Black and White / War / Drama
107 minutes / 1942
RATING: 7/10
Ronald Reagan and Errol Flynn are two members of a Allied bombing crew assigned a near-impossible mission over Nazi Germany. When their plane is shot down, they set out to make it home again....and to do as much damage to the Nazis as they can along the way.
Their desperate journey has plenty of explosions, fisticuffs, arial shootouts, guns blazing, and, at one point, Errol Flynn diving through a window to tackle two Nazi guards at once. There are laughs too, especially when the crew has the chutzpah to steal a ride on Nazi leader Hermann Göring's private train car. Desperate Journey is jingoistic, and at times not so realistic (ie. the real Nazis were smarter than movie Nazis) but it has an authenticity to it that comes of being made during World War II. This film was part of the war effort, made to encourage those back home that not only were we in the right, but that Australians, Brits, Americans and more could come together as a team to outsmart and beat back the Nazis.
Caution
As the crew is chased across Germany it isn't surprising that there are casualties along the way. And while there is no real gore, those losses make this a film that children could find too dramatic and emotional for them to deal with. So this might be best for 12 and up. Conclusion
I watched this with a group ranging in age from 40 to just shy of 80, and all eight of us enjoyed it. If you have any sort of appreciation for World War II films made during World War II, this is one of the especially fun ones.
Animated / Children
82 minutes / 2018
RATING: 6 out of 10
My kids loved this - we rented it for two nights, and they asked to watch it twice. So why give it just a 6 rating? Because what makes it attractive to gentle, easily scared, children is also what makes it a below average film: there is no conflict.
Summer vacation has arrived, and Grandfather Alden wants to take his four grandchildren to an island their family owns. He leaves them there, and with the exception of a couple minutes when the children are trapped in a cave just as the tide comes in, this is an entirely calm film. Grandfather Alden leaves them on the island alone, but the only other "danger" they have to deal with is a leaky roof.
This is a sequel to the slightly better 2013 film The Boxcar Children. Both movies are based on the beloved 150+ book series originated by Gertrude Chandler Warner way back in 1924. According to the bonus features on this DVD, Warner set out to make a story for Grade 1 and 2 students that would use the 100 most important words for them to learn. I found that rather telling – it makes the books out to be more about learning vocabulary than presenting kids with a rip-roaring adventure. And if that was her intent, she has succeeded.
CAUTIONS
The only caution I can think to include is that the movies make no mention of God (Heaven comes up once, but not God) and on such a beautiful island, where it would be hard not to sing His praises, His absence is felt (by adults, anyway). In the series a brief reference to evolution pops up in every second or third book, and that, along with God's absence in the books and films, makes me suspect that author Gertrude Warner was probably not a Christian.
CONCLUSION
So far I'm not exactly singing the praises of the book series, or this, the latest film based on them. So why recommend the movie at all?
Because, for younger kids, particularly those who are familiar with the Boxcar Children already, they will absolutely love it. My critique of the book and this movie is not that there is anything wrong with them; it's only that there is nothing remarkable about them. The acting is okay, the animation is middling, and the story, from a parental perspective, is on the boring side.
But on the other hand, there are no language, violence, sexuality, or other concerns. And young children, up to maybe 10 years old, will enjoy the familiar characters and the cozy comfy safety of this no-conflict story. It is a nice safe film for your family movie night.
Can we dismiss UFO sightings as just a bunch of hysteria, or perhaps as misidentification? Is it a matter of weather balloons being mistaken for visitors from another planet?
Before you answer consider this: millions have reported UFO sightings, including American former president, Jimmy Carter. And while some of those might be weather balloons, tricks of the sun, or other optical illusions, what are we to think of the many who claim that have had a "close encounter of the fourth kind" - who claim that they've actually seen aliens themselves?
