Transformers: Age of Extinction

(This review can also be found at http://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2014/transformers2014.html.) 

Overall Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, language and brief innuendo
Appropriate for: Ages 13+
Genre: Sci-Fi Action Adventure
Length: 165 minutes
Year of Release: 2014

In retaliation for the destruction of Chicago shown in the third Transformers film, the United States government is searching for all Transformers—even their former allies, the Autobots—in an attempt to eliminate them and end “the age of Transformers.” Or so they say. The government’s true purpose is actually more complicated than that. Harold Attinger, a prominent government official, is working with a technology firm to experiment with the latest discoveries in science in hopes of creating a powerful robotic army. For some devious reason, they are especially keen on finding the leader of the Autobots—Optimus Prime. Somehow, finding him will be the key to future success with their new scientific advancements.

Meanwhile, down in Texas, scrap dealer, robotic engineer, and inventor Cade Yeagar (Mark Wahlberg) is broke. His daughter (Nicola Peltz) is getting ready to graduate from high school, and she is desperate for college funds. When Cade finds an old, broken-down truck, he brings it back to his workshop and tinkers with it overnight, hoping to sell it and make enough money to solve some of his financial problems. By the morning, however, he has determined that the trashed truck is actually a Transformer. Soon, the injured Transformer awakens, revealing himself to be the Autobot Optimus Prime. Cade promises to help the shape-shifter with his repairs, hoping to learn something about the creature’s incredible technology that will help him with future inventions. But when CIA operatives show up on Cade’s property and demand to know the location of the Autobot, things start to get messy for Cade and his daughter. They become fugitives, running with the hunted Optimus Prime from a government that appears to have a goal much more complicated than merely exterminating Transformers.

An exciting summer action flick, Transformers 4 returns viewers to a universe where giant, robot-like aliens walk the earth. The movie examines the struggles and blessings of father-daughter relationships, depicts the virtue of sacrificing one’s own life for a friend, and introduces some interesting perspectives on human nature and existence that could potentially spark profitable discussions.

One especially pertinent topic of discussion is found in one of Optimus Prime’s final lines. He states something to the effect that people can find within themselves the answer to the questions “Who am I?” and “Why am I here?” From a biblical perspective, Optimus Prime’s statement reflects the truth that God has set eternity in the hearts of men—as Solomon says in Ecclesiastes 3:11. Humans are ever searching for answers to questions of eternal significance. They are concerned about more than just everyday life and humdrum existence. They long for true meaning and purpose—for a life that that has a lasting effect on history. Optimus Prime’s statement, however, falls utterly short of the truth that humans can never give themselves meaning. Alone, they cannot discover their true purpose. As the rest of Ecclesiastes 3:11 says, “[N]o one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end.” Alone, humans cannot understand eternity. God alone holds eternity in his hands, and he and his infallible word alone can ever answer the questions of who we are and why we are here.

Although this movie has its moments, it is mostly just an overwhelming sequence of collisions, explosions, and destruction. The violence certainly earns this film its PG-13 rating. The battles between the Autobots and other Transformers can be intense at times, involving a great deal of collateral damage that frequently consists of the destruction of cities and the death of humans. While most of the violence happens between the Transformer characters, the human characters in this movie also see a good deal of action. They are involved in a few car and spaceship chases, a couple characters are violently attacked and threatened with guns, and there is a good deal of shooting. One character is killed in the fire-blast of a Transformer, and viewers see a shot of his dead body, petrified and burnt with his bones exposed. There are also a couple instances of intense hand-to-hand combat. In all of the action, however, the blood and gore is actually pretty minimal.

Besides the violence, the film also contains a good deal of foul language and name calling. The Lord’s name is also taken in vain several times. Although there are no sex scenes and no nudity, there is a smattering of sexual innuendo and a disgracefully large number of under-dressed young women. Several men look lustfully at a number of different young ladies, referring to them as “hot.” One character tells another that he finds a certain woman “very attractive” and later tries to kiss her. The daughter of the main character has a boyfriend against her father’s wishes and hides the fact from her father. The girl and her boyfriend are seen cuddling and later kissing. Although it is later mentioned that the boyfriend snuck into the girl’s house one night in the past, nothing further is mentioned or shown.

In general, the relationships between most of the human characters start out pretty messed-up. The father is initially depicted as rather irresponsible and disconnected from his daughter. The daughter is disobedient and rebellious, and her boyfriend is frequently disrespectful to her father. I did not appreciate this inclusion of yet another stereotypical 21st-century family with a rebellious teenage daughter and an irresponsible father. However, the characters’ relationships are reconciled by the end of the movie, and the three characters begin to show each other love and respect. I still wish, though, that viewers could be reminded that a family doesn’t need to go through a Transformer battle and an end-of-the-world experience in order to have that kind of reconciliation.

