Fortress of Mist (Merlin's Immortals #2), by Sigmund Brouwer

**

After successfully (and bloodlessly) taking the city of Magnus in The Orphan King, young Thomas quickly learns that keeping a kingdom can be just as much of a challenge as acquiring one. Thomas finds himself up to his neck in political maneuvering, as the King demands his assistance in the ongoing war with the Scots, and treasonous spies try to incite the neighboring lords against him. Meanwhile, Thomas is plagued by seeming visions of the lovely (and supposedly dead) Isabelle. But it is Katherine, the kind, fire-scarred girl, who Thomas most wishes to see. Both women are drawn to Thomas, and both seek Thomas's allegiance (and his inherited collection of mystical books) for a powerful force: the Druids, who control so much of the land, and those who would oppose them. Will Thomas be able to hold Magnus in the face of these challenges? Will he align himself with the Druids, who offer limitless power and immortality? Will he side with their opponents? Or will he forge a separate path?

The Incredible Burt Wonderstone (2013)

***

An excerpt of a review recently posted on Schaeffer's Ghost:

The Incredible Burt Wonderstone wants to be a movie about friendship, but it isn’t. Yes, Burt and Anton part ways, and yes, their reunion is touching, but during their separation, Burt doesn’t seem to miss Anton in the slightest. Rather, Burt’s journey, such as it is, is one of rediscovery. He has lost his first love—magic, and the sense of awe and wonder and delight that it brings. What was once a thing of joy and excitement has become rote. In his quest to enjoy all the things that magic brought him—money, fame, sex—he has forgotten the magic itself. 

As I watched the film, I was reminded of Christ’s admonition of the church at Ephesus. After all, anyone who’s been a Christian for more than a few years knows that, as with most life experience, the buzz tends to fade. We start off so full of wonder and delight—the God of the universe loves me and sent His Son to die in my place for my sins! Hallelujah! What a Savior! 

But as the years pass, so too does our irrepressible joy in the Gospel. We become so focused on the blessings we have received that we forget the One from whose hand we have received them. Our faith can seem, well, ‘old hat.’ Gradually, the wondrous things God in Christ has done—and continues to do—in us and for us begin to seem slightly less wondrous. Like Burt, we forget why we do what we do.

Full review available here.

Gods at War: Defeating the Idols That Battle for Your Heart, by Kyle Idleman

***

I had never heard of Kyle Idleman until I read Tim Challies' review of his recent bestseller Not a Fan. Challies had some very positive things to say about the book, but ended his review with three concerns: 1) Idleman relied overmuch on humor and pop culture references; 2) Idleman occasionally employed questionable exegesis; 3) Idleman seems to imply that sanctification is accomplished through effort. I expect Challies, if he were to review this latest book, would find himself repeating his earlier concerns.

But first a bit about the book. It is, as you might expect from the title, a discussion of modern-day idolatry. Idleman argues, quite rightly, that at the root of every sin is the sin of idolatry--the elevation of something else above God. He is quick to admit that the various 'gods' we serve are often not bad things in and of themselves; it is only our worship of them that is sinful. He groups these idols into three categories: pleasure (food, sex, and entertainment), power (success, money, and achievement), and love (romance, family, and self). He does a decent job of explaining our modern fascination with these 'gods', though I think a more nuanced discussion of the 'god' of self would have been helpful. And fear of man, though related to success and achievement, is prevalent enough to merit its own separate discussion--the 'god' of reputation, perhaps, or popularity.

Jack the Giant Slayer (2013)

***

An excerpt of a review recently posted on Schaeffer's Ghost:

I have not seen the TV spots and trailers for Jack the Giant Slayer, but I’m told that they were … not good. Allow me to assure you that the movie is nowhere near as bad as the marketing would apparently suggest. In fact, it’s actually quite good. And I’m not the only one who thinks so. Sure, it’s chock full of laughably CGI’d giants and a soundtrack that desperately wants to be mistaken for The Lord of the Rings, but it’s fun, darn it! There are some good one-liners along the way, the action sequences are fairly creative, and the casting is above-average for this sort of flick. Nicholas Hoult has grown up quite a bit since I last saw him in About a Boy (2002), and his wide-eyed, dreamy vibe is a good fit for the head-in-the-clouds Jack (who spends most of the film clad in what looks suspiciously like a hoodie, tee shirt, and jeans). Eleanor Tomlinson is likewise a good fit for Princess Isabelle—appropriately spunky, lovely enough to warrant Jack’s immediate infatuation, and intelligent enough to know an unlikely hero when she sees one. Ian McShane sheds his bad-guy persona in favor of an old-fashioned but genuinely affectionate father (though I admit it’s rather jarring to hear him deliver any line that’s not punctuated by pungent profanity). Bill Nighy does excellent voice work as Fallon, the leader of the giants (though I wish the CGI team had made more use of his face, and not just his voice). Stanley Tucci is positively delicious as the eeeevil Lord Roderick—though he should really shave the beard so as to maximize his mustache-twirling potential. But for my money, the real star of the picture is Ewan McGregor as the sprightly and stalwart captain of the guard, Elmont. He exudes that quintessentially British brand of courage, all bright cheerfulness and unshakable loyalty and unflappable sangfroid. I can’t remember Ewan McGregor ever being so likable. He was a delight to watch—and I’m not usually a big Ewan McGregor fan.

