Many Thanks to the Christy Award Judges. (Updated. What *is* Christian fiction, anyway?)
Many thanks, again, to those who chose the nominees for this year's Christy Awards. I'm told it is a rare honor to have a book nominated in two categories, and this year, Auralia's Colors was nominated for Best First Novel and "Visionary" (best fantasy novel). I am still recovering from the surprise.
(UPDATE: The judges decided that Stephen R. Lawhead's Scarlet was the year's best Christian fantasy novel, and that The Stones Cry Out by Sibella Giorello was the best first novel in Christian fiction. Congratulations to Lawhead and to Giorello.)
It was an encouragement to see Auralia's Colors included alongside books by such admirable writers.
It was also quite surprising. I don't consider Auralia's Colors to be "Christian fiction" — in fact, in interviews I've insisted that it did not really make much sense in such a narrow category. Don't get me wrong: I'm thrilled when Christians discover Auralia's Colors. But frankly, I didn't write it with that audience in mind. I wrote it hoping that it would be read and enjoyed by the same wide range of people who appreciate The Hobbit, or Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, or Bridge to Terabithia, or A Wrinkle in Time. All of those books were written by Christian writers, but I've never heard them described as "Christian fiction," and I don't think any of them ever won a Christian book award.
What makes a book "Christian fiction"? The truth that it reveals? The beauty of its craftsmanship? The publisher identified on the spine of the book? The author's worldview? The "message" of the story?
I know of Christian novelists who win prestigious awards for their literary achievement, but they're ignored in the realm of "Christian fiction." What would have qualified them? A religious publisher? Some kind of deliberate attempt within the story to persuade the reader that Jesus is Lord?
I've asked this question before, and I'm still curious, so I'll raise it again: Where is the recognition for Sara Zarr's Story of a Girl, which was a fantastic first novel that was nominated for the National Book Award? There's already a film in the works, developed by well-known, immensely talented artists. Sara speaks openly about her Christian faith in interviews. Was it the fact that she wasn't published by a Christian press that kept her out of the running? I'm rather baffled. I don't get it.
I'm glad that the judges appreciated the book, and I'm grateful. I was especially excited for the folks at WaterBrook Press, who took a gamble on a rather unusual book, and who helped me shape my first novel and share it with the world. They deserve all the credit they get and more.
But I'm no closer to understanding the distinction. And I hope Auralia's Colors will be assessed with the same tough standards as any work of fiction in the general 'Fantasy' section, and not explained as some kind of particular, "religious" fiction.
Anyway... whatever the thinking was behind the scenes, I am grateful for the vote of encouragement from the Christy judges.
Browser, 6/11: Radiohead w/lasers!; My Chat with Kim Ketola; "WALL-E"; "Where the Wild Things Are"; Outlandish Outlander; Sixpence None the Richer; E.B. White
Radiohead laser show
The new Radiohead video didn't use any cameras. It used lasers.
And now, I challenge you to fill in the blank with something that would catch everyone by surprise. For their next video... Radiohead won't use any cameras. They'll use __________________.
Thanks to my good friend Henrik Lind for the link!
-
Hellboy 2, WALL-E, Kung Fu Panda, Get Smart, and My Kid Could Paint That
My latest live-radio chat about new releases with Kim Ketola on "Along the Way" is now available for download.
-
"And a little robot will lead them"
In the Washington Post, Michael Gerson praises WALL•E:
"Wall-E" is partly an environmental parable, but its primary point is moral. The movie argues that human beings, aided by technology, can become imprisoned by their consumption. The pursuit of the latest style leads to conformity. The pursuit of pleasure displaces the deeper enjoyments of affection and friendship. The pursuit of our rhinestone desires manages to obscure our view of the stars.
...
And beyond these thoughtful paradoxes, this animated summer movie dares to raise a principle central to our humanity. People -- children and others -- require constant reminding that they are more than the sum of their wants. And in this task, a little robot will lead them.
-
Can Spike Jonze save Where the Wild Things Are?
The movie's troubles continue. What a shame. I have such high hopes for it, with Jonze directing and Eggers writing it.
Something has gone very wrong with "Where the Wild Things Are," the much-anticipated Spike Jonze adaptation of Maurice Sendak's classic children's book. The $80-million film, with a script by literary cool-guy Dave Eggers, was filmed largely in the second half of 2006 in Australia. It was originally slated for release this October but got pushed back to the fall of 2009. Last week it disappeared entirely from the Warner Bros. release schedule, a sign of continuing troubles.