Fans of the previous Transformers films will likely enjoy this summer flick. With some impressive CGI and exciting battles, this movie may just satisfy your desire to see some epic action and sweet cars. Although the profanity and innuendo was offensive, Transformers 4 still is a better alternative to other, much more explicit movies. If you are not a Transformers fan, however, I would suggest skipping this movie. Again, it has its moments, but the two hours and forty minutes of collisions, explosions, and destruction can really drown out any sense of plot, character development, or valuable faith themes.

Romeo & Juliet

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG-13 for some violence and thematic elements.

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Romance Drama Adaptation

Length: 118 minutes

Year of Release: 2013

(Parent/Teen discussion questions for this movie can be found at http://christianperspectivereviews.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_3012.html)

If you’re a part of the Montague family in Renaissance Verona, the one thing you need to know above all other things is that you hate the house of Capulet. If you’re a part of the Capulet family, the first thing you need to know is that you hate the house of Montague. It’s that simple.

But not for Romeo Montague.

Romeo (Douglas Booth), the son of Lord Montague, happens to be in love with the niece of Lord Capulet—a pretty young lady named Rosaline. Hoping to see Rosaline, Romeo sneaks into a ball hosted by Lord Capulet himself, bringing a couple of his buddies along with him to join in on the fun. When Romeo lays eyes on a different young lady at the ball, however, all thoughts of Rosaline vanish from his mind. With that one glance, Romeo knows that his feelings for Rosaline were nothing. He never knew what it was to truly love until now. He steals a dance with the beautiful girl and, later, steals a few kisses. By the end of the ball, they are both desperately in love with each other. But there’s one problem. Before Romeo leaves the ball, Romeo discovers that the girl who has stolen his heart is Juliet (Hailee Steinfeld), the only child of Lord Capulet. Rather than let their love die, however, Juliet and Romeo choose to ignore the history of hatred between their families and continue their relationship in secret. Their choice proves to be more complicated and more dangerous than either of them expected.  

It’s the classic love story told in a classic, breathtaking, and professional way. This film really hit the mark with its beautiful soundtrack, its stunning sets, the historic costumes, and some mostly solid acting by actors who can pull off the Shakespearian lingo pretty well. Whether or not the film stayed true to Shakespeare’s original script, I cannot say. I haven’t read Romeo and Juliet for several years and do not remember details, but the plot of the movie seemed to follow the major plot points that I remember from reading the play. According to some articles I have read, however, the script lacks much of Shakespeare’s original dialogue. At the same time, like the original play, this movie examines the consequences of making rash decisions, of being ruled by passion, and of passing on a legacy of hate. Although this movie is a poor adaptation, I would still consider it to be a good movie.

Even though the passionate love between Romeo and Juliet is very frustrating at times when you consider how young they are and how thoughtless they can be, the film handles their romance tastefully. There is a lot of kissing (and by that I mean A LOT), but the movie contains no nudity and no explicit sex scenes. However, there is one scene with Romeo and Juliet in bed together that involves mostly just more kissing. Juliet takes off Romeo’s shirt and Romeo removes Juliet’s robe (she is wearing a nightgown underneath), but she remains fully clothed for the entire scene, and Romeo is only shirtless. Because this scene comes only after their wedding, I actually found it to be sweet, innocent, and refreshing compared to similar scenes in other movies. However, I think that this scene still earns the movie its PG-13 rating, and I cannot recommend the film for young viewers.

The Lord’s name is taken in vain a couple times, but, besides that, there is no foul language (unless it is disguised in that fancy Shakespearian lingo). The violence consists of quite a few duels and several deaths. Most of the deaths occur by stabbing, and most of the stabbings happen at the end of a duel when one swordsman is defeated. The camera actually shows the sword or knife going into the body, which is rather disturbing but not overly bloody. (Think The Count of Monte Cristo.) A couple characters talk about suicide, and one character poisons himself.

Again, this movie is not appropriate for small children and pre-teens. However, for families with teens, I definitely recommend Romeo & Juliet. I encourage families to take the opportunity to discuss the lessons this story has to offer. Talk about what “true love” really is. Talk about the choices Romeo and Juliet make throughout the film. Although the two lovers certainly suffer consequences for their rash decisions, their choices to commit suicide come across as somewhat glamorous or romantic. Parents should be aware of this and should not hesitate to offer guidance to less mature viewers. Humans are human, which means our control over the future is extremely limited. That is why it is so important that we surrender our lives to God’s will, letting him carry out his plans for us instead of constantly trying to control our own lives. We will only make a mess of it. This is a lesson that Romeo and Juliet would have benefitted from before their desire for control brought their own lives to a desperate end.

