This is the type of story that brings a tear to the eye of movie producers... when they realize that one of their oil wells has dried up and become a spring bubbling forth natural fresh water.
Joe Eszterhas, who wrote the memorable screenplays for Showgirls and Basic Instinct among others, has returned to his Catholic faith. Listen to an interview with him on NPR. He has a book out titled Crossbearer, and he has a new screenplay written about the life of St. Paul.
[H/T: Eric Pavlat @ Inside Catholic]
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Friday, June 22, 2007
Religion & Entertainment: My Review of Champions of Faith
I had first heard the story of Jeff Weaver and Mike Sweeney's baseball brawl from Fr. Francis Mary Stone, a Franciscan Missionary of the Eternal Word, and the host of "Life on the Rock" on EWTN. Fr. Stone brought the incident up during a talk he gave at a day of prayer for men at the Most Blessed Sacrament Friary in Newark, NJ, home of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal. Fr. Stone used the story in the context of accountability for our actions; Sweeney called Weaver a few years after the brawl and they made peace with each other.
I heard it this time from the mouth of Mike Sweeney himself on the DVD Champions of Faith, produced by Catholic Exchange. This 65 minute DVD focuses on a handful of Major League baseball players and coaches; more specifically, it focuses on their Catholic faith in Jesus Christ which has helped them in their hardest times and given them the strength to excel in their passion, baseball. Sweeney's story is only one of the heart-warming (and sometimes tear-inducing) testimonies to Christ in Champions of Faith. Another truly touching account recalls God’s power to work across time and space to give a terminally-ill young woman words that would strengthen the faith of her family after her death.
In addition to the in-depth personal accounts of players and coaches, the DVD also covers aspects of the faith, such as the Eucharist – the Real Presence of Jesus Christ – attending Mass, and the importance of prayer. On the topic of the Real Presence, Mike Sweeney says, "a lot of people say, 'well, how can you believe that?' and I'm gonna say, 'well, why can't you believe that?'" Numerous players mentioned the temptation to skip Mass with their busy schedules, but that making that sacrifice to wake up an hour earlier or drive a little further is always worth it. They all recognize the worth of prayer and its role in their lives.
The DVD is inspiring for youth and adults. It encourages the younger generation because they can see their baseball heroes professing the same faith they themselves are growing in. It encourages adults because they can see busy professional baseball players finding the time and the courage to live out their faith in their public lives. All in all, I give the DVD 4 out of 4 stars, based on its content, its effectiveness, and its truth to the gospel of Jesus Christ upheld and proclaimed over the centuries by the Catholic Church.
See also the Italian Catholic's review of Champions of Faith.
I heard it this time from the mouth of Mike Sweeney himself on the DVD Champions of Faith, produced by Catholic Exchange. This 65 minute DVD focuses on a handful of Major League baseball players and coaches; more specifically, it focuses on their Catholic faith in Jesus Christ which has helped them in their hardest times and given them the strength to excel in their passion, baseball. Sweeney's story is only one of the heart-warming (and sometimes tear-inducing) testimonies to Christ in Champions of Faith. Another truly touching account recalls God’s power to work across time and space to give a terminally-ill young woman words that would strengthen the faith of her family after her death.
In addition to the in-depth personal accounts of players and coaches, the DVD also covers aspects of the faith, such as the Eucharist – the Real Presence of Jesus Christ – attending Mass, and the importance of prayer. On the topic of the Real Presence, Mike Sweeney says, "a lot of people say, 'well, how can you believe that?' and I'm gonna say, 'well, why can't you believe that?'" Numerous players mentioned the temptation to skip Mass with their busy schedules, but that making that sacrifice to wake up an hour earlier or drive a little further is always worth it. They all recognize the worth of prayer and its role in their lives.
The DVD is inspiring for youth and adults. It encourages the younger generation because they can see their baseball heroes professing the same faith they themselves are growing in. It encourages adults because they can see busy professional baseball players finding the time and the courage to live out their faith in their public lives. All in all, I give the DVD 4 out of 4 stars, based on its content, its effectiveness, and its truth to the gospel of Jesus Christ upheld and proclaimed over the centuries by the Catholic Church.
See also the Italian Catholic's review of Champions of Faith.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Religion & Entertainment: My Review of The Nativity Story
Ok, when it's all said and done, I give it a C+. I don't know which, really. I'll give my reasons.
The script was, indeed, Scripturally based, but the passages lifted from Scripture did not mesh well with the rest of the script. I suppose I'm a bit of a purist about this -- I think Peter Jackson's screenwriters did a superb job on the Lord of the Rings movies. There were also lines omitted for no good reason. One example is Zechariah's canticle upon the naming of his son: it was completely omitted. I seem to recall some of the words or phrases used elsewhere by Elizabeth, while John was still in the womb, but the impact is different. The Magnificat is spoken at the end of the film, but not in its entirety.
[Update: The exact use of Scriptural speech is, in my opinion, an all-or-nothing endeavor. The movie failed because it injected Scriptural passages (like the "Blessed are you among women" of Elizabeth, the Benedicta) without trying to conform the rest of the script of the movie to that kind of language. Simply put, it seemed like Elizabeth was "talking crazy talk" instead of being inspired by the Spirit. I would not have minded if they conformed the Scriptural words to the script of the rest of the movie.]
Other omissions I had hoped to see included are centered around the presentation in the temple (Luke 2:22-38). The Nunc Dimittis (the canticle of Simeon), Simeon's grim blessing to Mary, Anna the prophetess... all missing. This leads me to another issue: the timeline.
