The Guilt Trip: Family Works (Sometimes)

Posted on April 29, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

I’m still waiting for Seth Rogen to be really, really funny again, like Knocked Up funny. But unlike The Green Hornet where he seemed to be trying too hard (and Christoph Waltz stole the show as good villains are inclined to do), Rogen turns in a Punch Drunk Love or maybe, Big Fan. That is, this comedian didn’t come just to play, he came to set the drama straight.

Andy (Rogen) has been trying for years to see his organic cleaner make it big, but every year seems to put his dream farther in the rearview mirror. With one last ditch attempt at making a winning sales pitch, he returns home and has a heart-to-heart with his mother, Joyce (Streisand), where she reveals that she met the love of her life before she met his father. As he begins a weeklong drive, he invites her along with the hopes of reuniting her with this love, and getting her out of his hair.

Of course, this isn’t as serious as the two movies I alluded to: there are silly asides like Joyce’s tackling the pounds of steak in an hour contest to try and win a free meal (a la John Candy in The Great Outdoors) and the various misunderstandings people have about their relationship as they travel. But more often than not, we find ourselves coming back to Joyce’s questions about true love and whether she missed it, to Andy’s frustration professionally and his need to establish that he belongs, to their levels of mistrust and apprehension about each other, and finally, to the way that family works when it’s operating correctly.

I know Streisand has stayed at the edge of the public consciousness for years (see her role in the Meet the Parents franchise) but she’s been out of film for almost twenty years. She stepped easily into the role of Rogen’s mother, but I think Rogen’s delivery allows his foil plenty of space. The mother/son dynamic is one that still draws in the third leg of the triangle, the absent father, and shows how much influence a mother raising a son by herself will have. It creates weird dynamics, almost unnaturally, but it allows for nurture and development that might not happen where both parents are there. We see how it made Andy forward thinking and contemplative (even in high school) but we see that the absence of a father also led to some distrust and frustration in his dating relationships.

I think we expect disastrous, physical funny from Rogen. But what if we let him tell a story where we consider our relationships, and how we relate to our parents? What does it look like when we get older, try to live independently, and still find ourselves needing our parents? What happens when we recognize as children that they need us, too? Billy Crystal’s Harry once famously proposed that men and women can’t be friends, but can grown children befriend their parents? Can that work? Ultimately, it seems to me that if we’re not willing to adapt as we age, then we’ve killed off the relationship already.

The Guilt Trip isn’t great, but it’s good enough to be worth viewing. And it will challenge you, if you’re willing, to call your parents and talk about things in your life, and clear the air of things that happened before. But it may also make you recognize that what you have is something different from parent to child: you may actually realize that friendship has grown where separation once reigned.

Posted in Movie Reviews, Pop Culture | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

F.R.I.E.N.D.S.: More Than A Sitcom

Posted on April 29, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

In 1994, a little sitcom with a bunch of relative unknowns debuted on NBC and redefined (along with ER) “must see TV.” Now, that little sitcom with its easily recognized title song (the Rembrandts’ “I’ll Be There For You”) has arrived on Blu-ray in individual seasons (affordably!) so that you can reconnect with the six friends from the Central Perk coffeehouse to be reminded why they’re so funny and how they changed ideas about friendship… forever.

Remember when Rachel (Jennifer Aniston) first met the gang? How she stumbled into a Central Perk discussion by Ross Geller (David Schwimmer), his sister Monica (Courtney Cox Arquette), Chandler (Matthew Perry), Joey (Matt LeBlanc), and Phoebe (Lisa Kudrow), in her wedding dress? Or how about the tentative attempts by Ross to date Rachel, and then her attempts to reciprocate by Season Two? Tom Selleck’s divorcee pre-Blue Bloods dating the much younger Monica?

Unlike so many sitcoms with twenty and thirtysomethings, where the hinge scenes played out in a bar, this one takes place (at least early on) at the coffeehouse and Monica’s apartment. It revolves around Rachel’s attempts to get a job and finally cut the purse strings to her parents, establishing herself as an adult; around Chandler’s attempts to find the right woman (if you’re a fan, you know where that’s going); around Ross trying to re-establish a connection with his high school crush, Rachel; around Joey’s misadventures in love and acting. So much of it revolves around missing the “right one” right in front of you all along.