-
Spacemen, Vikings, and Dragons!
The remake of Outlander is bringing Jim Ca-Jesus back, and he's starring opposite John "I'm in Every Franchise" Hurt and... Eomer! Here's the trailer for what looks like it could be the most unintentionally funny movie of the year.
I wonder what this trailer will look like to those folks who think that Jim Caviezel really is some kind of prophet. Here he goes once again, lonely, persecuted, misunderstood... and saving the world!
-
Life After "Kiss Me"
So good to see Sixpence back at it.
-
Charlotte's Web-spinner
The Writer's Almanac on E.B. White:
Today is the birthday of the man who gave us Charlotte's Web, E.B. (Elwin Brooks) White, born in Mount Vernon, New York (1899). He was a writer for many years for The New Yorker magazine. He later moved with his wife to a farmhouse in Maine. E.B. White wrote, "Just to live in the country is a full-time job. You don't have to do anything. The idle pursuit of making a living is pushed to one side, where it belongs, in favor of living itself, a task of such immediacy, variety, beauty, and excitement that one is powerless to resist its wild embrace."
For all his love of the country, E.B. White is also the author of a classic about New York City, Here is New York, which people still read today.
Film Forum and My Review of "Hellboy II: The Golden Army"
This is collection of reviews that I found interesting and helpful. The collection will be revised as I find more notable assessments online. Feel free to submit more reviews, or even your own, in the comments below.
HELLBOY II: THE GOLDEN ARMY
With his newest fantasy, Guillermo Del Toro has earned a place at the table with Jim Henson, George Lucas, Peter Jackson, and Hayao Miyazaki as one of the big screen's most imaginative inventors of new worlds. Hellboy II: The Golden Army is far superior to Hellboy in many ways. In fact, it's my favorite comic book movie of the year so far.
Reader Mail: "The Shack"; Sixpence's Christmas; "My Kid Could Paint That"; "Sex and the City " Claims Another Victim.
Ted writes:
What's your opinion of The Shack? I'm disturbed by the fact that so many Christians are buying a book that portrays God as a woman. It's dangerous to expose ourselves to books that preach a false theology.
Stephenie Meyer's "Twilight" Series: Good for Teens? For Anybody?
The books of Stephenie Meyer are appearing on bookshelves everywhere I turn. And her latest, The Host, is on Anne's nightstand. There's a movie of Twilight on the way. Vampire sagas are a dime a dozen these days, and it'll take some serious persuasion to convince me to give this a try. Even Joss Whedon's bloodsuckers never made a fan of me. But I am getting curious. What do you think of Meyer's work?
Christ and Pop Culture has a commentary up today.
Robert Downey Jr. is... Sherlock Holmes.
What was rumor is now confirmed. Robert Downey Jr. will play Sherlock Holmes for director Guy Ritchie, reports Variety.
Hmmmm.
I love Downey, Jr. But ... Holmes? Really?
Who would *you* cast as Holmes?
Steven Greydanus on Hellboy and Other Movie Demons
Steven D. Greydanus prepares the audience for Hellboy 2: The Golden Army by reminding us that wicked monsters may point us toward the truth... and that sometimes it's easier for us to comprehend demons than angels.
"Believe it or not, he's the good guy."
So proclaims the tagline for Hellboy II: The Golden Army, opening in theaters this week.
Well, he definitely needs explaining. With his horns —filed to stumps or not — as well as his red skin, goatee and tail, Hellboy overtly embodies universally recognizable cultural iconography of the enemy of mankind in the great war of powers and principalities.
This imagery isn't limited to Christianity. George Lucas claimed to have included Hindu and Greek mythology in researching the look of the similarly demonic-looking Darth Maul. ("A lot of evil characters have horns," Lucas told Bill Moyers in 1999).
Still, Hellboy's world "like those of other recent supernatural-themed films including Constantine and Ghost Rider" seems significantly shaped by Christian culture.
WALL-E magic. Also: "Wit" and "Passion" and Painful Movies
No, they caaaaan't take that awayyyy from me....
I'm loving the raves for WALL-E.
The first and the second time I saw the film, I came away saying, "I can't review this movie. Not yet. Because I can't explain the power it has over me. I honestly don't know how Andrew Stanton or his collaborators do it."
