Peter Rabbit. Squirrel Nutkin. Miss Moppet. Timmy Tiptoes. Jemima Puddle-duck. Do these names mean anything to you?
If not, that’s a shame. Children’s literature is lacking in the kind of innocent, imaginative storytelling that made author Beatrix Potter famous and beloved. And it’s not too late to gain an appreciation for Potter’s work.
René e Zellweger plays the author in Miss Potter as a model for the conscientious and ambitious women who would follow her example. It turns out this celebrity of children’s storytelling lived out a meaningful tale of her own that grownups can enjoy and learn from.
“Miss Potter is for moviegoers who are drawn more to the delightful than the destructive,” says Camerin Courtney (Christianity Today Movies). “But no matter your taste, it’s undeniably refreshing to see a PG-rated movie for adults done so well. We see characters change and grow, we watch people actually get to know one another before falling in love, and we’re treated to beautiful shots of English countryside.”
“The pleasures of Miss Potter are few and simple, but they are sublime,” says Greg Wright (Past the Popcorn). “Please don’t be prepared to like Miss Potter too much; it may let you down early on. But let its gentleness and simplicity grow on you—don’t seek to know too much about it ahead of time, and let its words take you to surprising and delightful places.”
Lisa Rice (Crosswalk) says, “Miss Potter is a beautifully-filmed movie that hearkens back to the days when propriety was everything. … It is a sobering study on the power of the encouragement—or discouragement—that a parent can give children, which can either break their spirit or launch them into their purposes.”
Mainstream criticsare divided. Some are bothered by a little too much sweetness and innocence, wishing the film was a more grownup affair. I don’t think Peter Cottontail would mind.
Stomp the Yard stirs up enthusiasm
It’s been, what, a month since the last flashy movie about troubled young people who know how to dance?
Here comes Stomp the Yard, which starts with a dance showdown that leads straight into bloodshed. Then, our hip-hop hero starts a new life in a new school, where he has to find a way to fit in. In the end, the film’s dance sequences draw us in for a story about injustice and struggle.
But is the story worth it? Is the dancing?
David DiCerto (Catholic News Service) says, “[T]he athleticism of the choreography and Short’s charisma energize a flimsy and formulaic script.”
Bob Hoose (Plugged In) was surprised by the film. “Yes, Stomp is a little cliché d and stiff with a fairly predictable story that includes a violent murder, a number of cleavage-baring outfits and implied sex. But along with that, it proves itself to be one of those films that attempts to show black teens as more than Hollywood-stereotypical gangstas or hoopsters. … [T]he movie shows us kids who have goals in life.”
Kathy Bledsoe (Past the Popcorn) says, “Even though this film may not win any awards, it will provide a lot of opportunity to connect with youth and discuss the kinds of choices and decisions children are being forced to make these days—even in the presumed ‘safe’ haven of Middle America. I encourage my fellow ‘white folk’ in particular to ‘step’ out of themselves and see this movie!”
Mainstream critics aren’t quite so sure the film has much worth considering, calling it “uninspired storytelling” and “a flabby mess.”
This Alpha is a very bad Dog
Rachel Saltz in The New York Timeswrites that Alpha Dog “has much the same entertainment value you get from watching monkeys fling scat at one another in a zoo or reading the latest issue of Star magazine.”
(Wait, does she mean that the monkeys are reading Star magazine? Oh never mind.)
With a review like that, you’d expect that the rest of the critics would fall in line, trying to out-do each other with put-downs for Nick Cassavetes’ film, which is earning some hype for the participation of pop star Justin Timberlake. While the film seems to be about the sad plight of young people who are lost and reckless, many find the film disingenuous for the way it glorifies lurid behavior. Whatever they say, the young fans of the man who sings “Sexyback” are likely to line up in droves for Alpha Dog (“Sexy-bark”?)
But one Christian film critic is sticking up for the film.
Greg Wright (Past the Popcorn) says, “There are no heroes, there is no happy ending. It is a movie that will challenge your thinking; I can’t imagine anyone sitting passively through it without finding something that strikes a chord within. … [S]omewhere along the way I started caring about the characters, even the ones that seemed unlikable on the surface. It’s a reminder that people we think are ‘bad’ are usually just people that make bad choices, often without thinking through the consequences.”
