Warning, there are spoilers in my rant below.

I went to see Indiana Jones 4 last week. It's exactly what you should expect from George Lucas these days.

It's amazing how a movie can be good and stupid at the same time.

The movie starts out well enough. Indy is captured, forced by some Russians to look for something mysterious, fights his way out, etc.

Then he finds himself in the middle of nowhere, and a town is nearby. So he takes off for the town. Only to find that it's a nuclear test site. Then the sirens go off.

Up to this point, it's been pretty classic Indy. It's good. Then comes the stupid part.

He gets in a lead-lined fridge. Now this might be his best bet, but most likely you would not survive in such a small lead-lined box.

Then the fridge gets tossed all over the landscape. And Indy makes it out without a scratch.

One word: stupid.

Now the gag could have been saved pretty easily - let's say there's a bomb shelter in the backyard. Surely the government did some tests that included different backyard bomb shelters to test their effectiveness. It could have even been made comedic by having some monkeys in there or something. Maybe a video camera and switching to a monitoring station where somebody notices Indy in with the monkeys.

But here's the thing: Lucas is so fascinated with technology that he'd rather consider a solution that included a fridge flying through the air and bouncing all over the place. Easy enough effect shot for the ILM'ers.

The movie was full of stupid stuff like that. As well as other dumb stuff. For instance:

Reminiscing over dear ol' dad and Marcus Brody. Move on!

After being chased by KGB agents, Indy spends some leisurely time at his place translating a bunch of cryptic symbols. Surely the KGB would have thought to check his house?

The romance was really flat. I mean, Anakin/Padme flat. You got the feeling that Lucas directed some of it, it was so dry.

Don't even get me started on the jungle chase scene.

Now the general idea of the movie wasn't so bad. In fact, it had a lot of potential. A lot of people have complained about the ending, but I didn't mind that so much. I think this movie was lost in the little moments. It moved so fast, there wasn't much room for characters to interact, unless it was in the middle of another action moment.

All in all it was still entertaining. But stupid at the same time. Not awful, but not great.

So now Indy 4 is my new yardstick. Every movie I see from now on will either be "better than Indy 4" or "dumber than Indy 4." It actually works pretty well to have a mediocre film as a yardstick.

Labels: movies

From Rowling Pulls It Off:

It has been widely observed that J.K. Rowling owes a creative debt to Christian fantasists J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis (apart from their fondness for initials). It's odd now to remember that, at the same time, some parents have objected to the magic depicted in the Harry Potter books as a glorification of satanic practices. For "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" confirms something else apart from the well-thought-out-ness of Ms. Rowling's moral universe: It is subtly but unmistakably Christian.

The principal Hogwarts holidays have always been Christmas and Easter, but it took five books before Ms. Rowling really began tipping her hand. In Book Six, "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," she addressed concepts of free will, the power of love, and the sanctity of the soul. But in the final volume she gently lays it all out. The preciousness of each human life; bodily resurrection after death; mercy, forgiveness and redemption; sacrificial love overcoming the powers of evil--strip away the elves, goblins, broomsticks and magic wands and these are the concepts that underpin the marvelously intricate world of Harry Potter.

Actually the series has always addressed the concepts of love and free will in a way consistent with Christianity. But the Christian imagery was definitely strongest in the seventh book, and quite unmistakable - including imagery of the cross, quotation of scripture, and a Christ-like death and resurrection. Neville Longbottom also reminded me of David in some ways - the gentle boy who was willing to face the greatest evil. Other characters show true regret and remorse for their previous actions, and others reveal a capacity for total forgiveness.

While it would be hard to beat the level of Christian imagery in the Chronicles of Narnia, I do think the Christian imagery is probably as strong (or stronger) in Harry Potter than it is in Lord of the Rings. Christians should re-think their stance on Harry Potter.

Labels: books, movies

I just finished the seventh and last Harry Potter book this morning. It was very, very good.

I read the first Harry Potter book back in March, and read through each one after that, and finished the sixth book over a month ago. I decided that I wanted to read the fifth book before the movie came out, and to have finished all six before the seventh book came out. I was the same way about the Lord of the Rings series - when I found out the movie series was coming, I read through all of the books (including The Hobbit) before the first movie came out.

The Harry Potter series was a very rewarding series to read. Rewarding in the sense that each successive book reveals more of the story, intertwines more of the characters, and creates a progression to the end of the last book. I'm seriously thinking about re-reading the series again - because of the way things (and characters) that you didn't think were important early on become very important in the end.

We also saw the fifth movie last week, and they did a great job adapting it from the fifth book.

