Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ. delivered direct to your Inbox!


Most Recent



The Rest


Red heart icon with + sign.
Adult non-fiction, Book Reviews

Darwin's Sandcastle

Evolution's Failure in the Light of Scripture and the Scientific Evidence by Gordon Wilson 2023 / 222 pages In the protective bubble of my Christian high school I was a confident six-day creationist – I realized that anyone who believed everything came from nothing was too stupid to take seriously. Then I went to university, and I realized that the very non-stupid professors I was meeting all seemed to have one thing in common: they thought evolution was so. And some had reasons that I'd never heard of, and others even offered problems with six-day creation that I'd not heard of, and had no way to answer. I went from thinking evolution was kooky to being worried it might be credible. It took me quite a while to come to one final realization – that brilliant people who deny God can use their giant brains to blind their own eyes. That was startling to me at the time, though it might not be as much so to today's younger generation who have lived through medical, psychological, and governmental experts saying boys can become girls. I think as bad as the transgender madness is, the silver lining for God's people is that this is really an eye-opener – via this craziness God has made it obvious to anyone with eyes to see that the smartest people in the world can turn themselves into absolute dimwits if they try really hard. For myself, coming to that understanding would have been a lot quicker, and less traumatic, if I'd had this book. What Dr. Wilson does here, as his brother details in the foreword, is help readers understand: "...the biblical worldview not only accounts for the exquisite engineering of the falcon's eye, but also the stubborn blindness of the scientist studying the falcon's eye. The Christian faith accounts for what the falcon can see and what the scientist cannot see. Both phenomena require an accounting; both demand an explanation. We should stagger under the weight of two things – one being the wisdom and knowledge of God, and the other being the mystery of lawlessness." Contents Wilson is offering an impressive and succinct Creation Science 101 here, equal parts evolutionary takedown, and creation science build up, serving as a helpful primer not only on the problems with evolution, but outlining some of the building blocks for doing good, biblical, creation-based science. So, what's all inside? Here are a few of the arguments he makes: He starts with Scripture, since God was there in the beginning, and secular scientists were not. So, is it possible to incorporate millions of years into Genesis? Wilson shows how the text won't allow for it. He asks, where did all the information come from? Information is not something that chance can come up with no matter how much time is given. He highlights the brilliant design evident all around us - God's fingerprints really are everywhere. Wilson also addresses some of the most common objections to creationism, including: "The problem of pain" as we see it in Nature - why are some killing machines just so well designed if we have a loving God Who crafted this? Why do we see similarities across certain species if there is no evolutionary common descent? What about "vestigial" or left-over organs from our earlier evolutionary incarnations? And what about Junk DNA? Junk in our DNA makes sense if we're just a result of a random process, so isn't that evidence for evolution? Secular dating methods, and how the timeline they give doesn't fit with the biblical account. Conclusion What I love about Wilson is he doesn't overstate his case. He's confident in God's Word, but he knows there are some difficulties creationists have to deal with, and he knows too, that evolutionary theory is both dreadfully wrong, and has had a lot of brilliant minds propping it up over the years, so there is still some heft to it. What he's crafted here is a book that sums up the bare minimum our children should understand about evolution and its attacks on God's glory before they finish Grade 12. I think this could be a wonderful text to work through in our schools, but otherwise, a great one for parents to read through with their kids before they send them off to any sort of secular (or even most Christian) universities. Gordon Wilson is  also the driving force behind a series of Christian nature shows – both TV episodes and movie-length documentaries – collectively gathered under the name The Riot and the Dance. You can even watch the first TV half-hour episode for free here, and you really should; it's amazing to see what God has done, and so encouraging too, to hear Him given the credit for it that is His due. You can take an extended peek inside the book by clicking here. And you can get a taste for the man himself in this 30-minute lecture below on his books and Young Earth Creationism. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Adult biographies, Book Reviews

Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus

by Nabeel Qureshi 2014 / 384 pages RATING: Great Nabeel Qureshi (1983-2017) was a Pakistani-American who was raised as a devout follower of the peaceful Ahmadiyya sect of Islam. By God's providence, he befriended a fellow university student, David Wood, who later became quite famous as a Christian apologist. Here in Nabeel's book, we see Wood is already an able defender of the faith, and especially equipped to discuss and debate the issue of God vs. Allah, Christianity vs. Islam, with his Muslim friend. There's an aspect of this book that will appear to the logicians among us – folks who like to hear arguments clearly presented. Qureshi's debates with Wood do that in detail, presenting the case for Christianity and the Gospel message, over against Islam. We hear, too, from other debaters, including a formal university debate between Muslim apologist Shabir Ally and Christian Mike Licona, and less formal occasions with other Christians, but also Nabeel's father, discussing Jesus' crucifixion. As he continues to study and contrast these two religions Nabeel finds that what he thought about Islam isn't so – the Koran's origin isn't as fixed and certain, and Muhammad wasn't the admirable example he'd believed. But more than facts, there is also heart to Nabeel's story – his own, and our Father in heaven's, Who came after Nabeel. As C.S. Lewis said of himself, Nabeel was a most reluctant convert, and in sharing his story, Nabeel wanted Christian readers to understand the enormous cost and struggle that a Muslim faces in even being open to Christianity. He wants us to realize that to even be wrestling with his friend Wood about who God really is, could only be done in rebellion to his family – his wonderful, beloved family! When he told his parents of his conversion, his mother said: "You are my only son. You came from my womb.... I cradled you, sang to you, taught you the ways of God. Every day since you came into the world, I have loved you with all of me in a way I have loved no one else. Why have you betrayed me, Billoo?" Telling his parents was devastating to them, and Nabeel too. Christians who were blessed to grow up with their whole families in church don't understand this price. And what we might not have considered, then, is how being God's is worth any cost. Conclusion This is a powerful story, and among the best Christians biographies I've ever read. It's also a wonderfully instructive look inside the Muslim world. The theological wrestling means this is mostly aimed at adults, though some avid reader teens could certainly appreciate it too. Sadly, the author passed away in 2017 from stomach cancer. Thankfully, even though the Lord decided to take Nabeel home at the very young age of 34, in His providence He first had Nabeel write this, and two other books on Allah and God, as well as make speeches and presentations, many of which are readily available on the Internet. So Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus can be just the start of your journey with Nabeel....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Book Reviews, Popular but problematic

