The Wicker Man (1973) review

(9/10)

This psychological horror was a very intellectual scare through the brain of my faith, acted through very well and executed with brilliant precision.

PLOT:Sgt. Neil Howie (Edward Woodward) comes to an island in Scotland named Summerisle to search for a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. Neil is a very pious man and doesn't tend to be swayed easily by anything, so when he starts to find out about the bizarre religious practices of this island's residents, he sticks to his Christianity with suspicion of fowl play in the disappearance of Rowan. Visiting with the leader, Lord Summerisle (Christopher Lee), Neil finds out the island is populated by pagans with old ways that could be deadly to him and the missing girl. It's a brilliant plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The acting in this film is excellent as well, with very convincing and serious parts played by Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee as Sgt. Neil and Lord Summerisle, as well as a well done performance by Britt Ekland as Willow, the landlord's daughter. Every performance in this film was done in greatness by the actors and actresses. The other shiners would have to be Dian Cilento as Miss Rose, Irene Summers as May Morrison, and Ingrid Pitt as the librarian, as well as others.

SCORE:The score in here is beautiful and very well done by Magnet and arranged by Paul Giovanni. The music itself was very folk-like and the sung lyrics sounded beautiful and rather Celtic altogether. I really loved the soundtrack, as it was actually very full of song.



OTHER CONTENT:This film is a horror for the intellectuals who believe deeply in God and Christianity, as it involves a martyr being put forth as a possible sacrifice in a pagan-ruled area. I found the film not only a psychologically scary treat but also very well shot with beauty in the cinematography. Even the most crude shots in the film were shot with such precision that it seemed attractive to the eye, from Willow's dance to the burning of the wicker man itself. I felt this was a film that gave the audience something to think about in terms of religion, whether it be a test of faith or scare in itself. The film itself wasn't too scary, but it messed with your mind enough to inspire a shock and come-to-realism in what you are actually watching.

OVERALL,an awesome psychological horror with a brilliant plot, excellent acting, beautiful score, an intellectual scare of a treat, beauty in cinematography, and scares for believers, but the scares are more psychological than easy to spot, so it's thought process and disturbing thoughts aren't for everyone.

The Passion of the Christ (2004) review

(8/10)

Since I'm a devoted Christian, I'll probably like this film a whole lot more than others, but I love how the real aspects of His torture are captured through great direction.

PLOT:This Biblical film takes place shortly after the last supper when Judas (Luca Lionello) betrays Jesus Christ (Jim Caviezel) and turns him in to the head priests who are after him. We follow Jesus, Peter (Francesco De Vito), Mary (Maia Morgenstern), Mary Magdeline (Monica Belluci) and others as we witness the story of Jesus' crucifixion and torture from the streets to Calvary. It's a good story to make a film on executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The acting in here was pretty great. Jim Caviezel played a pretty solid job as the tortured Jesus Christ and made you feel how bad it was for Him. The other shiners would be Francesco De Vito as Peter, Maia Morgenstern as Mary, Monica Belluci as Mary Magdeline, Giovanni Capalbo as Cassus, and Rosalinda Celentano as Satan.

SCORE:The score in this film is very well done by John Debney. I really got into the touching and dramatic themes composed.

EFFECTS:The effects in here were quite realistic to say the least. The blood surprisingly flows freely for such a Christian film. The blood effects used to show Jesus' wounds before and after being formed are very gruesome and detailed. It really captures the brutality of civilization back then along with the pain He felt. The effects used for the corpses and demons were pretty impressive too.



OTHER CONTENT:This is an expertly-crafted version of Christ's torture and crucifixion as I've never seen it before. Mel Gibson does a great job of taking the source material from scripture and putting it on the screen expertly. He put his vision into the story we all know about Jesus and his death. It's a very brutal and realistic look at it. I cried for about half of the film, for no human being needs to go through this kind of torture, especially Him. The only flaws I could find in this film is that it's a bit overlong and a little distracted from the point. Gibson drags out the scene of Jesus hauling his cross to Calvary in pain to be crucified for dramatic effect, but it just starts to become dull and dreadful, as if the film wasn't enough already. Also, there are a few aspects Gibson put in there to get his vision out that distracted from the film, such as some of the Satan scenes and a lot of the brutality; the message is somewhat lost by the end of the film. However, if you're truly a hardcore Christian, you'll love this film regardless.

OVERALL,a great Christian film with a brilliant plot, great acting, touching score, realistic effects, realstic brutality, and a good vision to the classic story, but it's a little overlong and distracts in some parts.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000) review

(8/10)

This peculiar, Coen brothers take on Homer's "Odyssey" is a lot of southern fun.

PLOT:After breaking out of a jail line-up, Everett (George Clooney), Pete (John Turturro), and Delmar (Tim Blake Nelson) head on a journey to find a foretold treasure in a valley that is about to be flooded. Of course, things aren't going to go all according to plan. They'll have to flee the law in every direction they head in, but they just might become celebrities along the way in this early 1900s, Mississippian film. It's a well-adapted plot executed quite uniquely.



ACTING:The acting was alright considering most of the characters were either uneducated or painfully cliched southern folk. The shiners were George Clooney as Everett, John Turturro as Pete, Tim Blake Nelson as Delmar, Charles Durning as Pappy O'Daniel, Ray McKinnon as Vernon T. Waldrip, and John Goodman as Big Dan Teague. I believe with out Clooney, this film wouldn't have been as good as it really was. Turturro did a pretty great job too. I particularly didn't care for Holly Hunter as Penny. This wasn't really a good role for her.

