Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb

(This review can also be found at http://www.christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2014/nightatthemuseum2014.html.)

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for mild action, some rude humor and brief language.

Appropriate for: Ages 7+

Genre: Family Fantasy Action Adventure Comedy

Length: 97 minutes

Year of Release: 2014

All seems well at the Museum of Natural History in New York. The place buzzes with excitement as Larry Daley (Ben Stiller), the museum’s night guard, preps for the grand opening of the planetarium exposition at the museum. Thanks to the help of his friends—the wax figurines of Teddy Roosevelt (Robin Williams), Sacagawea, and others that come to life at night because of the magical tablet of Ahkmenrah—it looks like the evening is going to be a success. That is, until every exhibit in the museum starts going nuts. The life-like constellations from the new planetarium start attacking the visiting VIPs, Teddy Roosevelt aims his gun at someone’s head, and all of the animals wreak havoc among the banquet tables as the frightened visitors run from the building. A night with so much promise ends in disaster. When it’s all over, Teddy and the other exhibits have no memory of what they did.

As Larry soon discovers, the magical malfunction is linked to the corrosion that has been slowly spreading over Ahkmenrah’s golden tablet. If Larry and his friends don’t figure out how to stop the corrosion, pretty soon the entire tablet will be useless, and its magic will end. No more magic, no more living exhibits. Without the magic, Teddy, Sacagawea, Octavius, Jed and the others will be silent and still forever. Not even Ahkmenrah himself, however, knows the cause of the corrosion or how to repair the tablet. He does know one person who would have the answers they are looking for, though: his father, the pharaoh Merenkahre. But he just happens to be on display at the British Museum in London. Undaunted by the distance and determined to save their friends, Larry and his son Nick (Skylar Gisondo) take the tablet to England, bringing the whole team with them, and set out to learn the secret of the tomb.

Despite its simplistic and somewhat cliché plot, Night at the Museum 3 is an exciting flick for the whole family, filled with laughs, imagination, and kid-friendly adventures. While its biggest attraction is the clean comedy, this film also touches on the important themes of friendship, fatherhood, and loyalty. I especially appreciated the movie’s depiction of the relationship between Larry and his son, Nick. Unlike most on-screen parent-child relationships, Larry and Nick are shown communicating in a mature and level-headed manner. Their conversations do not involve yelling, slamming doors, and raised tempers but instead display an unprecedented level of clear communication and mutual respect. In general, Larry seemed to follow the command of Ephesians 6:4, which says, “Fathers, do not exasperate your children.” He does this by treating his son as an adult and as an individual rather than belittling him and his desires. Throughout the film, he also learns to value the time he gets to spend with his son and to recognize what a blessing Nick is in his life. In addition, Nick generally showed honor to his father, conforming to God’s command in verses one through three.

Near the beginning of the movie, however, Nick disrespects his father by throwing a dance party in their apartment while Larry is gone. Like any teen party, the scene has its share of loud music and red Solo cups, but the camera shows no underdressed girls, no couples making out, and no inappropriate dancing, keeping the film PG. A few other PG moments involving dancing include a scene in which Dick VanDyke’s character busts some moves in the nursing home with a group of old ladies and a closing scene in which all the characters break out their best moves. In this scene, one couple is shown slow dancing. While discussing VanDyke’s character with Larry, an elderly employee at the museum says that “Cecil Fredericks was the sexiest night guard we’ve ever had—present company excluded.”

In some of the other more risqué moments of the film, a Neanderthal and another character kiss, Ahkmenrah’s mother wears a low-cut dress, a few statues of scantily-clad ancients make an appearance, and Larry affectionately kisses the capuchin monkey. Although surprisingly minimal, toilet humor also makes an appearance. A character is nearly hit in the crotch several times, Dexter the monkey is shown peeing on two occasions, and a new character mentions that her boyfriend thinks her hair-do looks like “golden pooh sitting on [her] shoulder.”

Compared to the previous two films, this third installment of the Night at the Museum franchise has much less destruction and violence, although kids looking for a bit of action will not be disappointed. We witness an armored knight dueling the live skeleton of a triceratops and, later, three characters battling a “mythical snake demon” that has come to life. Although the destruction is not nearly as debilitating as in Night at the Museum 2, this movie has its share of out-of-control museum exhibits and broken glass. Defibrillators make appearances throughout the film, and a couple characters (both good and bad) are shown being electrocuted, although the good character doesn’t seem to suffer much damage from the event. In addition, the miniature characters, Octavius and Jed, find themselves in a number of perilous situations, one of which involves lava and a miniature volcano.

The film also includes some scenes that, although they do not fit the category of “violent,” certainly should be classified as “slightly disturbing.” In one scene, a paranoid man aggressively grabs a young boy, prophesying that “the end will come.” Later, a character eats packing peanuts and, in a different scene, another character promises that “someday, we will drink dragon’s blood together.” A boy is held captive with a knife blade at his throat, and an Egyptian promises to bury another character with honors, assuring the character that he will have all his organs removed and put in separate containers. In addition, a wax character’s nose begins to melt, creating a comical (and somewhat gruesome) effect, while another character’s face begins to deteriorate as a result of the tablet’s gradual loss of power, resulting in a deathly and frightening sight.

Although I did not catch any misuses of the Lord’s name, “d***” is used once and “h***” is used three times. One character exclaims, “where the devil,” and several characters use the words “heck,” “dang,” and “gosh.” While the Christian God is never explicitly mentioned, several characters discuss “gods” in one scene. When Merenkahre asserts that he is descended from Rah and that the Egyptian gods are the only true gods, Larry tells him that he tries to be open-minded, mentioning his own Jewish heritage while also affirming that Attila the Hun and Sacagawea both worship different gods as well. The whole concept of the magical Egyptian tablet also brings up some spiritual topics. Although they are not all in accordance with biblical Christianity, these references to religion and spirituality can serve as perfect discussion starters for families viewing this film.