But David DiCerto (Catholic News Service) says Cassavetes “effectively conveys the nihilism and morally vacant lifestyles of his disaffected youths—an indictment of irresponsible parenting as much as the corrosive influence of much of today’s pop culture—but the story is emotionally uninvolving and the overall raw tone and incessant sordidness, while perhaps accurately reflecting reality, are excessive.”
Christa Banister (Crosswalk) sends a memo to Timberlake: “Next time you consider a cinematic detour from your musician’s day job, find a stronger script.” She concludes, “[W]hat we’re supposed to learn from this senseless tragedy is that unfortunate incidents like these happen everyday—even in affluent neighborhoods. … But unfortunately, the artificial gloss of the characters and unrealistic dialogue … doesn’t do much to get the message across.”
Adam R. Holz (Plugged In) says, “Those involved with Alpha Dog insist it offers serious social commentary. … Even if we accept the director’s comments about what motivated him to tell this bleak story, Alpha Dog still has one overarching—and huge—problem: It glorifies the very things it’s ostensibly warning against.”
Mainstream critics are split over Alpha Dog.
Dench is Oscar-worthy in nasty Notes
Notes on a Scandal comes from a novel with a much longer title—What Was She Thinking? Notes on a Scandal. And if the Academy doesn’t give nominations to both Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett for their portrayals in this intense, twisted thriller, many moviegoers will say, What Were They Thinking?
Dench and Blanchett play Barbara and Sheba, two schoolteachers caught in a scandalous game of jealousy, lust, and deceit. When Barbara catches Sheba in an affair with a student, she tries to exploit the knowledge in order to make Sheba dependent on her. But when Sheba’s husband (played by Bill Nighy in yet another memorable turn) begins to lose his patience with Barbara’s self-centeredness, Barbara begins to lose her grip on the game, and things go from bad to worse.
Director Richard Eyre, who drew a career-best performance from Dench in Iris, just may have topped that here. But where Iris was a meaningful story about an enduring relationship, art, and compassion, Notes on a Scandal feels like a lurid tabloid-headline drama. No matter how great the performances might be—and they are Oscar-worthy—this story has little of value to offer us, except a glimpse of the emptiness waiting for those who view love as a power play.
Harry Forbes (Catholic News Service) calls it “a lurid but skillful melodrama. … Richard Eyre directs … with Hitchcockian flair, while taking care not to glamorize the seamier plot elements. … The themes may rule out the film for many, but for those who approach the plot as the astute psychological thriller it is, they’ll appreciate two actresses at the top of their game.”
Mainstream critics are celebrating the performances, which may be virtue enough to win the film success at the box office and during awards season.
This Perfume smells funny
Director Tom Tykwer made a name for himself with the stylish Run Lola Run. And fans of Krzysztof Kieslowski were impressed with Tykwer’s adaptation of a Kieslowski script—Heaven.
But style may not be enough to win many admirers for Perfume: The Story of a Murderer, Tykwer’s adaptation of Patrick Suskind’s 1985 best-seller.
The movie follows Jean-Baptiste Grenouille (Ben Whishaw), a young man growing up in France in the 18th-century, where he is blessed—or afflicted, as the case may be—with powerful olfactory ability. Yes, he can smell things a mile away. And the film focuses on vivid images of everything he can smell, which may be an unpleasant experience for the audience.
The film is earning mixed reviews from Christian critics.
Harry Forbes (Catholic News Service) writes, “Tykwer’s artful adaptation … shows sensitivity in telling a story which could be utterly repellent in other hands, and without justifying the terrible deeds, succeeds in illuminating the protagonist’s strange motivation with Christian—love the sinner, hate the sin—compassion. … Reasonably restrained in its overt violence, the film will nonetheless not be to every taste and should be approached with caution.”
Greg Wright (Past the Popcorn) is impressed, but that doesn’t mean he liked it. “Not since Barry Lyndon has a period piece been so startlingly realized. … The first half of Perfume plays like a gritty and literate commentary on the dilemma of an artist. … [But] Tykwer deliberately leaves the moral framework of the narration tottering back in the hills. Where is the audience left? Sitting in the dark, wondering if the movie’s second half is some nihilistic lesson on the futility of capturing the essence of beauty and life.”
