Judges

The Book of Judges would seem to be all about hitting you over the head with a stick. The theme played out over and over (and over) again is this: God’s chosen people, the best people on the whole planet, and often the only ones getting any attention - good or bad - cannot function in any way shape or form without the constant presence of God in their lives.

Section after section plays out according to this script. They’re following God, but gradually turn away, worshipping other gods and such, ultimately devolve into a life of total debauchery, until such point as a “judge” rises to return them back to the fold, typically with tragic results and the deaths of many.

Perhaps us heathens missed the memo, cause if you fast-forward to modern times, I’m aware of (and friends with) several people not on the often perilous path set forth in the Bible, and I don’t know of anyone actively holding orgies or generally being selfish pricks. Could be that we’re missing out on some well earned fun there. I digress...

Continuing on with the theme so far of people who seriously have no concern for their own well-being is the oft told story of Samson. This guy had the strength of 50 regular men, or in more modern terms, he was as strong as Hulk Hogan and Mr. T combined! He was also apparently criminally stupid. As the story goes, he was a man driven by lust, and he hooks up with a saucy tart named Delilah. She wants to know the secret of his super-strength, as of course he must have one, so, since he’s deeply in love, he tells her the WRONG secret (of course), and she subsequently tries to have him killed to tragic results for the Philistines. I’d imagine the events unfolded like this:

Delilah: “Samson sweety, for no particularly sinister reason, would you please share the secret of your enormous strength?”
Samson: “Gee, your intentions seem pure, so ok. It’s kryptonite.”
Delilah: “Kryptonite.  Really?”
Samson: “Absolutely.  Now, give me some sugar baby.”

[Later that night after Delilah bejewels a sleeping Samson with kryptonite bling]

Delilah: “Samson! The Philistines are upon us! Coincidentally! On the very night you told me your secret and on which night I also coincidentally used that secret against you!”
Samson: “(yawn) Well, I lied, so now I must whoop some Philistine ass.”

[a little later]

Delilah: “Well, that didn’t work. Now we’ve got this stack of bodies which you just know will start to stink, and it’s a pain getting blood out of a dirt floor. On the upside, Superman’s stopped coming around bugging us.”
Delilah: “Also...  Whine! Waa! Samson, you don’t trust me...I can’t believe you lied, so I’m going to ask again and you tell me the truth this time...k?”
Samson: “I’m a powerful and strapping young man living in biblical times, I’m extremely lustful and could easily discard you and pick up one or more less-annoying and murdery tart(s), but what the heck, it’s my magical Air Jordans...”

Stupid. Just stupid. They go through this charade THREE TIMES! She tries to have him killed THREE FRIGGIN’ TIMES, and after all of that, he tells her the real secret of his glorious locks, they shave his head, gouge out his eyes, and lock him up. Going back to a prior comment, perhaps this is why God pays such special attention to the biblical Israelites. The people of the time were so completely incompetent that they required constant supervision. And, the stupid surely doesn’t end here. Over time, due to extreme negligence, they let his magic super-power hair grow back, then, when the Colosseum is at max capacity, he says “please lead me over to the main support pillars for that thing”, and (surprise of surprises) they do. He then grunts, pushes the pillars out with his regained super-strength, and kills everybody plus himself. What a thoroughly inspiring morality tale.

I’d like to say Judges ends on a high note, but instead it rehashes an old story. Remember our good pal Lot, and how he bravely offered up his virginal daughters for gang rape so the villagers would leave God’s angels alone? You guessed it, second verse same as the first. A Benjamite (not to be mistaken for Vegemite) takes in a man and his concubine (and associated transportation and goods) for the night. The villagers show up (again) demanding that the stranger be sent out for a serious group buggering, and his brave and valiant host says no, then offers his own virginal daughter and the stranger’s concubine instead. They apparently pass on the daughter, but torture and rape the concubine to within an inch of her life, leaving her the ability to crawl back and die at their gracious host’s doorstep. (lovely so far eh?)

The stranger, thinking this is less than ideal, loads up his concubine the next morning and heads for home, where he proceeds to cut her up into 12 parts and sends one part to each of the 12 tribes of Israel to say “this is what the Benjamites have done”. The whole of Israel, stunned by this shocking turn of events rises up against the Benjamites with an army of some 400,000+ people. They consult with God who says “I am with you”, and they attack...and lose somewhere around 20-30,000 soldiers to the apparently better Benjamite army (only numbering around 25,000 or so in the first place). They regroup, consult with God again who says “No really guys, I’m totally with you”, and they attack the next day. Again, suffering massive casualties (around the same headcount as the first time). Most stories would’ve ended here, but let’s not forget these are the Israelites we’re talking about. Stupidity and suffering are their middle names. They regroup, again, consult with God, again, get his assurances for support, again, then attack, again. This time they fairly convincingly rout the Benjamites, slaughtering 25,000+ soldiers and burning their villages. And to think it only cost them around 60,000 of their own troops. War is truly a worthwhile endeavor.

The scant remaining Benjamites then start bemoaning their fate, as they’ve nearly been completely wiped out, and there aren’t enough remaining women for the remaining Benjamite men to continue their bloodlines and such, and woe be us if one of the 12 tribes of Israel is completely exterminated, I guess. The solution is nothing short of genius. The remaining men are told to go hide in the vineyards in Shiloh (to the north of them I think). Then, when the women of Shiloh come out to join in the dancing as part of a festival they’re having, the men are to rush from the vineyards and seize one of them to be his wife. THIS is the solution in order to get around some old oath people had taken specifically refusing to ever give their daughters to Benjamites.

I have to say I’m not sure about the mixed message being pushed here. All of Israel rose up against the Benjamites for the unspeakable acts they committed against a woman, then, they turn around and encourage the few remaining Benjamite men to essentially commit more such acts, and this time it’s ok. I could be wrong, but when I think romance, I don’t usually envision men running out of a field and taking women hostage.

Joshua

My NIV Student Bible is full of endless useful information and littered with useful sidebar comments and interjections on the various activities that occur throughout the many books of the Bible. Each book typically has a nice prologue with a brief outline of the book, suggestions on how to approach reading and such, there are little explanatory notes in the bottom margin explaining smaller bits like what a shekel is, and an inserted paragraph here and there explaining key points as they crop up. The Book of Joshua continues an interesting trend among these notes, that being the glossing over or outright ignoring items that could be considered significant.

Some things that seemed to fail to attract notice include: where Cain & Abel found their wives, the parts where EVERYBODY – men, women, & children, innocent or not – were subjected to plagues and/or death repeatedly, the taking of multiple wives, and the rather significant disparity between the treatment of men and women (man, you broke law xyz, you are hereby fined 100 shekels, woman, you broke the same law, you are hereby fined 150 shekels…just kidding, I meant public stoning.  The man meanwhile is presumably thinking, “Glad the fine wasn’t 150 shekels…for that price, heck, I’d rather be stoned to death”). Where would we be in Joshua if we didn’t add to that list. Some of the old favorites are repeated of course (wholesale slaughter of entire civilizations), but then we get reference to the Book of Jashar.

Didn’t hear about that in church or Sunday school? Neither did I. So, what is it?! Well, I’ll leave it to you to further explore this via Google, but the brief tidbits I got out of it were the following.

• Nobody really knows
• It probably should be spelled Jasher, but even that’s up for debate.
• Generally speaking it seems to be agreed that Jashar/Jasher is not a person per se, but more accurately translates to the Book of the Upright. (I believe that’s as in “upstanding”)
• A version of the book seems to exist kinda sorta, but nobody can place its origin prior to 1625 or thereabouts, which just may cast a bit of doubt on its validity.
• It’s referenced on a few different occasions, in different books.
• And finally, it’s not in the Bible.

Why then did this one manage to escape inclusion into this book of books? The whole premise behind the Bible is that this is a book of divine origin and intent, upon which we can base our lives, but the fine folks at Zondervan Publishing House in Grand Rapids, Michigan didn’t see fit to include it in my copy. Nor was it in my King James copy. Nor would it seem to be in anyone else’s.

