Check this out:

http://artsandfaith.com/t100/

Great Films That I Cannot Recommend

...and no, the Jazz Singer is not one of them.

I have a dilemma of conscience when it comes to film. You see, I've been keeping a film journal for the past several years resulting in a list of 450 films and an ever changing title for said list. The original title was "450 Great Films", then "450 Films Worth Watching", then "450 Worth Renting", etc. The problem is that as I go through the list these days, there are some films that stand as great film-making achievements that I just cannot recommend from a moral point of view.

I love the fact that the history of cinema is built on embarrassing achievements. For example, the first full-length motion picture was a little thing called "Birth of a Nation" and was essentially a billboard advertisement for the heroic struggle of the Ku Klux Klan. In 1927 "The Jazz Singer" became the first "talkie" film released by a major studio and it's depiction of Al Jolson in black face has since become a measuring stick for what qualifies as grossly racist, and a bad Halloween costume idea. Leni Reifenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" is still considered one of the greatest accomplishments of film-making even though it's subject matter is that of the 1934 Nazi Party Conference in Nuremberg, Germany.

These films share a common acceptance now that they've been relegated to a historical standing; and I hardily recommend everyone see these classics, but can I do so only because of the safety that comes with distance? What about the great challenging films being made today that are still waiting to mature. Time will probably knock some of them out because it's not usual to be swept up in the "new" of something and mistake it for good.

One of my consistent struggles as a follower of Christ is that so many of my brethren accept and deny things based on their limitations of understanding or the grand swipe of wisdom called "because that's the way God made it". I say bullshit. If God wanted us to be idiots he wouldn't have given us the struggle built into the human thread. He is the God of 'why', and there's no better place to begin these questions than with our passions. A moral stance doesn't have to deny the truth. In fact, in my life, it's greatest feat lies in the fact that morality gives me options to choose or deny not it's existence but my role in it's existence; taking me further from the position of spectator and into that of a participant in life. This is where my fellow recovering drug addicts collectively murmur "no shit", or your denominational equivalent.

6 great films that I can't recommend:

Man Bites Dog: Satirical Belgian film made for pennies tells the story of a film crew following around a charismatic serial killer.

Dead Ringers:
David Cronenberg's (Scanners, Spider, The Brood) incredibly chilling and brilliantly made film of twin brother gynecologists, OK, need I go further. As much as I would like to call this a 'cautionary tale', I just can't do so with a straight face.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer: A very well made first feature by John McNaughton, based loosely on the life of Henry Lee Lucas. I haven't watched it in years but it was pretty creepy in the 90s.

In a Glass Cage : Spanish film about a victim of pedophilia taking revenge on his assailant who is now in an iron lung after a failed suicide attempt. Sounds cut and dry? You wish.

Leaving Las Vegas: When life is going too well for you, pop this one in. Guy looses his job, then his dignity, goes to Vegas and drinks himself to death with his hooker girlfriend. Brilliant, but I still can't figure out why one should watch it.

Reservoir Dogs: I hear the moans from film fans, but this is a perfect example. Are stylish excellence, fantastic direction, and amazing performances enough to give it a pass?

Behind these five films are another 1000 based on opinions, and who fights longer and louder than a bunch of film snobs? But as for my list those left out mainly fall into the categories of "can't be taken seriously enough", such as any movie with zombies, which my list is full of; or they have begun to show signs of ageing well.

...but that is another blog.

next

2 days ago, i had received news that my wife and i owed $1100 more on our taxes than we had originally thought. this may not sound like much to most...but it crushed my world. i wanted to quit everything...period. needless to say, i didn't handle it well that day. so yesterday morning when i woke up, i decided i had to fit a movie into my day. i was heading to richmond to meet up with an online gaming acquaintance for lunch. perfect opportunity to squeeze in a flick.

i had been interested in next because im a sci fi junkie. however, i expected the same kind of crap that cage has been putting out for some time in his 'action-hero' role ('the rock', 'con-air', 'ghost rider', 'gone in 60 seconds', 'snake eyes', 'face off'). side note...sometime take a look at how cage can be so incredible in some roles and such a bomb in others - ie: 'bringing out the dead' vs 'firebirds'.