While there is sex, the sitcom seems to disprove Harry’s proposal to Sally that “men and women can’t be friends because sex always gets in the way.” These folks actually seem to care about each other, protecting each other, and working to make things right, often with the worst advice ever! It’s caffeinated, sharp, and even with its pop culture references, it stands the test of time. Not everything is still funny nearly twenty years later, but with Ross’ directness/naivete,  Monica’s boldness, Phoebe’s abstract/bizarre behavior, and the boys’ (Chandler and Joey) bumbling girl chasing, it’s a mixed bag of silly, smart, entertaining, exploration of life as the young, working middle class.

It’s hard for me (after over a decade of marriage, and now time as a father) to imagine what it’s like to be their age and not have a family to fall back on… til you realized that the friends of Central Perk are actually FAMILY. When your family proves to be unsustainable, in the cases of the Gellers and Rachel, then your friends become the “family you choose for yourself.” Do they always like each other? Do they always get along? No and no. But at the end of the day, their loyalty to each other is bigger than any of the insecurities, troubles, layoffs, setbacks, losses, or failures can overcome. They struggle on together and it’s because they bear each others’ sorrows that they can move forward, and ultimately, celebrate their triumphs together.

In HD, it looks better than many of the episodes I saw originally on small, bad televisions in high school and college. With special features like commentary and features on guest stars, episodes, and more, fans will dig in all over again. And it beats watching out-of-order reruns on TBS… or wherever you find the show in late night!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Lincoln: A Second Look

Posted on April 24, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

Lincoln is easily my favorite president. Blending his speeches, his decision-making in the Emancipation Proclamation, and his tragic murder, the Lincoln mystique has always drawn me in. Turn all of that over to Daniel Day Lewis for a magical delivery of Lincoln as if he was walking and talking before me, and the result is amazing. Obviously, some important people agreed as Lewis won for Best Actor at the Oscars. But what can we see from Lincoln that can inform our lives, right now?

I propose that we can see a model of leadership that merits our consideration.

1. Power of Story: Lincoln obviously understood that spending time with his subordinates, telling stories and jokes, breaking bread together. The Ethan Allen vignette might be my favorite, showing off a sense of humor that is mentioned in some history books but never fully makes our education of “Honest Abe.” One of the truths I’ve learned as a pastor is that you can tell someone the truth in a bullet point paragraph or tell them the truth through a story; one way leads to boredom and potential anger, while the other leads to unlocking their perspective and allowing them to work things out on their own. [For the record, Jesus taught in… parables, allowing people to see truths through everyday situations they would’ve understood.]

2. Devotion to Family: Sally Field definitely won me over with her portrayal of crazed First Lady Mary Todd, and Joseph Gordon Levitt was his typical excellence. But the way that the Lincolns worked in private wasn’t the same way they operated in public, and that means there’s more weight to carry around. Lincoln’s interactions with Todd over the loss of their child and the involvement of Robert (Gordon Levitt) in the war, and his interaction with his two sons, showed off the simple, stoic nature of this president. While Lincoln sacrificed much as the face of the nation, he also seemed to insulate his family (as best he could) from the trials around him. Making time for his family and protecting their privacy, he determined the best course of action for them, and worked hard to keep it steady.

3. Boldness & Vision: Is our country still segregated without Lincoln? Would women vote? What does it mean that Lincoln saw the war, which had already cost so much, as a way to make humankind free forever? I know some will argue that Lincoln prolonged the war, but didn’t he potentially cause less bloodshed over time? Having temporarily liberated the slaves to fight, what would have been the end result if he had allowed slavery to be perpetuated? His argument, quoting Euclid’s statement, “Things which equal the same thing also equal one another,” shows that he had a big picture view of what humans were worth, and that he knew he was supposed to see it through.

4. Call: In one scene with a few soldier/clerks, Lincoln asked if they thought people were born to a certain time for a certain purpose. He basically asserted a question about “call,” about what we are MEANT to do with the time that we have on the earth. He wanted to do what God had appointed him to do in this time, and he saw the impact that equality for all men could bring about. Whether outspoken or not, he exhibited a “kingdom” attitude about the world he lived in, wanting it to be better than it was when he first arrived.