Percy Jackson pushes homosexuality now too

My first involved interaction with the Greek myths was in university, as a required classics course. But the professor wasn't all that interested in the classic part – he was a pervert, and the Greek gods gave him plenty of material to wallow in. Adultery, rape, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, homosexuality, and transsexuality too – there wasn't much of anything that the Greek gods didn't get up to. I don't think he even had time to get into the demonic side of things, with Hades, harpies, Furies, and the underworld's countless ghosts. So when I first ran across Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson books, their Greek myth source material left me with low expectations. The appeal But it was the "classical" connection that got some parents enthused. Percy and his friends are mostly all "halfbloods" – the demi-god offspring of a Greek god/mortal woman coupling – but with the twist that this is all taking place today. In the first novel, The Lightning Thief, Percy doesn't initially know he is a demi-god, or that the Greek myths and the gods in them are all real. So there is an educational aspect, as we are alongside Percy as he learns more about his own family – turns out his dad is Poseidon, god of the sea – and as he gets himself educated about Apollo, the Minotaur, satyrs, Medusa, Cyclops, centaurs, and so many more. The Greek myths are a part of Western civilization, so that's a reason to know about Zeus and his gang, just to be educated. If you hadn't ever heard about Hercules and his labors, or the flying horse Pegasus, you're not going to get some cultural references – in articles, songs, movies – that many others will understand. Another reason for Christians to study these myths is to learn about the Greco-Roman world that the Apostle Paul was speaking to in his missionary journeys. While the Greeks and Romans had different names for their gods, they shared the same pantheon. Their gods stand in stark contrast to the one true God. Whereas He is holy, merciful, and just, Olympus was populated by the petty – super-powered, sure, but morally no better, and often much worse, than the humans who worshipped them. Education vs. entertainment So there are good reasons to get educated about the Greek gods. But that's different than looking to them for entertainment. There is a reason to study the Greek myths... but steering our kids towards them for fun? That strikes me as akin to pointing our littles to the 90s Friends TV series, telling them it's good binge-watching material because there are laughs to be had. There are indeed – and in the Greek myths too – but in both instances the sexual perversion should be putting us off. Then there is the myths' philosophy. When kids in a Christian school study the Greek myths they can be prompted to question them, which they probably won't think to do reading the Percy Jackson stories for fun. What kind of questions should they ask? Where does this story say that right and wrong come from? Christians know right is defined by the very character of God. But in the Greek myths how can you even know what's right or wrong? One god wants this, another that, and the top god in the Greek myths is the capricious, philandering Zeus, who makes rules that Percy and his friends sometimes try to circumvent. So how is right and wrong defined in this universe? Percy seems to be the one who most determines it – what he does is right, and those who oppose him are in the wrong – which offers up to the reader the implicit message that you define your own morality. What's wrong with the world? Christians know that the brokenness around us came from Man violating God's law. The myths largely flip that, teaching that trouble most often comes from the gods and their bickering What is the solution? The myths offer a mix of fatalism – you can't escape your fate – and relying primarily on yourself and your own smarts because the gods may or may not choose to help. Percy Jackson also adds in a lot of relying on your friends and, of course, relying on your superpowers. Will that save you? Only sort of, because in Percy's world and the Greek myths generally, everyone is doomed to die. But it might save the day. This self-reliance stands in stark contrast to our need to turn to Christ, Who will do for us what we can't do for ourselves – clean and perfect us. What gives life meaning? The Greek myths pitch honor, duty, and being so heroic you'll be long remembered after your die, as pursuits worth spending your life on. But such pursuits may result in your life being cut short by a god who for reasons that have little to do with you, just doesn't like you. Or maybe you were always fated to die tragically. For many, these pursuits are going to be literal dead ends. But we can fulfill God's purpose for our lives, which is to glorify Him and enjoy Him forever. If our children are reading these stories as entertainment, and they're not contending with the philosophy being pitched – if they're not even aware of it – then they won't be sifting out what's bad and will be influenced to some extent. Especially if they're ingesting thousands of pages of it across these 25+ books. Just the original 5 books amount to more than 1,500 pages. Aren't they sanitized? The Percy Jackson books are aimed at middle school readers, so maybe parents would expect author Riordan to skip over the Greek myths' most lurid and depraved aspects? That's not an unreasonable expectation... but what's in need of sanitizing is going to depend on one's definition of depraved, won't it? Our secular world still opposes rape, so I wasn't surprised to learn that Riordan recasts the gods' many rapes into romances instead. He's not going to try to normalize or celebrate rape. But our culture has been celebrating homosexuality for a decade or three now, and in the last five years it's also jumped on the transgender train. So unless an author is explicitly swimming against the cultural stream – unless they are overtly Christian (or maybe Catholic or Mormon) – then we should expect them to go with the flow. We should expect them to go after the accolades available to any author who'll add in a "brave" gay, transgendered, or maybe genderfluid character into their books. That's how it's played out with Riordan. Laying it on thick When Percy Jackson first appeared two decades ago, his popularity got my attention, but The Lightning Thief didn't seem good enough to recommend or bad enough to write up a warning, so the series dropped off my radar. But recently one of my daughters got interested, and that got me looking at them again. I figured, why not pick up one of the most controversial titles and start looking there? So I got the graphic novel version of The House of Hades – how's that for a creepy title? – which was book 4 from the second series. It was published back in 2013, and already then, Riordan was really pushing homosexuality. Nico di Angelo has a significant role, and while he first appeared as a seemingly heterosexual character in 2007's The Titan's Curse, here he is forced to out himself as gay. And it isn't just an announcement. Nico doesn't want to let anyone know, and we learn that because he's hidden that part of himself, he's never been able to have close friends. So a ferocious, vicious version of Cupid (this is no cherubic baby with a bow) makes Nico admit that, while everyone thought he had a crush on Percy Jackson's girlfriend, his crush was actually on Percy himself. Then, after Nico outs himself, his friend Jason tells him that it is possibly the bravest thing he's ever seen anyone do. So Riordan is laying it on thick here. Any kid wrestling with homosexual temptation has now been told that it is brave to embrace your sin, and it is a sin to deny your true self. Series by series There are 25 books in the Percy Jackson universe, not including the growing number of graphic novel adaptations, short story collections, at least one coloring book, and various other etceteras. And by all accounts, as the series has progressed since the  first novel was published in 2005, it's gotten queerer. I've been researching the series by reading through the many graphic novel versions available, with a particular focus  on titles that were supposed to be the most LGBTQ friendly. So here is a very incomplete account of LGBTQ content, series by series, that I'll expand on as I learn more. Percy Jackson and the Olympians (7 books) The first 5 books in this series, Percy Jackson and the Olympians, are the ones that many of today's young parents grew up with. There's hell hounds, snake demons, and all sorts of undead critters, whether that's a mummified oracle, soooo many skeletons, or Percy's friends summoning the dead, or getting possessed by them. I haven't heard of or spotted anything LGBTQ-related in the original 5, but I haven't had a chance to read through the latest two. As they were written recently I'd have guessed Riordan would slip something in, and, sure enough,  it seems he has in at least one of the two. The Lightning Thief (2005) The Sea of Monsters (2006) The Titan’s Curse (2007) – Nico di Angelo is introduced here, given a tragic sympathetic background – little boy, orphaned along with his sister, and then Percy promises to, but fails to, protect Nico's sister who dies as a result The Battle of the Labyrinth (2008) The Last Olympian (2009) Chalice of the Gods (2023) – From Plugged In's review online, it seems that the book does note Zeus made his male cupbearer Ganymede immortal because he’s attracted to him. Wrath of the Triple Goddess (2024) The Heroes of Olympus (5 books) A big plot element here is that Death is chained and restrained, and if you thought that would be a good thing, you'd be mistaken. While we're grateful Christ conquered Death, in this series, one of Percy's missions is to free Death so the monsters they kill will stay dead. I've checked out the first four books in this series and discovered that in the 4th Riordan is using a sledgehammer to push homosexuality – no subtlety to it. The Lost Hero (2010) The Son of Neptune (2011) The Mark of Athena (2012) The House of Hades (2013) – Nico di Angelo is forced to out himself as gay, and that's celebrated by a friend as the bravest thing he's seen. For more details see the section  "Laying it on thick" earlier in this article The Blood of Olympus (2014) – Nico has a developing relationship with Will Solace The Trials of Apollo (5 books) I haven't looked at this one yet, but Apollo is a key character, and his bisexuality is said to feature prominently in the series. One reviewer put it this way: "I’m queer! You’re queer! That geyser is queer! Everyone is queer! ...There are also a lot of new characters who are queer, including – yes – geyser spirits called palikoi. During the series, Apollo meets a pair of immortal warrior lesbians, a transwoman hunter of Artemis, and many, many bisexual gods and demigods." The Hidden Oracle (2016) The Dark Prophecy (2017) The Burning Maze (2018) The Tyrant's Tomb (2019) The Tower of Nero (2020) – Piper and Shel are in a lesbian relationship The Nico di Angelo Adventures (2 books) The whole series is focused on the relationship between Nico and his gay love interest. The Sun and the Star (2023) – First to focus on a queer couple, with an appearance by lesbian couple Piper and Shel too The Court of the Dead (2025) Magnus Chase and the Gods of Asgard (3 books) This involves Norse gods, but takes place in the Percy Jackson universe, so it's a spin-off of sorts. Here we meet the shapeshifting, genderfluid Alex Fierro, who gets involved with a pansexual Magnus Chase. The Sword of Summer (2015) The Hammer of Thor (2016) – While I haven't read it, I found a LGBTQ advocate celebrating that there is "a whole chapter" devoted to Alex explaining his trans experience, and then later building a "pottery golem" that he declares non-binary. The Ship of the Dead (2017) The Kane Chronicles (3 books) Riordan has also written a series on the Egyptian gods. Like the Greek myths, the Egyptian mythology this is based on has all sorts of dark demonic supernaturals. Those show up here, along with ghosts, sickness spirits, and all sorts of gods trying to kill or possess the Kane kids, their parents, and even their grandparents. Then there is a thong-wearing male god, and a well-endowed hippo goddess who gets ogled in the graphic novel version of book 2 (ugh!). But the first two books don't seem to have any queer content. The Red Pyramid (2010) The Throne of Fire (2011) The Serpents Shadow (2012) ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Drama, Movie Reviews

