My favorite movies:

Note: the above pages are currently under construction.

Capsule reviews of some recent films:

Spider-Man 2

Despite some of the lukewarm reviews it received, I really liked Spider-Man 1. But Spider-Man 2 was even better. It was not just a good special effects movie, though it certainly was that. This superhero movie actually had a good story, with characters that you could sympathize with and care about. There was good development of the themes from the first movie, and the ending left you longing for more. (It will be hard to wait for two or three years to figure out what Peter's friend Harry Osborne will do next!) I never really read Marvel Comics as a kid -- I was an avid DC Comics reader (Superman, Batman, etc.) But I like this story so much that I am going back and reading the original Spider-Man comics, which are collected in a book called The Essential Spider-Man. (Alas, it is printed in black and white.) This was the most fun summer movie of 2004.

The Passion of the Christ

I'm sure I will disappoint many when I say that I did not particularly care for Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. I left the film feeling more brutalized than inspired, and I thought that its depiction of the Jews was highly problematic. A film that claims to be true to history and the bible had better be prepared to make good on that claim, and Gibson's film does not. Anyone who thinks that it does has not read the bible carefully enough, or understood it in its proper historical context. The film also seems to rest on certain theological assumptions about the atonement that I believe are fundamentally flawed. To give just one example: there is an implied assumption that in order to be redemptive, Jesus' death had to be more brutal and horrific than any other death in human history. This kind of view of the atonement fits perfectly with a spirituality that glorifies suffering in an unhealthy way -- "the more it hurts, the better it is." I know some people whose lives have been made miserable by this philosophy, which distorts the true meaning of Christianity.

All this being said, the film definitely had some beautiful moments. The sequence with Simon of Cyrene, for example, was quite touching. I can imagine Simon being transformed by the experience of helping Jesus to carry the cross, even though the bible says nothing of this. (Perhaps the 19th century mystic whom Gibson draws from is the source of this vignette.)

I've had many discussions with many people about this film. Someone told me (and he may be right) that I need to look at it as a work of art, and not as a documentary. I confess that it has been hard for me to get past the biblical, historical, and theological issues, especially when the director of the film has flaunted the claim of accuracy in our faces. I will admit that the film contains some fine performances, especially by Jim Caviezel and Maia Morgenstern.

I recently saw a stand-up comedian who asked the audience: "Have you seen the new Mel Gibson film? What was its name again? Oh, yes -- Lethal Weapon 5." Maybe that was a little unfair. But it also contained an insight that the movie industry's formulas do not always blend well with reality. Maybe my opinion will change if I see the movie again. But it is one of a handful of films that I am not sure I can sit through a second time.

Hedwig and the Angry Inch

Some people are describing this film as the "Rocky Horror Picture Show" for the new millennium. That could very well be the case. This is a very intriguing and entertaining film about trans-gender issues that contains more than a few surprises. It is really a kind of "rock opera," and it holds up pretty well in relation to other works in this genre. The music is fabulous. Don't go if (a) you don't like rock and roll or (b) you were horrified rather than amused by "Rocky Horror." I will probably have to spend a couple hundred years in purgatory for liking this one.

Jurassic Park III

A definite improvement over #2, which despite its great special effects, was crippled by plot holes big enough to drive a truck through. The story is simple and straightforward. The dialogue is a bit lame -- so what else is new in this series? -- but it's nice to have Sam Neill and Laura Dern back, and the digital dinosaurs are so convincing that this time I was too busy following the story to be sitting there saying "How did they DO that?" This is by no means a great movie, but for dino-obsessed people like myself, it is still quite entertaining.

The Perfect Storm

Although the special effects were undeniably spectacular, and the storm sequences left me on the edge of my seat, I found this movie overall to be strangely unengaging. George Clooney's acting was wooden from start to finish (surely he is capable of more depth than is in evidence here?), and the other characters were not terribly well-developed either. Sometimes the secondary plots were a lot more interesting than the main one, e.g., the rescue of the three people in the sailboat. I haven't yet read the book on which this is based, but I suspect that the movie bypasses much of what it has to offer.

James Bond 007: The World is Not Enough

Is it formulaic? Of course. Is it predictable? Yes, definitely. Is it preposterous? Most certainly! But it was the most fun I've had at the movies in a long time. Pierce Brosnan has turned out to be quite a good choice for Bond -- with just the right combination of humor, intelligence, romantic charm, and toughness. Let's face it, Sean Connery was one tough act to follow! The other Bonds were okay but Brosnan seems especially suited for the role. Judi Dench, often seen lately in more sophisticated roles, handles her role as "M" with the appropriate solemnity. And John Cleese as "R," the replacement for "Q," looks promising. As usual, the opening sequence is spectacular, and the whole movie is beautifully shot, with seamless special effects. A totally silly, wonderfully entertaining movie.

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace

Despite some of the negative reviews this movie has received, I must confess that I still liked it. It has been objected that the plot line is thin, the dialogue is lame, and the characters are not well-developed. Frankly, I thought all of these things were pretty weak in the original Star Wars too. Let's face it, the whole concept of the force is rather nebulous (that must sound strange coming from a theologian), and the conflict between good and evil is presented -- to put it charitably -- simplistically. BUT SO WHAT? The Star Wars films, this one included, are a visual and sonic treat. I thought it was a lot of fun.

Back to Fr. D.'s home page
Back to Fr. D.'s personal pages