SCORE:This is also one of my favorite soundtracks. All of the music matches the time period that this was trying to recreate perfectly, plus some of the songs are either beautiful ("Down to the River to Pray") or toe-tappingly catchy ("I Am a Man of Constant Sorrow"). It's all of the same certain feel.

 

OTHER CONTENT:This film was fun and had clever twists, accurate history, and an interesting story overall to be told. The Coen Brothers always come up with great films, and this one is no less. The only flaws in this are that there isn't much of a true plot and there are times where this can get a little jumbled up/confusing for the viewer. It's not everyone's type of film, but it's good.

OVERALL,a great Coen brothers film with a uniquely executed plot, alright acting, good matching soundtrack, fun, clever twists, accurate history, and an interesting story, but there isn't too much of a plot, and things can get jumbled up sometimes.

The Tree of Life (2011) review

(9/10)

I don't know if this could be considered THE BEST film of 2011, but it's definitely one of the most beautiful.

PLOT:In this film, we follow a Midwestern family in the 1950's led by a tough father (Brad Pitt) and an open-minded mother (Jessica Chastain). Mainly, we follow the life of the eldest son, Jack (played as a child by Hunter McCracken, and played as an adult by Sean Penn) and his struggle with choosing which path of rules to follow, his parents' impression on him, and the question of faith. It's a pretty good plot idea, executed beautifully.

ACTING:The acting wasn't the main focus of the film, but it was good nevertheless. Everybody did a great job, including Sean Penn as adult Jack, who barely appears in the film. The other shiners were Brad Pitt as the father, Jessica Chastain as the mother, and Hunter McCracken as young Jack. McCracken did very well for a child actor, despite the deep southern accent that would get on some people's nerves.



SCORE:The score was a beautiful mix of classical music, monk-like chants, and a few subtle organ/piano themes. I believe the score carried a good bit of this film along and enhanced most of its fascinating imagery very well. It doesn't get in the way of the intricate sound effects, however. They combine together to make a symphony of perfect sound division.

EFFECTS:The effects in here ranged from rolling clouds, to volcanic eruptions, to cosmic clusters, and even to a few dinosaurs. I believe the effects, real and CG alike, were beautiful and led the imagery of the film way ahead.

CAMERAWORK:The director incorporated a good bit of nice shots, cut-scenes, pans, and angles that set a certain emotion or captured a certain beauty that could be captured few other ways. Needless to say, I loved it.



OTHER CONTENT:I'm new to Terrence Malick's direction style, and I have to admit that he has an artistic vision of beauty, utter life, picturesque faith, and vague metaphors, which I'll explain in a minute. This film reminds me of "2001", because it's filmed in a similar way that it comes off as beautiful. It has character development, beauty, wisdom, emotion, a story, and even some experienced filmmaking. The only flaw I could find in this film is that Malick's use of unrelated cutscenes as vague metaphors is often misleading and confusing; it was hard to follow at times.

OVERALL,an awesome film with a beautifully executed plot, great acting, beautiful score, beautiful effects, loving camerawork, and everything a film of this type needs, but it can be very hard to follow at times.

Courageous (2011) review

(6/10)

I watched this with my church group, and I have to say that it's not as bad as the critics say it to be; that is, if you are in the right mindset.

PLOT:The four best men on the force, Adam Mitchell (Alex Kendrick), Nathan Hayes (Ken Bevel), David Thomson (Ben Davies) and Shane Fuller (Kevin Downes) all have loving families and a strong faith, but when tradgedy befalls Adam's family, all men are thrown into questions of their duties as fathers and strengths of faith. Not to mention, their close friend Javier Martinez (Robert Amaya) is having trouble finding a job and there's a strong drug circulation running around town. Will the four cops learn to be better fathers? Will Javier find a job worth keeping? Will the cops get to the bottom of the drug circulation in town? I'll leave you there. It's a pretty basic plot executed weakly yet unpredictably.



ACTING:This is the low point of the film. Most of the acting was full of weak performances and Hollywood cheese. The shiners in this were Alex Kendrick as Adam, Ken Bevel as Nathan Hayes, and Robert Amaya as Robert Martinez. The worst actors were almost all the minor actors and Kevin Downes as Shane.

SCORE:The score was only made for effect, but I believe it is an improvement from the typical mood scoring from other Christian films.

OTHER CONTENT:I know most (not all) critics aren't impacted by religion, especially Christianity, so they won't care about the message in this. This has a pretty good message though I am not a father. It makes me think of my dad and his issues as a father. The movie itself, aside from its message, is pretty cheesy. The humor comes in as a comic relief as the seriousness builds up afterward. I do give this movie credit for having more unique laughs than the other Christian movies I have seen, but they kind of distract from the central meaning of the film. They are supposed to keep the audience entertained, but it all winds up coming off as a tactic. The times it is serious, it's not half bad and even good, but at other times it ends up being cheesy since it has to be Christian, thus family friendly, and not relate to real life. It still does a pretty good job of being real, but it tries to be so friendly that it feels like Hollywood taking over. I did love the twists it inserted to the movie, however. This isn't a bad film; it just has its moments of cheesiness and Hollywood masking.



OVERALL,an ok Christian movie with a basic yet cheesy and unpredictable plot, weak acting, improved score, unique yet distracting comedy reliefs, lost realism, and unique plot twists.