There’s a scene where the main character is doing a sales pitch and she’s holding a notebook with blank paper while saying improvised, awkward nonsense.

I think that was the pitch meeting for this movie.

This is my review of Christian Mingle The Movie!

Before I begin my rant, I will say that the two lead actors Lacey Chabert and Jonathan Patrick Moore give it their very best.  Also there is a good message about not using faith as a means to get what you want, and how your faith journey is your responsibility, not someone else’s.

(Commencing rant mode) However that message is buried in an awkward script with horrible writing scribbled all over.

Gwyneth (Lacey Chabert), Paul (Jonathan Patrick Moore) and Gwyneth’s friend Pam (Saidah Arrika Ekulona) are the only characters who actually act like believable people.  As for everyone else, I am diagnosing this movie with Caricature Syndrome.  Both the male and female characters are insultingly cartoonish.  The main character’s boss wears a sailor hat and acts like a goofy maritime captain because…potatoes!  His overacting made me cringe any time he was on screen.   Heck, even when he’s being serious, he still chews the scenery. Paul’s father is unrealistically peppy and spouts off Christian catchphrases every time he opens his mouth.  “Who talks like that?” I kept shouting during his scenes. Meanwhile most of the female characters fall into two categories: Superficial, one-note career gals who are only there to give advice to Gwyneth and sickly-sweet Bible study women who are all smiles, but man, can you feel the air of superioity around them.

Every. Single. Christian. Character is way too cheerful, to the point of coming off as artificial.  Yes, I believe that inner peace comes from faith in Jesus, but Christians are allowed to express more than one emotion.  Even the strongest believers are allowed to doubt, to get angry at God, to question His promises; that is all part of the faith journey.  The “eternally-carefree-Christian” trope reduces faith to something simplitic, and nothing ticks me off more than oversimplification of faith.

This movie is so desperate to be endearing that it falls into the realm of cutesy mindlessness.  While I’m sure the hearts of everyone involved were in the right place, the road to cinematic cheese is paved with lackluster writing.

This movie reminds me of Saint Teresa of Avila’s, “The Interior Castle” and Saint Dymphna, the patroness of mental health.

This is my review of Inside Out!

They’re not lying when they say that this is the best Pixar movie since WALL-E and Up.  Inside Out tells the story of a girl named Riley (Kaitlyn Dias), whose personality is shaped by five personified emotions: Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Fear (Bill Hader), Anger (Lewis Black) and Disgust (Mindy Kaling).  When Riley and her family move from Minnesota to San Francisco (where I went for the 2014 Walk for Life), she begins experiencing changes in her emotions.  Shiz really hits the fan when Joy and Sadness are thrusted out of Headquarters and into the maze of long-term memory.

I love Joy.  She’s like Casey Newton from Tomorrowland; an eternal optimist with an amazing ability to defuse tension among the group.  Her joyous spirit never becomes annoying because it is grounded by her commitment to Riley’s happiness.  This dedication defines Joy’s every action and keeps her own head above water when everything is falling apart.   It’s because of her that I was able to care for Riley.  We see her grow up from a baby to an eleven-year old girl, so I felt like I knew this character as intimately as the five emotions did.  I guess because I’ve always liked rage comedy, I really liked Anger.  He was cartoonishly angry, not furious to the point of being offensive (as in taking personal jabs at the other characters).  I found Fear to be endearing because he and Anger played off of each other very well.  Imagine Fear as Chucky Finster and Anger as a hot-headed Tommy Pickles.
The world-building is top-notch!  The world of Riley’s mind had loads of character; a child’s mind filled with islands of youthful innocence, controlled by five simplified emotions that mature over the course of time.  I liked how there are five islands for the defining aspects of Riley’s life (family, friendship, hockey, imagination, etc.)  Also the animation is classic Pixar; crisp colors, smooth movements and brightly-lit without looking cheap.

Of course no movie is without its flaws, and Inside Out is no exception.  The parents are the first flaw.  There’s compassionate and then there’s unrealistic happy-go-lucky; Mama and Papa Riley fall into the latter category.  I found it really hard to believe that never once do they get mad or argue with each other when the moving truck is missing.  The mother’s only dialogue is consoling advice and asking “what’s wrong?”  The one time that the father scolds Riley is too restrained.  I’m not saying he has to be abusive, but all they had to do was have the father raise his voice or even pound his fist on the table.  A kids’ movie can have some realism, you know.
The second flaw involves Sadness’ character.  For a character who starts this whole debacle, she doesn’t have much presence.  Sure, she’s read the mind manual, so she knows the way around the long-term memory maze, but even then she just complains while Joy (literally) drags her around.  She never faces consequences or attempts to right the wrong, which reduced her to being a tag-along character for the majority of the film.

Inside Out is an entertaining and intelligent delight!  I’m hooked on a feeling that Pixar has upped the ante with this gem.

Saint Teresa of Avila and Saint Dymphna, pray for us.

I wasn’t planning on getting political so early in my blogging, but God’s timing is different from mine, and I had a feeling that He was calling me to do something political.  So let’s get political…and purple!