Overall, I enjoyed Night at the Museum 3. The humor was generally very tasteful, and I found the depictions of friend and family relationships to be very refreshing. For some families, it may not be worth seeing in theaters, but I definitely recommend renting it. You’ll enjoy this final trip to the museum where history comes to life—literally.  

Earth to Echo

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for some action and peril, and mild language.

Appropriate for: Ages 7+

Genre: Sci-Fi Family Adventure

Length: 89 minutes

Year of Release: 2014

(Family discussion questions for this movie can be found at http://christianperspectivereviews.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_7.html)

Tuck (Brian Bradley), Alex (Teo Halm), and Munch (Reese Hartwig) live in an average neighborhood in Nevada. They may be average middle school boys, but their friendship is anything but average. The three of them do everything together, and they’ve always got each other’s backs. When a highway construction project comes to the neighborhood, however, the future of their friendship becomes uncertain. The plans for the new highway have no room for their neighborhood, and the families of the three boys are forced to move away. Their separation seems imminent, and the boys are dreading it.

During their last week together, weird stuff starts happening. To start it all, Alex’s phone goes nuts and starts displaying an image consisting of random blotches. Soon, the other boys’ phones start receiving similar signals. After some digging, they discover that the image is actually a map of an area in the nearby desert. They decide that there’s something big going on, and they determine to solve the mystery. The night before Alex’s moving day, the three boys hop on their bikes and take off into the desert to find out what the map leads to. Their search brings them across a mysterious but friendly creature. Communicating to them through a series of beeping sounds, the cute, metallic alien tells them that he is from outer space. He’s trying to return to his home, but there’s something wrong with him, and they are the only ones who can help him. That’s when the real adventure beings for Tuck, Alex, and Munch—an adventure that will change their lives—and their friendship—forever.

A new and improved version of the classic E.T. and a low-budget, PG version of the 2011 Super 8, Earth to Echo is a fun alien flick for the family. The film has an adventurous, imaginative edge that will attract younger viewers and some clever humor that both parents and children will enjoy. The perspective from which the movie was filmed is also very interesting. The entire thing is shown as if it is all footage that the three friends recorded on their cameras and phones. At times, the camera can get pretty wobbly and cause some dizziness (especially to viewers with a tendency for motion sickness), but it was actually pretty innovative and made the story come alive.

Although—in my opinion—this movie is probably one of the most family-friendly movies of the summer, there are still some things for parents to look out for. There is a small smattering of profanity, including a few exclamations of  “oh my G**,” a declaration that an object is “a piece of c***,” one “what the h***” that was barely audible, and the statement that something was “scary as balls.”

On the boy-girl side of things, one of the boys lies to his friends, telling him that he and a girl kissed. He claims that he has “kissed better,” and he and the girl are later jokingly referred to as “kissing buddies.” Talking about the same girl, one of the other boys calls her the “mannequin girl” and explains that he thinks “mannequins are hot.” At another point in the movie, after two of the friends tell Tuck’s camera that they are sleeping over at their friend’s house to play video games, the third boy jokingly says, “I’m sleeping in your mom’s bed;” he mentions that he’s not going to be playing video games. There is also a scene in which the young characters go into a dimly-lit bar filled with some sketchy people. Later, they search for a character’s brother in a house filled with a bunch of high schoolers who are drinking and partying, and we see a couple making out. These scenes will probably make parents nervous, but it’s all kept PG and will likely not trouble younger viewers.

The violence is nothing to be concerned about and consists mostly of just a few intense moments of objects flying around and breaking things, a brief tussle between two boys, and children being chased by the authorities.

Other objectionable issues mostly involved the relationship between the kids and the parents. As in many other recent films, the parents are depicted as somewhat stupid and careless, and the boys disobey their parents and lie to them without suffering any real consequences. One middle school girl is also shown speaking to her parents in a very disrespectful and sassy manner. Parents should not hesitate to discuss these issues with their children. In Exodus 20:12, God commands his people, “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.” A relationship defined by disobedience and lies is not what God wants for families.

As a whole, the film is a great family film, appropriate for kids ages seven and up. Parents should certainly discuss the issues they see in this film with their children. At the same time, parents should also point out the merits of this film. It has some very valuable themes, such as the importance of friendship and of loving people who are different. The movie also shows us that true friends are there for each other, even when they are far apart.

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.

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.

Maleficent

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for sequences of fantasy action and violence, including frightening images

Appropriate for: Ages 10+

Genre: Action Adventure Fantasy  

Length: 97 minutes
Year of Release: 2014

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

It seems the fairy tales have tricked us yet again.

Maleficent retells the story of Sleeping Beauty—except this time, the tale does not begin with the birth and christening of Princess Aurora. Rather, it begins with a young fairy named Maleficent. Maleficent isn’t your average fairy, however. She is the size that any human child would be at her age. Horns, similar to a ram’s horns, grow from her head, and a pair of beautiful feathered wings extend from her back. Maleficent is beautiful, kind, and good. She takes care of her home, the Moors—a fairy-land full of mysterious and magical creatures. She is practically a princess herself.