Full review available here.

The Mummy (1932)

***

An excerpt of a review recently posted on Schaeffer's Ghost:

The narrative here, like that of many monster stories, is at its heart a romantic one: Once upon a time, Priest Imhotep loved Princess Ankh-es-en-amon. When death separated them, Imhotep was so desperate to be with her again that he acted in deliberate rebellion against the gods he previously served by stealing the Scroll of Thoth in order to bring Ankh-es-en-amon back to life so they could be together. He chose human love over faith. 

Imhotep was caught in the act and, as punishment for his transgression, he was buried alive in complete mummy regalia. Now, having been accidentally resurrected by the nitwitted archaeologist’s assistant, Imhotep picks up where he left off, searching for his long lost love, whose soul apparently resides in her modern day ancestor, the young Helen Grosvenor. Along the way, Imhotep is perfectly willing to kill anyone who gets in his way. His ‘love’ for Ankh-es-en-amon results in disrespect—and violence—toward others. 

Then, it turns out that the final step in his long-planned reunion with Ankh-es-en-amon is Helen’s death—only by killing the body where the soul of Ankh-es-en-amon dwells can she be freed to be with Imhotep forever. This plan doesn’t seem to go over too well with Helen (or, it is implied, Ankh-es-en-amon), but that doesn’t stop Imhotep. What she wants doesn’t matter. His ‘love’ for Ankh-es-en-amon overrides all other considerations. He ‘loves’ her so much that he is willing to kill her—against her will—to be with her.

Full review available here.

A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

***

An excerpt of a review recently posted on Schaeffer's Ghost:

To children, A Good Day to Die Hard offers the simple reminder that parents are fallible. They screw up. They miss out on stuff you wish they’d been around for, and they make all sorts of mistakes that drive you bonkers and, in some cases, cause you serious emotional pain. But at the end of the day, even loving parents get it wrong sometimes. Most goofs were probably more the result of boneheaded thinking and normal human error than of any actual malice or a desire to ruin your life. That doesn’t mean that what they did (or didn’t do) was ok. But at some point, you have to let go, accept them for who they are, and recognize their overtures of affection for what they are—even if said overtures involve offering to help you kill some Russian bad guys. [...] 

To parents, Good Day to Die Hard offers a modern day action retelling of Harry Chapin’s classic hit ‘Cat’s in the Cradle.’ If you prioritize outside activities over family, you pay a very real relational cost. Granted, we’d all be terribly disappointed if John McClane was too busy being a good dad to save Nakatomi Plaza from terrorists thieves, or save Dulles from whoever that psycho general guy was, or save New York from Jeremy Irons or save Lucy McClane from a less-than-terrifying Timothy Olyphant. Saving the day makes for great movies. It may not make for great families.

Full review available here.

Quiet, by Susan Cain (a guest post)

****

Last year, I reviewed Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking, by Susan Cain. And I loved it. So when I was presented with a second opportunity to review the book, I recruited my husband to read it and share his thoughts. The book is also the subject of the Book Club over at Patheos, where we both contribute to Schaeffer's Ghost, an Evangelical commentary on books and film. Here's an excerpt of his review:

###

I think part of the problem here is one of categorization. When thinking in terms of Christianity, the absolute categorization of either an introvert ideal or an extrovert ideal falls flat. This is because there is both an introverted and an extroverted component to the Gospel. 

On the one hand, Christians ought to be extroverted. This is true not only because we are expected (even commanded) to engage with others in sharing the Gospel, but also because the very foundation of our faith is someone external to us coming along, dragging us out of ourselves (it’s even more violent than that—the Bible uses the language of putting the old person to death) and planting us firmly in a non-optional relationship with another person (Jesus) and a group of other people (the church). In a very real sense, there is no ‘alone time’ for the Christian—something which no doubt causes many introverts to shudder in panic. In this sense, the Gospel has a quite necessary extroverted component. 

On the other hand, Christians ought to be introverted. We are responsible for our own spiritual lives—the commands to be holy and fight against sin are not Biblical charges to take up political crusades against institutional evil. They are rather directions for examining our interior lives and casting off those aspects of ourselves which continue to persist in rebellion against God. And of course part of this process is being slower to speak, being aware of our own sinful nature, and being on guard against allowing that sinful aspect of ourselves to take control of our tongue and actions (in one sense, the serpent in the Garden was the chief of extroverts—he projected his personality onto others in an attempt to remake them in his own image). Likewise, quiet meditation on Scripture, solitary prayer, and reflection should all increasingly be aspects of the Christian life. In this sense, the Gospel has a quite necessary introverted component as well.

Full review available here.

I received this book for free from WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group for this review.