The Book Thief

Overall Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Historical Fiction

Length: 550 pages

Year of Publication: 2005

In this historical fiction novel by Markus Zusak, our narrator is Death, and he needs a vacation. He needs distraction. It’s not because of the number of souls that he must carry away, however. It’s because of all the humans those souls leave behind: the survivors. This book is about one of those survivors, a person Death calls “an expert at being left behind.” To start off the tale, Death recalls that he saw this survivor three times. He calls her “the book thief.”

The book thief’s name is Liesel Meminger, and her story begins when she is nine years old, on a train with her mother and brother. They are in Nazi Germany, and it is January 1939. Her mother is bringing her two children to a street named after heaven to live with foster parents, who will hopefully be better able to feed and educate the boy and girl. However, Death sees the book thief for the first time on that train as he takes the soul of Liesel’s little brother. Liesel steals her first book in the graveyard where her brother is buried. She alone is delivered to her foster parents, and her new life on Himmel Street begins.

Death recounts the following five or six years of her life, describing both the beauty and ugliness of the young girl’s life in the messed-up world. Through the experiences that define this part of her life—reading with her loving foster father, thieving with her loyal friend and neighbor Rudy, caring for the spirited Jew hiding in their basement—Liesel begins to see the power and value of words and to recognize their demanding presence in the world. Books and words begin to mean everything to her—and so do the relationships that she develops with her parents, her neighbors, and others whose lives converge with hers.

This book creatively examines themes such as the power of words and the mysterious nature of humans—creatures who often tend toward hatred and malice, yet can also be strong, good, and loving. It also illustrates the implications of a worldview that lacks the biblical understanding of God. Zusak presents God as distant, silent, and careless of human history. The very modern view of existence that the book presents makes it perfect material for discussion and analysis. Parents of teens who read this book should take the time to discuss the implications of the book’s worldview and the Christian understanding of God’s involvement in history. Parents may also wish to discuss human nature and the real cause of sin and death.

Although I have seen this book classified as a “children’s book,” I cannot recommend The Book Thief to children under thirteen. Even though the reading level is not difficult, the subject matter is best suited to mature individuals. My main reason for not recommending this book to young readers is because of the disappointingly large amount of foul language and misuses of the Lord’s name that it contains. Reading a book is generally a much more intimate experience than watching a movie, making the issue of language even more significant than it is in movies. When you’re reading, all of the words are loud and clear in your head.

The other aspect of this book that earns it a PG-13 rating is its nitty-grittiness. The descriptions of death and dying are not for the sensitive reader, and the accounts of the Second World War’s horrors make this book an unviable option for children. Among other things, the author describes a few fistfights, the aftermath of a plane crash, the bombing of a neighborhood, a young boy being forced to strip naked for a medical examination, and Jews being brought to a concentration camp. Although less of an issue, there is also some content involving alcohol and smoking. Due to these elements, I think that even young teens should ideally read this book with a parent—if at all.

To more mature readers, however, I recommend this book as an interesting and thought-provoking read. The style is innovative and the topics are very pertinent. This book is certainly a work of modern literary art. If you are looking for an enjoyable, sweet, exciting, or suspenseful read, however, I would not recommend this book. Although it is enjoyable, sweet, exciting, and suspenseful at times, it did not grip my attention or my heart until the bitter-sweet ending.

I decided to read this book after seeing the 2013 film adaptation. While I thoroughly enjoyed the movie (see my review), I did not enjoy the book very much at all. I was actually quite shocked by my own reaction. After all, the flavor of the book is very similar to that of the movie, and, although some events are altered and the story is significantly truncated in the film, the basic plot is the same. However, the character of Liesel in the book seemed totally different from the sweet, innocent, curious character I met in the movie. The novel revealed that her motives for stealing books were actually somewhat spiteful. In the movie, she seemed to steal the books out of curiosity and a desire to read them—not out of a desire to vent her anger. This made it harder for me to enjoy the read.