From a Biblical standpoint, this seems odd. Outside of that, it would seem that this book was assembled over time based on stylistic fit, politics, and popular vote. At any rate, it doesn’t seem to exist anymore, and the biblical scholars who annotated my student Bible didn’t seem terribly troubled by it.

Getting beyond these details, it’s an interesting read. Joshua is a book (and man) of action. There is a significant amount of Holy War action in here as the Israelites, after 40+ years of wandering, suffering, and learning proper obedience go in and finally take the land that God so long ago promised their forefathers. They are to go in and raze entire civilizations down to the last infant and take the spoils for themselves. The reasoning for killing every single last one of them is that, well, they’re just so evil that they’ll only cause problems if left to live.

Really.

Kids back then didn’t have impressionable minds that could be changed apparently, and just couldn’t be saved. There just weren’t any people there that could possibly have a chance of being saved, so the only option was complete and total slaughter.

Except for Rahab the prostitute and her immediate family (Rahab became a direct ancestor of Jesus according to my notes).

Yes, prior to the invasion, Rahab was kind enough…she bent over backward as it were…to shelter two Israeli spies and in exchange, they vowed to spare her life.

I’m not even going to continue with that one.

There is much emphasis in the notes however that letting handfuls of people here and there live would ultimately be the undoing of the Israelites, as this is a direct violation of God’s decree.

What else happens… Ah yes, Jericho falls, and later on the battle with the Amorites was going so swimmingly that Joshua asked God to stop the sun and the moon until it was over, and the rough estimate is that the sun delayed setting for a full day.

Much of the remainder of the book deals with Joshua dividing up and distributing the freshly captured promised land to all the tribes of Israel. Finally, in the fashion of Moses, he gives a recap of events, emphasizes at great length that the Israelites should only ignore God’s laws to their own peril, then he passes away.

All of this brings us to the Book of Judges, presumably where we’re introduced to such characters as Wapner, Judy, and Dredd.

Deuteronomy

The book of Deuteronomy is sad and tragic, and possesses all the predictability and good judgment of characters in a horror flick. The vast majority of the book is spent with Moses begging, pleading, and lecturing the Israelites on God’s law, how it’s really not subject to negotiation, reminders of what God’s wrath is like, and how to be good obedient non-suffering people.

The Israelites, in their role as horror movie sidekick, insist on going up the stairs and opening the door, running deeper into the woods, etc. Much like this year’s Dallas Cowboys (a horror story in their own right), ya just know the entire time you’re reading that yes, they will indeed screw this up. Much of this I chalk up to pure stupidity. As a people, they don’t take lessons to heart very well, whether they’re lessons taught at the expense of other people, or even crap they brought upon themselves. Part of it though could certainly reasonably come from what they observed of their fearless leader Moses. Here was God’s main man, the direct intermediary between the big guy hisself and the unwashed masses, and even he couldn’t get it right. Moses was banned from setting foot in the promised land for what turns out to be a poorly documented infraction. Perhaps the Israelites simply figured it was too daunting of a task to pull off.

The book for the most part was a re-hashing of Exodus through Numbers told with less clinical presentation and with more heart as Moses laid out everything they’ve been through, everything God has done for the Israelites and against their enemies, fleeing Egypt, wandering in the desert, and taking the promised land. Moses took some time to blame the Israelites for the circumstances leading up to his ban on crossing the Jordan. Really, it’s no wonder, as this whole scenario is captured with brilliant brevity in the movie City Slickers when Billy Crystal (Moses) is trying to patiently explain for the 50th time to Daniel Stern (the Israelites) how to program a VCR (follow God’s word) so that he can watch one channel while recording another (be fruitful and prosperous), only to have Bruno Kirby (God) scream about how the cows (the cows) could friggin figure it out already. Eventually even Moses’ patience has to run out.

There were good talks on when and how to effectively stone people to death and how to properly go to war, and women continue to get the shaft. If a man takes a wife, goes around falsely accusing her of being a hussy, and the girl’s father can provide proof to her virtuosity, the slandering man is fined 100 shekels. If the charge is true though, the girl is taken to her father’s house and stoned to death on the doorstep (one would suspect fathers with daughters carried some kind of stone damage rider on their hut-owner’s insurance). This is of course because the girl, for her part, would be doing something disgraceful and evil, while the guy…er…um…apparently calling a virgin a slut isn’t disgraceful and evil and worthy of stoning. I would like to imagine though that in the original language in which this was written, a proper translation for the man’s actions would come across as “excessive douchebaggery” or some such. I would also love to know how often this sort of thing came up back in ancient society, and how on earth these fathers provided proof.

Man: “This woman is a slut!”

Father: [while rummaging through a box] “Wait just a cotton pickin’ minute! Let’s see…lock of her baby hair, first baby sandals…where is it…her first molar…she got two shekels from the Tooth Fairy for that one…junior agricultural achievement ribbon, second place for raising that well-mannered camel in junior high…ah, here it is. Her hymen. Yup, safe and sound right here in the keepsake box. You sir owe me 100 shekels, you devilish rapscallion!”

Man: “My bad. Hey, at least this isn’t a stoning offense eh?”

More likely than not, I’d guess this scenario played out more along the lines of the guy decided whoa, married a chick with far too many hang-ups, or her laugh’s annoying, or her nose hairs tickle me when we smooch, I’ll say she’s a slut, and she’ll be summarily stoned to death, freeing me up to get some new action. The father likely protested, but to what end?! I realize I’m not a woman, but perhaps women readers could enlighten me as to what sort of proof you could leave behind with anybody that could be used as proof of your virtuosity later on.

Another curiosity along these lines is tucked into Chapter 24. If a man marries a woman, then she becomes displeasing to him, he can write her a certificate of divorce. Pardon me? Speak into my good ear??? Among the really devout, there’s much talk about letting no man put asunder that which God has joined. Divorce is some forbidden and sinful thing. This section would seem to run counter to that. (but then, these guys seem to have a habit of taking multiple wives too)

The book ends on somewhat of a high note with Moses getting to peek at the promised land from a remote mountain vista, roughly at which point he died. Moses is credited with writing the first five books of the Bible, and very coincidentally he was the only prophet with whom God had such a direct relationship. I hate to draw parallels here, but Joseph Smith was also (I think) the only Mormon prophet to whom God (or God’s agents) had direct and repeated contact. A curious thing, that.

Fortunately for us (and to keep blog posting going), Moses imparted much of his mojo onto the rising star Joshua, who valiantly leads the Israelites into the promised land, and as is extensively suggested in Deuteronomy, certain peril (largely self-inflicted).

Now, to see what wonders await us in the book of Joshua.

One masterpiece after another

Typically in the movie business, you come up with a great idea, get people excited about the first installment, then phone in a couple of sequels of continually diminishing quality for the cash (Matrix, I’m looking at you).

Somebody forgot to tell Pixar.

Toy Story 3 brings us the next chapter in the lives of our beloved characters, and the story and attention to detail make this installment every bit as good as the first two. In this one, Andy is all grown up and heading off to college, and this of course throws the toy community into a nervous tizzy. As we’ve come to expect from the folks at Pixar, this movie – this cartoon – has more heart, tender moments, and edge-of-your-seat, heart-gripping action than most traditional movies. We come to care about the well developed characters and their pain is our pain…their joy is ours. There is something here for the kids, for the adults, and for the kid in all of us adults. This movie was a real treat, and I cannot recommend it enough.

Some movie catch-up

Dear reader, fret not, for though I’ve been reading the good book of late, I still set aside time for mainstream entertainment. Here are a handful of movies I’ve caught lately. Starting off, Much Ado About Nothing is, without question, one of the silliest Shakespeare plays I’ve ever seen. This one has three parts to the silliness. First, it’s written as a comedy and it actually achieves this with some very nice dialog. Second, it has Keanu Reeves. I dare you to watch this movie without having a signature “Whoa!” go through your head at some point when brave Keanu enters stage left. While he doesn’t have much business in films of this nature, he actually didn’t detract, due entirely to the added silliness of his portrayal. Third, by far the best, and certainly the most unexpected, Michael Keaton’s bumbling constable steals the show. He really hams it up here, and it’s a real treat. Fair warning, the dialog is very much in the Shakespearian vein, but if that’s not a problem, do give it a view, it’s a lot of fun!