One day, a young human boy strays into the Moors from the neighboring human kingdom. Maleficent and Stefan meet and become friends. As the years pass, their friendship turns to love. Although Stefan tells Maleficent that their love is true love, Stefan leaves one day to pursue his dream of becoming a great man in the kingdom. While they are apart, the kingdom begins attacking the Moors in order to overcome the magical realm. Maleficent (Angelina Jolie) is powerful, however, and she defends her home, fatally wounding the king in a great battle. On his deathbed, the king promises his crown to anyone who can overcome Maleficent. Hearing the king’s promise, Stefan returns to Maleficent only in order to betray her, his desire for power darkening his heart. He takes her wings to the king, receiving the crown in return. A few years later, Maleficent, overcome by her hatred of Stefan and her desire for revenge, curses Stefan’s newborn daughter to an eternal sleep that will begin on her sixteenth birthday. This death-like sleep can only end if the princess receives true love’s kiss—something that Maleficent knows does not exist. But, as Maleficent watches this young princess (Elle Fanning) grow, she realizes that she made a terrible mistake: Aurora’s gentle and joyful spirit may have been the only thing that could unite the kingdom of the fairies and the kingdom of humans. Maleficent must undo the evil that she caused.

There is no profanity to speak of in this movie, and the romance goes no further than a couple of innocent kisses. This flick’s biggest concern for families is certainly the violence. Although bloodless, there are two main battles in this film that are relatively intense for a PG film. The battle scenes are comparable to the battles in Disney’s 2008 film, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian, only a bit darker and a bit more intense. This movie also has a smattering of magic throughout, which can only be expected in a Disney fantasy movie. Although you could consider the magic to be “dark” at times—especially Maleficent’s curse on Aurora—it is clearly presented as evil. Therefore, I would not consider the element of magic in this film to be any more harmful than the magic in the Narnia movies. Several frightening images also make an appearance in this movie, including a scary wolf, a fiery dragon, a character suffering from burns in several places, a pair of glowing green eyes, and the transformation of a crow into a man. Although these violent and frightening elements don’t quite earn this movie a PG-13 rating, I would definitely not recommend the film to families with children under the age of ten. However, be aware that this movie might even be too much for even some sensitive thirteen-year-olds.

On a positive note, however, Maleficent is a touching story that examines the consequences of hate and revenge, showing us the corrupting nature of a selfish love of power and the danger of acting in anger. This movie also shows the power of love. Not your average mushy boy-girl love, the love of a pretty face or of charming words. No, this flick differentiates between selfish love and selfless love, championing the latter over the former. This film paints a picture of self-emptying love—a love directed at a pure and joyful heart.

While examining the nature of true love, this movie also examines the nature of the heart. It does so by presenting Maleficent as both a hero and a villain. Like many other recently released Disney films—including Oz, the Great and Powerful and Frozen—Maleficent touches on the mysterious battle that is continually raging on within every human being. It shows how the heart has the shocking tendency toward terrible thoughts and actions. By God’s grace, however, it also has the capacity for goodness, truth, and beauty. This element of the flick is the perfect material for a family discussion on the nature of man. It reflects the words of Paul in Romans 7:15-25 when he discusses the battle between his sinful nature and the Spirit. In verses 22 and 23, Paul writes, “For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me” (NIV). Maleficent examines this mystery: how one person can be both villain and hero. It shows that the biggest battles are not fought out on a field but in the deepest parts of the heart.

Because of these redeeming elements, the brilliant acting, the exciting plot, and the beautiful cinematography—not to mention a great soundtrack—I would definitely recommend this movie, especially to families who love a bit of action and adventure and who are looking for a good movie to discuss.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sequences of sci-fi action/violence.

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Superhero Sci-Fi Action Adventure

Length: 142 minutes

Year of Release: 2014

(Parent/Teen discussion questions for this movie can be found at http://christianperspectivereviews.blogspot.com/p/the-amazing-spider-man-2-discussion.html)

In the opening scenes of the latest installment of The Amazing Spider-Man, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is graduating from high school. As he enters a new chapter in his life, Peter also contends with new challenges and new struggles. One of his biggest struggles is his relationship with his high school crush, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone). The problem is that they love being together, but the memory of Captain Stacy’s last words to Peter continually haunts poor Spidey: “You’re gonna make enemies. People will get hurt. Sometimes the people closest to you. Leave Gwen out of it.” Along with this tension in Peter’s relationship with Gwen, Peter makes some discoveries regarding the truth about his parents and faces new villains connected with the infamous Oscorp. These are no ordinary villains, however; they are friends turned foes—a fact that makes Peter’s role as Spiderman both bitter for him and dangerous for the ones he loves.

I’ve overheard some people criticizing this movie for being so unrealistic. If you go to see a movie with the word “Spiderman” in the title, however, you shouldn’t be expecting realistic. Also, it’s based on a comic book, so it won’t exactly be scientifically accurate. Nevertheless, this is a good thing to note: if you don’t like superheroes and genetically mutated villains, you will not appreciate this movie.

Along with the superheroes and genetically mutated villains comes quite a bit of violence and destruction which certainly earns this movie its PG-13 rating. The violence is no worse than it was in the previous Amazing Spider-Man, however. In addition to some disgusting bad guys and a couple gross-looking characters, this film also has some foul language and misuses of the Lord’s name. Although I would not say that these negative elements are enough to keep families from watching this movie, the language and violence are still present and would not be suitable for sensitive viewers. As a result, parents must be discerning as they consider this film for a family movie night. I certainly would not recommend the movie for kids under thirteen. 

Although I definitely found this Spider-Man to be a lot more emotional than the previous film, I actually enjoyed it more than the first movie in some ways. I appreciated that this movie showed Peter struggling with some very real problems—even while he’s battling genetically mutated Oscorp employees—and making some really tough decisions. The audience sees him try to do what is best for his girlfriend, persistently pursue the truth about his parents, and reach out to a hurting friend from his childhood, even though it ends up costing him dearly. Although this movie certainly doesn’t attain “happily ever after” for our favorite web-slinging dude, Peter does mature through his experiences and he recognizes his important role of bringing hope to the people of New York. Peter himself even learns to hold on to hope even when the future seems bleak.