When I started reading the book, I was expecting it to be sad and traumatizing—like the movie was. But it was even worse. In addition to being sad and traumatizing, it was also filled with a sense of despair and fatalism that I hadn’t noticed in the movie. This was partially due to the author’s style of writing—something you don’t get to experience while watching a film. Zusak wrote The Book Thief in a way that is very non-traditional, repeatedly using short, one-sentence-long paragraphs and a plethora of sentence fragments—elements that are popular in contemporary writing. He matched these choppy paragraphs and sentences with a choppy plot, allowing the narrator to reveal many major developments before the narration reaches that point in the chronology of the story. While I can handle some foreshadowing, I didn’t enjoy being constantly reminded who was going to die at the end of the book. The perpetual foreshadowing made the tone too despairing for my taste—even though I knew what would happen since I had already seen the movie—and the author made Death address the book’s future events in a rather heartless manner. Although the narrator does seem remorseful and sensitive at times, he often discusses the death of characters so matter-of-factly that the fatalism even manages to kill any sense of sadness. There is only despair. Five and a half hundred pages take a while to read, and that’s a long time to be depressed about something that doesn’t even happen until the end of the book. It’s especially hard when the plot leading up to that event is not even overly engaging.  

This book is certainly a work of art. But, for every work of art, there’s always some people who just don’t appreciate the artist’s work. For this book, I guess I’m one of those people.

How to Train Your Dragon 2

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for adventure action and some mild rude humor

Appropriate for: Ages 7+

Genre: Family Action Adventure

Length: 102 minutes

Year of Release: 2014

(Family discussion questions for this movie can be found at http://christianperspectivereviews.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html)

Welcome back to Berk. It has been five years since the nerdy, awkward, and likeable young Viking, Hiccup (the voice of Jay Baruchel), changed everything by showing the world that dragons and Vikings can coexist—that they can even be best friends. Now, all is well in the village. All of the Vikings in Berk have dragons of their own, and one of their new favorite pastimes is dragon racing. Hiccup, though—he has even more exciting things to do. He and his trusty Night Fury dragon, Toothless, have been busy exploring the waters and islands surrounding Berk and piecing together a map of the newly-discovered areas. They are also enjoying testing out their new flight technology and satisfying their thrill-seeking personalities at the same time. When his father, the chief of the Vikings, approaches Hiccup with the prospect of soon succeeding him as chief, Hiccup is adamant that the position is not for him. He’s convinced that he is not cut out to be a leader. He wants to do what he loves, and he loves spending time with his dragon.

One day, while on a flight together, Hiccup and his girlfriend, Astrid (the voice of America Ferrera), discover a threat that just might end the happy harmony of Vikings and dragons in Berk. If Hiccup is going to stop this evil enemy that he and his friends now face, he must step up, become the leader he was meant to be, and do what he knows is right.

This sequel to the 2010 How to Train Your Dragon is a fun and exciting computer-animated family flick that touches on some important themes such as the value of friendship, the importance of standing up for what’s right, and the power of a family who works together. In addition, this second Dragon film has brought us yet another beautiful soundtrack and some more absolutely stunning animation.

From a family-friendly perspective, some of the battle sequences could be frightening for young children. Although completely clean of blood and gore, there are still some scary monsters and bad guys as well as a few sad moments involving the death of a well-loved character. Additionally, there are some sequences throughout the film consisting of dragons and Vikings falling through the air that can be intense at times.

A few hints at profanity, although minor, also present a bit of an issue. However, most of these consist of phrases such as “soil my britches” and “gods help us all.” The phrases in the film that would have been actually offensive are tactfully cut short to exclude the expletive and are, therefore, easy to dismiss as a non-issue.

The romantic elements in the flick were tasteful, involving mostly just a couple kisses and hugs. Other than that, there is one young Viking lady who repeatedly appears to be obsessed with one guy’s muscles, but this element turns out to be more laughable than suggestive. Regarding the controversy surrounding the character Gobber, I would say that the objections are not unfounded but that the issue was blown a little out of proportion. The character’s sexuality is only hinted at—the film does not shove the fact into the viewers’ faces. It is not even explicitly stated and would likely go unnoticed by younger viewers. However, I would warn families not to become desensitized by these small attacks to the Biblical worldview. Parents, don’t shy away from discussing this issue with your children. However, I would not count this objection as a reason to not see the film. In fact, the film actually presents the nuclear family in a very positive light, even celebrating the love of a husband and wife as they choose to reconcile with one another after spending many years apart.

My biggest objection to the movie is the way in which Hiccup disobeys his father on a couple occasions. Instead of suffering the consequences of disobedience, however, Hiccup’s rebelliousness actually ends up being rewarded. At times, Hiccup’s father even seems to be rather unintelligent, adding to this culture’s habit of depicting fathers as wimps. In the end, however, Hiccup’s father is shown to be a loving, caring, and strong leader and a man who Hiccup clearly hopes to emulate.

As a whole, I highly recommend this film. Although it depends on the kid, I would probably not recommend the movie to families with kids under the age of seven due to the intense sequences. No matter whom you watch this with, however, I hope you take the time to consider the biblical truths that this story presents and let them inspire and encourage you as you stand strong for what is good, true, and beautiful.