i was shocked. maybe it was because i was so desperate to disconnect from the reality of taxes for 2 hours. maybe i just so underestimated this film that it more than met my expectations. who knows. but i liked it. it varied from the formula. it kept me guessing...often (not in plot mind you, but within each scene). julianne moore was great in her role as an agent. also, jessica biel is becoming more convincing as an actor. cage was cheezy at times, but that's who he is in these roles. it was also nice to see 'columbo' for a short bit, playing older friend to cage's character. i also enjoyed the russian vs us 'callback' to the cold war era which i grew up during.

i felt that i got my 7 dollars worth of film. if you like movies that delve into the ever complicated 'time line' issue...then this is a must. i still have to pay my taxes. but at least i avoided it for 2 entertaining hours yesterday.

Frailty

The beauty of this film is in how unassuming it is. I probably passed it a dozen times at the video store before giving in; and there's no doubt my low expectations have helped to elevate the film. My view of cinema has changed considerably since becoming a Christian. I am frankly more interested in stories of redemption and overcoming adversity not because that's what "God wants me to do", but because as spectators we enjoy stories that reflect our own circumstances.

This movie, on the other hand, falls no where near my previous explanation. It's simply a fantastic twisting tale that continues to go in the opposite direction of where you keep insisting it's going, and who can pass up another "aren't Christians crazy" story line. The film is told in flash-backs by Michael McConaughey's character as he tells an FBI agent that he knows the identity of a serial killer whose story is basically summed up in the opening credits; so pay attention.

The story is that of a devoutly religious single father (Bill Paxton)raising two young boys in non-specific rural America. He's is awoken one night from a heavenly visitor informing him that he has been chosen to kill demons that are living among us. The names of these individuals is given to him which he jots down on a small piece of paper, then waits for further instructions. Time goes by and the sincere explanation of his vision to his sons is quickly forgotten as... I don't know, dad's a little idiosyncratic? When the father follows a ray of light beaming from the clouds onto a barn, and finds his divine weapon in the form of a large axe, the dissention of the older son to his father's plans becomes the focal point of the film. Saying anymore would spoil it, but suffice it to say that blood definately flows.

The films only serious shortcoming is casting Booth as the FBI agent. He walks through the part and let's face it, the guy is creepy, and when he's in a movie you know he isn't there as the peaceable anti-hero. McConaughey also walks through it, but little is asked of him. There really aren't any stand out performances, but Matt O'Leary as the unbelieving son shows some serious promise if he can make it out of his teens in Hollywood. This was Bill Paxton's first time behind the camera and I applaud him knowing that. It's too early to tell whether he will be a director, or an actor who also directs, only able to make decent films when a script is gold. I will certainly buy a ticket to his next film to find out.

Fun Fact: Powers Booth's breakthrough role was as Rev. Jim Jones in the television mini-series about the People's Temple. We, the generation stigmitized as much by the mini-series as the actual event, have never gotten over that incredible performance.

frailty

my first thought was..."here's another movie making christians out to be 'crazies' again". the reason i get tired of movies with said motif is because so many 'christians' are 'crazies'. but frailty proved itself to be a work completely opposite of what i thought. it deliberately lead me down this path only to slap my face with an incredible plot twist. i love that in a movie. rarely, and i mean rarely, am i so voluntarily duped. when it happens it is sheer cinematic ecstasy. then, just as im totally falling in love with this film, they do it to me again, within moments of the first plot twist. just as im about to hit the floor from a left hook i never saw, they kick me in the gut, completely knocking the viewing wind out of my lungs. this was hot.

when i finished watching this movie, i wanted to believe. i'll leave lance to discuss the beauty or lack there of in regards to the form and structure of the piece. suffice it to say...through getting lost in this film i felt more connected to reality than i have in a long time.

on a scale of 1 to 10... i give it a thumbs up and homerun.