Although I found the theme of hope in this film to be refreshing, the source of the hope for the characters in this movie seemed so flimsy to me. The movie tells its audience that we can find hope in our fellow humans and in ourselves when, in truth, humans are a mess and Christ alone is our source of hope. This movie recognizes that every life comes to an end, but it ignores what comes after that end, saying that the only thing that matters is what a person does in this life. As one of the characters says, “Fight for what matters to you, no matter what. Because even if you fall short, what better way is there to live?” Without God and without Christ, though, what does that even mean? What difference does it really make?

Despite the failings in the worldview of this movie, I still highly recommend this film to families with older kids. Maybe when you watch it, talk about the movie’s worldview. Bring up these questions about hope, and examine Peter Parker’s source of hope. Think about the fact that maybe Spidey needs a Superhero of his own.

The Book Thief

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for some violence and intense depiction of thematic material
Appropriate for: Ages 13+
Genre: War Drama
Length: 131 minutes
Year of Release: 2013

(Parent/Teen discussion questions for this movie can be found at http://christianperspectivereviews.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_4279.html)

The Book Thief is the story of a girl who is hungry for words. Set in the midst of a Germany filled with Nazi propaganda, the movie begins with the world on the brink of World War Two. Young Liesel Meminger (Sophie Nélisse) is the daughter of a communist woman who is at odds with the German government. For the protection of her children, Liesel’s mother brings her two children to the home of foster parents. After her brother dies during the trip, however, Liesel alone is delivered to the home of Hans and Rosa Hubermann (Geoffrey Rush and Emily Watson). Now Liesel faces the challenges that come with new parents and a new home. Her new mother has the temperament of a thunderstorm, and Liesel’s illiteracy becomes the brunt of the children’s ridicule at her new school. Her life, however, is sweetened by the friendship of her loving foster father, Hans, and her kind next-door neighbor, Rudy (Nico Liersch). When Hans discovers Liesel’s desire to learn to read, he promises to help her, and books soon become a source of beauty and wonder in her life. Not until her home becomes the refuge to a hunted Jew, however, does Liesel learn the true value of words.

Although I have done my best, this summary utterly fails to capture the essence of this touching story. Despite the death and sadness that fill this film, the screenplay paints a picture of humanity that reminds viewers of the vacuum in the human soul that is ever hungry for beauty and goodness. The film reminds us that, although all humans must die, not all humans are defeated by death. Furthermore, The Book Thief makes an attempt to communicate the idea that humans are special and that words are a powerful gift. As a character says to Liesel, “Every living thing, every leaf, every bird, is only alive because it contains the secret word for life. That’s the only difference between us and a lump of clay. A word. Words are life, Liesel.” Unfortunately, however, the film fails to distinguish humans from any other living, breathing creature. It fails to explain why words have so much power. Although The Book Thief shows viewers hope in the face of death, it does not give them a source for that hope. Without bringing God into the picture, the hope that Liesel finds in books and words is shallow and fake. Without referring to God’s powerful word in Genesis one and the “breath of life” that he breathed into mankind, the movie’s distinction between clay and humans seems superficial. The characters fail to recognize that words are not God. In truth, God made words. Therefore, words are not life; rather, the Word of God is life.

From a moviemaking standpoint, this movie is beautifully made, professionally acted, and accompanied by a breathtaking soundtrack. Philosophically, this movie dives into some incredibly deep topics, addressing them in ways that are utterly genius. The very fact that this movie deals with some nitty-gritty topics, however, makes this film inappropriate for young children. The dreary and depressing aura of the film, along with the recurring depictions of death and war, would be simply too frightening for children who are too young to understand the movie’s central themes. In addition, the presence of Death as the narrator of the film could also be disturbing and slightly gruesome to more sensitive viewers; however, this element is not overdone and, therefore, not repulsive. Although there are a few misuses of the Lord’s name in the film, I found them relatively inoffensive compared to the content of other contemporary films and, therefore, would consider language in this film to practically be a non-issue. The film also deals with the element of young love quite tastefully, not only painting a heartwarming picture of friendship but also showing viewers a beautiful image of the love of family.

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and would highly recommend it to families with teens. Whether you want to have a good cry or are looking for a movie that will spark a profitable discussion, this is definitely the movie for you.

Peter Pan (2003)

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for adventure action sequences and peril

Appropriate for: Ages 10+

Genre: Children’s Fantasy

Length: 113 minutes

Year of Release: 2003

Wendy Darling (played by Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her brothers, John and Michael, are longing for an adventure. However, in early 20^th century London, their adventures are limited to their nursery, where Wendy entertains her brothers with stories of princesses, pirates, and the worst pirate of them all, Captain James Hook. But her brothers aren’t Wendy’s only enraptured listeners. One evening, Wendy’s aunt informs her and her parents that Wendy is ready to be trained in the ways of womanhood. She must spend less time playing and imagining with her brothers, move out of the nursery and into a room of her own, and begin learning to be a lady. On her last night in the nursery, Wendy awakens to the soft crying of a boy, sitting on the floor beside her bed. She sweetly asks him why he is crying. Soon, Wendy learns that the boy’s name is Peter Pan and that he is from Neverland. He also admits that he is crying because he can’t get his shadow to stick, so she sews it onto his feet for him. Later, Peter (played by Jeremy Sumpter) reveals that he comes in the evenings to listen to her tell stories. He asks her to come back to Neverland with him so that she can tell more stories to him and the Lost Boys. She asks if she can bring her brothers along, and Peter agrees. With the help of a little fairy dust and lots of happy thoughts, the Darling children and Peter fly away to Neverland, where Wendy, John, and Michael are caught up in the exciting conflict between the wonderful Peter Pan and the absolutely evil Captain Hook. After several adventures, Wendy realizes that she is forgetting more and more about her parents every hour that goes by. She now must decide if she will stay with Peter, who can only give her the friendship of a boy, or return home to her parents, who love her dearly, before they forget her as she has nearly forgotten them. Will she stay with Peter in the land where she will never grow up, or will she return to a place where becoming a woman is inevitable?