I consider myself an Independent, i.e. I’m a Purple girl in a sea of Red vs. Blue. I declared myself an Independent after examining the good and the bad of the right-wing and the left-wing.  Believe it or not, both Conservatism and Liberalism are two trees that bear good fruit.  Neither ideology is perfect, but they do have something to offer.  At the same time, they also have their weeds, which I will get to in a moment.

Let’s start in the Red: I like Conservatism’s emphasis on social morality.  I’ve always been concerned about the moral fiber of this country.  No, I don’t think metal music is evil, but I take issue with reducing an unborn baby to “a clump of cells.”  I roll my eyes every time I read an article that lectures us about how monogamy is unrealistic.  I believe in objective truth; people have their reasons for doing things, but if truth doesn’t remain the same, then it’s not truth.  I also like Conservatism’s focus on hard work and being self-made.  I don’t see what’s wrong about congratulating people who started with nothing and ended up building a successful business that enables them to financially empower themselves and feed their own families. Business owners are neither always greedy nor always virtuous. They are people who are trying to make a living for themselves.
Now let’s move on to the Blue: I like Liberalism’s “leave-everyone-alone” nature, i.e. Classical Liberalism.  I refuse to mock or criticize Caitlyn Jenner.  A politician’s numerous divorces are none of my business.  I don’t poke my head into other people’s lives because I wouldn’t want someone to inject themselves into my personal life.  As I mentioned earlier, people have their reasons for their own actions.  Sometimes people can’t live up to society’s standards.  A woman who is abandoned by the father of her child shouldn’t be judged for raising her child without a father.  A person who is gay shouldn’t be shunned by their family or community.  Someone who points out America’s shortcomings should not be vilified as unpatriotic.  In the end, we’re all human beings who are on different journeys in our lives, so leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone.

Conservatism and Liberalism are not without their weeds.  Just like before, I’ll start with the Red and then work my way to the Blue.

Conservatives have a tendency to be judgmental.  I get irritated when I see a meme on a right-wing Facebook page that makes fun of people on welfare, or when I hear people who side with Conservatism say, “Just go out and get a job!”  Are there welfare recipients who use it to avoid looking for work?  Yes.  But does that mean every single person on government assistance is lazy and unmotivated?  No.  Securing employment is not as easy as some make it out to be.  It can be done, but we should acknowledge economic challenges.   Also it doesn’t help when certain GOP candidates use the words, “Legitimate rape.”

Liberals have a tendency to lecture people about Islamophobia, but then take next-to-no issue with vilifying Christians.  Let me make this clear: I do not advocate trashing someone else’s religious beliefs because I certainly wouldn’t want someone to attack my faith.  However the way I see it, either pick on every religion on the planet or leave every religion alone.  There’s a difference between legitimate criticism of religion (such as people who use religion as a weapon) and accusing every religious person of being narrow-minded and bigoted.

I believe that you can attack an issue WITHOUT attacking the people behind that issue.  You can oppose abortion without condemning women who have had abortions.  You can call out religious hypocrisy without shaming faith-filled people.  The moral clarity of Conservatism and the “live-and-let-live” principle of Liberalism are the fruits that I embrace as an Independent.   This is why I am proud to be a Purple fish in the ocean of Red and Blue.

1 Corinthians 1:10, “I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you are united in the same mind and in the same purpose.”

If you grew up in a tight-knit church community like me, you have heard of and/or seen Soul Surfer.  It’s one of those Christian movie classics, and after watching the film, I can see why.  This is my review of Soul Surfer!

Soul Surfer is the true story of Bethany Hamilton, a professional surfer whose life changed when, as a teenager, she was attacked by a shark and lost her arm as a result.  From there, the story is of how she doesn’t allow this tragedy to define her life, but rather rises above her limitations and clings to her passion for surfing.

I will admit, AnnaSophia Robb’s performance was a bit odd at first.  Bethany is well established as a composed, level-headed young woman, but for a moment I was starting to wonder, “Did she confuse composed with emotionless?”  But as the movie went on, it became clear that the core of Bethany’s character is an internal strength that keeps her steady when her world is falling apart.  Dennis Quaid and Helen Hunt have amazing chemistry as Tom and Cheri Hamilton.  I actually wondered if they had acted together in other movies.  Almost all of the acting is top notch.  Notice how I said “almost.”

Okay, I’m probably not going to make any friends with this opinion, but Carrie Underwood…yeah…I’m sure she was doing her best, but her line delivery felt less like a character saying dialogue and more like an actor reading off of cue cards. I’m not questioning her sincerity, just her acting ability.

Unlike Courageous, I didn’t take any walking breaks during this movie!  Hooray! There’s no filler to be found because every scene has a purpose.  The smooth pacing help advance the story from beginning to end.

By no means is Soul Surfer a perfect movie, but it is a movie that should be required viewing for aspiring Christian filmmakers.  The God talk is written as genuine dialogue that would be said between believers.  Most importantly, the movie and the message never conflict with each other.  The Christian elements are successfully woven into a human story about a determined person who overcame all odds to inspire others.

Saint Lucy, pray for us.