Watching Lincoln, I’m impressed by the acting, the scenes, the costumes, the flow of the script, but even after I watch, I’m left wondering how I might live my life better thanks to Lincoln’s example.

Posted in Movie Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Impossible

Posted on April 23, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

Thailand, 2004. The worst tsunami in recorded history obliterates Khao Lak, an ocean front tourist attraction, plucking Maria Bennett (Naomi Watts, nominated for Best Actress at the Academy Awards) and her family, and throwing them into their own private hell. Maria and her eldest son, Lucas (Tom Holland), find themselves battling isolation and a massive injury to Maria; father Henry (Ewan McGregor) and their two youngest sons are deposited elsewhere. We know it’s based on a true story, but the question remains, how in the world could this family and this community survive?

Watts is masterful here and deserved the nod, but the child actors are amazing. Holland is terrific and the two younger boys play their parts with a mix of bravado and fear in a way that seems entirely organic. Forced into adult roles, these children took care of each other, their parents, and even random strangers who were injured, scared, and struggling to hang onto an inkling of reality that they knew before their world turned upside down.

If you dig disaster movies, then this one is for you. If you don’t… yeah. In the wake of the Boston Marathon tragedy, people responded in superhuman ways, both for themselves and for others. In The Impossible, no one would’ve survived if other people hadn’t come to their aid at some point. It’s striking that in this third world situation, no one saw it coming, but what’s more striking is that the people who respond took care of everyone, regardless of their background, nationality, similarities, or anything different from the fact that they were human and they were in need.

One scene in the movie sticks out in my mind. McGregor’s father has found a group of other non-Thai who were vacationing and now shares their sorrows. One man actually has his cellphone as he’s waiting for his family to call, but he surrenders the phone to Henry first to call and then to follow-up. He recognizes Henry’s need and sublimates his own need. When Henry is overcome by fear and grief, another person there surrounds him with a hug and words of comfort. This is the hurting and damaged caring for the hurting and damaged, this is care from the position of equality, from parallel compassion.  THIS is what happens when the faithful recognize that they are still works in progress and that they are no better off than those who have not yet met Jesus, but for meeting Jesus. It is an image of the church as hospital, as refuge for the sick who in their healing care for the sick themselves.

The Impossible is not heartwarming. Yes, they achieve some closure here, but the pain and the scars remain fresh as the camera fades to black. This is a story of family, of triumph, of our community at large, and a reminder that we should care for those we can while we can. That what we do with the time we’re allowed matters.

Posted in Movie Reviews, Pop Culture | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Must See Theater: Annual Summer Movies Rant!

Posted on April 22, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

Every year for the last few years, I’ve published my most-anticipated movies list, a list of a dozen movies that have to be seen in theaters, a “see it or bust” if you will. This year reveals the growing

12. R.I.P.D. (July 19). Ryan Reynolds meets “The Dude” Jeff Bridges in a ripped-from-the-graphic-novel story about dead/undead cops who battle forces the average human can’t see. Think of it as a (slightly?) more serious version of Men in Black.

11. Fast & Furious 6 (May 24). I wanted to give up on this series but Fast Five introduced the Rock, and this is about the only way to catch Vin Diesel growling and battling. It looks like guaranteed popcorn fun with the typical car chases, pile-ups, and more.

10. 2 Guns (August 2). Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg team up to take down a drug cartel. Washington and Wahlberg sounds even better than Washington and Reynolds. I’m in.

9. The Wolverine (July 26). I love three Marvel characters (the list of DC characters is much longer): Daredevil, Spiderman, and Wolverine. The first two are for ideological/theological reasons, but the last is simply because he’s cool. Hugh Jackman stops singing long enough to don the claws again, with a bit of a reboot into the history of the character.

8. The Lone Ranger (July 3). The hype has died down for this one, but my childhood Saturday mornings were tied closely to the LR and his buddy, Tonto. I’m not completely sold on Johnny Depp as a Comanche warrior, but I’ve got to see the film, and nothing beats the theater. We’ll see how they handle all of the aspects of the legend, but I’m sure they’re skipping the Christopher Lloyd tie-in.