In reconciling the Luke narrative and the Matthew narrative, if Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day and presented in the temple after the forty days necessary for Mary's purification, I would have expected that the visit of the magi and the subsequent flight to Egypt took place after that. Matthew 2:11 mentions a house, not a manger. Then again, I'm not a Bible historian, so I don't know what an "official" reconciled timeline of the nativity narratives would be.
This movie also suffers from "translationism". The name of the infant is called "Jesus" instead of Yeshua (or Yehoshua) which is grating amid names like Zechariah. Mary should be called "Miriam" (or something like that). They speak in Aramaic occasionally (when saying particular prayers or greetings) and then go right back into English. Now I recognize the worth of authentic language found in The Passion.
The soundtrack was a little off at times -- meaning, the music didn't really fit the scene. There were several pieces of music based on Christmas songs that just didn't click.
Finally, and I will admit this is a very tricky matter to handle properly, the representation of the angel Gabriel is weird. He seems to appear and disappear with the presence of a dove (or some other bird, but I'm assuming it's a dove), but this has the unwanted effect of making angels transforming animals or something along those lines. I'm not sure exactly how I would do it, but the movie's handling of it seemed too weird.
Despite these complaints, I did enjoy the movie, it just didn't grab hold of me the way I'd have liked it to.
The script was, indeed, Scripturally based, but the passages lifted from Scripture did not mesh well with the rest of the script. I suppose I'm a bit of a purist about this -- I think Peter Jackson's screenwriters did a superb job on the Lord of the Rings movies. There were also lines omitted for no good reason. One example is Zechariah's canticle upon the naming of his son: it was completely omitted. I seem to recall some of the words or phrases used elsewhere by Elizabeth, while John was still in the womb, but the impact is different. The Magnificat is spoken at the end of the film, but not in its entirety.
[Update: The exact use of Scriptural speech is, in my opinion, an all-or-nothing endeavor. The movie failed because it injected Scriptural passages (like the "Blessed are you among women" of Elizabeth, the Benedicta) without trying to conform the rest of the script of the movie to that kind of language. Simply put, it seemed like Elizabeth was "talking crazy talk" instead of being inspired by the Spirit. I would not have minded if they conformed the Scriptural words to the script of the rest of the movie.]
Other omissions I had hoped to see included are centered around the presentation in the temple (Luke 2:22-38). The Nunc Dimittis (the canticle of Simeon), Simeon's grim blessing to Mary, Anna the prophetess... all missing. This leads me to another issue: the timeline.
In reconciling the Luke narrative and the Matthew narrative, if Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day and presented in the temple after the forty days necessary for Mary's purification, I would have expected that the visit of the magi and the subsequent flight to Egypt took place after that. Matthew 2:11 mentions a house, not a manger. Then again, I'm not a Bible historian, so I don't know what an "official" reconciled timeline of the nativity narratives would be.
This movie also suffers from "translationism". The name of the infant is called "Jesus" instead of Yeshua (or Yehoshua) which is grating amid names like Zechariah. Mary should be called "Miriam" (or something like that). They speak in Aramaic occasionally (when saying particular prayers or greetings) and then go right back into English. Now I recognize the worth of authentic language found in The Passion.
The soundtrack was a little off at times -- meaning, the music didn't really fit the scene. There were several pieces of music based on Christmas songs that just didn't click.
Finally, and I will admit this is a very tricky matter to handle properly, the representation of the angel Gabriel is weird. He seems to appear and disappear with the presence of a dove (or some other bird, but I'm assuming it's a dove), but this has the unwanted effect of making angels transforming animals or something along those lines. I'm not sure exactly how I would do it, but the movie's handling of it seemed too weird.
Despite these complaints, I did enjoy the movie, it just didn't grab hold of me the way I'd have liked it to.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Religion & Entertainment: The Nativity Story
I'm planning on seeing The Nativity Story sometime very soon (although my weekend schedule is very full). The trailer looked great. The story is familiar and the minor tweaks present to make a handful of chapters last 100 minutes are sure to supplement the Scriptural material. But I haven't read any good reviews of it yet. Here's an excerpt from the CNN review (emphasis mine):
I think this movie fills its niche in the same way Passion of the Christ filled its own. That movie was gut-wrenching and painful to watch, because the events it recounted were gut-wrenching and painful to endure. So Nativity will be slow at times, or tense at times, but it won't feel the same as Passion because it's not the same thing. Get over it.
"The Nativity Story" is a major release (from New Line, like CNN a unit of Time Warner), and boasts the kind of production values only money can buy. Discreetly ecumenical in thrust, it's a reverent, orthodox movie aimed at churchgoers across the spectrum.Is there a problem there? Do we need an "updated" version of the Nativity, a modern-day retelling? Do we need to change things to make the story more "believable"? Should we reduce the account of Christ's birth to anecdote or fairy tale?
A little too reverent, perhaps. It takes the first chapter in the Greatest Story Ever Told and turns it into a mild yarn.
Drawing on the gospels of Matthew and Luke, screenwriter Mike Rich takes no liberties with Scripture, though there are occasional concessions to contemporary sensibilities.Review: The greatest 'Story' ever dulled [CNN.com]
I think this movie fills its niche in the same way Passion of the Christ filled its own. That movie was gut-wrenching and painful to watch, because the events it recounted were gut-wrenching and painful to endure. So Nativity will be slow at times, or tense at times, but it won't feel the same as Passion because it's not the same thing. Get over it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)