A few days ago, I posted this on my Facebook page: “The script for Jurassic World was written by four people.  The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was also written by four people. The Godzilla remake was written by five….and look how freaking well those turned out.  Excuse me for my skepticism.”

Then I found out that Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver were two of the four Jurassic World screenwriters, and suddenly I had hope.  Jaffa and Silver wrote the script for “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” a movie that I love.

This is my review of Jurassic World!

Chris Pratt is a movie star.  Period.  God has blessed him with a natural charisma and good acting chops.  He plays the capable and focused Owen Grady, a former Navy guy whose occupation is to train and control Velociraptors (“Raptors” for short).  His command over them is believable and his Navy background explains why he’s able to take charge of high-stress situations.  Bryce Dallas Howard plays Claire Dearing, the park operation’s manager of Jurassic World.  She’s the typical career woman who can’t be bothered to settle down, but I like that she never came off as cold or unpleasant.  She’s a busy woman whose just trying to keep her business afloat.

Pacing!  Thank you Lord Jesus for screenwriters who understand pacing!  After “Aloha” and “Courageous,” two movies that have no sense of pacing, it was a relief to see the story of Jurassic World flow smoothly.  What needs to happen is put on screen, and filler is nowhere to be found.  Some of the dialogue is exposition, but it’s more of characters saying, “Yes, I know who Owen Grady is,” “He’s a smart guy,” “He thinks he’s smarter than everybody.”  It’s not like characters go up to each other and start telling us, the audience, everyone’s individual backstory.

However what holds Jurassic World back is Unestablished Plot Point Syndrome, or UPP.  This is where an idea from an earlier draft comes out of left field and is never mentioned again.  I’ll give an example: Bryce Dallas Howard’s character has two nephew, Zach and Gray Mitchell.  Their characters are typical boys and are passable actors for the most part, but then during a bus ride, Gray says, “Are Mom and Dad getting divorced?” This plot point literally comes out of nowhere.  Writers, you need to establish something like this early on.  When we first meet the kids, nothing about their parents’ interactions with each other indicate that divorce is on the horizon. I’m not saying the parents have to be seen arguing, but a small hint in the beginning would have been helpful.  Also movies that involve characters being thrust into situations cause a story to suffer from a lack of character agency (meaning a character moves the plot with his/her actions instead of simply reacting to what is happening around them).  Jurassic World has this problem.

Other than that, Jurassic World is quite amazing.  Great special effects, strong writing by people who know what they’re doing and developed characters make this a crowd-pleasing summer blockbuster.

Saint Joan of Arc, pray for us.

The runtime of Pan’s Labyrinth is 119 minutes.  American Sniper is 132 minutes. Gone Girl is 149 minutes.  Meanwhile Courageous is 129 minutes long.  Of the four movies, only one felt less like 129 minutes and more like 129 hours.

This is my review of Courageous!

Courageous is the fourth movie from Sherwood Pictures (Flywheel, Facing the Giants, Fireproof) and it tells the story of four police officers coming together to be better fathers to their children…or so the back of the DVD box says.  More on that in a bit.

Let’s start with the good: All of the actors do a pretty good job.  Alex Kendrick is very convincing as a guy who loves his family, but is mostly a good-enough father, though his first few interactions with his son get a little frustrating.  There’s five storylines going on, but by far my favorite involves Robert Amaya’s character Javier Martinez.  He’s an honest, hardworking man who just got laid off and is trying to provide for his family.  His wife is very likable, and even the kids are endearing.  Javier’s story is very believable and when he does talk about God, it’s to keep his own head above water and ease his wife’s worries.  The dialogue sounds like it’s coming from the character and not part of an agenda.  Many times I said to myself, “Forget the other four characters, why can’t this movie be about Javier?”  You got an honorable father, a sweet family and a story about hard work and perseverance all in one storyline.  Seriously, Sherwood Pictures, Javier’s narrative alone is a wholesome family film practically gift-wrapped for you.

Unfortunately, Javier’s story is one of five, and sadly, that is the only good thing I have to say about Courageous.  The fatherhood aspect of the movie actually kind of drops in the second act, and is only shoehorned when characters talk about it, i.e. exposition.  The reason I brought up the running time of this movie is because Courageous is a really long movie.  Just like Aloha, this movie has the pacing of a snail crossing the street.  There is so much filler in this movie; scenes that could have (and should have) been cut out in the editing process cause the movie to lag. I watched this movie last night and I started it at exactly 8:45 pm.  The movie ended at 11:15 pm.  In that span of time, I took five walking breaks.  That’s right: Five times I had to pause the movie, get up and walk around.  I brought up the running time of Pan’s Labyrinth, American Sniper and Gone Girl.  I have sat through all three of those movies and I was rooted to my chair the entire time.  I understand that writing multiple storylines that are supposed to interconnect is a difficult formula to pull off.  I have no doubt that the makers of Courageous had their hearts in the right place, but they would have been better off trimming the fat and just focusing on either Javier or even Alex Kendrick’s character.

The message was honorable, but what Sherwood Pictures hasn’t learned yet is that a look between a husband and wife says more than ten lines of dialogue…in other words, less is more.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.