This fascinating documentary, produced by Creation Ministries International, doesn't offer the answers you might expect from a Christian creationist organization. Early on it seems as if they are making the case that at least some of these sightings and encounters are, in fact, real. They share reports from former air force officials, the findings of researchers, still unexplained film footage, and other evidence.
But are these encounters with actual aliens...or is there something else at work here? Even as a case is made that some of these encounters must be real, we're also told why they can't be aliens. The distances in space are simply too vast, the speeds required too high, to the point that physics seems to rule out the possibility that we are encountering visitors from far distant galaxies.
So what are they?
SPOILER ALERT: author Gary Bates and others argue that these are, in fact, spiritual beings - demons - masqueradingas aliens. It's quite the intriguing premise!
The film offers lots of evidence for this position, with one particularly interesting bit being how the shape of UFOs seems to "evolve" to match up with people's expectations. As Gary Bates notes:
"...UFOs seem to appear within the understanding of the culture of the time. UFOs in the late 1800s appeared like airships. The ancient Romans and Greeks have stories of flying shields with occupants on board. American Indians have legends of flying canoes with people on board. And as we approached our rocket age...[they] started to take on the silver, shiny type of shapes."
Similarly, "aliens" used to claim to be from Mars, Venus, and Saturn. However, now that we know those planets are not hosts to "massive civilizations of extra terrestrials" the aliens no longer claim to be from Mars or Venus. Instead they say they are from other systems or galaxies.
There's also the correlation between UFO belief and occult experimentation – many "abductees" have dabbled in the “dark arts.” In asking for contact with demons, did they unknowingly invite these encounters? It is worth noting, too, that the messages “aliens” pass on are often direct attacks on the Bible, portraying Jesus not as the Son of God, but merely as some advanced alien. Even more interesting, several people who have been plagued by alien encounters, report that these encounters were very different after they became Christians. When they rebuked these "aliens" in the name of Jesus, they would leave!
Cautions
The only caution I can think of would be concern age-appropriateness. The nature of "talking head" documentaries is that children aren't usually interested. But just in case they are, parents should be aware there is a brief discussion lasting a few minutes concerning claims some abductees make regarding sexual violations by aliens. It is far from lurid, with Dove Foundation describing it as "clinical, clean talk."
Conclusion
This is will be an intriguing documentary for any and all who are fascinated by UFOs, by science fiction, and by aliens. While the primary audience is meant to be Christians it would also be a great conversation-starter with unbelieving friends about how the Bible offers explanations for all of life...even including alien encounters!
One important note: there is another DVD, also featuring Gary Bates, called Alien Intrusion that is simply a powerpoint video lecture.It has a different subtitle (one it shares with the Gary Bates' book that inspired them both) Alien Intrusion: UFOs and The Evolution Connection. The documentary is called Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception. While the powerpoint lecture is interesting too, what you really want is the documentary, so be sure to check the subtitle and get the right one!
It is available at Creation.com under the "Store" tab at the top of the page.
How can a mouse meet up with a hungry fox, snake, and owl, and live to tell the tale? It helps that he has a monstrously big friend who is just about to meet him. And a fox, or a snake, or an owl, wouldn't dare eat a small mouse who has such a big friend!
But...what if they found out what the mouse knows: "There's no such things as a Gruffalo"?
Or is there?
This short film, based on the book of the same name, is a clever tale about a mouse who thinks his way out of trouble. It is beautifully rendered, visually and musically, with the only concern being that everyone wants to turn this little mouse into a little morsel. So in our household the pause button had to be used a few times to calm some anxious viewers. For those under eight, especially if they don't watch much TV, there is a little bit of tension here. In fact, kids under three might find it just too scary.
But it does all work out in the end, and reassuring any little ones of that might help them make it through.
So, two thumbs up for this short, fun, and clever story.