7. Pacific Rim (July 12). Bumped back twice, this Guillermo Del Toro sci-fi thriller looks like it will be a more serious version of Battleship with a dash of Voltron thrown in. Starring Idris Elba, there has to be a certain amount of gravitas, and Del Toro is no slouch. Giant, man-controlled robots dueling it out in the sea against fierce creatures? Count me in.

6. World War Z (June 21). Max Brooks’ novel gets some real hype when it stars Brad Pitt in the cinematic version. I still think Walking Dead deserves a lot of credit for Z getting made: were zombies really on the radar before that hit? Will this be I Am Legend or 28 Days Later?

5. Epic (May 24). My lone cartoon choice (sorry, Monsters University), Epic, looks to have a story, a human girl who is shrunk to the size of some minute warriors, that will be both Borrowers and battle royale. The initial animation looks solid, and therefore gets the lone animated nod.

4. Elysium (August 9). Between Steve Norton’s coverage at HollywoodJesus.com and Neil Blomkamp being the director, I’m definitely down to see what happens with District 9: Part 2. Not really what it’s called, but you get the point. This will be part-political, part-sci-fi, and part-action flick, starring Matt Damon as a guy who has to lead a daring raid against the “privileged” living in space so that those loving in squalor on Earth might survive.

3. Star Trek Into Darkness (May 17). I just watched J.J. Abrams’ reboot, and I couldn’t be more excited (especially as a Star Wars guy) to see the sequel, with Benedict Cumberbatch in the “Khan role,” however that plays out. Kirk (Chris Pine) et al. will be battling a terrorist in this one, and it’s bound to be fierce.

2. Iron Man 3 (May 3). Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), philanthropist, hero, alcoholic. The Avengers world gets grimmer with the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) on the attack. Downey has more successfully taken his character deeper in the Iron Man series than any other actor, short of Christian Bale in the Dark Knight trilogy.

1. Man of Steel (June 13). Duh. There’s no other movie that touts a Christ figure quite like this one. Listen to the voices in the trailers, and tell me that Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner don’t come across like Marlon Brando! A superhuman who chooses to use his powers for the good of all even at the expense of himself, that just provides the set up that seems absolutely watchable.

Check back in later this summer. We’ll see if I go 12 for 12. It’d be fun.

Posted in Movie Reviews, Pop Culture | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Oblivion: Better Than Expected

Posted on April 19, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

Tech 49, Jack Harper (Tom Cruise), has a simple job to do: he must repair the drones that keep the water mining operation running on Earth in 2077. He works closely with his partner/lover, Victoria (Andrea Riseborough), overseen by Mission Control’s Sally (Melissa Leo) via satellite. The couple exists in isolation, living in a state-of-the-art facility high above the corrupted earth below, and out of the reach radiation that resulted from the nuclear war of 2017. This is a world both ugly and beautiful as depicted by writer/director/producer Joseph Kosinski (Tron sequels), and it provides the backdrop for an above average spring blockbuster.

While I’m no Cruise fan (I think Minority Report is the last movie where he didn’t play his own image of himself), he throws a Hail Mary here, and comes up with an April touchdown. While the sci-fi premise here is a mashup of movies that we’ve seen before, like The Island, Independence Day, Armageddon, etc., the backdrop of the Earth as Kosinski sees it is terrific and there are enough twists and turns to make it more interesting than the trailer.

There are some twists I don’t want to give away, but the felt tension of Cruise’s Harper, as he begins to assess that the world around him isn’t what it seems, is pretty stunning. The audience doesn’t quite know either (this isn’t one of those films where we know and the protagonist doesn’t) but the sense of dread is nearly palpable. And even when the truth becomes evident, the film doesn’t let us off the hook: we’ve become invested in Harper’s survival, and the odds are not forever in his favor.