Anastasia

Drama / Mystery 1956 / 105 min Rating: 7/10 In 1918 Communist revolutionaries murdered the Czar and his family, and for years afterwards rumors persisted that the Czar’s youngest daughter, Anastasia, survived the massacre. And because the Communists themselves kept telling different stories about the execution – from blaming it on others, to denying it happened – they created fertile ground for the rumors to grow and spread. And in the years that followed, several women stepped forward claiming to be Anastasia. This film is based on premise never proven – the notion that one of those women really was the "Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia." The year is 1928, and an exiled Russian general has hatched on a scheme. He figures he can claim the Anastasia’s royal inheritance – worth 10 million pounds – if he can find a young woman of the right age and look to impersonate Anastasia. He settles on a young amnesiac and starts teaching her how to walk and talk and react as Anastasia would. But when the young woman seems to know far more about Anastasia than she has ever been taught, the general starts to wonder if this woman really is the royal princess! Cautions I was trying to come up with one, because this is a remarkably objection-free film. A despairing Anastasia does try to thrown herself into the river at the start of the film, but is stopped. To find a concern I'll note that the 1997 animated film of the same name is, despite its G-rating, scarier. That's because the animated Anastasia brings in a villain, Rasputin, who was a real, manipulative person, but who wasn't the spiteful sorcerer shown here. Rasputin calls on dark demonic forces to curse Anastasia, and you just have to wonder what the animators were thinking. So, for a film you can watch with kids around, stick with the 1956 classic. Conclusion If you like stories that bring the past to life, this will grab you. There's also an air of mystery here, an intriguing story mom and dad can appreciate, free of any content concerns. But while it's safe enough to view around children, it also won't interest them. Anastasia is well acted, with Ingrid Bergman winning an Oscar for her performance, but this is dialogue-driven. It's for the adults who can appreciate a well-written story, but Anastasia doesn't have that whole family appeal. Check out the trailer below. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Book Reviews, Economics, Teen non-fiction