There is a sequel, The Gruffalo's Child, about the title character heading off to search for the "big bad mouse" that so terrified his father. But it loses the charm of the original because now it is a father who lies to his child, rather than, as in the original, a mouse lying to predators. While we can justify lying to predators it is quite another thing for a parent to lie to their child. Also, the moody music, and the uncertainty about who we should be cheering for (the Gruffalo child, all on his lonesome searching through the woods, or the mouse that he is, basically, hunting?) make this one a good bit scarier than the original. That's why our family is going to give it a miss.
I enjoyed this documentary, but I'm really glad I gave it a quick preview before trying to share it with the kids.
There was a hint on the back cover of the DVD that this might include more than stunning visuals of flamingos. There were plenty of flamingo pictures, but there was also one hyena! So was this going to be a nature film where the good guys get eaten? Yup, I know that happens in the world, but I don't know if my kids have to be exposed to that quite yet. So I gave it a fast forward viewing and found newly and not yet hatched flamingo chicks getting eaten by Matabou storks (30 minutes in), mongeese (53 min), and Hyenas (62 min). Oh, and at about the 40 minute mark we get to watch a struggling, crippled chick how is left behind to die.
So I will not be sharing this with my 6-year-old and under crew.
Who would like it? The visuals are indeed stunning – the opening shots of a sea of bobbing flamingos are exotic, strange, otherworldly.
But in addition to the shots of "nature, read in tooth and claw" the film will discourage some viewers with its slow pacing. The birds are the stars here, and flamingos, it turns out, do a lot of standing around. So action is minimal, and the camera tends to linger long over each shot. But one man's slow pacing is another's calm close-ups and patient panoramic views. A bird lover will find much to love!
Cautions
When it comes to cautions, other than the scenes where feathers are flying (and these only add up to a total of maybe 3 or 4 minutes) the only nit I can pick are a few moments in the narration of a vague mystic non-Christian spirituality. So, for example, at one point we're told:
"The story of the bird is a promise to us - Nature's affirmation. In winter or in death, in times of desolation. the rain will arrive, the call of the birds will be heard and everything, everything, can begin again"
Nothing all that disturbing. I mean, we weren't expecting anything Christian from Disney, right?
Conclusion
So who should see The Crimson Wing? This is an intriguing, visual feast best suited for documentary-loving older children or adults who already love these birds and would love to learn more.
Related reviews: on flying creatures
A fantastic Intelligent Design documentary: Flight: the Genius of Birds
This is a quick, simple depiction of an Intertestamental tale that most Christians don't know
The way the story is most often told, in the second century BC a Greek king by the name of Antiochus ruled over the Seleucid Empire, and that included Judea and Samaria. Jews were being pressured to adopt Greek culture. Antiochus went so far as to outlaw Judaism, and ban circumcision. Then in 167 BC he ordered that a statue of Zeus be erected in the Jewish Temple and pigs be sacrificed on the Temple's altar.
His desecration of the temple so outraged the Jews that they rebelled. In this animated account the rebellion is depicted as being led by "Judah the Hammer" but that is an abridgment of the traditional tale. The rebellions was led by Judah's father, Mattathias, along with all five of Mattathias' sons, including Judah. Judah would become the leader only later, after his father died.
Two years after the rebellion began victory was won! The statue of Zeus was quickly destroyed and then the Temple was rededicated. The Temple menorah was relit, but, according to the Talmud, only enough oil for one day's worth of burning could be found, and yet the menorah remained lit for eight days until new oil could be brought in.
Caution
There is some minimal violence, as you might expect in a story of armed insurrection. But it is basically bloodless. And children of school age would likely be able to handle this.
How much of the story is true and how much is legend we can't quite be sure. The miracle of the eight day oil supply is found only in the Talmud, where it was written down about 600 years after the event. However the Maccabee rebellion itself is described in 1 and 2 Maccabees and in the works of historian Josephus, giving us good reason to think the core of the story is true. A eight day festival of lights, also called Hanukkah, commemorating the rededication of the temple, is still celebrated by Jews today.