Speaking of fun, Iron Man 2, the second installment in the series, is pretty good. Personally, I didn’t think it stacked up to the first one, but in all fairness, the first one was really awesome. This one follows up on some of the teaser business in the first one with SHIELD and the whole Avengers business, gets a (IMO) much improved Rhodey in the form of Don Cheadle, and I have to agree with Stark’s assessment on meeting Scarlett Johansson’s character. “I want one.” Yowza. I still haven’t decided if Samuel L. Jackson has a proper place here or not. We’ll see how his character progresses in future installments, and Mickey Rourke, though a bit scary to look at, puts in a pretty solid performance here. In short, we get more tech, cool upgrades, some pretty bad-ass characters, and some excellent action and effects on top of a pretty solid script. It was fun and I’d recommend it.

Speaking of cool, Oceans from Disney Nature is a really beautiful look at the deep, brought to us by extensive filming via Disney and narrated nicely by Pierce Brosnan. The cinematography is outstanding and the critters and situations they bring to the screen are simply amazing. If you like good nature films, this one is really beautifully made and really showcases some absolutely incredible animals. Highly recommended.

Also highly recommended is Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, staring Russell Crowe. We’d kinda heard mixed rumblings about this one. “It’s dark.” “The story’s been changed.” and such.

Well, yes and no. The story part, yes, but it’s fully explained, and the dark part…not any more so than a lot of other such films. Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, and William Hurt lead a pretty excellent cast in the telling of how our hero Robin started out in the King’s army and ultimately transformed into the outlaw we all know and love from all the other movies ever made about the subject. See, that’s the story change. This gets us up to the point where most other movies about the guy start. Crowe makes a very solid Robin and Cate does a good Marian. I found this to be quite an engaging and enjoyable story and highly recommend it.

Numbers

The book of Numbers, as read through my NIV student Bible, certainly serves to illustrate how one man’s rubbish can be another’s treasure. How one man’s pain can be another man’s pleasure. (Hey, that rhymes, some of the time!) It also gives us a great lesson in “forgive, but don’t forget.”

The opening notes for the book of Numbers carries the tag “A joyous adventure comes to a tragic end.”

Perhaps the author of that line read the much more amusing “National Lampoon’s Exodus,” in which Moses, in comedic fashion, doesn’t see the construction sign and rides the family camel at high-speed off a ramp, to hilarious results.

The Exodus that I left behind for this one had the Israelites oppressed under slavery, witnessing the brutal suffering of the Egyptians, then escaping into a desert where they wandered and grumbled for some time, subsisting off of manna scraped up off the ground every morning, and repeatedly punished for being some of the stupidest people on the planet and continually revolting even after having witnessed some pretty extreme wrath at the hands of God. Gee. It’d be a shame to see all that fun come to an end.

Speaking of fun, Moses, one of the most devout figures in the entire Bible, a man who spends the vast bulk of his life doing God’s work and often being the middle man between God and the grumbling hordes…essentially middle management, one of the most unenviable positions on the planet…a man who is built with all the same flaws as any other (by his maker no less) spends his life in God’s service. God, to make a point that rules are important and that minutiae is every bit as important as the big picture sentences Moses to living out his life in the desert, never reaching the promised land, due to a minor and poorly documented infraction. This fate in fact befell all but two of the original Israelites, and a large part of why they wandered the desert for 40 years was to make sure that generation of losers died off before they could finally move forward. I guess the good times did end after all.

Numbers ultimately is a rehashing of Exodus and Leviticus, but in more of a story form and not the rigid listing of rules like we were previously presented with. A bit of warring shows up at the end too.

Also, a man flogs his donkey. No, that’s not a euphemism.

It seems the Moabites were shakin’ in their birkenstocks (I assume this is what they wore back in the day) because the Israelites had thrashed the Amorites and were now coming for them. They sought out Balaam, a known sorcerer of sorts, and apparently a guy on God’s good side. Mostly. Balaam was to put a curse on the Israelites at the behest of the Moabites.

Balaam sez, “Ok, I’ll come check it out, but I can do no more or less than what God will allow me to do.” At this point you’d think the Moabites would say, “Hmm, God’s chosen people are coming to whoop our asses, and we’re pinning our hopes on a guy who’ll be doing God’s will on THIS side of the wall, perhaps we ought to devise a plan B.” Alas, they were stupid instead. But that’s not the weird part. In fact, that’s pretty much expected at this point.

Balaam sets out on his donkey (aka. the Volkswagen of ancient times) to go see these Moabites. God, not happy apparently with the manner, timing, style, or perhaps lipstick in which Balaam had set out gets Balaam’s attention in the most direct manner possible. I’m kidding. No, that wouldn’t make the story as good. So he has an angel appear - I am not making this up - to the donkey. The donkey sees an angel, sword drawn, angry, and does what donkeys do. It immediately changes course, veers off into a field, and likely cranks out a pile of donkey-apples. Balaam, seeing nothing, confused, starts crackin’ ye olde donkey whip to get his ass back on the road. Seems like a fairly natural reaction. A bit further, in a narrow alley in a vineyard, the angel again appears. And again, only to the donkey. The donkey promptly makes more apples and proceeds to grind his rider’s leg into a wall, attempting to go around, and again suffering Balaam’s riding crop. A bit further, in an even narrower alley (which apparently were everywhere and in increasing narrowness), the angel appears again, the donkey gives up, no more apples to give, and lays down. Balaam then gives the donkey a rousing good thrashing, at which point this scenario goes past ridiculous. In Dreamworks-esque fashion, the donkey talks in what I can only hope and pray was the voice of Eddie Murphy, and the question he asks I’d imagine would’ve made Balaam reach for his gun, had those been invented at the time.

Donkey: “What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?”

Not near as cute as “In the morning, I’m makin’ waffles!” If you’re Balaam and your up-till-now normal mode of transportation started behaving erratically AND talking, how would YOU answer?

Balaam: “Not what you’ve bloody well been directed to do, that’s for sure, and for no reason readily apparent to me.”

Balaam does in fact mention that, had he had a sword on his person, he would in fact have slaughtered the beast then and there.

Donkey: “Have I not always behaved normally in the past?”

Balaam: “And in the past, you’d go where directed and then NOT get whipped, yes???”

A bit more banter back and forth, and voila, the angel decides to appear to Balaam too.

Balaam: “Ohhhhhhhh…”

The angel then proceeds to berate Balaam for animal abuse and goes as far as saying, “Had this kept up, I would’ve killed you and let the donkey live.”

This is clearly one of those “mysterious ways” we always hear about when strange crap happens and God’s supposed to be behind it. Remember, it’s “mysterious ways”, not “screwing with you”, “yanking your chain”, or any other phrase suggesting that this is the completely wrong way to win people over to your cause, or is an unusually sadistic way to go about things.

How often would you imagine a person back in those times would’ve said, “Ya know, my donkey’s on the fritz, I wonder if there are cosmic forces at work here?! Perhaps I outta take time out, reflect, and pray to my God who always treats me right” rather than “The ONE time I’m in a rush…”

After all of this, Balaam comes to the Moabites, speaks some of God’s choice words, and essentially does nothing to help the Moabites, but he does it for profit.

God’s sense of compassion and upstanding morality continues a bit later when the Israelites go destroy the Midianites, keeping and dividing all of the spoils. Included in the spoils, specifically outlined by God, would be all the young ladies who’ve never been with a man. All other Midianites…men, their wives, and sons are to be slaughtered, but those tasty tasty virgins (some likely very very young) are to be kept and divided as spoils of war. The old testament is thus far quite unfavorable to women. That’s so odd. One wouldn’t expect such a thing from a series of books written by a man. This is clearly divinely inspired, and certainly not something that has occurred repeatedly and with varied results throughout history. (scientology and mormonism anyone?)