What becomes the takeaway for this mostly popcorn thriller is the way that each character deals with the truth when it’s revealed to them. Some people respond with a spasmodic denial, other people respond with begrudging, almost suspicious acceptance, some people have to search for the truth. But once they have the truth, each of them must decide what they’re going to do about it or with it: will they share it with others? will they hold onto it for their own benefit? will they hide it under a rock? In the same way, people have different responses to faith: some run to it and some run from it. And when they discover it and embrace it, the way they respond to their faith and share it with others (or don’t) says a lot about them and what they actually believe.

Oblivion isn’t “deep,” but with its twist and big picture questions, it’s worth seeing. You’ll be treated to a visual masterpiece, and explore the questions of our time from the view of space.

Posted in Movie Reviews, Pop Culture | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Boston Marathon & 42: How Will You Fight The Hate?

Posted on April 16, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

“Not again.”

That’s the thought that echoed through my head when a Facebook post led me to the first harrowing reports of the bombs which exploded at the end of the Boston Marathon yesterday. Soon, the reality of two, shrapnel-loaded bombs set in, as I considered the city of my youth and the way it was now the site of a terrorist attack. I called family members who work near Boston and checked on people who would potentially have been in the race.  And I considered how I, how the city, and how the country would react.

And frankly, I don’t care who did it or why it happened. I care that it keeps happening.

On April 16, 2007, a gunman walked onto the campus of Virginia Tech. Violence struck suddenly, as one person’s anger, rage, sickness, pain, frustration, and issues burst forth in an attack that left thirty-three people dead. Six years later, the VT community, the families, and the state of Virginia remembers, and celebrates that this was a dark day but evil will not win.

On April 15, 1945, several Negro League players were offered the “opportunity” to try out for the Boston Red Sox, but were not given a chance to make the team, including Jackie Robinson. A year later, Robinson would receive the invitation to the Brooklyn Dodgers’ minor league team, and later make the big leagues. But the violence of his situation was not yet fully begun.

Philadelphia Phillies manager Ben Chapman is the embodiment of the verbal violence in the new film, 42. He hurls epithets at Robinson, not least of which is a barrage of the “n” word that becomes nearly overwhelming as it unfolds onscreen. But even fiercer still are the physical assaults Robinson endured (and sometimes nearly missed). And one of those came to mind yesterday as I reflected on the Marathon, on Tech, on 42, and on our response. Three “days,” two sporting events, three great violences, and one life lesson.

In one scene of the biopic, Robinson plays first base correctly, receives a ball thrown to him by the shortstop, easily getting out the batter, and finds himself in agony as the runner viciously cleats him in the calf. While a lesser man might have stayed down, and even more would’ve cried for revenge, Robinson tells his clamoring teammates that they will beat this assault by playing the game well… not by taking their revenge by the baseball code (allowing that the next batter up would be “plunked.”) Now, on April 15 each year, Major League Baseball celebrates “Jackie Robinson Day” because on April 15, 1947, two years later, Robinson broke the color barrier.

The code of public opinion says that we will spend the next few days peeling back the layers of the Marathon bombings, and then, like we have in the cases of the Sandyhook/Newtown tragedy and Tech, we will spend even longer on establishing the means and motives of those who caused such tragedies. We will lose sight of the victims, we will focus on vengeance, and we will fail to see that by our focus, we have given the evildoers their day: we have let them take our joy.

Now, honestly, I know that vengeance and justice often ride down the same road together for awhile. But if we can recognize that “vengeance is mine” from God (Romans 12:19) is for our own protection (check out Zero Dark Thirty), then we will consider what is truly important. We will recognize that there is nowhere “safe” because securing our world means losing our safety, that taking back vengeance means stealing our sense of freedom. Those who perpetrated the Marathon bombings deserve justice, but who we are afterward depends on who we become in the pursuit of that justice.

We need to recognize that our actions, our institutions, and our policies impact peace and justice everyday. That we have the power to change the currents of anger and vengeance by how we teach our children in our homes with our words and with our actions, that we can affect anger and hate by the decisions we make as a country and by the domestic policies aimed at schools, at communities, and at groups of people.

We will not eradicate evil without God’s help, but we can recognize that there are fundamental needs that all people deserve that they have been deprived. We can recognize that human free will always comes into play, but that nurturing and caring for those who are ignored, ostracized, rejected, and abused, we might in fact cause a day to come when no date will be remembered for its darkness but be remembered for its light.