I think one of the things I liked most about the Harry Potter series is that he's not an infallible hero. He's a hero, but he makes mistakes. He gets things wrong sometimes. But unlike the villain in the series, it's Harry's friends and his relationships with others that helps him to make the right decisions, and figure out what it is that he needs to do, and helps him get it done. He keeps trying to do things on his own in order to protect them, but then he realizes that he has to trust and rely on others. It's a constant theme throughout the series, that love is the best weapon that Harry has, and the only weapon that his enemy cannot understand.

I understand why some Christians have a problem with this series, but it's no different from Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Mary Poppins, or any number of other magical-oriented stories oriented towards children. The primary difference is that they call them "witches" and "wizards." I fully believe that if Rowling had used a different term for a female magician (or had only applied it to the villains), Christians would not have reacted as they have. In any case, the values and themes portrayed by the books are very positive.

It's a fascinating series, I highly recommend it. And if you enjoy movies, and haven't started watching the Harry Potter movies yet (I know a few of you haven't), do so. They're quite good, and getting better. Trust me, you'll want to see the sixth and seventh movies when they come out. Or better yet, just read all seven books.

Labels: books, movies

I decided to start a new series of posts, just wrapping up every week the major things that have been going on in the past week. This is partly to just share with folks what's up with the Mooneys, but also because I often have smaller thoughts to share that just don't warrant an entire post.

Fourth of July - we hosted a big family event for the 4th. Took the kids out for fireworks afterward. They loved it! I also got to try to explain to McKenna what "Independence Day" means.

Worship - I got to play bass today for the first time in a LONG time. My bass is showing some neglect - it desperately needs new strings. I was asked to fill in today on bass at a church where I've been leading worship occasionally for the last couple of months. I had a blast!

Movies - we took the kids to see Ratatouille yesterday. They loved it, though it didn't keep their attention as much as some of the other Pixar movies do. It was Jeremiah's first time seeing a new big screen movie. Amy tried taking him to see a free movie last summer and it was an awful experience. But he did pretty well yesterday, especially considering the movie was almost two hours. And for those who are budget conscious, the AMC Theaters around here have all shows at $5 before noon on weekends.

I also saw Transformers last Monday. I was a big Transformers fan as a kid, and this movie did not disappoint. But I think even folks who weren't Transformers fans as kids would enjoy it. Just don't take your little kids to go see it - the violence wasn't bad, but there were a few jokes that were not appropriate.

And while this isn't news about the past week, I'm currently taking part in Conservative Rant, a political blog started by my good friend Andy. My goal is to contribute to that site once a week, but it'll probably only be twice a month for the next couple of months. My first post there was Why I’m Conservative (or, Why I’m Not Liberal) and my most recent post is How Pacifism Leads to War. I plan on using that site for most of my political-oriented posts from now on, but I'll mention them here from time to time.

Labels: church, life, movies, politics

OK, so if you know me at all, you know how cool I think this is.

Teaser trailer was just released. Click here to see it. I now know where I'll be on July 4th, 2007.

Labels: movies

You gotta think that good old Leonardo might be spinning in his grave with how his name has been associated with all of these grand conspiracies. A couple of interesting columns about The Da Vinci Code:

Debunking the Debunkers
C.S. Lewis's message to "Da Vinci Code" fans.

Holy Sepulcre!
"The Da Vinci Code" shows that conspiracy theories have no limits.

My brother's post is certainly worth a read as well.

As for myself, I'd like to see it, but there's just too many other movies coming out that I'm interested in. And the reviews have been pretty bad. I'll catch it on cable in a couple of years...

Labels: church, movies

The Summer movie season, that is. With the release of Mission: Impossible III today, the summer movie season has officially begun. While this season isn't offering anything in the way of Star Wars: Episode III, Batman Begins, or Lord of the Rings, there are some interesting things coming up that I'm looking forward to..

---

Poseidon (May 12th)
It might end up being just like the original, but who cares? Kurt Russell rules. And he hasn't shown his action star capability in years. Speaking of Kurt, did you know that he was the voice of Elvis in Forrest Gump? My prediction: fun flick, but won't have as big of an impact as the tidal wave shown in the preview.

---

The Da Vinci Code (May 19th)
There's a lot of buzz going around about this. The plot is full of a bunch of bunk, but hey, so was National Treasure, and that movie was cool. (Speaking of which, yes, National Treasure 2 is in pre-production.) My prediction: a lot of people will see this movie, and even more will misunderstand it. It's fiction, folks, not religion.