What will Deuteronomy bring…

Leviticus

In the book of Leviticus, God lays down the laws for a nation. Since switching to a student New International Version Bible, there are lots of helpful annotations here and there meant to explain some of the goings on here. One such note suggests that I am to be impressed that the governing laws for a nation of people can be set down in such few pages, comparative to the legal tomes that intricately define law in countries such as the U.S.

It might be possible to actually be impressed were it not for the content. For starters, there’s an unusually lengthy section dealing with (I’m not making this up) mildew. Depending on the type, color, texture, and tenacity, that mildew could be the very undoing of a man (or at least result in destruction of their home). A very significant portion of the law library then deals with the vast number of sacrifices that must be performed in order. There are sin offerings, guilt offerings, burnt offerings, and grain offerings to name a few, most involving animal sacrifice (obviously except for the grain). Infectious skin diseases also get duly noted. Then of course the hotly debated stuff about homosexuality and shellfish. Curiously, in a book that’s been very explicit about their laws, they talk about not lying with a man as one does with a woman, but there’s no corollary for women. Do lesbians get a pass? Does the author perchance not mind that sort of thing? It’s curious indeed. These are God’s laws, so I’d challenge somebody to say that well of course that’s implied, because those same people would be just as likely to say we can’t know the mind of God (say, when innocent children suffer).

Then, we just get some oddities.

Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

I’ve read rumor that the ban on shellfish is lifted in the New Testament somewhere. What about this clothing law? Is my cotton-poly blend Speedo a sin? (on me? sinfully delicious!)

A note on something interesting is the biblical concept of land ownership. There’s a lot of drum beating going on these days where some of the fundamentalist crowd, the kind who hold the Bible up above national law, lament the interference of big government, talk about how we simply must allow the free market to continue raping us work…the loudest ones are often pretty well off. These same folks would seem to not give much thought to Leviticus and God’s law. Ya see, back in olden times, the land belonged to God…period. The tenants (us) are allowed to do our thing, farming the land for 6 years straight, then, the 7th year is a Sabbath year. No farming, the land is allowed to rest, and God will bless us, every one. After 7 Sabbath years have gone by (49 years folks), during which much land trading, purchasing, defaulting and such have gone on, guess what happens. There’s a special jubilee wherein everyone goes back to square one. You go back to the original family allocation. The rich downsize, the poor get back in the game. Just like free market capitalism! Awesome!

In reality, God’s laws were designed to account for, and care for the poor. Even here, old testament, vengeful God, and we’re supposed to love our neighbor as ourselves.

A final note on something that requires a bit of math. According to cleanliness laws, a woman finishes menstruating (unclean), counts off 7 days, and on the 8th day must take two birds (doves or pigeons) to the priests to be sacrificed, in order to be made clean again. Pretty straight forward. One woman, one month, two birds…we’re looking at 24 birds per year. Ok, so what’s the big deal? Well, when the Israelites left Egypt, the way it reads, there were 600,000 men on foot, besides women and children. Women, it’s reasonable to assume, were roughly half the population, so we’re talking about roughly the same number of women. Let’s say a third of ‘em are working their way through menopause and cut that down to 400,000 healthy, active, menstruating women. Let’s figure them at 24 birds per year too, and that gives us 9.6 million bird sacrifices, for roughly 26,301 bird-kills per day. There must’ve been a LOT more birds around back in the day, and quite the assembly line of priests to deal with the workload, or else a lot of perpetually “unclean” women I guess. This illustrates the lack of a need for more extensive laws, as the entire system is bogged down in sacrifice, 24x7, with no hope of coming up for air since every bowel movement, menstruation, and semi-questionable facial expression requires sacrifice. Perhaps if one, instead of reaching for the toilet paper, merely grabbed a pair of doves, said a couple of Hail Moses, then tidied up, you’d kill two birds with one proverbial stone, streamlining the process.

Back to the central theme, if this is some yarn with a moral, there’s a lot of leeway. The logistics of keepin’ it real though, it’s a bit much to swallow.

Stay tuned for Numbers!

Editor's note: It was pointed out to me that back in the day, there was a high probability that women spent a lot of their time pregnant, and that my math was probably off by a fair amount. That's a very good point, so let's make some adjustments shall we? Let's be generous and assume that 90% of the ladies were with child at any given time. I'm pulling that number out of the wazoo, but it certainly seems pretty generous. That whittles our collection of monthlies down to 40,000 for roughly 960,000 bird sacrifices per year, for roughly 2630 bird sacrifices per day. Still quite a pile of bird carcasses.

Exodus

Exodus is a book in three parts. God deals harshly with the Egyptians for refusing to let the Israelites go, the Israelites wander the desert for 40 years, and God orders some fine furniture.

As mentioned previously with Genesis, the viewpoint employed during reading directly influences the meaning. Whether it’s literal truth or a story makes a big difference. In the first part of Exodus, a new Pharaoh comes to town in Egypt and decides the Israelites living among them are to be a big source of slave labor, and as a general rule, slaves don’t get the best treatment. Moses comes along and is directed by God to lead his people (the Israelites) out of bondage, out of Egypt, and to the promised land which flows bountifully with milk and honey. The way that this is done is interesting. The method, repeated several times, is this. God says, “Moses, go tell Pharaoh to let your people go, if he doesn’t agree, tell him I’ll send Plague X on the Egyptians, and oh, by the way, I’ll explicitly make Pharaoh ignore you, thus ensuring the Egyptians suffer the plague at hand.”

This is literally how it goes through locusts, water turning to blood, horrible disease, other niceties, and ultimately death.

Moses: “Pharaoh, let my people go lest you be beset with irate blue-ringed octopi!”

God: (whispering) “No Pharaoh, don’t do it, he doesn’t mean it.”

Pharaoh: “No I say. Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time.”

Moses: “Ok, you asked for it.”

The Egyptians: “AAAAAAAA!!! OCTOPI!!!!! Oh the humanity!”

Now, as a story trying to teach us the valuable lesson that we need to listen to God’s word, sure, this works, because hey, it’s just a story. As a literal event, let’s compare this to another example. A fundamentalist self-identified Christian does God’s holy work to the extent of killing a doctor at an abortion clinic. At this point, should God or society as a whole then condemn the Christian community as a whole? I think it’s generally agreeable that this isn’t a reasonable approach.

Pharaoh sounds like a real jerk. But, his policies and procedures are hardly indicative of Egyptians everywhere, many of whom were almost certainly good and decent people, yet just the same, God threatens punishment, then MAKES Pharaoh ignore his warnings, then proceeds to punish ALL of Egyptian society, men, women, and children with horrific plagues, and in fact kills many of them.

You have free will.

Except when you don't.

Now worship me or else.

Pharaoh lets the Israelites go after mass killings, then recants and chases after them. Moses parts the Red Sea, the Israelites make it safely across, then the Sea returns, killing Pharaoh and his army, thus spawning many movies and fulfilling the promise of Charlton Heston.

Now, though there would seem to have been many trips made in Genesis between Israel and Egypt…trips that didn’t require inordinate amounts of time…the Israelites then wandered the desert for 40 YEARS. Now, this isn’t like the Sahara or anything, but sounds more like an area of dry scrub land. Think Wyoming, but not as miserable. As a tale of Israelites learning lessons of trust in God and obedience to God, it’s great, but as a reality, it doesn’t make any sense. Much of this period is marked with Moses and some of the top brass talking with God, telling the Israelites they simply must be obedient or suffer the consequences (which you’d think would be seared into their brains after seeing the multitude of disasters that beset the Egyptians), then having to punish and wrangle said Israelites for straying and otherwise committing evil acts.

The Israelites are portrayed as a tribe with ADHD. “Wow, Moses has been gone for weeks, guess it’s time to forget everything we’ve been through up to this point and turn away from God, as surely that’ll work out well for us.” Repeatedly. So the people do things that are procedurally incorrect, they build false idols, and so on, but…nobody ever says “Hey, we’ve been in this here desert for a loooong time, what say we leave?”