Peter Pan, although a fun family movie, certainly earns its PG rating. This movie involves some frightening elements, including very ugly and creepy pirates throughout and a scene involving evil mermaids. Although ugliness and creepiness is what you can expect from pirates, these mermaids aren’t your average sweet, fish-like ladies. In fact, these disturbing mutant-looking beings, with their fish teeth and webbed hands, reminded me more of The Pirates of the Caribbean mermaids than Disney mermaids. One of the creatures even tries to drown another character. Even I found the mermaids, and some of the pirates, to be creepy and disturbing – and I am sure young children would agree with me. Another scary part is the scene in the Black Castle. Frightening carvings line the walls of the castle, and skeletons are chained to rocks inside the castle. In addition, Hook’s pirates gag three of the children characters and leave them dangling from a rock in the Black Castle, where they are supposed to drown when the tide rises. At random times throughout the movie, the evil Captain Hook frequently kills members of his crew for irritating him. I found these killings to be unnecessary, especially for a PG film, and slightly disturbing, although they did serve to display Hook’s vile nature. Some other scary parts of the movie included the fight scenes between the Lost Boys and the pirates (particularly the duels between Peter Pan and Hook), the deaths of a couple fairies, a quick image of Hook’s handless arm without the hook, and a red-eyed, Hook-hungry crocodile. Because of the numerous scary parts of this movie, I would not recommend this film to children under the age of ten or to older, more sensitive children. 

In addition to the scary parts of the movie, Peter Pan also involved a bit of (clean) romance between some of the child characters. In one of the scenes, Princess Tiger Lily accidentally catches John and Michael in one of her traps. As they hang upside down in the air, their nightshirts flip down over their heads, uncovering their bare bodies, but the screen only shows their backsides. Later, Tiger Lily kisses John in thanks for saving her and Michael from a pirate. The major romance, however, is between Peter Pan and Wendy. At the beginning of the story, Wendy’s aunt tells the young girl and her parents that Wendy has “a woman’s chin” with a “hidden kiss” on her lips, even though Wendy is not even thirteen. Wendy’s father even urges his daughter to “grow up.” On top of these promptings from her elders, Wendy wakes up one night to see a boy, who can apparently fly, hovering over her bed. The boy immediately flies away when he realizes Wendy is awake. Later, Wendy’s teacher at school catches her drawing a picture of herself in bed with the strange boy flying above her. The boy returns the next night, introducing himself as Peter Pan. Wendy appears quite spellbound by the dashing boy and tries twice to give him a kiss, but fails. When Wendy and her brothers arrive in Neverland with Peter, the Lost Boys, who call Peter their father, ask Wendy to be their mother. Although the situation sounds awkward, it turns out to be more like children playing house than anything. However, the “crush” between Wendy and Peter continues throughout the rest of the movie. In the end, all they do is share one kiss. The romance, therefore, is kept clean, although I found it to be rather sad that the relationship between Wendy and Peter was forced to exceed a simple, healthy friendship. 

To adult viewers, the relationship between Wendy and Peter can serve as a reminder that children should be allowed to be children. After all, being a child is a big part of the process of growing up, and forced maturity is as damaging to a child as pulling the petals of a rose apart is to a flower. Wendy suffered from a lot of distraction and heartbreak because her aunt introduced her to a part of growing up that she was not ready for. Her attention toward feelings of love even slightly marred her relationship with Peter. While the Bible does encourage believers to be spiritually mature (Hebrews 5:12-14 and 1 Corinthians 13:11-12), Jesus also encouraged believers to assume the faith and innocence of a little child (Matthew 11:25, 18:3-6, and 19:14). Overall, I think Peter Pan effectively reminds audiences of the need for kids to be kids as long as necessary. The film can also spark some valuable conversations between parents and adolescents about growing up and handling crushes.

Another valuable lesson that this movie can teach viewers is that everyone needs love – even mischievous, twelve-year-old boys who never want to grow up and always want to have fun. Peter Pan probably looked to Wendy for affection because he did not have a mother and father of his own to love him. Similarly, Wendy may have looked to Peter for love because of her slightly dissatisfying relationship with her father. At the climax of the movie, I believe it was good of Wendy to show Peter that she cared about him even though she didn’t agree with all of his decisions, but the kind of love that Peter really needed was the love of a mother and father. 

Besides being appropriate material for family discussion, Peter Pan’s engaging storyline, fairy-tale feel, exciting conflict between good and evil, and absence of foul language makes it a fairly decent family movie. However, because of the violence, creepy scenes, and undercurrent of romance, I advise parents to be wary of letting younger and more sensitive children see this movie. No matter what the age of the child is, though, parents should be sure to discuss this movie as a family. Overall, I do suggest Peter Pan as a decent family flick, but I would not rank it as high as some more wholesome fantasy movies such as Nanny McPhee, Nanny McPhee Returns, or the Narnia films.

Soul Surfer

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG for an intense accident sequence and some thematic material.

