The Help (2011)

****

First, let it be said that this is not the kind of movie I usually see in theatres.  If a movie can be described as "sweeping,"  "inspirational," "gut-wrenching," or "heartwarming," I usually give it a wide berth.  But a friend wanted to see it, and since I liked the book, I thought I'd give it a shot.

I'm glad I did.  I actually really liked this movie. 

Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

***

Yeah, I definitely liked it.  Granted, I knew I would.  They had me from "Cowboys & Aliens."  Actually, they had me from "Directed by Jon Favreau."  I thoroughly enjoyed Iron Man and Elf, and Favreau has always struck me as someone with skill who genuinely loves the nerdy stuff he makes movies about.  There's a self-awareness and humor there that is often lacking in Hollywood (or so it seems).  The addition of Indiana Jones, James Bond (sort of), and Sam Rockwell, with Ron Howard and Steven Spielberg producing, were icing on the cake.

Plus it is such a fun idea.  And clever, too.  I mean, if aliens exist, why would they have to wait for the present (or the future) to make contact?  Why not pay a visit to earth during the days of the Old West?  It's exactly the kind of idea little boys have dreamed of for decades--Woody and Buzz, together for real!

Let's go to the movies!

In addition to book reviews, and the occasional noteworthy (to me) article, I have decided to add movie reviews to this blog.  Nothing super in-depth--I don't know anything about film or cinematography or anything.  But I do watch movies, and I like having opinions.  So yeah.  You have been warned.

Think: The Life of the Mind and the Love of God, by John Piper

***

A decent enough book. It was, perhaps, less revelatory than Piper may have hoped, at least for me, but I already agreed with him about the importance of thinking (love the Lord your God with all your mind, after all) and the danger of intellectual pride and spiritually dead knowledge. I have seen in my own life the emptiness of head knowledge alone, and have also been guilty of intellectual laziness when I avoided thinking about challenging spiritual truths instead of continuing to grapple with those truths by the light of Scripture. So I agree with Piper that we love God best with heart and mind and soul and strength. Still, for those who struggle with a natural (or learned) antipathy to intellectualism, or those who place their faith in knowledge and understanding (and there are many Christians in both camps), this could well be a much-needed rebuke.

I particularly liked Piper's discussion of reading as thinking, but that's hardly surprising, since that discussion included linguistics, hermeneutics, textualism, and any number of other areas that I find inherently interesting.

All in all, a fine book, though not exactly earth shattering (for me, anyway).

Charity and Its Fruits, by Jonathan Edwards

****

An excellent (and thorough) analysis of I Corinthians 13. This was my first exposure to Edwards, and he did not disappoint. Edwards thinks deeply and critically about each aspect of the well-known discourse on love, and his insights are, for the most part, extremely helpful and well-supported. This passage is read so often that it is easy--for me, anyway--to gloss over it or place it in the mental category of "yeah, yeah, patient, kind, I know the drill . . . next!" Edwards slows the reader down and really dwells in the text so that the words have a chance to really sink in. I particularly appreciated his discussion of the various attributes of charity--what it is, and what it isn't. Edwards expands each attribute into positive and negative characteristics, actions, words, and heart attitudes with a thoroughness that is pretty much guaranteed to result in serious conviction in the reader.

The Puritan Paperback version is very readable, though of course the language is--necessarily--somewhat old fashioned, and the content is dense enough to warrant a slower reading pace. I read one "lecture" each week, and that turned out to be a pretty good pace.

Definitely a worthwhile read.

Amen, sister!

I actually enjoyed a lot of the Die hard sequels, and even though Live Free or Die Hard was no Die Hard, it still made some smart choices--Lucy McClane was well cast and well-written ("Now there are only 5 of them"), and let us not forget that John McClane shoots the bad guy through his own freakin' shoulder.  All of that being said, I still think Original Recipe Die Hard is an absolutely brilliant film, so I appreciated this tribute . . . from a female writer . . . at NPR!  Awesome.

What makes the Die Hard franchise practically tragic is that it's become so stupefyingly ordinary after bowing in 1988 as a remarkably taut, funny, exquisitely crafted action film that — but for the appearance of late-'80s computer and phone technology — has not aged a day. As explosively entertaining as it was the first time I saw it on the big screen 23 years ago, it was just as good two weeks ago, when my local theater showed it as part of their summer '80s series in a marvelously earthy print that screamed, "I hold up so well that I have been watched ... a lot." The print had been loved into a certain degree of scruffiness that somehow was just right for the film.

My Soul Is Rested: Movement Days in the Deep South Remembered, by Howell Raines

*****

This book is incredible: moving, eye-opening, horrifying, inspiring, and deeply disturbing, all at the same time.

Raines wisely allows the various historical figures to describe their experiences in their own words, and so on some level it is their storytelling ability that makes the events come alive. Yet Raines' skill in coaxing these stories from those who lived through the atrocities of the Civil Rights movement and the careful piecing together of those stories undoubtedly entitle him to his own fair share of the credit for this masterpiece.

My experiences with oral histories (both fictional and non-fictional) have been quite impressive, but the use of oral history as the medium for the story was, in this case, an inspired choice. As with other oral histories, the telling of the story through individual experiences (rather than dry, omniscient narration) heightens the emotional effect of the material--the reader feels the panic, senses the chaos, marvels at the senseless hatred and violence that plagued the South in the 1960s. Indeed, the book makes for a disturbing read, as the horror and fear and pain are all too clearly communicated through the memories of those who lived through the events.