---

X-Men: The Last Stand (May 26th)
So what if Brian Singer didn't stay on as director of the X-Men series? He had more important things to do (see "Superman" below). Brett Ratner has done a couple of respectable movies, including Rush Hour and The Family Man. But as long as Hugh Jackman is still Wolverine, it can't be all that bad. My prediction: this will feel much different than the first two X-Men movies, but will still rock.

---

Superman Returns (June 30th)
Brian Singer certainly did have better things to do. For all of us who won't admit that Superman 3 and up were even made, this movie is right up our alley. Singer decided to start telling the story right after Superman 2, which is fine with me because that movie is awesome. My prediction: this will be as good as Batman Begins, if not better.

---

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (July 7th)
Shiver me timbers, it's a sequel! And since they filmed two sequels back to back, we'll be seeing another next year. I had very low expectations for the first Pirates, and I ended up thinking it was one of the best action movies of 2003. This one appears to have all of the same elements. My prediction: probably about as good as the first one, and definitely better than the ride at Disney World.

---

World Trade Center (August 11th)
If you haven't heard about this one yet, you most definitely will. Oliver Stone takes on 9/11. Nicolas Cage plays a Port Authority police officer that gets trapped in the rubble. If you thought the buzz surrounding Flight 93 was polarized... wait until you see what happens as this gets closer to release. Actually, it might start very soon, since the trailer is rumored to appear this weekend. My prediction: a million times more interesting (and accurate) than Fahrenheit 9/11... of course, that's not saying much.

---

I'll warn you now, some of these movies might end up not being any good. So if you go and see one, and it stinks, don't blame it on me. It's all part of the season. But sometimes you gotta go through a couple stinkers to get surprised by one that's really good.

Of course, I'm sure you noticed that most of these movies are sequels. The others include a remake, a book adaptation, and one that is historical fiction. Even the sequels this year are sequels of movies that were based on TV shows, comic books, or Disney World rides. Gotta love Hollywood. The biggest movies have to be "sure things."

Did I miss anything? What movies are you looking forward to this summer season?

Labels: movies

We went to go see "End of the Spear" tonight. For those of you not familiar with the story, I don't want to ruin it. Briefly, it's a true story about the group of missionaries who made contact with Waodani tribes in Ecuador in the 50's. The Waodani tribes were known as the most violent ever documented.

If you've ever heard of Elisabeth Elliot (author of "Passion and Purity"), then you're probably familiar with the story about her husband, Jim Eliot. This movie tells the story from the viewpoint of Nate Saint, one of the missionaries trying to find and contact the Waodani along with Jim Eliot.

David Howard, Jr., nephew of Elisabeth Eliott, wrote a great editoral piece for the Wall Street Journal, Triumph From Tragedy, though it does give some of the story away.

This story is extremely applicable to us now, as we try to make sense of the paths our lives are on, and struggle with the sense of being on a mission in the world. Here is a vivid portrait of some young Christians who risked everything to reach out to those who might otherwise have no chance of hearing the gospel. As a movie, while not perfect, I think they did a pretty good job telling the story in two hours. I won't talk more about specifics of the movie yet -- though I might in a week or two. There were some moments in this movie that I thought were extremely well done.

Labels: church, movies

I went to go see Episode III last night, at the midnight show. As usual, going at midnight is fun. Lots of fans, lots of anticipation. This is likely the last time we'll be seeing a new Star Wars movie on the big screen.

It was also Lucas' last chance to get it right. The best Star Wars movie, by far, was The Empire Strikes Back, known otherwise as Episode V. Why the best? Because it was a great story, it deepened the characters and their relationships. And it was only successful at that because Lucas didn't direct it. Lucas nearly killed himself making the original Star Wars (now known as Episode IV), and knew he needed to stay out of the director's chair to keep himself alive. So he turned to one of his trusted film professors.

Unfortunately, he didn't learn from that success, and he certainly didn't learn enough from his mentor in terms of dramatic directing.

Note: if you haven't seen Episode III yet, you might want to wait to read the rest. Or go ahead, I don't care. I'm not going to be giving away much, and if you really cared about spoilers anyway, you'd be in line to see the movie by now (5:00 pm on opening day).

Lucas has developed a reputation for changing things, but perhaps one of his boldest changes came when he described the original Star Wars Trilogy as being about Anakin Skywalker, not Luke, Leia, and Han. As he was preparing to announce the prequel trilogy (which is now complete), he wanted to assure us that it was always supposed to be about Anakin, his rise, his fall, and his redemption.

Fine, we can understand and accept that, and the desire to go back and tell the story of Anakin's rise and fall. After all, we all wanted more Star Wars.