Individually, we must remember that who we are speaks volumes when we’re knocked down and we get back up. That who we are and what we do can reflect that God wants us to live in love and peace with others. That lacing up your shoes and going for a run remembers those who have fallen. That next year, the Marathon will run, and we will shout back into the dark, “We will not be overcome! Our joy is greater than your evil!”

That peace begins with you and with me. That every time we choose not to fight back, to have the guts not to, that we speak to what our world could be and that others will notice, one at a time.

Posted in Pop Culture, Sports, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

42: Are You Built To Last?

Posted on April 13, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

I’m a sucker for sports movies, and the trailer for 42 revved up my emotions every time I saw it. Branch Rickey’s (Harrison Ford) growling, “I want a ballplayer with the guts not to [fight].” Jackie Robinson (the until now underutilized Chadwick Boseman) dropping to the dirt after being beaned in the side of the head by a fastball. The scenes of baseball and racism from the 1940s interspersed with each other over the fast rap beat. I knew I had to see it.

The Story: Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (the mind behind one of my favorites, L.A. Confidential, and a diverse set of films), the film plays out as you’d expect, if you’ve read anything about the life and times of Jackie Robinson. But just to make sure the stage is set early, the film gives us a recap of what has just occurred on the global stage: World War II has just been a U.S. victory with the help of an integrated army, but the re-entry into all aspects of life for these African-Americans is anything but. And then Rickey had an idea.

A Methodist, the owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers decides he’s going to forcibly break the color barrier in baseball and puts Robinson on his minor league team with full intent to have him playing in the big league soon. Through a series of antagonisms, Robinson, who is also a Methodist, works his way forward, slowly gaining the begrudging respect of his teammates because of his skilled play and, for the most part, silence in the face of bigotry.

For fans of baseball, and anyone interested in how Robinson impacted the color barrier on and off the field, 42 is a no-brainer. Having grown up watching the PBS miniseries Eyes on the Prize about the civil rights movement and later, Mississippi Burning, 42 falls somewhere in between, neither fully forcing us to see how bad the bigotry was (in the physical abuse or death that occurred) nor turning away to sanitize it all. The face of evil is clearly Philadelphia Phillies manager Ben Chapman (Alan Tudyk), but what is more remarkable is the number of people who are on the fence about racism who slowly must pick a side.

Among them are many of the players on the minor league team and later, the Dodgers themselves, who grow to admire Robinson. They see firsthand some of the abuse, and recognize that the generalizations made in private are much harder to voice when staring another human being in the face; they recognize that Robinson can play and that he makes them better, and if he is in fact a teammate, he deserves their support. They see that his play is all-out all of the time, and that his reaction to abuse is not retaliation but to channel his anger into legal play on the field (the Padres and Dodgers should be forced to watch this film this weekend). Pee Wee Reese (Lucas Black) is the most famous of those men, but several others support Robinson in stages of his rise to stardom in the league.

The Takeaway: While the trailer does show off a significant number of things (like the guts conversation and the Leo Durocher tantrum), it still doesn’t steal the emotional thunder of Robinson and Rickey’s relationship. Whether you see the reason for Rickey’s decision-making coming or not, you’ll find yourself wondering what scars in your life are meant for someone else’s healing. When Robinson comes along, he’s picked for a reason, for Rickey’s purpose, but it’s a situation where both men are stretched and healed by the influence of the other.

And then there’s the overtly religious takeaway: that Rickey openly compares Robinson to Jesus Christ, who had “the guts not to fight back” when faced with trials, torture, and death on the cross. Seeing the story play out in living color, it’s hard NOT to see Robinson as a Christ-figure, and recognize that there are many issues facing our world today where we should stand up, put our arms around the shoulders of another, and say, “this is the relationship we’re modeling for the world.” Whether it’s racial or not, discrimination exists beyond the frames of our textbooks and the problems of other nations, and if we fail to make a stand, we will suffer the fate of Martin Niemoller’s lament:

“First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

“Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

“Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

“Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.”