All of this culminates with the Israelites constructing a golden calf which they then treat as their god and which they worship, thereby making the real God really mad. The resolution of this is nothing short of genius. The golden calf, which historians argue likely wasn’t even very large, is destroyed. Constructed in its place, by God’s decree, is a mobile tabernacle with several ornate gold-plated pieces of furniture including the Ark of the Covenant, a table and dishes, a lamp stand, and an alter. All told over a metric ton of gold and three-plus metric tons of silver (plus jewels and other lesser metals) were used. The procedures for worship are extensive, and death and exile are not far off as punishments for infractions. God is basically saying, I am too much for you to behold, so you can’t gaze at me directly, worshipping that false golden calf is evil, but you can worship at this very elaborately decorated tabernacle in which you can be assured I do reside. Not that gold…THIS gold.

Probably the main contribution of Exodus is the ten commandments, a good half of them which are good general rules of thumb whether you’re religious or not. One rule on the list, keeping the Sabbath holy, is more strict than I recall hearing through my may years of church lessons. Punishment for working on the Sabbath was death. Perhaps there are exclusionary rules later on for this sort of thing…perhaps it’s now “receiving multiple paper-cuts”, and perhaps it somehow excuses those pious “resting” folks from frequenting business establishments on that day of rest, taking advantage of the unwashed masses who’re violating this commandment. (aka. spending the day shopping)

Next up, Leviticus, in which we get a great many rules, some of which may or may not still be recalled depending on need, while others can apparently be safely ignored.

A Couple of Dicks…

…was what this movie was originally slated to be called before somebody above Kevin Smith’s head insisted on a change (or that’s how the web portrays it anyway).

Cop Out, the title and possibly a dig at whoever made the decision that the title needed to be changed, is the first action movie by Kevin Smith. The story revolves around the exploits of two detectives played by Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan in what is another addition to the buddy-cop scene. It has it’s humorous moments, many involving Seann William Scott, and generally speaking it’s entertaining. I didn’t feel that it had near the entertainment value of Clerks and will be curious to see if Smith continues in this direction.

The Thin Man

A bit of a throw-back here, made in 1934, The Thin Man stars actors I’ve maybe vaguely heard of in a movie I’ve definitely never heard of. What possessed us to watch this one? The recommendation of a friend. We weren’t disappointed.

The dialog is snappy, often comedic, and expertly delivered by the cast. Aside from the occasional expression that gives you a firm reminder or the time period (“That’s swell!”), this film has aged well.

A retired detective is drawn into a murder investigation at the behest of his sassy gal who just wants to seem him in action. He’s very reluctant to take the case, but more or less gets pulled into it anyway, using his expertise to find the killer on scant evidence.

If you can find this, it’s worth a rental. I’m honestly not sure of its availability. Our copy came from the local library.

On The Road

On The Road by Jack Kerouac is a benzedrine-driven look at what the ADHD condition might be like. The story and dialog jump around like a crow after so many shiny things, and quite honestly, it takes awhile to find the book’s rhythm so that one can actually make some sense of it.

From the sounds of it, the book is almost an autobiography of sorts, but the names were changed to…well…not protect the innocent, as the major characters are actually other famous people, but perhaps to take some additional liberties with the story and get a novel out of it. We follow the main character Sal Paradise as he makes several trips crisscrossing the U.S. and ultimately drives south to Mexico City, often with the companionship of the ultimate vagabond, Dean Moriarty.

I’ll say this for the book, it nearly gives a person the urge to hop a train or hitch-hike off to parts unknown without anything really resembling a plan. I don’t think this book is for everyone, but ultimately I found it enjoyable.

Genesis (no, not the band)

Project Bible lurched out of the gates with the Book of Genesis. This book has it all. Creation, incest, murder, amazing feats of carpentry, massive flooding, more incest, concubines, polygamy, bad parenting...you name it and this book had it. It becomes pretty apparent reading this that a person's take on it will have a lot to do with their assumptions going into it. Basically, if you're inclined to view it as a story, some notes of historical significance, or as the straight-up truth, that will color what you take away from this. I admittedly launched into this as a skeptic and non-believer, and will say once again that I'm not out to convert anybody one way or another, including myself, but merely want to see what all the hub-bub is about (as it were).

As a story, it's ok, and there's a strong emphasis on good vs. evil, with God being responsible for a lot of the good, and not involved in the evil. Historically, well, there's not much to say here. Many cultures worldwide integrate some form of flood story into their stories and religions. One could probably argue for the historical support of Abraham, as he's ultimately the source of a few major religions, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Also, some of the referenced cities have some basis in historic fact. That said, what makes this a more valued historic document than any other book referencing factual elements (say, The Da Vinci Code)?!

Taken as straight truth, I'd say, is arguably the most dangerous track a believer could take. God, as described to me over various years of church attendance, can do anything, is omnipotent and omnipresent, the alpha and the omega. Rewind back to Genesis and here we find God creating the entire universe, planet Earth, animals, plants, etc. This is an absolutely impressive week's work. I aim to take nothing away from that. The capstone to all of this is Adam and Eve. Sinning aside, they are to be fruitful and multiply, populating the planet with more humans. At this point Genesis gets a bit sketchy, and soon enough so and so down the line is taking a wife. Glossed over, but not far from the surface is a whole lot of incest needed to get to this point. Adam and Eve's kids didn't have another village to go to. Either "God went and created a whole bunch more people" was left out, or "the kids were doing things with their siblings and/or parents which would later become morally repugnant and genetically ill advised" was. There aren't too many more options. The population builds, God decides they're wicked, drowns everybody save for a few, and we start this same process over again. Noah, wife, and kids don't have any other people to run off and marry. So...they're making more kids somehow. Also on the list of things that aren't ok later on would be the taking of multiple wives and consorting with concubines. I also couldn't help but get the sense that God was messing with people. Abram (later Abraham), a particularly blessed person, is to multiply and father many nations, so it stands to reason that the woman he takes as his wife is barren. (what???) The wife then says, I want a kid anyway, so Abram, you go get busy with the maid. It's only after this that the wife suddenly becomes no longer barren (as mentioned, specifically due to God's intervention) and starts bearing Abram's children. I know our human intellect can't possibly fathom the purposes of our almighty Creator, but how any of this is productive in showing us that He cares about us escapes me. God basically scored Abram some more action (a form of caring for sure, but not the message the Bible is intended to spread is it? God as the ultimate wingman?). Truly this is a guy's religion. Lot also finds favor in God's eye. He and his family alone are to be spared when Sodom and Gomorrah burn. Lot, the guy who told a mob, "No, you can't have God's angels (who can likely defend themselves well enough), but you can do what you want with my two young daughters." Really. That's a real stand-up guy. Glad he's not watching MY kids.

So yes, as a story it's interesting with many of the qualities of a soap opera, and there are many opportunities for a good moral, but taken as truth, well, I take issue with too many of the assertions here to go down that road. I'm certainly willing to learn if there are some major interpretive points here I've just missed, but honestly, Genesis isn't a terribly huge book, and the language so far has been fairly straight forward.

At any rate, on to Exodus!

An undertaking

People who know me may know that I’m not a particularly religious person. For various personal reasons, my upbringing around the espoused ideals of Christianity didn’t exactly leave me jumping with joy for Jesus. That’s not exactly a complete or correct description. Jesus wasn’t ever really a problem so much as his followers were. I bore witness to a reasonably large amount of hypocrisy that quite honestly left me questioning the validity of the whole works. After all, it seems like a lot of people get into religion for the money. With money, comes power, and power corrupts. Followers of Christianity would think nothing of dismissing that kook Joseph Smith and Mormonism because hey, that religion was started late in the game, and Islam? Pshhh…that can’t possibly be right. Jump across the fence and you have folks on the other side of the coin giving the same dismissals to Christianity. Everybody claims only theirs is correct, the central tenets of all are often ignored, and there is archaic stuff in there that people are ok with glossing over for convenience (even as they cling to other parts). Combined with a love of science, all of this has left me rather agnostic. I’m not one to rule out the existence of a higher power, but I can’t claim to have seen evidence of the existence of such a thing either. On top of all of this, I have not read the Bible cover to cover either. I have a reasonable familiarity with all the usual stories, but can’t claim any first-hand knowledge of many of the other odds and ends I’ll occasionally stumble upon in conversation or reading. With that in mind, I’m going to take a book-by-book look at the King James version with reviews to follow. This won’t be an attempt to convert myself or you, dear reader, but more of a case of learning more about that of which I’ll periodically speak.