Appropriate for: Girls ages 10+

Genre: Biography Sports Drama

Length: 100 minutes

Year of Release: 2011

Soul Surfer is the true and touching story of a teenaged blonde, Bethany Hamilton, who lives in Hawaii with her Christian parents and two older brothers. As a toddler, Bethany was taught to surf by her parents, and, as children, she and her best friend Alana spent more time wet than they did dry. Now a teenager, Bethany’s true passion is surfing, and not only does she love it, but she is really good at it too. She believes she was born to surf. But when Bethany becomes the victim of a shark attack and loses her left arm in the process, she begins to wonder how this could be a part of God’s plan for her. Over the next few months, Bethany discovers the value of perseverance and the importance of trusting that God works out everything “for the good of those who love him,” even though her trials may not make sense at the time.

Now, before I get into all of the things that I loved about this movie, I can’t, in all honesty, avoid the one big problem this movie has: bikinis. While it might be expected in a movie about a teenage girl living in Hawaii, I must say that this movie has way too many shots involving underdressed girls, both young and old. Because of this reason, and this reason only, I do NOT recommend this movie for boys. However, this is a healthy movie for girls – a perfect mother-daughter flick and a great movie for a girls’ slumber party – but it is the wrong movie for men and boys to watch. 

Other than this issue, I found very little to criticize about this movie and bucket loads to praise. This is one of those rare and valuable movies that dare to even mention a Christian faith in God, and it is refreshing to see a “Christian” movie acted, directed, and produced so professionally. While some of the acting in a couple of the minor roles could have been improved, AnnaSophia Robb (as Bethany Hamilton) and the supporting lead actors give an excellent performance and portray their characters with great effectiveness. 

There are some very powerful messages in this movie that really touch my heart as a viewer, especially since this movie is based on a true story. Some of the lessons I was able to glean from this movie included the importance of perseverance, trusting in God’s ultimate plan, and having joy in the midst of sorrow. The part of this movie that touches me the most is the amount of trust in God and the overwhelming joy that this young girl has even though she lost so much. 

It is also cool to see how Bethany comes to realize that God put her in the position she was in so that she could reach out to people that she would never have been able to reach before. By the end of the movie, Bethany realizes that the loss of her arm has given her the opportunity to share God’s love and greatness with more people than she possibly could have reached if she had never lost her arm. “I've had the chance to embrace more people with one arm than I ever could with two.”

Besides the bikini problem, the shark attack scene can be a little scary and there is a lot of blood involved, but nothing extremely gory is shown. Because of this, though, I would not recommend this movie for kids ten and under. There is also a part in the movie where Bethany goes to a night surfing party with her friend Alana without her mom or dad’s permission. Although her mother ends up finding out and talks to her daughter about it, I don’t recall Bethany ever getting any sort of punishment for her actions. Overall, however, Bethany’s relationship with her parents is very healthy, which is quite refreshing after so many movies where being friends with your parents is seen as weird or childish. 

To wrap this up, I would like to stress that this is a wonderful and inspiring movie for girls, but definitely out of the question for boys who truly desire to follow Christ with their heart, soul, mind, and strength. To all those mothers out there, I highly suggest renting or buying this movie and watching it with your girls. There are some very powerful messages in there that can not be portrayed so well in any other way.

At the Back of the North Wind

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

Appropriate for: All ages

Genre: Children’s Novel

Length: 342 pages

Year of Publication: 1871

George MacDonald’s Victorian children’s novel, At the Back of the North Wind, is set in Victorian London and is about a sweet young boy named Diamond, the son of a poor coachman and a loving, sensitive mother – both of whom care for him very much. Although Diamond and his family are very good and honest people, their lives are filled with hardship and disappointment, sickness and hunger. 

At the beginning of the story, Diamond has his first encounter with the North Wind, a mysterious yet kind “spirit” in the form of a beautiful lady with long, flowing, black hair. Throughout the book, North Wind brings Diamond along with her on several adventures, during which she generally performs good deeds and helps people. But she also performs some terrible tasks – one of which culminates in the sinking of a ship. Although such deeds seem appalling at first sight, giving the reader a sense of uncertainty regarding the integrity of the character called “North Wind,” the reader soon discovers that even the awful things that North Wind does, such as the sinking of the ship, always lead to something good in the end. 

During the entirety of the book, Diamond does many things to help others – even those who are not very kind to him. His kind actions and words are a good example to those around him and make him a favorite among nearly everyone he meets. But, sadly, the young boy struggles quite a bit with poor health. At one point when he is very sick, Diamond is again visited by the North Wind, who takes him on a journey to a beautiful land “at her back,” where he seems to stay for years and years, when in fact he is there for only a week. This land is a country without pain or death – a place filled with pleasant songs and lit, not by the sun, but by a "still, rayless light." After seven days in this country, Diamond returns to his home – but, throughout the rest of the story, he longs to return to the country at the back of the North Wind. It turns out, though, that the place he visited was only a shadow of the real country at the North Wind’s back. At the very end of the book, Diamond dies and the narrator communicates to the readers that Diamond is finally at the real country at the back of the North Wind. A place void of the kind of suffering and hardships he experienced during his life on earth.

This children’s book contains many valuable lessons about serving others, unconditional love, and not being afraid. It also touches on several deep theological issues, such as how God uses even bad things to fulfill His good will. However, because this book was written in the 19^th century, it is somewhat lacking in plot and structure. This is the type of book that was meant for parents to read to their children a chapter at a time as they put them to sleep, so it is completely lacking in cliffhangers, and there isn’t very much conflict in the story at all. I guess it could be described as a bunch of stories, mostly about Diamond, within a story. A lot of these stories are pretty good, but one rather long fairy-tale called Little Daylight that is told by one of the characters is definitely my favorite part of the book. 