Rickey and Robinson recognized their mission, and followed through. They believed that Robinson was “built to last,” that he could pursue his baseball dream regardless of the odds because he knew what was really important (love of God and family). They believed that he had the “guts” to do the right thing even when the world around him was wrong. Those moments matter as they determine our path, whether we’re standing for ourselves or someone else, and they matter because in those moments, we experience love.

Everyone experiences a moment when they need to know the love of another to get them through. And that love will make all of the difference. Robinson was loved by Rickey, by his wife, by his teammates (some of them). And ultimately, his love of the game ignites a passion that breaks the color barrier, and means our country will never be the same. Robinson was in fact built to last, both as a color barrier-breaking ball player, and as a hero who stood in the face of adversity and overcame.

Ultimately, we need to decide if we’re built to last, when the challenges of life face us. Will we rise to the occasion? Will we speak up for truth? Will we defend those who cannot defend themselves? Will we challenge the status quo with the will of God behind us and the hope in the kingdom of God? Will we have the guts to?

Posted in Movie Reviews, Pop Culture, Sports | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Bible Episode 2- From HollywoodJesus.com

Posted on March 11, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

I was one of the 27 million who tuned into the first episode of The Bible TV series last week, a somewhat skeptical participant but quickly intrigued by the visualization of my frequently read stories from Genesis and Exodus of the Old Testament scripture. Then I heard from people: churchgoers and those who hadn’t darkened a church door in years, who were amazed by the quality, intrigued by the Message-like storytelling, and inquisitive about what I thought of the interpretation. And my eyes were opened to the opportunity The Church has, if it could only harness people’s desire, their hunger, to learn more about what the Bible has to say about God and what God wants for us. That blew away the critics who focused on what they didn’t like: on creative liberties taken, on perceived defects in the acting and special effects, and on omissions. And it guaranteed I would be watching the second episode.

Tonight, after a quick recap, the series followed through with Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, thanks to two brave spies, the determination of the prostitute Rahab, and the promise of the one true God. Given that it is the grittiest, most SFX-free story we’d seen so far, I was struck by how it conveyed relationships in a way that anyone could relate to (the outcast and despised woman, the hope sought in any way possible, the hearsay of an amazing God and a dangerous people). And then it segued into one of the strangest stories of the Bible, that of Samson, the world’s strongest man who is free of all vices but the one that does him in: lust. (I’m sure someone will be miffed by the casting choice or the depiction, but my bigger question was, why Samson and not Gideon? But it doesn’t change the point. God uses broken people for the good of all.)

While the History Channel’s “other” original miniseries, Vikings, flounders pointlessly, The Bible continues to drive home the working of God in the midst of humanity’s, specifically Israel’s, troubled decision-making and unfaithfulness. We can see consequences arise directly from acts, whether of lust or greed or unfaithfulness, and we can also see the grace of God shining in the midst of our brokenness.

That cycle of faithfulness, unfaithfulness, and grace is evident in the second major arc of the night, as the priest Samuel (William Freeman AKA Belloq from Raiders of the Lost Ark) first unwillingly taps Saul to be the king of Israel and later David. (It did strike me that the on-again/off-again narration seems to be an attempt at fast-forwarded storytelling more than a necessary tool, but maybe that’s just the Keith David reading. But that’s merely an aside!) David does what he does with Goliath in a reasonably quick depiction, and we’ve got a full-on David versus Saul controversy with the incumbent clearly losing the populace vote. We see the honor of David (as well as his transparent faith) and the accelerating madness (and faithfulness) of Saul, and it makes sense that two people could encounter an opportunity to enter the stream of God’s grace and choose different paths.

Given that the two episodes tonight were called “Homeland” and “Kingdom,” we can see how the people of Noah and Abraham, who were not “landed” folk, came to establish themselves as a people of the land of Israel. We see their movement to that end, as well as the way that David rises quickly from shepherd boy to king, even showing how you can “take the boy out of the country but not take the country out of the boy.” We see how the God who traveled with his people everywhere became a God who had a place of worship—even if the people needed that more than he did.