Mainstream critics aren’t too fond of this one, and some seem downright allergic.
Arthurshould’ve remained Invisible
Director Luc Besson, better known for stylish and violent films like La Femme Nikita, The Professional, and The Fifth Element, is back, this time with a children’s fantasy about a boy who has quite an adventure among microscopic creatures who live in his backyard.
“There’s plenty of action, adventure and heroism, then, to keep kids in the theater glued to their seats,” says Marcus Yoars (Plugged In). “Their parents, on the other hand, may squirm a bit out of sheer boredom from the cliché d dialogue and remarkably flat voice performances from a horde of celebrities. … Those same parents will also fidget when they encounter the abuses of God’s name, a not-really-veiled alcohol/weed gag and a spiritual mishmash as diverse as the film’s influences.”
Mainstream critics wish this project had remained invisible.
Primeval primarily sadistic
You might think, from reading the summary, that Primeval is a film about violence in South Africa. And you’d be right: It follows journalists on a quest to capture a legendary crocodile, only to find them stumbling into the territory of a dangerous warlord.
But all of this amounts to little more than a cheaply made horror flick, one that ends up having little light to shed on its timely subject matter.
Bob Smithouser (Plugged In) calls it “a grim mess of a horror picture that resorts to cheap jump scares, dopey situations and what are, by today’s standards, cheesy special effects. … It’s just a bad movie all the way around.”
Mainstream critics are calling it “primeawful,” among other things.
More reviews of recent releases
Freedom Writers: Marcus Yoars (Plugged In) says, “Fifty profanities and moments of gore certainly detract from this story. … [But] Erin Gruwell’s is a remarkable adventure that encompasses sacrifice, determination, fearlessness and hope. … [E]xceptional messages get communicated in almost every scene as these kids grab hold of something beautiful and life-changing.”
Kathy Bledsoe (Past the Popcorn) says, “All the elements are present to make a movie that entertains and educates. The problem is that the subject has been explored before and better—Stand and Deliver, Mr. Holland’s Opus, Dangerous Minds, etc.”
The Queen: Christopher Lyon (Plugged In) writes, “The Queen is a quiet, profound, and even gently amusing film that accomplishes the unlikely. It builds empathy for an emotionally distant monarch and a (currently) buffeted politician by following them through a difficult week.”
Children of Men: Dennis Mullen (Relevant) says, “What happens to people when hope for the future dries up? … Children of Men … offers a grim answer and tells an incredible story along the way. … [The film] is rough, brutal and profane. It is also a study in magnificent filmmaking. … But in the end, Children of Men is a story lacking any solution to the desperate condition of hopelessness.”
Venus: Mike Smith (Past the Popcorn) says “Venus is an arthouse film, filled with dark humor that may or may not play well in Peoria. Despite great characters and one of the best displays of acting by seasoned actors since On Golden Pond, the story is too dark and obscure. It is heavy and irresolute—another case of art being too sophisticated for its own good.”
The Painted Veil: Greg Wright (Past the Popcorn): “The Painted Veil … is both maddening and refreshing in its refusal to answer [the film’s central] questions in the style to which we have become accustomed. There are no pat answers here. The tale of Kitty Fane’s journey toward love, loss, and restoration is both revealing—as the veil of Kitty’s self-absorption is lifted to reveal the truth of life, death, and Walter’s passion—and mystifying.”
Code Name: The Cleaner: Michael Brunk (Past the Popcorn) says, “Okay, the bottom line … if you want a light movie with a dash of comedy and a sprinkle of action—and you happen to like Cedric the Entertainer—you could probably do worse than Code Name: The Cleaner. But don’t expect much more than that.”
Facing the Giants and Stranger Than Fiction: Tim Jackson (Relevant) considers the differences between two films. First, he defines his terms. “Art often begins with a question that propels us on a journey to discover the answer. Advertising begins with an answer … and creates questions to lead us to that answer.” Then, he says, “Giants is an infomercial for a brand of Christianity. … The pitch is clear: Buy Jesus now and as a bonus He’ll fix everything broken in your life. … Stranger Than Fiction is art, even if it’s fluffy pop art.”
Copyright © 2007 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.