Conclusion
This is a good but not great video – 28 minutes simply doesn't leave enough time to do this story justice. But for children, and parents too, who have never heard about Hanukkah's origins, this will grab their interest.
The depiction of the Greeks' persecution of the Jews is clearly meant to parallel the action of the Nazis – particularly when Greeks soldiers are going house to house, busting down doors, looking for orthodox Jews. So another reason to watch would be as a gentler way to introduce students to the sad reality of Anti-Semitism than could be done with anything Holocaust-related.
You can buy your own copy of Maccabees: The Story of Hanukkah at Amazon.com by clicking here.
An Unexpected Journey (2012)
169 min (also a 182 minute version) RATING: 8/10
The Desolation of Smaug (2013)
161 min (also a 186 min version) RATING: 8/10
The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)
144 min (also a 164 min version) RATING: 7/10
Bilbo Baggins was quite content puttering around his garden, sitting in his armchair, and reading his books – he wasn’t looking for adventure. But then a tall wizard and a dozen mid-sized dwarves asked this small hobbit to come help them battle a huge dragon. It was the sort of offer any respectable hobbit would refuse...and Bilbo did.
“An adventure?.... Nasty, disturbing, uncomfortable things. Make you late for dinner….We do not want any adventures here, thank you!”
But something was stirring inside this quiet soul…might he be an adventurous sort after all?
The next day Bilbo surprises even himself by taking the dwarves up on their offer. So off he goes, on a long journey to the Lonely Mountain where the fearsome dragon Smaug guards his stolen horde of treasure. On the way the company meets trolls, giants, horse-sized spiders, orcs – lots and lots of orcs! – and a kingdom’s worth of elves.
But why did they want this little hobbit to come with? The dwarves don’t know; they agreed because the wizard, Gandalf, insisted. And Gandalf isn’t entirely sure himself. The is the best explanation he can offer:
“I don't know. Saruman [another wizard] believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I've found it is the small things; everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay... simple acts of kindness, and love. Why Bilbo Baggins? Perhaps it is because I am afraid... and he gives me courage.”
Book to film
This is the second time that director Peter Jackson has adapted a J.R.R. Tolkien story to film. The first, the Lord of the Rings trilogy was one of the few movie adaptions to live up to their source material: three exceptional books became three of the best movies ever made, even as they remained quite loyal to the original story.
This time around a great book has been transformed into three films, and while the films are very good, they hardly resemble the book. Oh yes, all the major plot elements are still there, but because Peter Jackson has to stretch the book to fit three films he had to add lots of extra bits. A few of those bits are sweet – a love story between elf and dwarf – but most are violent: two enormous battles have been added and numerous skirmishes.
The Hobbit was a children’s tale, a sort of kinder, gentler version of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings adventure. But there is nothing kinder or gentler about this film version – in fact no child should see it.
So anyone loyal to the book will have good reason not to like the films. But if we look at them simply as adventure movies, then these are rollicking tales!
Cautions
The biggest caution concerns the violence, because there is lots of it. It is mostly of a bloodless sort, which is why, despite the films’ enormous death toll, they still manage a PG-13 rating. But there is just so much of it!
Very little of it is realistic – it struck me as being video game-ish – but some of it is played for comic effect, and that’s the most disturbing aspect. When the company fights because it must, that is brave, even heroic, and we can cheer. But what are we to think when Gandalf slices through an orc’s neck so cleanly his head remains in place? We get a quick look at the orc’s confused, distressed facial expression before Gandalf gives his head a tap to send it rolling off. This is meant to get a laugh, but it just gave me the creebles. Death as comedy?
I should also note that while I haven’t watched the extended versions, I have heard that the violence in the extended version of the last film, The Battle of the Five Armies, would be enough to get it an R-rating.
I could add some cautions about the occasional bit of juvenile humor (there are a couple snot jokes, etc.) but since no children should be watching this anyway, and teens and adults aren’t going to be impacted, that will suffice.
One of the reasons why this is not a film for small children!
The only other caution concerns the magic that pops up throughout the film. Some of it is of the dark sort. The villain behind the scenes, causing many of the company’s problems, is the Necromancer, who had nine undead soldiers doing his bidding. He is nasty, and even demonic looking. Now God condemns witchcraft (Deuteronomy 18:10-12, Leviticus 19:26, 20:6) and the casting of spells, so it’s not a big deal to show a villain making use of magic – they are supposed to be bad! More problematic is when the heroes do it too, and a lot of them do, with Bilbo Baggins even dabbling in what seems to be dark magic after he finds a magic ring that turns him invisible but which also seems to talk at times. Once the ring even tries to convince Bilbo to murder someone!
So what should we think of heroes who use magic? That would be a discussion worth having with your kids. Bilbo's use of the ring highlights the dangers of dark magic - in The Hobbit we get only a glimpse of the sort of temptation this ring will pose in the later Lord of the Rings trilogy, but it's enough to know this ring is not some cute play toy but more an ever present and enticing temptation. So the overall presentation of magic here doesn’t worry me overmuch, particularly because the magic is so very clearly not the sort of sorcery that occurs in our own world. If its presentation is flawed, at least the magic shown is not of the sort that is liable to tempt any watcher to imitate it. So, on this issue these films don't present a danger to viewers.
Conclusion
There is also a lot to love here: the company is courageous, and Bilbo Baggins grows in bravery through the film. Our heroes are quite heroic! Many of the themes are admirable, and even biblical, like:
money can corrupt
a man has no greater love than that he is willing to lay down his life for another
loyalty doesn’t meaning blindly following
love can require us to confront a friend
vengeance can blind us
bravery doesn’t mean not being afraid
A small weak fellow putting bigger stronger sorts to shame (1 Cor. 1:26-29)
It wouldn’t be hard to find many others. So overall I’d rate this as an above average action adventure that isn’t suitable for children, but might be enjoyed and discussed with older teens.
The Six Days of Creation: A Young Earth is Not the Issue
Lecture
50 minutes / 2002
Rating 7/10
The debate over whether God really created in just six days might seem to about the age of the earth: is it thousands or millions and even billions of years old? But, as presenter Ken Ham shows, the real issue is one of biblical authority.
"You don't get millions of years out of the Bible do you?" Ham asks. "I go to churches and sometimes they say: 'We believe in the local flood.' 'We believe in theistic evolution.' 'We believe the day age theory.' 'We're progressive creationists...who believe God created over millions of years and the Big Bang and so on.' 'We believe the gap theory.' And then they say, 'What do you believe?' And I say, 'What the Bible says.' Because not one of those positions comes from the Bible. They are all imposed upon the Bible. And by the way, when you impose man's ideas on the Bible, you know what you are teaching to generations in our culture? That you don't have to take God's Word as written; you can believe man's word is infallible and reinterpret the Word of God. You are undermining biblical authority."
That's the real issue underlying the battle over Genesis. Later Ham notes he doesn't even like to be called a "young earth creationist" because that makes it seems as if the earth's age is the key issue instead. But the reason we need to have a proper understanding of the age of the Earth is only so that we can have the proper respect for biblical authority - if the Bible doesn't mean what it says in the first chapter, then how can we trust it anywhere else?
Some of the points Ham addresses include:
what the word "day" means in Genesis 1 and the rest of the Bible
why so many Christians believe in an old earth
and the danger in believing an old earth
This is a very good lecture, as lectures go, so if you are interested in the material you'll enjoy the presentation – it is a very good and thorough introduction to the topic. However this is not something that will grab attention – it is simply a man at a podium with some powerpoint slides. So, a good one for adults who want to know more, but not really something for kids, or those only marginally interested.
You can buy it on DVD at Answers in Genesis or you can watch it for free online, in 4 parts, at:
Black and White / War / Drama