Lucas proved with Episode I and II that he simply can't direct dramatic sequences. The scene at the Skywalker home in Episode I around the table is one of the more painful scenes in Episode I. But we all had this feeling that maybe it was just Jake Lloyd (the actor for the 9-year-old Anakin in Episode I) -- kid actors can be very difficult to work with. But even what were supposed to be heartfelt scenes with only adult actors seemed dry and contrived -- such as Obi-Wan Kenobi's (Ewan McGregor) apology to his master Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) about his disrespectful comments.

Episode II didn't improve anything. If anything, it only more deeply revealed Lucas' incapability in the dramatic direction department. The entire love story between the 19-year-old Anakin (now played by Hayden Christensen) and Padme (Natalie Portman) simply wasn't in the same league as the romance between Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) in The Empire Strikes Back.

Now, finally Episode III is out, and Lucas' ineptitude is complete.

The only reason to film Episodes I-III were to see Anakin Skywalker turn into Darth Vader. We all wanted to know (or were supposed to want to know): how did it happen? In Episode III, the moment we've been waiting 28 years for was simply uneventful. The most pivotal moment in the entire saga, and it ends up playing out more or less like this: oh, I guess I'll be a Sith now. There's simply no drama to the moment. The setup -- the events leading up to that point -- was good. He's confused, he doesn't know who to trust, and he's desperately afraid of losing the one person he cares about the most. Everything after that point was pretty good -- his confrontation with Obi-Wan towards the end of the movie was nearly everything I wanted it to be. But the turning point itself was nothing worth remembering. It should have been a moment on par with "I am your father" from The Empire Strikes Back, but instead of going into the annals of film history as that scene has, it will simply pass into obscurity, except possibly as a footnote for how a great opportunity was wasted in an otherwise good film.

Everything in the prequels up to that point was successful in terms of setting up how Anakin was at the edge of a cliff. But there was never anything truly impacting about how he fell off that cliff and plunged into darkness. A good director would have fixed that with a few small changes, a heightened sense of drama, and a better ability to tell a story. It's too bad Lucas didn't learn enough from his success with the original Star Wars Trilogy to hire better directors for the prequel trilogy. But hey, not all movie franchises can live up to expectations like the Lord of the Rings series did.

Labels: movies

The Star Wars site has the new teaser trailer for Episode III out, and it's very cool. Check it out!

Labels: movies

Unless you've been stuck inside a bomb shelter, you've probably already heard about the new Star Wars Trilogy DVD's. I'm amazed, however, at how many people haven't heard about any of the changes made to this release. Yes, this is the "Special Edition," even if it's not labeled as such -- the "Special Edition" was released in 1997, and included Jabba in Star Wars, as well as Greedo shooting first, among other additions that varied from welcome and well-done to useless and awful-looking.

This round, some of the changes are welcome. The lightsabers were fixed in Star Wars, during the duel with Vader and Obi-Wan. The Emperor was replaced in The Empire Strikes Back, so no more monkey-eyes talking to Vader. This time it's Ian McDiarmid - they guy who played the Emperor in Return of the Jedi, and who is playing Palpatine (as well as Sidious, though he's uncredited for that) in the prequels. There are also some new lines that offer more insight to Vader's surprise of Luke's existence.

But the thing that has everyone talking, is this scene right here:

Yeah, that's Hayden Christensen as Anakin Skywalker. So for some reason Anakin is young in ghost form, while Yoda and Obi-Wan are not. What makes it hard for me to swallow, is that when you're watching the scene, Hayden has a smirk on his face (after all, he was typecast as an angst-ridden teenager), instead of the natural, thankful, proud smile that you'd expect from a guy who had just been saved through the efforts of his son.

What's also funny is that they sped up the scene of Lando clapping during the Return of the Jedi celebration to try to get it in time with the music.

Overall, the DVD set is great, with a completely new sound mix for them, and the picture quality is incredible. There's also some great new documentaries on the bonus disc. Though there is one further complaint that's popped up -- in Star Wars the music in the surround channels are swapped, so that the music that normally comes out of the left front, and should be reverberating in the left rear, is reverberating in the right rear (more info). It's not something you'd normally notice, but Lucasfilm denies that it's a mistake. Yeah, right.

Not to worry, though. Lucasfilm will undoubtedly fix it when they release the next version of the "Original" Star Wars Trilogy, probably as a huge box set with the prequels in a few years, with more changes. I just hope they replace that awful-looking Yoda puppet in Episode I with the digital one from Episode II.

Labels: movies