I hate the cliche... but it is, indeed, movie magic at its best.
A few of my friends and colleagues don't get it on this one. That's fine. No movie is perfect. I'm not spirited away by some of their favorites either. No matter how much I admire, say, Lawrence of Arabia or Citizen Kane or Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, they don't move me the way it might someone else. And no amount of my nit-picking about the reasons *why* it doesn't enthrall me would change it for them.
Heck, I wouldn't want to steal their joy.
In the same way, pointing out the fact that there *might* be an implausibility or two in this SCI-FI FAIRY TALE ABOUT A ROBOT WHO FALLS IN LOVE is unlikely to leave even a scratch on my admiration.
So I'm trying to avoid getting bogged down into back-and-forth debates about this one because, frankly, experiences like this are very rare for me. I think back to The Black Stallion. The Iron Giant. My Neighbor Totoro. E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial. Finding Nemo. These are timeless movies that deliver so many occasions of enchantment, surprise, beauty, and meaning that I feel rejuvenated every time I see them.
So I find myself nodding and cheering when I read further observations about the film's triumphs. Like these:
[T]his animated marvel is most epic when operating on a small, personal scale, ultimately earning its esteemed place in the Pixar canon not only through top-notch CG, expertly orchestrated chase sequences, and provocative pro-green viewpoints, but also through its depiction of love's capacity for making us more than what we might otherwise be.
Brendon Bouzard in Reverse Shot:
WALL-E "is an immaculately executed character, a necessarily endearing emcee to what is at times the grimmest American comedy in years. As much as I would love to equivocate about the film's reification of gender (yes, the robots have genders, even though the closest they desire to sexual contact is hand-holding) or its satirical barbs at the overstimulated, grotesquely obese humans who lazily populate the spaceship Axiom, a Guy Debord hell of flashing screens and corporate fascism, I find it hard to do so. Its successes are simply too overwhelming."
The film's original premise is fascinating because the "world out there" that the little robot dreams of is not a faraway place on another planet but a faraway place that used to exist right here, on Earth. He can hear recordings of Louis Armstrong, but plants and companions are as unreachable as Pluto. For exploring that idea at length, with brevity and grace, WALL-E is a noble experiment, and even with an action climax and an abbreviated ending, it's likely to be lingering in the mind when Cars has long since faded.
I'll be honest with you... at this point, I wouldn't have the balls to work for Pixar. It's the greatest work environment I've ever visited, Shangri-f*%$#-la, an artist's dream job, but god... imagine being the dude who ends the streak. How can this dream machine go forever? Somebody, sometime, is making THE BLACK CAULDRON, and you're just gonna have to deal with it when it happens.
Disney stumbled. Disney arguably fell for a while. There was a point where the brand didn't mean anything anymore. Pre-Katzenberg/Eisner, Disney Feature Animation was pretty much on its last legs, getting ready to sell off the drawing tables. So it can happen. It's possible for a streak to end and things can change. Can Pixar really avoid it forever? Can they really keep this sytem of theirs, this community, alive and thriving and productive?
Can you imagine? "Here's my movie. I'm very proud of it. ... Oh. Wow. You've made... uh... ROCK-A-DOODLE." Seriously. That's my worst nightmare. To be the guy who made Pixar's ROCK-A-DOODLE. Talk about Nixonian flopsweat. Dear god. I mean, I'm just enough of a hack to do it. And I'd never realize I'd done it until after the fact.
The good part of the system is that they would catch it. Pixar isn't afraid to kill movies that aren't working, and that's important.
...
WALL-E has generated a fair amount of controversy and conversation and opinion pieces already, and it’s being discussed in a way that would indicate it’s being taken seriously. People love the love story, but when it comes to the fate of humanity onboard the Axiom, people seem divided in how they react, or even in what they think it “means.” Some viewers want the first half of the film, but at feature length, with nothing involving other characters. I think if anything, that must make Andrew Stanton proud. People engage with the characters of WALL-E and EVE so completely that they’d rather just spend the entire time in the theater just watching them. Gotta respect that.
...
For a film like WALL-E to tackle themes like that and still somehow entertain and move you with grace and elegance is a real master’s class in pop entertainment. The closing credits to the film were unexpectedly moving, telling additional story while also detailing the development of human art from cave drawings to computer animation. It’s a big idea, and it works perfectly, accompanied by a great new Peter Gabriel song.
Overall, having seen WALL-E three times now, I get the feeling I’m just starting to appreciate just how nuanced and rich a picture it is. Pixar remains stumble-free, but more than that, they appear determined to expand our notion of what “mainstream entertainment” is, and I’m just glad that I get to live and work at the moment they’re producing these classics so I can enjoy them as vital, current films and not just ossified classics. I’m sure I’ll be discussing this one more at the end of the year, but for now, I just look forward to seeing it again soon.
-
Hurts so good
Here's Roger Ebert talking about the extraordinary Mike Nichols movie Wit, and why it was too painful for him to watch.
Are there any movies that you find too painful to watch?
For me, there's The Passion of the Christ.
I endured it once all the way to the end, but only because I had to. Christ means too much to me, and his suffering is on my mind a great deal. Watching him bear each blow — and Gibson goes to extremes to ensure that we understand the damage done by each variety of whip and weapon — is just too excruciating. No, it's not that I'm unwilling to meditate on the sufferings of Christ. But the movie is so preoccupied with the physical intricacies of flogging and flaying that after about twenty minutes I find it difficult to think at all, or to take anything to heart. The art of the gospels gives me what I need, and the traditions of sacred art have given me myriad interpretations to consider. I don't believe Christ wants his sufferings to burden me so greatly that I lose all touch with the joy of his resurrection, or that I lose my zeal to serve him for what he's done. That's why I doubt that I will ever watch Gibson's film again.
(And then there's the fact that the musical score steals so severely from my favorite film score, Peter Gabriel's brilliant soundtrack to The Last Temptation of Christ, that I felt distracted and annoyed throughout the film.)
But far be it from me to condemn the film. It is a work of art, and one that has moved and changed and challenged many viewers in rewarding ways. My reaction is personal, and my avoidance of the film does not have much to do with anything being wrong with the film. It's just that the emotional and spiritual turmoil it causes for me does more harm than good.
Films about infidelity often turn my stomach, and I usually avoid them. I know too many people whose lives have been ruined by such destructive behavior, and it's hard for me to watch characters devastated by such choices onscreen. But I appreciate and defend the filmmakers' freedom to make these films and tell these stories, because audiences need them. It's a subject that should be explored in art.
And if the filmmakers treat the subject of infidelity lightly, I'm likely to write a rant instead of a review. (This is what keeps me from loving Shakespeare in Love. The film wants us to ignore the fact that, beneath this inspiring romance, Shakespeare is already married, and he's abandoned his wife and child.) But far be it from me to condemn the film, which is rich in wonderful moments and cleverly phrased insights.
There are other films I won't watch because I am pained by the artist's indulgence or carelessness or lack of concern for beauty and meaning. In Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino was too cavalier with human cruelty. I saw it several times when it opened, partly because I was fascinated with Tarantino's talent for snappy dialogue. But now I avoid it. It leaves me feeling battered and bruised. Sure, it exhibits remarkable style and excellent performances, but I'm not entertained by artists who seem to enjoy seeing how far he can torture an audience before they cry 'Uncle.' (On the other hand, I'm a big fan of Pulp Fiction, which is similarly intense, but the storytelling is compelling and thought-provoking.) Heck, most movies these days fail to interest me because they're so cheaply made... they insult the senses and the mind.
But I appreciate Ebert's reminder that each moviegoer is different, and sometimes an excellent work of art may hit too close to home. That's why I try to avoid saying "This movie is great for everybody" or "This movie is utterly worthless."
You? Is there anything besides bad moviemaking that will make you turn off a movie?
10 Ways to Be a Better Film Critic
Evan Derrick's "10 Ways To Be a Better Film Critic": Part One and Part Two.
This is quite a read, and I like a lot of what Derick's said here.
And hey! He even praises my friend Greg Wright!
Think about your favorite film critics. What makes their reviews stand out? What ruins a good movie review?
And if you want to get personal and tell me how my reviews might improve, feel free to comment. I'd like to know. (But no, I won't necessarily post those. I'll keep them to ponder.)
Rod Dreher Gets WALL-E
Woo hoo!
Rod Dreher's review of WALL-E has me ready to run out and see it a third time. Or write a book about it. Or something.
The following contains SPOILERS, so don't say I didn't warn you...