There are a couple of things to be aware of about this book. I think it is prudent to mention that there is a part in this book where Diamond’s drunken neighbor is said to have beaten his wife. Another part of the story follows Diamond as he goes into a rough part of town where he runs into some people who try to steal his jacket. The only other thing to be aware of about this book is that some of the material regarding North Wind can, at times, be a little scary for young children. But, it is good for readers to be aware of the fact that, although North Wind does some seemingly bad things, they ultimately turn out for the best. Also, it is helpful to be reminded that the death of Diamond at the end of the book is not sad, but happy, because Diamond is able to reach his true home at the back of the North Wind. 

Although slow moving and a little strange at parts, this book is very good, wholesome, and appropriate for all ages – kids and adults alike. So, I give this 19^th century children’s novel 4 out of 5 stars. Even if you are an adult, I hope you take the time to read and analyze this book for yourself some day. It is complete with many very cute stories – but also chock-full of interesting theological topics.

Source Code

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG-13 for some violence, disturbing images, and language

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Sci-Fi Action Thriller

Length: 93 minutes

Year of Release: 2011

On what seems to be an ordinary day in Illinois, Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) suddenly wakes up in a train heading towards downtown Chicago. Colter has no idea where he is or what he is doing in the train. He becomes even more confused when the young lady sitting across from him begins to call him Sean and starts talking to him as if she knows him. But almost as soon as Colter discovers that he is, in fact, in the body of another man, the entire train explodes, and he awakens yet again, this time strapped into a harness at a top secret military base. 

After several minutes of frantic confusion, Colter is told by a woman named Goodwin – who seems to be his commander, but whom he doesn’t remember ever meeting before – that he is part of an anti-terrorist mission to track down the bomber of the train he had, seconds before, been riding in. He also discovers that his confused experience in the train had been a re-living of the memory of one of the explosion’s victims. Goodwin tells Colter that he will continually be sent back into the 8-minute memory of this victim until he discovers who the bomber is. According to Goodwin and an elderly man who seems to be her boss, he won’t be able to save the people on the train who died in the explosion, since the event had already occurred. However, he will prevent the bomber from later bombing a larger section of Chicago, saving thousands of lives in the process. Still very confused and disgruntled, Colter is sent back into the short-term memory of the dead man to find the bomber. But soon, Colter begins to sense that something isn’t quite right. Before long, he will have to face the gruesome and uncanny fact looming behind the already-bizarre mission.

If you liked Inception or The Adjustment Bureau, you will probably like Source Code. This movie is another one of those great, out of the ordinary, sci-fi action movies that keeps you on the edge of your seat and your brain spinning as you are plunged into a score of obscure events and ideas. Even as the credits roll, the viewer is left with numerous questions regarding the previous 93 minutes of the movie. Along with its exciting and original plot, this movie encourages the audience to make the most of your life. It also champions the values of living in harmony with each other and giving of your self for the sake of others. 

Unfortunately, as is the case with the movies Inception, The Adjustment Bureau, and most other sci-fi films, Source Code presents several off-tune theological ideas, having to do mostly with the condition of man after death. Also, since this film is not a Christian film, the idea of “making every second count” had more to do with “eat, drink, and be merry” than it did with fulfilling our true purpose in life, which is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. This movie also contains quite a bit of foul language and a few rather disturbing images, not to mention a lot of blood, violence, and a few explosions. 

Although the violence and profanity in this movie are rather heavy, this movie’s originality and the several good messages it presents definitely outweigh any negatives this movie may have. Just for that, I’m giving Source Code an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars. Still, this movie is only suitable for more mature viewers and is definitely out of the question for any child below 13. As always, this movie can be the perfect discussion starter on topics such as the meaning of life and life after death, so make the most of this opportunity and “make every second count!”

Les Miserables

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

MPAA Rating: PG-13 for violence and some sexual content

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Drama

Length: 129 minutes

Year of Release: 1998

This adaptation of Victor Hugo’s beloved 1862 French novel is a story about justice, grace, and love. The story takes place in France during the early 1800’s and begins by introducing us to the burdened Jean Valjean. Valjean is an ex-convict who has finally been released from prison after completing 19 years of imprisonment in Toulon. He is bitter and angry from the years spent in prison, but, by the grace of God shown through a kind and wise bishop, he is given a chance to start his life over. Choosing to take hold of this opportunity to be made new, Valjean changes his ways, and, as a result, becomes the mayor of a factory town in France by the end of several years. He has finally turned his back on the anger and bitterness of his past. But, when a familiar face shows up, it seems as if his past will drag him down yet again. Throughout the rest of the story, Valjean continually strives to do the right thing, yet is constantly hunted down by the one person who still knows of his dark past. 

Although I have never read Les Miserables, I have seen a very old film adaptation of the book and have also listened to the Focus on the Family Radio Theatre presentation of this classic. I am a huge fan of the Radio Theatre version, and, while I found the old film version to have basically the same plot details as the Radio Theatre presentation, which was my first exposure to Les Miserables, I did not like the old movie at all. So, I was excited to discover that there was a newer film version of this story. 

Upon watching this 1998 version, I found that it turned out to be a good adaptation – but, unfortunately, not a perfect adaptation. For instance, this movie is only a little over 2 hours, when, in all honesty, no movie can capture the complete essence of this story with out being much under 4 hours long. Because it is so short, this version cut out a lot of plot details, twists, and turns that I remember from listening to the Radio Theatre version. 