But ultimately, I love that the “man after God’s own heart” is a seriously flawed human being. I love that the originator of the Davidic line has some issues of his own, and that while we might revere David for who he is, he is by no means perfect. (In fact, we hear Bathsheba tell him that it’s wrong—and we hear Nathan condemn it, too.) Not only is David adulterous but the depiction here shows the closeness of relationship in David and Uriah that makes the transgression even more of a betrayal. Is it really true that absolute power corrupts absolutely? Were Saul and David both done in by their own corruption? Or are they different? (I say yes, but other viewers may disagree. Personally, I object to the lack of the parable Nathan tells as the story allows David to condemn himself. But the main points are definitely preserved.)

In this second episode, we’ve seen the movement of the nation of God to Jerusalem; we’ve seen the cycle of faithfulness and favor, unfaithfulness and disfavor, and finally, redemption. We’ve seen the power of God and the weakness of humanity. We’ve seen the struggle to follow the ways of God, and we’ve seen the grace of God to make God’s followers even more then they ever thought imaginable.

And next week? Jesus is coming…

Posted in Pop Culture, TV | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hating On “The Bible” Miniseries

Posted on March 4, 2013 by Jacob Sahms

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I’m skeptical of media that barely dresses up a point of view with a few tidbits of action, drama, or acting, barely concealing that it is a diatribe against this or that thing which someone holds dear. And I’m doubly skeptical of those pieces of media which come from the Christian sector, having forgotten that Jesus spent most of his time teaching in parables, that is stories, framing theological truth in the midst of narrative.

That said: Christians should be hoping that The Bible on the History Channel is watched by millions of viewers. And based on last night’s Twitter and Facebook traffic, it was. That means people were considering the stories they’ve heard over and over (or never heard before) and were reflecting on their own lives. That means the good news of God’s love was a subject beyond the walls of Sunday morning services.

Unfortunately, too many Christians failed to see the big picture in the first episode, which covered from Eden to Rahab, and I wonder what they were expecting. Given ten hours (minus commercials), a budget of less than twenty-two million (chump change for ten hours of special effects and acting), and the scope of both the Old and New Testament, there were going to be some edits to the “script.” Given that the show dramatizes the most widely read book… ever… there’s going to be some difference of opinion in how “literal” a translation it is. (Seriously, how many people were able to grasp the big picture of Lincoln or Zero Dark Thirty without deconstructing the attention to detail?)

Honestly, if you think Eugene Peterson’s The Message is blasphemous, you’re not going to like it. If you think that only the words used in the translation of your choosing can be used to describe the scene taking place, you’re not going to like it.

But if you want to consider the bigger picture, how the God of the Trinity made him/herself known to humanity, and showed the power of God’s love for humanity, then buckle up.

Sure, I could’ve done without the guy I call Ninja Angel who helped bring justice to Sodom; I didn’t particularly like ol’ Scottish dude playing Abraham. I know that there wasn’t a conversation between Abram (he was Abraham throughout) where God changed his name and delivered a monologue about stars or sand. But what WAS there was pretty phenomenal.

God shows up and saves Noah and his family after years of human depravity, and then facilitates the growth of Abraham’s nation-to-be. God uses the brokenness of Moses and the doubt of Joshua to form leaders from broken, messed-up people who will lead God’s people where they need to go. And The Bible did that while displaying a pretty awesome burning (but not consumed) bush and a parting of the Red Sea (eat your heart out, Charlton Heston!) Still, my favorite part was the heart-wrenching depiction of Abraham’s faithfulness in presenting Isaac as a sacrifice and God’s miraculous response.

Maybe instead of nitpicking the parts, we need to consider the whole. Maybe instead of arguing for Ruth to be included or Adam and Eve to eat an apple, we should consider what would happen if we invite a friend or group over to talk about how we see God moving in The Bible and how God moves in our lives. Maybe we should let the Story speak for itself like Jesus often did, so that God’s glory would be revealed in our hearts rather than deconstructed in our minds.

If you’re not down for that, maybe you should go read the Bible. I heard there are some crazy stories in there.

If you missed The Bible miniseries last night, it will encore at 8 p.m. on Monday night on Lifetime. Next week’s episode will air at 8 p.m. on The History Channel on Sunday night.

Posted in Pop Culture, TV | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments