2014: The Year of the Faith-Based Movie?

Movies like Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, The Avengers, X-Men, The Amazing Spider-man, The Dark Knight and The Man of Steel have been a part of the genre that’s been dominating the big screen nearly every year in recent times: the super hero.  In 2014, however, a new genre has emerged that no one saw coming: faith-based movies.

Top grossing movies for 2014 as of Aug. 1

This year, titles like Son of God, Noah, God’s Not Dead, Heaven is For Real, and the upcoming Left Behind and Exodus: Gods and Kings are lighting up (or will be lighting up) the big screen.  And what perhaps is the most surprising part about all of this is that the ones already in the theaters have actually done very well. All, at one time or another, made the box office top 2 for at least one week. Noah made it to the number 1 spot, while Son of God, Heaven is For Real and God’s Not Dead peaked at number 2. The latter did so despite playing in 2,000 fewer theaters than the number 1 and 3 movies of that particular week. And, for a time in late March/early April, Noah, God’s Not Dead and Son of God were all in the top 10.  Finally, of the 391 movies domestically released and tracked in 2014 by Box Office Mojo, all four movies are in the top 31, and combined have racked in just over $313 million at the U.S. box office. So the interest in this subject is undeniably there.   

The thanks for this success goes out to the History Channel’s 2013 10-part, highly watched, mini-series “The Bible”. Evidently movie studio executives and producers saw this success and decided to take the faith-based movie genre out for a ride.

Being that I’m a "faith-based" guy, and have actually seen the four movies mentioned, I thought I’d give my take on them, being as unbiased as I can, in the order that were released.

Son of God (released February 28, 2014)

This 138 minute take on the life of Jesus was predominantly a rehashing of parts 6-10 of “The Bible” miniseries, with new footage spread throughout.  In essence, if you saw the miniseries, you already saw The Son of God.  Not quite sure why husband and wife creators/producers Mark Burnett and Roma Downey decided to even do this, except maybe to give people who don’t have cable TV (and thus unable to get the History Channel) a chance at watching the story.  And if that’s the case, then that’s great. 

The movie itself was good and pretty accurate scripturally. Not sure Jesus in reality was as good looking as the actor Diogo Morgado who portrayed him was (“….he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.” – Isaiah 53:2), but Morgado did a good job.

I do have one small gripe about the release of the movie on DVD.  I would think, and hope, that the main objective of the makers of a movie like this would be to get it into the hands of as many people as they could as soon as possible in order to share the story of Jesus. However, the movie was made available on Red Box a month after its release on DVD. This is typically done to give the movie a few weeks to make money on DVD and On Demand sales before being made available for a $1.20 rental. Although not an uncommon practice, I was really disappointed when that happened with this movie (this did not happen with God’s Not Dead or Heaven is For Real).  I know making money is the top priority for movie studios, but I would have hoped Burnett and Downey would have fought hard to prevent this from happening.  And maybe they did.  Again, this is an important story, and getting it in the hands of as many people as possible as soon as possible should have been a priority.

God’s Not Dead (released March 19, 2014)

I have to admit, when I first saw the title of this movie, I didn’t quite understand why it was chosen.  The company that created it, Christian-based Pureflix, produces virtually nothing but Christian movies, and quite a lot of them. Most don’t make it to the big screen, but this one did.  Some of their movies tend to be aimed more at Christians than non-Christians, so choosing the title “God’s Not Dead’, led me to believe this move was no different.  If you were a non-believer or seeker, would that title make you want to see this movie?

I was pleasantly wrong.

Although far from perfect, God’s Not Dead offers encouragement for believers and something to think about for non-believers via the various subjects and story lines throughout the movie.  Some are definitely better and more feasible than others, but the filmmakers do a nice job tying them all together at the end.  The best story line to me, by far, was the primary one in which a college student refuses his Professor’s request for the class to write and sign a piece of paper stating “God is Dead”. Doing so would allow the students to skip the toughest subject in the class. By refusing, the teacher instructs the student to prove that “God is alive” during the next four class sessions.  How the student does so is fascinating and very well written. Good knowledge for everyone.

I did have a couple of minor issues though. I was a bit surprised that only one student out of 80 in the classroom had the nerve to refuse their professor’s request. But it’s possible. A couple of characters went from passionate unbelievers to believers a bit quicker and easier than one would expect. But again, it’s certainly possible. The professor claimed to be an atheist, yet he asked his students to write “God is Dead”.  Saying that God is dead implies that God was once was alive. That doesn't sound like an atheist to me. That actually would have been one of my first questions for the professor. But as the movie progressed and we learned more about him, we understand why that was the case.

Anyhow, my issues were pretty trivial as far as the big picture goes.  The film effectively depicts the different levels of peoples religious beliefs or unbeliefs, from the atheist, to the seeker, to the ignorant, to the closest Christian.  Two characters accepted Jesus as they faced death, while others because they simply made a choice to believe. Others are given the chance but refuse it.  As a bonus, the Christian rock group “The Newsboys” make a cameo in one of my favorite scenes in the movie. Plus they sing the title song.  And the “Duck Dynasty” folks even make an appearance in a memorable scene with a reporter.

This was my favorite of the four, and worth a look.  Just keep an open mind if you do!

Noah (released March 26, 2014)

When director Darren Aronofsky stated that Noah was “the least Biblical film ever made”, we knew his version of the story of the Ark would be an interesting one. And he didn't disappoint. I wrote a full review of it back in April, and you can read it here if you’re interested:  http://drummerjeff.blogspot.com/2014/03/noahs-struggle-to-stay-afloat.html.

Heaven is For Real (released April 16, 2014)

Originally a book, Heaven is For Real unfortunately succumbs to the far too often reality of falling short as a movie. I read the book over a year ago and thoroughly enjoyed it.  So when a movie version was announced, I was cautiously optimistic (although I vowed never to be again after reading and watching “The Firm” some 20 years ago!) In case you don’t know, the book and movie are based on a true story of a four year old boy named Colton Burpo who is visited by Jesus and angels while experiencing Heaven during a life-threatening appendicitis surgery back in 2003.  In the days, weeks and months after the surgery, he reveals things he was never told and, according to his parents, couldn’t possibly have known. 

 

His father, Todd Burpo, a Pastor of a church in a small town in Nebraska, spends much of the time trying to understand and comprehend what his son is revealing. In the book, he does so via his strong faith and a supportive congregation. In fact, Burpo is constantly saying how Colton’s claims reminded him of one Bible passage or another. In the film, however, there are very few Bible references, his faith wavers, he consults non-Christian (and in one case, atheistic) council, and his church board members threaten to remove him from their church. None of which was in the book. And that, my friends, is what happens when corporate Hollywood decides to take Christian content and reshape it for a secular audience. They are so afraid that if the content is too “religious”, no matter how good the content is, the film won’t attract a large audience.  It’s all about making money, which is sad.  The makers of Noah did the same thing to an extent.

Unfortunately, the “secularization” that was done to the Heaven is Real story was so blatant that it really affected the original story. I won’t go into much detail, but one scene which bothered me that was changed for the movie involved what happened during Colton’s surgery. During the procedure, Todd escaped into a “small room” (actually, the pre-op room) where he “lashed out” at God for putting his son through what he's going through (among other things).  Sometime after the surgery, Colton specifically told his dad that he saw him yelling at God in a “small room”. Yowza! In the movie, Todd lashed out at God in the hospital’s chapel, with Colton later stating that he simply saw his dad lashing out at God.  Hardly an “oh wow” moment.  But the fact that Colton specifically mentioned (in the book) a small room is a pretty amazing revelation!  Unfortunately, that was lost in the movie. There were other examples, but I’ll stop there. 

So, given the choice, I’d recommend reading the book whether or not you see the movie. But definitely read it if you see it!

Left Behind (to be released October 3, 2014)

Also originally a best selling book, this is a remake of the 2000 movie of the same name starring Kirk Cameron. This version stars Nicolas Cage. Tim Lahaye, who co-authored the book, stated earlier this year after a screening of the movie that "It is the best movie I've ever seen on the rapture." That's encouraging! Anyhow, you can see a trailer for the movie here:   http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2165550105/.

Exodus: Gods and Kings (to be released December 12, 2014)

This is a retelling of the story of Moses and the "exodus" of the Jews from Egypt, as told in the Biblical book of Exodus. This rendition starts Batman, I mean Christian Bale, as Moses.  Terrific actor, so that should be interesting in itself.  The movie is directed by Ridley Scott, which could really be interesting. A trailer was recently released, and you can view it here:  http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1575529497/.

Hollywood and Godzilla: 0 for 2.....

Godzilla 2014

Although better than their feeble 1998 effort, and despite it's modest box office success, Hollywood still hasn't cracked the proverbial Godzilla nut.  Sure, this summer's version has a very entertaining final 20 minutes with Godzilla and two MUTO's (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organisms) going toe-to-toe in an epic battle of prehistoric radiation-induced monsters. But that alone doesn't make for a good movie.  And unfortunately for me, this battle couldn't make up for the prior 90 minutes. 

In a nutshell, the movie is about the discovery of two radioactive gigantic, nuclear hungry MUTOs (I don't even know how to describe them) who were somehow discovered underground in the Philippines in 1999. 

Simultaneously,  a U.S. scientist in Japan named Joe Brody, played by Bryan Cranston of "Breaking Bad" fame, has been monitoring recent and increasing seismic activity throughout the region.  His research shows that this activity is leading to something big, but his warnings fall on deaf ears. Once the inevitable happens, tragedy strikes him, his wife, and their young son. 

Joe and Ford Brody

Fast forward to current time, and the seismic pattern from 1999 is re-emerging in Japan. An older and more obsessed Brody, still living in Japan, tries to warn the new generation of scientists, again to no avail. Once the inevitable happens again, MUTO 1,
a flying male, and Godzilla are released from their underground prisons. We also learn that the MUTO 2, a land dwelling larger MUTO, had earlier been moved to a storage facility in Nevada, and has conveniently escaped as well. The two MUTOs are now trying to reunite in San Francisco to scope out an underground radiation source there. On the way, MUTO 1 snacks on a Russian nuclear sub while making a seemingly unnoticed stop in Oahu. In the meantime, a resurrected Godzilla is on the tail of both of them. Rather than destroy the two MUTOs, the U.S. Military decides it would be best to let Godzilla take care of it.  

At the same time, Brody's son Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), now in his 20's, a recent returnee from a tour of duty in the Middle East and currently living in San Francisco with his wife and child, decides to fly to Japan and help is dad.

Now I know we have to extend reality a bit for these kind of movies, but there was so much that happened during all of this that simply didn't make sense. At least to me. Here are just a few things (spoiler alert!):

• How was MUTO #2 (over 200 feet tall) transported from the Philippines to Nevada? 
• How did MUTO #1 arrive in Oahu undetected? Especially with a Russian nuclear sub in tow? 
• When did the Honolulu Airport get a tram?  
• The U.S. Military for some reason was basically portrayed as being inept and bumbling. Although set in contemporary times, they had a difficulty accurately tracking these behemoths for some reason! The Japanese military of the 1950's and 1960's gave Godzilla more of a fight than the U.S Military in this movie!
• In a matter of hours, how did these two MUTO's not only mate, but produce a slew of living embryos?
• The rescue buses were using the Golden Gate Bridge to get to Oakland. Hmm... 
• Finally, we were told early on that these MUTO's were not initially destroyed because they contained so much radiation that it would endanger millions of people. Which is bad news for everyone in the bay area and maybe California after Godzilla was through with them. Major contamination! 

Despite all of this, Godzilla did look great though, albeit a bit more buffed than his predecessors. Sounded a bit like the T-Rex in Jurassic Park, but it was still a really good rendition. Didn't appear until more than half way through the movie, but I guess that's OK. But when he finally did in Oahu, the movie for some reason, and on several occasions, would abruptly switch back to Cole and his family just as Godzilla was about to confront MUTO 1. Not sure if it was for added dramatic affect, but I got frustrated with it!  I wanted to see them fight! But we were made to wait an hour and forty minutes for that to happen in a computer-generated San Francisco (no actual filming took place there).  At one point, I wasn't sure if the main story line was Godzilla vs. the MUTOs or whether or not Ford would be able to get back to San Francisco in time to reunite with his family!

Anyhow, I'm sure you can sense my frustration. Am I being nit picky? Perhaps on some things. But I'm sensing I may not be the only one. Godzilla and it's $160 million budget raked in an impressive $93 million it's first weekend in mid-May. But as of this writing almost one month later, it's box office total is $186 million, or an average of $31 million a week. Not too shabby, but that's a pretty big drop off considering it's taken nearly a month to duplicate what it did its opening weekend.  But despite all of this, I'm actually willing to give the movie another shot.  I'll rent it from Red Box for $1.20 this time though!  

I read recently that a sequel has already been announced by the studio. I have two bits of advice for the film makers the next time around:  

Godzilla circa 1964

1. Come up with another story line that has nothing to do with radiation or nuclear energy (the 1998 movie also dealt with that). Boring. 
2. As someone who grew up watching the old Japanese Godzilla movies, one of the appealing things about those movies is that the filmmakers didn't take their subject matter seriously. There was a "campiness" about those Godzilla movies.  Both Hollywood versions went heavy on the drama and suspense. Godzilla movies are supposed to be fun! Lighten it up on the sequel!
3. Bring back Monster Zero and/or Rodan!  Or maybe remake King Kong vs. Godzilla?

Using my rating system (1= skip it, 2= rent it, 3= worth a matinee, 4= worth full price), I’d give "Godzilla" a “2”.

Netflix SN #6 - PBS British TV on a Roll

During the past two years, my wife and I have really taken an interest in a slew of British TV series that have made it to American TV, specifically on the Public Broadcasting System (PBS).  Four in particular have peaked our interest:  "Downton Abbey", "Doc Martin", "Sherlock" and "Mr. Selfridge".

Past seasons for each are available on Netflix and/or Amazon Prime instant streaming.  Here's a short write up of each:

Downton Abbey

Probably the most well-known of the four, Downton Abbey just concluded it's fourth season run on PBS this month.  Although a bit vanilla compared to the first three seasons (in particular season 2, which was my favorite), Abbey still features superb writing and top notch acting.

Downton Abby is a lavish Edwardian mansion and park nestled in the North Yorkshire landscape.  The story centers around the residents there, both the family and staff. The family is led by its patrioarch, Violet Crawley, Countess of Gratham, and her son Robert Crawley, the Earl of Grantham. Robert is married to wealthy American Cora, and the two have three daughters. The staff of personal assistants, butlers and maids, and kitchen personnel are led by Charles Carson and Elsie Hughes. If you think this sounds similar to the "Upstairs, Downstairs" series from the 1970's, then you'd be correct. Same type of thing.

Season 1 takes place just before the start of World War 1, season 2 during WW1, season 3 just after WW1 ends, and season 4 in the early 1920's. Strange thing is that hardly anyone in the show ages during that time!  Regardless, the inter-goingson between and within the family and staff is entertaining to watch. Multiple, inter-twining story-lines abound, all equally intriguing. The choreography in the show is top notch. Unlike recent period piece big budget films, there is a definite feel that you're in the early 20th century. The actors/actresses look and fit right in to the era portrayed.

Doc Martin

This comedy is about one Dr. Martin Ellingham, a noted surgeon in London who suddenly and unexplainably contracts a phobia for blood. As a result, he decides to give up his successful practice and accept a position as a general practitioner in the small fictional seaside village of Port Wenn, England, where everyone knows everyone. The series follows the socially challenged Dr. Martin as he interacts with the friendly, and sometimes odd, villagers, while following in love with one of them, school teacher Louisa Glasson.

"Doc Martin" first premiered as a series in 2004, and just concluded it's sixth season earlier this year (on US television).  "Wait a minute, that was 10 years ago. How can it only be in its sixth season?" you ask?  The series actually ran annually it's first three seasons, then every other year after that. So season seven, if there is one, won't be broadcast until 2016.

In another interesting twist, the Doc Martin character actually began as two made-for-TV BBC movies in Britain beginning in 2001. That Doc Martin, although portrayed by the same actor (Martin Clunes), was the complete opposite of the one in the 2004 series. The original Doc Martin was funny and easy going.  However, when a British TV studio bought the rights to the show, they decided that Doc Martin would be more entertaining if he had a ruff, abrupt and intolerant personality with lack of bedside manners. And in a way, they were right. But it is fun watching both versions of Doc Martin, which you can do on Netflix and Amazon instant streaming. Then decide for yourself!

Like Downton Abby, the writing and acting is superb. In addition to Clunes' Doc Martin, the characters of Glasson, Bert Large, PC Penhale, and Mrs. Tishell are worth watching out for.

Sherlock

“Sherlock” is a modern day re-telling of A. Conan Doyle’s classic “Sherlock Holmes”.  Many of Doyle’s original stores are re-created in modern England.  Holmes’ trademark cap and crummy violin playing still exist; but gone is the trademark pipe, and his well-documented drug addiction has been replaced by a cigarette chain smoking vice. 

Portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch (most recently Khan in “Star Trek into Darkness”), this Holmes has all of the brains and wit of Basil Rathbone’s original Sherlock Holmes of the 1940’s, and the spunk of Robert Downey Jr.’s most recent portrayal.  Although he can hold his own, Cumberbatch’s Holmes isn’t quite the martial arts expect of Downey Jr.’s character (which never made sense to me).  One prize Cumberbatch can claim over his predecessors though is that of fastest talker.  When he’s trying to sort out a situation in his mind, Cumberbatch goes in into ultra-fast speaking mode. It’s so fast that I sometimes have to turn on the closed captioning just to figure out what he’s saying!  And frequently the closed-captioning can’t even keep up with him!

Of course Sherlock Holmes wouldn’t be Sherlock Holmes without his sidekick, Dr. John Watson.  In this rendition, Watson is portrayed by current "Hobbit" Martin Freeman.  Freeman is quite good, actually, and is someone I particularly enjoyed in the UK’s original “The Office” show with Ricky Gervais some 10 years back.  He and Cumberbatch are a good pairing and work very well together.

Lestrade, Moriarty, Irene Adler, and the Hounds of Baskerville are all here. Andrew Scott in particular plays a very creepy, psychotic Moriarty.  In fact he won a BAFTA (British equivalent to the Emmy’s) for his portrayal. Sherlock Holmes’ mysterious brother, Mycroft Holmes, plays a big role in this rendition. We're never quite sure whose side he’s on. In an interesting side note, Mycroft is played by Mark Gatiss, a co-creator of the show and one of its head writers.  Speaking of the writing, some of the storylines are quite addicting and well-told. Lots of mystery and crime solving to be had.

Like “Doc Martin”, “Sherlock” is on an every other year schedule, with season 3 having just ended in February. Thus, 2016 will be the next appearance of Holmes and Watson. Just as well if you haven’t watched any episodes yet.  The season ending cliff-hangers after the first two seasons left viewers hanging with a lot of unanswered questions and quite a bit of mystery.  Making viewers wait two years to find out what happened really bordered on cruelty!  The creators of “Sherlock” also elected to create three 90 minute “mini-movies” each season rather than the typical 8-10 30 or 60 minute episodes.

Mr. Selfridge

“Mr. Selfridge” is the newest of the shows, and is based on the real life Harry Selfridge, an American entrepreneur who sought to build London’s largest department store in the early 20th century.  The first season of the series, which began in 2013, focused on the birth of the store in 1909 and its first year of existence.  Season 2 just started in late March and is set some four years later beginning with the 5th year celebration of the store’s opening and a looming World War I.

Selfridge is well portrayed by Emmy award winner Jeremy Piven (“Entourage”), even though he is a good ten years younger than what the real Selfridge was. The supporting cast is just as solid.  Like “Downton Abbey”, the writers/makers of the series did a great job replicating the look and feel of early 20th century England (hmm, I wonder if the Downton Abbey folks shopped at Selfridges?).  Because there isn’t a whole lot of drama to be had in a department store, “Selfridge” relies heavily on the many relationships that develop throughout the show. This includes Selfridge himself, whose father issues, infidelity and resulting unstable marriage is one of the primary subplots to the main story. There are lots of love interests and love triangles featuring many of the principles of the show, which, as a result, gives this series more of a soap opera feel.  Still entertaining though, mainly for a couple of reasons.

First, Selfridge in reality was quite a visionary and trendsetter when it came to how a department store was set up and run. For example, in 1909 the most common mode of transportation was still horse and buggy.  This meant the streets of London were not the cleanest, if you know what I mean.  To eliminate the “odor” this problem caused, Selfridge decided to set up perfume and cosmetics at the front of the store, something actually frowned upon at that time, so the store would smell good when anyone entered.  This was just one of the many of Selfridge innovations that is portrayed in the show.

The second is that the writers of the show decided to have actual well-known personalities of the time visit the store.  This included the likes of the King of England, A. Conan Doyle, rival (and friend) Frank Woolworth, explorer Ernest Shackleton, and Russian ballerina Anna Pavolva. This was a particularly nice touch, I thought. Overall this is good viewing, although it did take a few episodes for both Piven and the show to grow on us.


So there you have it. Four currently active British shows definitely worth checking out. All are part of the PBS Masterpiece Classics or Masterpiece Mystery series on your local PBS station. Past seasons (except for the latest) for all are available on either Netflix Instant view or Amazon Prime.  Since the latest seasons are still relatively recent, they are currently available for a small price.  Won’t be long before they are free as well though.

“Mr. Selfridge” is currently running on PBS Sunday nights, while “Downton Abbey” will be back in January, 2015, “Sherlock” in January 2016, and Doc Martin in February 2016.  Which provides lots of time to catch up!