Stones into Schools

In a continuation of the unbelievable true story of Greg Mortenson’s life, Stones into Schools picks up where Three Cups of Tea left off to describe the tireless and ceaseless work that a group of highly diverse and fiercely dedicated people perform in order to bring hope, in the form of education, to some of the world’s most desolate, hopeless, and dangerous places on Earth. If the methodology of the Central Asia Institute (which is the official organization in support of this ambitious education initiative) gained massive amounts of support, and if those methods were applied with greater intensity across the war torn regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan, it’s easy to believe, based on Mortenson’s own proven results, that militant extremism in those countries could be drastically reduced within a generation, all without a bullet fired.

If you haven’t read either Three Cups of Tea or Stones into Schools, I cannot recommend these books enough. Greg Mortenson, reluctant though he may be to acknowledge the role, is a modern-day hero, and his story and the stories of those he works with are humanity at its best.

Neglect & Black House

For starters, I’ve been neglecting my duties in the sense that I haven’t updated this blog in ages. For what it’s worth, I haven’t really read or watched anything for a bit anyway, as I completed another rather exhausting move. Life is starting to stabilize again, and now I’ve picked up a couple of new books, and finally have the time to review the last one.

Black House by Stephen King and Peter Straub marks the first pairing of these two authors since they teamed up for The Talisman. True to its release date, this book takes a couple of the characters from Talisman 20-odd years into the future (corresponding to the duration since the release of the previous installment), where we catch up with Jack Sawyer after he’s spent some time as a police detective and summarily retired to the outskirts of a small town. The brutal murder of some local children slowly but surely drags our reluctant hero out of retirement for what will be a much less than ordinary case.

I found this to be a worthy follow-up story to The Talisman, and I’d be curious to know if there’s the potential for a chapter 3 or not. King has hinted at retirement or at least slowing down, but then he dropped that monster Under the Dome, so anything’s possible. I found the story to be quite entertaining and as usual, if you’re a fan of King, Straub, or the first book, this one is worth a read.

Popcorn chic

National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets is junk cinema at its finest. This is the movie equivalent to one of those toys you get out of a vending machine when you’re a kid. It’s fun while you’re there, but pretty forgettable otherwise.

Here we find Nicholas Cage reprising his role of Nicholas Cage playing the same character as in every other movie he’s in, but this time going by the nickname of Benjamin Franklin Gates. The mere cheesiness of his name pretty much defines his role in life as one who solves convoluted government-conspiracy-related puzzles. What luck then that he finds himself in this movie.

Still riding on their high from the first movie, we come in on Nick and his lady in a domestic dispute, their wise-cracking sidekick seriously owing on taxes he neglected to pay, and an ancient family member up the family tree suddenly being revealed to being a potential co-conspirator in the Abraham Lincoln assassination. Knowing that his ancestors are just as upstanding, truthful, and honest as himself, Cage proceeds to take off his leather glove, slap the accuser Ed Harris across the face, and challenges him to a duel. I made that last part up, but it would’ve been way more awesome than what really happened.

After this point, there’ll be some spoilers introduced, so before I go down that road, I’ll just say that this is standard Bruckheimer fare, and a fun little romp if you don’t over think it too much. If you DON’T watch it, you’re not missing too much either. Now, to the spoilers.

Ed Harris introduces some long-lost artifact for the express purpose of goading Cage into seeking out and then finding the lost city of gold. This city of legend was first witnessed by a European who, stranded on the coast of Florida, was taken in by Native Americans in the area who took him to the city of gold…which we ultimately discover is underground. The ground that it’s under is in the Black Hills of South Dakota. A quick look at any map of the U.S., combined with a grade-school grasp of the many different Native American tribes across the U.S. back during very early European settlement, plus the sheer distance when you’re pretty much on foot, and this scenario is completely and utterly ridiculous. (or, the natives from the Florida area had some awesome summer homes up north and had a mastery of air travel that has since been lost to the ravages of history) Oh, and they fairly easily and with minimal setup manage to break into Buckingham Palace AND the Oval Office, AND…AND…temporarily kidnap the President. Yeah, that’s happening.

All manner of catching up…

It’s been a long time since the last post, but I’m hoping to make up for it with a mega-review. I have 5, yes 5 movies and 2 books to cover here. Perhaps if I shortchange each one just a bit, nobody will notice.

Starting us off is the Tim Burton rendition of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, starring (who else) Johnny Depp. Conventional wisdom says that the combination of these two is often pretty entertaining, so how’d they do in this outing?

This is not your father’s Gene Wilder version, that much is certain. Depp steps into the role of Willy Wonka and takes the character several steps of eccentricity further than Wilder. There’s a whole back-story of Willy’s childhood added, and the oompa loompas get retooled as well. The back-story, ok, the oompa loompas though were highly annoying. Fortunately, they’re only around 3 or 4 times, relatively briefly. Other stars of note include the annoying main character from Spiderwick Chronicles and AnnaSophia Robb of Race to Witch Mountain and Winn Dixie fame.

Overall, I expected to really not like it, but found it entertaining despite my preconceptions. If you’re a fan of Burton’s work, it may be worth a look.

If you’re a fan of Cornelia Funke’s Inkheart books though, I hear you may want to avoid the movie adaptation of the same name. I haven’t read the books, and therefore found reasonable entertainment value from the movie. I’m not sure how to describe Brendan Frasier movies except to say he’s one of the more bankable stars in Hollywood because his movies generally make some pretty decent bread, even though he himself has never really climbed (probably fortunately for him) into that “stalked by the paparazzi” level of fame. He’s the kind of actor where by now ya know pretty much what to expect when ya go see one of his movies.

Anyhoo, in this movie Frasier plays the main character in the book, Mo, who is a silvertongue. That is, when he reads aloud, characters and events exit said book and proceed to do their business in our world. The effects are pretty decent, and we have Paul Bettany, Helen Mirren, and Andy Serkis rounding out the cast for (if you haven’t read the book) a fun story. So, if you plan to read the book, watch the movie first.

 Still lagging behind in my Twilight mania, I got around to watching the second installment New Moon (now with 4% more Dakota Fanning) where we meet up with Edward’s (Pattinson) competition Jacob (Taylor Lautner), who, while he doesn’t possess Edward’s aloof brooding qualities does have a few niceties that Edward lacks, namely a body temperature, an enjoyable personality, a seriously toned physique, and the ability to act like a normal person. Wonder of wonders, Bella (Stewart) ultimately shuns these stupid qualities for the seriously negative relationship environment she inhabits with Edward. These movies so far are mildly entertaining when viewed as comedies, but it’s tough for this old coot to grasp the appeal of a pasty scrawny diseased-looking Edward to the masses of raving young ladies hitting the theaters.

The absolute best line so far during the first movie, when Edward is finally talking to Bella enough to explain why he has such tough control issues around her (her intoxicating scent) comes from my son, who, seeing an opportunity to combine this tender moment with the adorable Dug from Up says “I can smell you.” THAT is comedy gold. Honestly, my opinion is not likely to influence whether you watch this series or not, other hype has probably already done that. Me, I can take ‘em or leave ‘em so far. Though it does sound like the final installment (Part 4?), if adapted with religious application of the source material, should be pretty messed up.