Although I have not read the book, there are also a few things about some of the characters that deviated a bit from what I remember about them from listening to the Radio Theatre. The first one I should note is the relationship between Valjean and Fantine. While, in the Radio Theatre version, all I get from their relationship is a sense of grace and pity on the part of Valjean and a feeling of the wonder of forgiveness and mercy on the part of Fantine, I feel that this movie made their relationship just a little deeper than it needed to be by giving their relationship a slightly romantic feel. Although this deviation certainly does not lead to anything inappropriate in the movie, I still find it to be unnecessary. 

The other character difference that I would like to note briefly is in the character of Cosette. In the Radio Theatre production, Cosette has a sweet and humble disposition and loves Valjean as if he is her father - never questioning his protection of her or his love for her. In this movie, Cosette is depicted with a slightly more rebellious attitude, and, instead of caring for the man who has always been like a father to her, she begins to question who he really is. She even starts doubting Valjean’s motives in sheltering her so much instead of choosing to accept the fact that he is just caring for her as a father would.

All in all, however, my family and I really enjoyed this movie and I think it is a beautiful adaptation of the beautiful story. The acting is great - made even better by the performance of Liam Neeson, who does a wonderful job portraying the conflicted Valjean. The best parts, though, is how this movie illustrates the grace of God in a very tangible way and how it contains some very important lessons on forgiveness, turning from sin, and self-sacrifice. However, this movie does contain some violence (having to do with the student uprising of June 1832), slight profanity, and some material involving prostitution. Usually, though, the worst this gets is only some rather low-cut dresses. However, there is one part that I warn you to be careful of while watching this movie. It is a 10-second segment, starting at the 30:40 mark, during which the prostitute is laying in her bed, very underdressed. So, I would advise viewers to simply “turn their eyes away from worthless things” and just look away during that part. 

Taking everything into consideration, I think Les Miserables is definitely worth the watch, as it is filled with several important life lessons and an entertaining plot. This movie’s PG-13 rating is very appropriate, so I would not recommend this to anyone under the age of 13. But this is the perfect movie for a parents and teens to watch for family movie night. Just keep in mind the few things I mentioned above and be sure to discuss them with your children and/or spouse if you are watching it as a family. Enjoy!

This Present Darkness

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

Appropriate for: Ages 13+

Genre: Christian Thriller Novel

Length: 376 pages

Year of Publication: 1986

In his best-selling novel, This Present Darkness, Frank Peretti draws you into a story of a battle between good and evil, darkness and light, within a town saturated with sin. But this isn’t just any story about the good people of a town fighting crime and injustice – this story goes to a higher level. Peretti explores the idea given in Ephesians 6:12, “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” 

The small town of Ashton seems like it’s covered in some sort of strange disease. When the local newspaper reporter gets arrested on false charges after witnessing what seemed to be a secret meeting, her boss gets suspicious that the police were trying to cover something up by arresting his reporter and decides to begin his own investigation. Peretti’s novel follows two men on their quest to save the town: the owner of the local Ashton newspaper, Marshall Hogan, and Hank Busche, the pastor of the little Ashton Community Church. Hogan is in search of answers as to the cause of all the strange occurrences in the town, while Busche’s business is fighting for God’s will to be done and His truth to prevail. Soon, however, they both find that they are in something deeper than either of them expected: Their town is one of many victims of a New Age plot that plans to take over the entire human race. But that’s not all. Hogan and Busche discover that their enemies aren’t just freaky college professors or unhappy churchgoers – there’s an unseen, demonic force behind all the evil, causing the diseased nature of the town. However, although Hogan and Busche don’t know it, they too have a spiritual force fighting on their side – against the demons – for the victory of God and His truth. 

This Present Darkness is one of those books that is very hard to put down. The plot is fast-moving and entertaining – and while some of the technology and such described in the book are outdated now, 25 years after publication, the book itself is certainly not outdated, but a very worthwhile read. 

There are a few things to be looking out for while reading this book. 1) The descriptions of the demons. These can turn out to be pretty grotesque if your imagination is graphic enough, which also applies to 2) the violence portrayed. A suicide and murder are mentioned, and the aftermath is described in some detail. Also, at one point in the book, one of the main characters is attacked and beaten up. 3) There are a couple parts that have to do with people who are possessed by demons, and that can be pretty freaky as well… and especially be aware of the part where one character almost commits suicide because a demon takes control of her. 4) If you are reading this book as a family or if your son or daughter is reading it, you should also be aware of the New Age ideas expressed by the “bad guys,” the eastern mysticism material, and the meditations done by some of the members of the New Age corporation. Be sure to discuss this concept with your children and explain to them what is wrong with the New Age worldview and how it disagrees with what the Bible says. 5) Lastly, there are a few references to rape and adultery that you should be aware of, and a couple of the “bad guys” seem to have relationships outside of marriage. However, nothing is described beyond a kiss or a hug, and everything is kept appropriate. 

I think it is proper to note that nearly all of the “bad things” noted in this book are used to illustrate the depravity of sinful mankind and how much they are in need of God. Such actions are put in a bad light, and the New Age beliefs of the corporation trying to take over the town are definitely downgraded, as they should be, while the line between good and evil is not at all questioned. One of the things I particularly liked about this book was the emphasis put on prayer and how powerful it is. This book was also cool because it gets the reader thinking about the spiritual realm and how real it is. Ephesians 6:12: “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” 

Overall, I found this book to be very enjoyable and appropriate. It supports the Christian worldview, and it even teaches readers a very valuable lesson about prayer. However, I wouldn’t recommend this book to anyone under the age of 13 – but even kids above 13 should still discuss parts of this book with their parents. Just keep in mind the few things I mentioned above and be sure to discuss them with your children and/or spouse if you are reading it as a family.