Planet 51 is an oddity. On initial viewing, it was pretty cute and has some good moments and is generally filed on the good side of computer animated features. I’m probably putting too much of my own baggage on this thing (as I haven’t heard the kids mention these things at all), but in retrospect it feels like a missed opportunity. Our hero (Dwayne Johnson) lands on the vacant Planet 51 only to discover that it’s inhabited in a very earth-like fashion by humanoid creatures that speak English. The astronaut is a throwback in the sense that he’s the jock test-pilot type and not particularly scientifically minded. The main alien character (Justin Long) ultimately befriends the wayward astronaut even as the planet’s government tries to hunt him down. The main hole for me is, he finally takes off in the end to head home…and that’s the end. I have no idea if a sequel is/was planned, but there’s zero tie-in with any extended cultural exchange or any such nonsense.

This movie was made in Spain and apparently took 7 YEARS to make it to the finish line. It would’ve been nice to have a stronger story, but it’s enjoyable for the kids and has some laughs for the adults here and there.

 Speaking of laughs for the adults, Role Models is some pretty funny stuff. In this mirthful tale, Danny (Paul Rudd) and his co-worker Wheeler (Sean William Scott) are a couple of energy drink product promoters (Minotaur:  Taste the Beast!) who travel around to area school giving motivational talks about choosing energy drinks over drugs. While Wheeler couldn’t think of anything better to do with his time (than dress up like a Minotaur and swill energy drinks all day after a hard night of partying), Danny feels like he’s in a dead end. A really bad day results in the two of them facing the choice of prison time or lengthy community service. They opt for service and find themselves paired up with some rather challenging kids as their mentors with an organization run by the always funny Jane Lynch.

Make no mistake, this is a raunchy comedy with highly colorful language (think Knocked Up and others). It’s a pretty funny flick and even has some moments of heart that are pretty nice, and if you enjoy movies like 40 Year Old Virgin, you’d probably get a kick out of this one too.

Switching over to books, I’ve recently finished The Talisman. It wasn’t originally on my list, but my wife had picked up a cheap copy of Black House (also by King and Straub) which I quickly learned was a follow-up to The Talisman, so, better read that first I suppose.

This book’s a pretty epic fantasy tale which introduces our main character Jack Sawyer, a boy who sets out on a quest for the talisman with the hopes of saving the life of his mother, who is dying of cancer. A long time family friend who was once in business with his now-deceased father turns out to not be a very nice guy, and he has a vested interest in keeping Jack from succeeding with his plans.

The flow of the novel is engaging and King and Straub weave a very enjoyable (if often dark) tale of good, evil, and the many battles thereof. The story wrapped up pretty well and really didn’t seem to lag much at any point. This one’s been a popular book for some time now and for good reason. If you enjoy King’s other work, this one is worth a read. (I am at this point not too familiar with Peter Straub)

 I’m only somewhat more familiar with Robert Louis Stevenson, having read Robinson Crusoe some time back. At the time I recall thinking that Crusoe was a challenging read at times because the language and structure is definitely from a different time and place. This follows through with Treasure Island as well.

In Treasure Island, we find our hero young Jim Hawkins working at an Inn. Through circumstance a rather unsavory pirate takes up residence at the Inn, exercising all manner of obnoxiousness and paranoia until such point as he croaks, leaving behind a chest containing an assortment of odd items. This is the beginning of a series of events that sends the young Mr. Hawkins on an adventuresome voyage to the fabled Treasure Island, complette with loads of pirates, scheming, and many daring and heroic scenes for Hawkins. I read this one to the kids, and while the language is a bit strange in modern times, we all rather enjoyed the story, and I’d say it’s worth the effort to read.

Something old, something new

In preparation for Tron Legacy (the better part of a year away still), we revisited the original Tron from all the way back in 1982, when music and fashion were totally awesome, and Jeff Bridges was still a toddler.

How did it hold up after all these years, you ask? Well, not too bad. The graphics of course can’t compare to what’s on offer today, but to expect them to would be unrealistic. The story’s compelling enough to allow a person to overlook that, and the story is about a guy (Jeff Bridges) who was fired from an evil corporation by an unscrupulous tool (David Warner) who stole his work, took credit for it, got promoted, then fired him. This evil doer then implements the use of the Master Control Program (MCP), whose job it is to monitor any and all technology and make sure it remains secure. The MCP takes on a life of its own, and can only be stopped by another watchdog program called Tron. If only the writer (Bruce Boxleitner) could get it to run, but he’s been locked out by the MCP. Re-enter Bridges, hacker/genius extraordinaire who agrees to help, but only if he can use the computer terminal strategically placed in front of the experimental object digitizing laser, via which he is subsequently digitized and transported into the system (didn’t see that coming), where he then does battle with the MCP and its minion programs and their frisbees-o-death.

So yeah, there’s a bit of hokey factor with it, but I still enjoyed it and after seeing trailers, and quite looking forward to the sequel which sees the return of both Bridges and Boxleitner. If you enjoy sci-fi, I’d recommend giving this one a go.

A guy getting sucked into the cheesy battleground of a 1982 computer operating system is hardly a suspension of belief compared to Roland Emmerich’s disaster flick 2012.

Much like The Day After Tomorrow before it, this film relies on extremely accelerated and dubious geologic events to provide the impetus for some pretty cool CGI effects. If you can REALLY let your mind go – seriously, turn it completely off – kick back with some snacks, it’s one gigantic thrill ride after another. Limousine racing through a collapsing building? Sounds fun! RV/small aircraft outracing an exploding super-volcano? Why not! Entire chunks of major cities tipping up on end and sliding into the ocean? Sure! Extremely massive amounts of water cresting peaks in the Himalayas? Hell yeah!

I won’t lie. There is much ridiculousness going on here, so watch this only if you’re really checking in on the special effects. For those, an HDTV and Blu-Ray might be pretty sweet.

Not your usual Alice

We recently went and watched Tim Burton’s film Alice in Wonderland in startling 2-D. Generally speaking, we’ve heard pretty decent things about it, but there are some criticisms out there as well. Let me address a particular sticking point right off the bat in this non-spoiler.

This movie is not, I repeat not a remake of the animated Disney film. I am not sure how people have missed this, as it’s fairly apparent in trailers and such that we’re dealing with an older Alice and a different story. This film also draws things out of Lewis Carroll’s books that weren’t in the Disney animation either. So, if you’re looking for the animated Alice as retold through the odd eye of Tim Burton, look no further, cause this isn't it.

This may be akin to a sequel and it certainly contains a whole host of very familiar characters (Alice of course, the Mad Hatter, the March Hare, the White Rabbit, Tweedle’s Dee and Dum, the Blue Caterpillar, Queen of Hearts, and of course the Cheshire Cat).

In this tale, Alice is older and has more or less forgotten her “dream” of the first go-round with the wacked inhabitants of Wonderland before falling to her surprise back down the rabbit hole. Once she falls back in, Burton and crew let their imaginations loose and the results are brilliant.

Our whole family enjoyed this movie immensely. The story, the animation, the live action, and the scenery were wildly imaginative and refreshing and just made for a really fun ride, and one we’d like to take again. I’d highly recommend this one and would encourage a theater viewing be it 3-D or otherwise. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!

A dog, a priest, and a dead guy

I wish I had a good joke to go with the title, but in this case, I’m talking movies, and what a lineup it is. Not a bad flick in the bunch, I’m pleased to say.

Starting us off is Lady and the Tramp, a piece of classic animation by the fine folks at Disney.

It’s a film full of entertaining animals, curmudgeonly relatives, and reminds us that no matter what our current position in society, we can choose to have a good heart and to be helpful to others.  Also, do what’s right even if the consequences might not be favorable.

At the end of the day, it’s certainly more for the kids, but it’s not near as painful to watch as some of the stinkers they’ve churned out (see the review of Oliver & Company). Give it a watch.

In Ghost Town, Ricky Gervais is dentist Bertram Pincus, a man with some serious personality flaws. He just doesn’t like people, and quite often after people meet him, the feeling is mutual.

A minor mishap with a minor medical procedure leaves him with the ability to see dead people. Dead people that would really like some help. Pincus, never one to help the living finds this situation every bit as unpleasant. Central to his annoyance is Frank (Greg Kinnear) who wants Pincus to help his with his widow Gwen (Téa Leoni).

The casting is great and the film, a comedy, is often quite funny, though it does have its poignant moments as well. Overall I found it quite enjoyable, and if you appreciate the humor of Mr. Gervais, you’ll likely enjoy it too.

But for a REAL laugh-fest, check out Doubt! Wow, what a riotess look at Catholic school what with the priest misconduct and the uh…nazi nun…and er…um…yeah…I don’t think this was a comedy.

Doubt focuses primarily on Sister Aloysius (Meryl Streep) the superior amongst the nuns with a very strict definition of propriety within the Church, Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman) the younger priest (yet still of higher rank than Aloysius) who wants to see the 1960’s Church become a bit more modern, open, and friendly to society, and Sister James (Amy Adams) the young and optimistic nun who finds herself at the center of a power struggle between Aloysius and Flynn. When the relationship between Flynn and the school’s lone black student comes under scrutiny, the fireworks start to fly.

The casting and acting here are superb, as is the script writing, which is necessary as this is no action flick. This film rides squarely on the shoulders of the actors to weave the story and take us along for the ride, and there is good reason for the critical acclaim Doubt has received. Powerful performances are delivered across the board, and I’d highly recommend this one.

3 movies, 1 book

I wish this started off better…

The sequel Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian had so much potential. It was set at the Smithsonian for cryin’ out loud. There is a huge amount of potential to be had there…  Alas.

This movie picks up a few years after the first one leaves off, and many of the familiar characters from the first one are being shipped off into storage in the national archives. Larry (Stiller), now a successful inventor of cheezy infomercial products is nevertheless drug back in to the midnight madness that is museum life, this time rushing to the aid of his friends who are under siege at the Smithsonian, where we are ultimately introduced to a few new characters.

In fairness to the movie, there are some pretty funny moments. When an excited General Custer yells “We’re Americans!  We don’t plan, we do!” for instance. In fairness to the readers here, those moments are rare, the plot, such that it is, feels cobbled together. There are huge holes in what little logic exists in this story in the first place, and the overall effect is one of indifference. (or at least it was for me) I wouldn’t recommend it, and horror of horrors, I’ve heard rumor of a 3rd installment in the works. Maybe they’ll get back on track. I won’t hold my breath.

I don’t fit the target demographic for Disney cartoons, but generally enjoy them anyway cause I’m plenty childish, and my kids give me an excuse to watch them completely without shame. So, when my daughter picked out Oliver and Company, I was all for it.

I have regrets.

This movie worked for the kids in a “aww, look at the cute talking animals” kind of way. In that sense, Disney hit the mark. It was otherwise a rather lousy movie and, in my opinion, one of Disney’s low points. On the human side of the plot, our main good guy is actually a down-on-his-luck thief who employs a ragtag group of stray animals to try and help him ply his trade. This man is in a debt of the life-threatening variety to a ruthless mobster (are you experiencing gleeful laughter yet?). Our little girl heroine is the product of inattentive and often absent parents in an enormous house with a butler to take care of her, and he doesn’t seem particularly concerned about her either. The little girl ends up ultimately kidnapped by the mean mob guy who ends up dead after a daring rescue by the good bad-guy and the animals, and we are treated to Cheech Marin, and attempts at music by Bette Midler and Billy Joel. I’m sure it’s a great movie if you’re stinkin’ drunk or high. Spend your money and time on something better.

Like Coraline.

I’m not sure what this was based on, but what a fun and imaginative story! Screen this one or watch it early with younger children though, as for our daughter, late in the evening, parts of it were a bit much. (it IS a Tim Burton production after all)

Coraline (Dakota Fanning) finds a small door that leads from her boring existence into a near-copy of reality where everything is better and her parents are much more fun and caring. She soon starts to realize though that things may not be what they seem.

The imaginations behind this flick did an amazing job. This is raw creativity unleashed, and the result is immensely enjoyable. I’d highly recommend this one!

In the third installment of Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein series, Dead and Alive, I finally get an idea of why they may be pushing this out as a trilogy of trilogies. This third book ends on a note that fairly neatly packages the first three as one story unit.

In the first installment, one of Frankenstein’s new race members “gives birth” in a manner of speaking. In this installment, that resulting creature returns. Frankenstein’s 5th version of a wife has one of the most interesting first days of life imaginable, and we are introduced to some really bizarre creatures – some created by Frankenstein, some who have assembled/reassembled themselves – who start operating contrary to their programming. All of this makes for a pretty interesting story, and overall this first trilogy is good reading. Instant classics? Nah…not really, but good fodder for a rainy day. Give ‘em a try, you may like ‘em!

In which we revisit Rambo…

Some potential nightmare-inducing scenes aside, Son of Rambow is a really good family film.

Lee Carter, a miscreant at the local school, loves the film Rambo and is hell-bent on making his own movie in a similar vein in order to enter a film competition. Will Proudfoot is a highly sheltered yet wildly imaginative child of a strict religious household who gets excused from classes during documentaries and such because he is simply not allowed to watch television. Fate conspires to bring Lee and Will together, and Will’s viewing of Lee’s bootleg copy of Rambo provides inspiration for the underpinnings of a movie script that Lee really likes and decides to adopt, while also enlisting Will to be one of the principle actors. Will, ever curious and polite, half agrees and is half drug into this production to the growing dismay of Church leadership and his mother.

This plot was handled beautifully. There are a lot of genuine moments to be found here. It’s often humorous, yet also touches on the tests of the bonds of friendship and family. The nightmare scenes I mentioned initially are, in fact, Will’s nightmares from the film, so it may be worth screening first if you’re not sure how your kids will handle it. It’s a really fun movie with a lot of heart, and I’d highly recommend it!

Decidedly NOT for children would be the second installment in Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein series, Book Two: City of Night.

These books read pretty fast, don’t take themselves too seriously, yet provide a compelling and imaginative story that makes for a fairly enjoyable read. In this continuation, Victor Helios (aka. Frankenstein) has moved on to the newest iteration of “wife”, Erika 5, with hopes that this one won’t make the mistake of the last four and be anything less than perfect and obedient. His many other experiments – many of whom are out unnoticed in the general population – are starting to malfunction, and Deucalion, Victor’s first creation, is establishing a working relationship with a couple of New Orleans’ finest detectives with the intent of ending Victor.

Koontz has quite the imagination, and if you’re a fan of mystery/horror, this series might be worth checking out.

Race to Which Mountain?

That would be the Race to Witch Mountain.

If ya have kids, they’ll likely be entertained, but I cannot promise the same for you. If you can really let your mind go, you may enjoy it I suppose.

This is a reboot/reimagining/continuation or some such or the other of the old Witch Mountain movies of yore featuring that guy from Green Acres (aww c’mon…you’re not looking that up are you? It was Eddie Albert. For cryin’ out loud). I don’t remember much about the old movies, save that I found them creepy when I was a little kid. In retrospect, it could’ve been the cheezy special effects they used for the kids’ “super powers”. In this modern installment with full CGI goodness, we have a reformed law-breaker cab driver in Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson who cracks wise, cracks heads, and is the randomly selected human helper of our two forlorn alien children. The alien children are mostly here for the chase scenes and to play straight-man for Johnson as they drive around looking for the plot while seeming to forget they have super powers until the most opportune moment to change their near-defeats to come-from-behind victories. Also, the alien boy from the original movies has a small part in this one, we get some Garry Marshall, and some sci-fi fan mockage. Oh, and yes, you can sneak in to one of the most secret and well guarded military facilities in the U.S. if you just remember to go in one of the publicized unguarded exhaust vents.

To my wife’s chagrin, all of this happens without Johnson removing his shirt even once.

We’re also treated to some awkward moments of Johnson trying to turn on the sap for scenes that are supposed to be emotional and stuff and, well, it kinda looked more like bowel distress. So far, he’s really more of a Scorpion King kind of guy.

The final verdict: if your kids talk you into renting this, fine, but do try and have other plans. Stretch out a toenail clipping session, read a book, nap, make balloon animals or something.