Nobody knows how to make a pencil

What is a pencil worth? It's a simple question, about a simple product, and it highlights just how complicated our economy is, and how very much managing it is beyond any one man, even the Prime Minister. Nobody knows what a pencil is worth... So how much is a pencil worth? You might try to answer that question by going to Walmart and checking their prices. They're selling a pack of 10 for $1.68, so that'd mean a pencil is worth roughly 17 cents, right? Except Walmart is also selling a pack of 10 "break-resistant lead" pencils for $2.87, so, for some at least – folks who hate getting up for that long lonely walk to the pencil sharpener at the front of the classroom – a pencil is worth 29 cents. And what if, as you were shopping, you had a million dollar idea you just needed to write down right now before you forget. But you didn't have a pencil and the person in front of you had just grabbed the last pack off the shelves. How much would one single solitary pencil be worth to you then? How much would you be willing to offer them for that package? A lot more than 29 cents, certainly. So we have three possible answers right at the start – 17 cents, 29 cents, and just short of a million dollars – and we haven't even left Walmart yet. They have about 50 different kinds down at the art supply store. There's all sorts of reasons a pencil could be worth more or less. Prices could go down or up based on whether its become cheaper or more costly. A tariff on wood products could hike the cost of its casing, and then we'd find out if consumers are willing to swallow a price increase. If Walmart's "low low price" goes from $1.68 to $2.25, maybe cheap pens start looking like a better alternative and demand for pencils would drop. Or maybe that $2.25 is still cheap enough, and people keep buying just as many pencils as before, even at this higher price. It's hard to say. Very hard to predict. And that's just pencils. Now imagine if we wanted our country's leaders to manage, not simply the pencil supply chain – determining how much of each pencil should be made, and for what price – but how many electric cars should be manufactured, how much egg and dairy should be produced, and how much grain should be grown. If pencil demand is hard to predict, its hard to imagine anyone would think they could run a whole national economy. And yet, that's what our politicians regularly promise to do. ...or how to make it either Way back in 1958, Leonard Read wanted to use the simply pencil as an illustration to show just how arrogant central planners really are. But he didn't talk about how much pencils are worth. He, instead, wrote a first person account, from the pencil's perspective, about how "not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me." This account, titled, I, Pencil, highlights how, as simple as a pencil might be, its few parts require enormous expertise. Consider just the wood, which requires men who need to know how to cut trees safely, and others who can drive those sketchy logging roads. And don't forget the knowledge needed to make the logger's chainsaw, and the driver's truck. And on and on it goes, layers upon layers of complexity such that, no man can know how to do it all. Not even close. And if no one knows how to make even a pencil, how would they be arrogant enough to think they could run the whole of the economy? But how then does a pencil get made, if no one actually knows how to do it? And how does an entire economy produce without someone at the top calling the shots. Economist Adam Smith credited "the invisible hand" – economics decisions that no one man or woman at the top could ever competently plan, all of us together can coordinate simply be everyone seeking after their own self-interest. Seeking my own self-interest could be misunderstood as being self-ish, but what Smith is emphasizing here is humility over hubris – I can't figure out what's best for everyone, but I am the best qualified person to figure out what works best for me. And when I am allowed to do so, the results are astonishing. This kind of unmanaged free enterprise has lifted more people out of poverty than every government program ever created. As documentarian Arthur Brooks noted, “From 1970 until today the percentage of people living at starvation’s door has decreased by 80%. Two billion people have been pulled out of starvation-level poverty." And where did the credit lie? It was due to a turn to freer markets. These results shouldn't surprise us, simply because they happen when governments obey God's own economics laws: do not steal, and importantly, do not envy. Adam Smith's "invisible hand" would best be understood as God's own Invisible Hand – He is directing traffic, for our good. Read's I, Pencil essay gets into the theology of free enterprise only a little, but it is an absolute classic for a reason. You can read it for free, or get it as a free e-booklet in all sorts of e-book formats here. You can also watch an animated audio version of it below (or an abridged and less lyrical  video here). And if you want more of the same, you can learn about how no one knows how to make a loaf of bread, or read my review of a clever kids' book called, No One Knows How to Make a Pizza. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Documentary, Movie Reviews

The Homeschool Awakening

Documentary 2022 / 95 minutes Rating: 8/10 A comic popped up in my social media feed last month, that perfectly summed up this documentary. It featured a mom talking with a just-released genie. “Equip me with the ability to homeschool,” wished the mom. “Granted!” the genie replied. “But I don’t feel any different,” the mom observed. “Exactly,” said the genie. That’s the message producer and narrator Kirk Cameron wants us to hear: that ordinary average parents can do this. You may not have a teaching degree, or any post-secondary at all, but because you know and love your children best, you are already better equipped than you know. To sell homeschooling, Cameron begins by taking on the most common worries and concerns. It’s quite comical to hear homeschooling families explain why they were once so sure they’d never homeschool themselves. “I’ve always viewed homeschooling as somewhat of a cult.” “I kind of thought homeschooling meant that you were Amish and that you made your bread from scratch.” “Homeschooling? I can’t teach my kids.” "Don’t you care about your children’s education? They aren’t going to have any friends. And how are they going to learn science? Are you a history teacher? A math instructor?” For all sorts of reasons Afterward we start learning why they went ahead anyway. The strength of the film is in the many different stories it explores. There’s a half dozen families here, all with their own reasons. Flexibility – Kirk Cameron did it for the schedule it allowed. He travels for his work as an actor, and when he came home, he could only see his kids after they got home and after their homework was done. Once they were homeschooling, his kids could come with him, and they could get more work done in less time, allowing him to see his children much more. If school is brutal – Some chose homeschooling because their child hated school. Socialization is often raised as an objection to homeschooling, but when it comes to socialization, school can oftentimes be brutal, with all the pressure from peers. And if a kid doesn't "fit"? Then they'll get ignored, or worse yet, bullied. Homeschooling allows kids to forget about what the 12-year-olds of the world think, and just work on becoming their adult self instead. Raising up a child in the way he should go – Parents also chose homeschooling because they didn’t want their children’s education to be in conflict with their values. They didn’t want their kids learning God got it wrong when it comes to gender, creation, marriage, and more. Meeting special needs – One couple had a special needs daughter that they thought they could help best. Individualized – Most of the families praised how individualized it could be – not every kid is “book smart”  but that doesn’t mean they aren’t smart in other ways. Homeschooling can allow parents to explore what those other ways are. Different smarts One family started homeschooling because of the experience a dad had in his own public school years. One of his teachers had pegged him as stupid, and told him so. That impacted him all the way into university, where he finally figured out that, hey, I've got my own kind of smarts. This idea of different kinds of smarts might be the part that most impacted me. We've all known people, maybe especially young men, who might not have been "school smart" but once they were out of school proved themselves to be incredibly capable out in the working world. Dr. Katy Koch puts it this way: “So the question is not ‘Am I smart?' The question is not, ‘Well, how smart am I?’ The question is, ‘How am I smart?’” She then presents the 8 types of smart she's identified. The first two below would fall under "school smart" and the next two under maybe "creative smart." Word smart Logic smart Art or picture smart Music smart Athletic, coordinated, body smart Nature smart People smart Self smart Some of the others are smarts that come from our interests - a kid who loves nature is eager to learn all about it. It was this section in particular that had me thinking even families who don't, and never will, homeschool could benefit from watching this documentary. We all are interested in helping our kids figure out their gifts, and many of them aren't going to be school smart. So what other gifts can we help them explore? Homeschooling is the quickest way to put a dent in public schooling It also struck me that homeschooling would be the quickest way to put a dent in public schooling, and that's important too. There's a quote, that R.C. Sproul may or may not have said that highlights how public schools can't be neutral. “There is no such thing as a neutral education. Every education, every curriculum, has a viewpoint. That viewpoint either considers God in it or it does not. To teach children about life and the world in which they live without reference to God is to make a statement about God. It screams a statement. The message is either that there is no God or that God is irrelevant. Either way the message is the same.” So, public schools aren't just bad, but irredeemably so and they need to go. But our own Christian brick and mortar schools take time to build, and need more teachers than we've even been able to supply, and for other reasons too they aren't an at-the-ready replacement for the public system. But with all sorts of online curriculum available right now, homeschooling could be. But what about socialization?  The big knock with homeschooling is socialization – how are children going to learn to interact with their peers if they aren't in a classroom with 20 other kids their age? The film offers up a whole bunch of answers to that question, so here's just a few: The real world isn't like school "There are a lot of people who grew up in school, so you’re friends with the girl who sits in the class with you, who you see. Then you grow up and you become an adult and you’re a mom and you’re at home and you have small kids and you look up one day and you say, 'where are the friends?'... I know so many people who don’t know how to pursue a friendship that doesn’t just happen where they are in the same place with someone else.” Why just their peers? “We wanted our kids to be able to relate to people of all different ages.” We do socialize! "People wonder about socialization. There’s so much socialization outside of just the school. There was sports and extracurricular activities." "It gives us so much more time for extracurricular activities because they are not spending 7, 8 hours a day. You spend much less time; you get more done and then you have time for taking karate classes, or we’re taking cooking classes or taking art classes, or we’re just exploring on our own and we’re going to travel and do things.” What about bullying? “I actually love that question, because I like to flip it. What do you think the benefits are socially of combining academics with peers? How is that beneficial? What about when the social actually creates a barrier to learning? Bullying, maybe from a teacher, or from peers, or if there is an economic difference in terms of how I dress so I’m perceived differently and so maybe not given the same opportunities. So socially, that’s actually an inhibitor to learning.” Whether you'll ever homeschool or not, watch this film Cameron is contrasting homeschooling with public schools – “Education really is discipleship. So who is going to disciple your kids? You or Caesar?” We are all on board with that challenge, but what's left out of the film is the idea of Christian brick and mortar schools as an option to consider. So, what with many of us backing the option Cameron doesn't even discuss, why is this a documentary we should see too? I'm going to say, inspiration. It is inspiring to see parents in communities outside our own take up the educational task God has given them – and take it up with the same, or maybe even greater intent and earnestness. I don't anticipate our family homeschooling any of our kids in the future, but this film is a reminder that I can and must be more involved in educating them here in our home. We love our school's teachers, but they didn't make our baptismal vows; my wife and I did. So Kirk Cameron is encouraging me to get at it helping my kids explore their interests, and develop their talents. Whether that's giving them opportunities to get into baking, or asking a friend if they can come do a shift at their restaurant, there are educational opportunities of all sorts, that all sorts of parents can craft for our kids. So watch this with your spouse, or a group of friends. Watch it with your whole Christian school and be inspired by a whole bunch of other parents who know God wants them to raise up our children in His ways. That can't help but be a motivating message. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Church history, People we should know

There was a man: Ulrich Zwingli

“Many men are like unto sausages: Whatever you stuff them with, that they will bear in them.” – Russian writer Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910). “Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old, they will not turn from it.” – Proverbs 22:6  **** There was a man. But first there was a child. This particular child was born on New Year’s Day in 1484 in the small village of Wildhaus. He lived in a cottage whose roof was weighed down with stones to protect it from gusty winds traveling down from surrounding mountains. Wildhaus lay in a valley and was located in the Swiss canton of St. Gallen. This canton was one of the eight cantons, or territorial divisions, in Switzerland, and was noted for its textile production. Respected for their amazing output of stunning embroidery, many women of the village were expert needleworkers. It is easy to imagine that the child saw his mother embroider intricate and beautiful patterns on cloth and that his eyes were fascinated by the detailed stitching and designs that flourished under her hands. But the strange truth was that when the child stood in the doorway of his home in Wildhaus, his father instructed him in embroidery as well – embroidery, not worked at by his mother, but fashioned and created by the Lord God. There were mountains decorated with glaciers, embellished with gorges, fashioned with meadows and flowers, and flowing with streams and rivulets. “Look,” said the father, “look and see what God has made.” And the child was shown incredible illustrations of the majesty of God. And a wonderful awe for the Creator was planted in the heart of the child. Quite the family The child’s father was the bailiff, the magistrate, of the parish of Wildhaus. He was an upright man and had the respect of everyone in his community. As well as being the bailiff, the father’s calling was that of a shepherd. The child saw his father leave in the spring, together with two older brothers, as they drove a flock of sheep up the mountains to the high pastures. He watched them climb until they disappeared from his sight. When summer began to decline and lengthening nights began, the child anticipated their return and daily watched for them to come back home to the cottage. He knew that a time of village companionship would begin – a time when neighbors would gather together in one another’s homes and fill the evenings with stories and songs. Perhaps they would speak of the Pied Piper, who in the year of the child’s birth, it was said, had carried away 130 children who were never seen again. It was speculated that this piper was the devil. Or perhaps the villagers who were gathered together, spoke of the Inquisition in faraway Spain and shuddered at the tortures being inflicted on those who disagreed with the church. It is also possible that they spoke of long-ago heroes who had defended the Swiss mountains from enemies. And everyone, including the child, would feel patriotism surge through them. The child also had a grandmother. She was a pious woman. At times the child would sit on her knee, and she would tell him stories about heroes of a different kind. Into his small ears, she recited tales of saints in church history – and she told him about heroes in the Bible, heroes who had climbed hills in Judah and who had defended their homeland. She spoke of Jesus, born in a cradle in a stall in Bethlehem; she narrated the story of Calvary; and she took him to the Resurrection. Having no Bible, she could only recount what she had learned from priests but the first seeds of truth were imbedded in the heart of the child. From one school to the next The child had a name. He was baptized Ulrich. Of the eight sons his mother bore his father, he stood out in ability to learn. His parents recognized this as a special gift and sent him to board with his uncle, Bartholomew who lived in nearby Wesen. An earnest and honest priest, Bartholomew sent his nephew to the village school. Soon, however, the child had learned all there was to know in the Wesen village school. Consequently, his father and his uncle arranged for Ulrich to go to a school in Basel. He was now ten years of age. Again, it soon became apparent that the boy outshone his classmates and from Basel he was transferred to a school in Bern when he was twelve years of age. In Bern, Ulrich excelled in debating, poetry, philosophy and music. Indeed, he was so talented in all the subjects he was taught, that the Dominicans of Bern asked him to join their order, young as he was. However, Ulrich’s father and uncle, who had been salted with Reformation ideas, were averse to this. Aware of the child’s potential, they determined they would educate him for the church, but under the tutelage of those acquainted with the new ideas. Consequently, they enrolled Ulrich in the University of Vienna. From Vienna, Ulrich went back to Basel from whose university he graduated in 1506 with a Master of Arts. He was now twenty-two years of age and obtained the position of parish priest in the village of Glarus. Started on the right path, time would prove that he would not diverge from it. Ulrich’s last name was Zwingli. It is said of him that at no time did he use the title “Master of Arts,” but was quick to say: “One is our Master, even Christ.” 67 Articles History records many things about Ulrich Zwingli. Even as Luther wrote ninety-five theses, Zwingli penned sixty-seven. Even as he had seen his earthly father guide sheep up to highland pasture, so he wanted to lead the Swiss people up to the mountain of God, up to the truth of the heavenly Father. Some of Zwingli’s theses read: The sum and substance of the Gospel is that our Lord Christ Jesus, the true son of God, has made known to us the will of His heavenly Father, and has with His sinlessness released us from death and reconciled us to God. Hence Christ is the only way to salvation for all who ever were, are and shall be. He who seeks or shows another way errs, and, indeed, he is a murderer of souls and a thief. The true holy scriptures know nothing of purgatory after this life. Christ is the only mediator between God and ourselves. When the position of leut-priest (preacher and pastor) in the Great Minster (monastery church) in Zurich became vacant in the latter part of 1518, Zwingli became its spiritual guide. Seven years later, in 1525, Zurich’s great council adopted many of his suggestions. The Latin mass was replaced by a simple communion service; a German-language Bible was introduced; the clergy were allowed to marry; the church’s land property was secularized and its jurisdiction heavily restricted; and images were destroyed or withdrawn from the churches. Grace where God allows Mandatory fasting became Ulrich’s first public controversy. The dispute began on the first Sunday of Lent, which meant it was the onset of forty days of mandatory penitential fasting before Easter. During these forty days only one meal a day was allowed in the evening – meat, eggs, and butter were strictly forbidden. It so happened that, on this initial Sunday, a few months after Ulrich’s thirty-eighth birthday, some citizens of Zurich prepared to meet together. In Grabengasse, in a home just a hop, skip, and jump away from Zurich’s city walls, these men knocked on the door of Christoph Froschauer. It was late afternoon, the time folks prepared to eat, and the sun was setting. Christoph Froschauer was a printer and a man of some note in Zurich. He was in charge of all the printing for the city government. Christoph himself answered the door, heartily welcomed the men and ushered them into his parlor. They all sat down. It was a varied group of men in that parlor. Two of them were priests, and one of these was Ulrich Zwingli. Reclining next to the priests was Hans, a tailor, Laurenz, a weaver, Niklaus, a shoemaker, two unnamed printing employees, and Heinrich, a baker. They had these matters in common: they were all tradesmen, they all loved the reforming ideas which Ulrich was preaching, and all were willing to be part of the change they were about to stir up. As the men were talking amongst themselves, Elise, Christoph’s wife, walked in with serving platters. The platters held sausages. Crispy and golden, juicy and flavorful, they smelled and looked good. They tickled the appetite. Everyone (with the exception of Ulrich, who tacitly approved of the events by being present), ate the meat with great relish. Celebrating Christian freedom in the matter of eating and drinking, the men enjoyed their fellowship and then, bidding one another farewell, returned to their homes. Subsequently, after the news of their meal leaked out, all, with the exception of Ulrich, were jailed. As the men sat behind bars, Ulrich took to the pulpit and preached. He exegeted New Testament passages that pertained to fasting, to keeping traditions, and to abstaining from certain foods. He argued that although fasting served a valuable purpose, especially as an act of personal or corporate piety, there was no biblical basis for making fasting obligatory for all Christians. Some of his words were: “…abstinence from meat and drink is an old custom, which, however, later by the wickedness of some of the clergy, came to be viewed as a command.” He summarized by saying, “…if you will fast, do so; if you do not wish to eat meat, eat it not; but leave Christians a free choice in the matter.” The consequence was that the Bishop of Constance sent a delegation to investigate the matter. The Zurich Council called for a debate between Zwingli and a representative of the bishop. In that debate the representative could not refute Zwingli’s scriptural defense and both the Council and the people of Zurich cheered. All sided with Zwingli. Consequently, the child who was now a man, was free to continue his preaching. One year after the gathering in Grabengasse, all mandatory fasting was officially abolished in Zurich. The Council followed, not only Zwingli’s lead in “sola scriptura” as opposed to tradition instituted by men, but also began abolishing other traditions of the Catholic church. Zwingli lived and preached in Zurich until his death in 1531. He was killed in battle during the Second War of Kappel – a battle fought between Catholic and Protestant forces. He was 47 years old. After the Second War of Kappel, Swiss cantons were given the freedom to choose Catholicism or Protestantism and an uneasy peace rested between them. Zwingli believed that a united Protestant Switzerland would represent God's true will for the Church on earth and that Catholics who refused to recognize this were not only standing against Zwingli and his teachings but against God himself. Not the same church Today there is a Swiss Reformed Church. It was begun in 1920. In 2024 it had a total membership of approximately 1.78 million with 982 congregations in various cantons. It allows the ordination of women and has embraced inclusivity by permitting blessings for same-sex civil unions. The rather sad 2000 census in Wildhaus recorded that in Zwingli’s birthplace 468 people were Catholic, while 572 belonged to the Swiss Reformed Church. Of the rest of the population, there were 17 individuals who belonged to the Orthodox Church, and there were 17 individuals who belonged to another Christian church. There were 49 who were Islamic. There were 3 individuals who belonged to another church (not listed on the census), 88 belonged to no church, were agnostic or atheist, and 46 individuals did not answer the question. Done for the Lord We might automatically surmise that Zwingli would be disappointed in the modern day apparent disintegration of his life’s work. Add to this, he did not live to see the amazing results that followed soon after his passing. Yet this Swiss child, who became a man, knew a wonderful surety. He was a child of God. Through the Holy Spirit, he had stood up for Truth; he had faithfully exegeted God’s Word; and he had daily turned to his Father. He had used the time allotted to him well and, consequently, was given contentment. Hebrews 6:10 echoes his reason for living and his hope for the future: “God is not unjust; He will not forget your work and the love you have shown Him as you have helped His people and continue to help them.” Zwingli’s life and his death encourage us to work, to work in these days which often seem rather hopeless in results. They point us to 1 Corinthians 15:58: "Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast and immovable. Always excel in the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain." Christine Farenhorst has written for Reformed Perspective going back 35 years. Her most recent book is “Upheld: A widow’s story of love, grief, & the constancy of God.” The picture of Zwingli is adapted from a painting by Hans Asper in 1549....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Animated, Movie Reviews

Up

Family 2009 / 96 min Rating: 9/10 Boy meets girl, they fall in love, get married, make plans for an adventurous trip, life gets in the way but it is a wonderful life nonetheless... and then the girl dies, leaving the boy alone. All of Carl and Ellie's life together is covered in the opening few minutes, quickly and beautifully. But our young ones will likely find this simply too wistful a beginning to endure without bawling – in the Dykstra household, when I first tried this with my trio, all then under 10, those first few minutes did them in, and we couldn't continue. But this is just the setup for an epic expedition – Carl, now aged, inflates hundreds of balloons to sail off, house and all, on that long-delayed adventure. He's going to do what the two of them had always planned – he's going to move to Paradise Falls, in the wilds of South America. And it's only once he's air-bound that he discovers a stowaway, a Boy Scout named Russell who happened to be on the porch when the house took off. So what we've got here is a sweet tale about a lovable but grouchy old man who finds the friend he is in need of in this eager young Scout. Cautions There's quite a lot of physical peril in this movie, including a pack of talking vicious dogs and a villain who actually wants to kill people (not just imprison them), but I'd still say the real measure of whether your children will enjoy this or even be able to handle it is that emotionally-intense opening covering Carl and Ellie's life together. If they can handle that, I think they won't get too stressed by the rest. Conclusion That said, I don't know if this is actually a kids' film, and I say that, not as an objection, but just a clarification. Sure, this is only rated PG, and lots of kids could handle it. But there's just more feels here than the littlest hearts can handle. For adults, however, there's so much beauty, and excitement, and even bravery and courage to enjoy. At the time, Up was only the second animated film to ever receive an Oscar nomination for Best Picture, and that was due to a lot of adult appreciation! So a couple could make this a great, innocent, date night film. And if they have teen kids, they can come too. Everyone agrees: this is one of the best animated movies ever made. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Animated, Movie Reviews

Wall-E

Animated / Dystopian / Family 2008 / 98 min Rating: 9/10 Wall-E is a small robot with a big job – he has to tidy up Earth! 700 years earlier humans abandoned the planet to the garbage they’d covered it with and they've been living on a giant space ark ever since. Wall-E’s assignment, these last many centuries, has been to get on with the giant cleanup job. In a homage to the silent films of old, the opening scene, twenty minutes long, is completely dialogue-free... and utterly charming. Wall-E is animated, sure, but it's so much more than just a children's movie. We watch the solitary Wall-E go about his task. Where once there were hundreds or maybe millions of other robots working alongside him, the years going by have left him as the only robot still on the job. That he's still running is due to his quiet brilliance – he might not talk, but he is a genius at finding the replacement parts he needs. So this little robot keeps stacking up cube after compacted cube of garbage, while also keeping the “treasures” he finds: a rubber ducky, an old boot, a kid’s sports trophy, and a VCR that'll still run old TV shows. There's much more I could share, but I don't want to ruin the surprise – this is such a creative, unique film! Cautions I will note that when it was released, this was positioned by producers as an eco-friendly film. The piles of garbage all over the Earth, and humans forced to flee to outer space, had many convinced this was a climate-catastrophist metaphor, a wagging finger shaking at anyone who doesn’t think the world is about to end in 12 years. And that's probably what was intended. But you don't have to watch it like you're Greta Thunberg or Al Gore. And unless someone is trying to use this to propagandize your kids, they don't have to watch it that way either. I'm not saying there wasn't an agenda – it seems like there was an agenda – but Christians agree that throwing trash all over such that it covers the entire Earth miles deep is bad. I'm just saying, the connection to today's global warming hysteria is never made. The producers knew it would be read in by many and maybe most, but we can choose not to. A more notable concern, if you are watching this with little kids, is there are moments when Wall-E is in peril – actually quite a few. He's such a cute little guy that I worry parents might mistake this as having the same level of tension as the similarly cute Paw Patrol show and films. But this packs more of a punch. Still, littles can be assured that it will all work out in the end – everyone will be safe (and parents can minimize the impact by turning down the sound during the more dramatic moments). Conclusion So, yes, the producers tried to promote this to eco-activists, but their marketing doesn't change that this is first and foremost an innocent, beautiful romance between robots Wall-E and the jet-powered Eve. And for parents looking to pass on a lesson or two, here's a great one to consider from Rod Dreher: "Wall-E contends that real life is hard, real life is struggle, and that we live most meaningfully not by avoiding pain and struggle, but by engaging it creatively, and sharing that struggle in community." Or, to put it another way, when life hands you lemons, make the very best of lemonade. Or, to put it in more Christian terms, we know God brings hardship into our lives, but blessings too. And if we receive His blessings gratefully, instead of fixating on our hardships, who knows but what we can do with those blessings. To sum up, Wall-E ranks among the great classics, so if you somehow haven't already seen it, you've just got to! Check out the trailer below. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Family, Movie Reviews

Ivanhoe

Drama / Adventure 1952 / 107 minutes Rating: 8/10 If you love the story of Robin Hood, this is the sequel (or maybe prequel) that you've been looking for. Based on Sir Walter Scott's 1819 novel Ivanhoe, it shares Robin Hood's English setting, time period, and villain – Prince John and his Norman knights are up to their conniving and taxing. And Robin Hood and his band are along for the ride here, even if these aren't quite the same "merry men" we've come to know in other stories. As the story begins, the Saxon knight Wilfred of Ivanhoe is searching for his missing king, Richard the Lionheart, who he followed to the Crusades. When he finds the king imprisoned, he returns to England to raise the ransom. But that puts him at odds with the king's scheming brother, Prince John, who can have the throne for himself, so long as Richard never returns. Ivanhoe is the son of a Saxon lord, but his father Cedric disowned him for following the Norman king Richard to the Crusades. So when Ivanhoe returns home, he has to do so in secret, greeting his lady love, Rowena, and then riding off with the jester Wamba to fill in as his squire. But if his father won't help him raise the ransom, who can Ivanhoe turn to? Two Jews play a key part. Ivanhoe rescues Isaac of York from an attempted robbery, and in turn Isaac offers his fundraising skills. And Isaac's daughter Rebecca secretly funds Ivanhoe's purchase of new armor. From then on there are jousts to be had and battles to be fought - lots of action here! Cautions There may be battles and jousts aplenty, but despite the many arrows flying and swords swinging, there's hardly any blood seen. So, not for littles, but kids over 10 likely won't find this scary or shocking. Not so much a caution, but a point of discussion for families: the most courageously religious figure in this film is Rebecca, a Jew. She is tempted with the opportunity to save her own life, if only she will turn from her faith, and she refuses. That is admirable in those circumstances, and even an example of courage to Christians, but it is also someone courageous holding onto what is not true, which could be worth a discussion with your kids. Conclusion Part of what makes this good family viewing are the issues it addresses. There's racism, Norman vs. Saxon, and Saxon vs. Norman, and antisemitism too. But in answer to this ethnic hatred, we have a good Norman and a heroic Saxon – King Richard and Ivanhoe – uniting to show a way forward. But before any of that's possible, who does Ivanhoe have to turn to for help? Why, it's the dismissed and disregarded Jews Isaac of York and his daughter Rebecca. Then there's the issue of love, what it is, and what it masquerades to be. One of the villains, Sir Bois-Guilbert, believes himself in love with Rebecca but if she won't be with him, then he'd see her dead instead. Rebecca is the counter-example, in love with Ivanhoe, and willing to help him even though he will never be hers. Finally, there's courage on display. Ivanhoe is the obvious example, searching for his king by his lonesome, and putting his life on the line repeatedly. But so many others stand up too, including Rebecca, willing to go toe-to-toe with Lady Rowena, in a bid to save Ivanhoe's life. The pacing here is decent in the first half, but slows some in the middle (which is why I waffled some between giving this an 8 or a 7), before picking up again. If you think the lull might test your children's patience, then consider breaking Ivanhoe up into a couple of showings, one half now, the other half tomorrow. Or have an intermission. And help with the ambience by making sure the lights are low, the popcorn bucket is full, and the snuggly blankets are at the ready. This is a good one, folks, a classic story of selfless heroism, racism rebutted, and the truest love displayed. You can watch the trailer below. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Animated, Movie Reviews

Christmas Carol: the movie

Animated 2001 / 81 minutes Rating: 7/10 Dickens' classic tale gets a child-friendly brush up, with a couple of cute mice companions added to the mix, and just a touch of romance too. Though 95% of it is animated, it is book-ended with a set of live action scenes featuring author Charles Dickens doing a reading of his Christmas Carol novel to an appreciative audience. He offers them a story of ghosts, but the first scare of the night comes from a little mouse skittering through the theater. Responding to the excitement, Dickens decides to adapt his novel just a smidge, to begin it with a mouse, "making its way through London town." And then off we go, into the rest of what is an animated tale. For those who don't know the story already, rich miser Ebenezer Scrooge has quite the Christmas Eve, getting visited by four ghosts, one after another. Cautions The two big concerns for Christians here would be Dickens' portrayal of ghosts and his portrayal of Christmas. The story's repeated ghostly appearances can be divided into two sorts. First up, there's Jacob Marley, Scrooge's every-bit-as-evil but no longer living business partner who comes by with a warning about the three ghosts that will follow. So, what does the Bible say about ghosts? Only one ghostly visitation occurs in Scripture: Samuel appearing to Saul, with the involvement of the witch of Endor in 1 Samuel 28, and the text does seem to indicate it really was Samuel. While Samuel had his own warning, he didn't have any of Marley's chain-rattling theatrics. Then there are the three spirits that follow, the ghosts of Christmas past, present, and future. The Bible speaks of an unseen spiritual dimension, where angels and demons alike exist. But spirits of Christmas? They don't exist, and if they did, they would steer Scrooge towards Jesus, not simply generosity. That's the biggest error in this, and every other version of Dickens' tale – it offers Scrooge a works-based way to earn his righteousness, rather than the blood of Jesus to wash him clean. So if you have young ones with you, a conversation will need to be had about Dickens' "artistic license." The author isn't trying to teach us about the afterlife, but he is trying to teach us what it looks like to live right in the here and now. So kids will need to be alerted to what Dickens gets wrong about ghosts, but more importantly, what he gets wrong about the point of living. God does tell us to love our neighbor as ourselves, but that is the Second Great Commandment, and this story elevates it to the point of completely obscuring the First (Matt. 22:34-40). Conclusion So why would a Christian want to watch Dickens' ghostly tale? Because it is a cultural icon, on par with the Greek myths, the tales of Sherlock Holmes, or Shakespeare's plays – this is a story worth watching, and discussing with your family, simply because everyone knows it. And while other accounts are more famous, this animated version is the most family-friendly, with the mice, and the romantic angle, taking just a bit of the edge off the ghostly apparitions. Check out the trailer below. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Drama, Movie Reviews

Mr. Deeds Goes to Town

Drama/Romance 115 min / 1936 Rating: 8/10 Frank Capra is best known for his 1946 hit It's a Wonderful Life. But a decade earlier he won an Oscar for directing this story about small-town yokel Longfellow Deeds, who inherits the massive amount of $20 million (think half a billion today) and won't let it change him. Mr. Deeds is a salt-of-the-earth sort – he doesn't drink, won't smoke, plays a mean tuba, and makes his money writing those endearing greeting card messages – so big money, and getting dragged off to the Big Apple, won't get him to abandon his small-town values. He's also not looking for fame, so he has no interest in the reporters trailing after him. So where's the conflict in this story? Well, there are some big city lawyers who don't want Deeds looking too closely at how they've managed the fortune he's inheriting. But the real troublemaker is big city reporter Louise "Babe" Bennett, who isn't above trickery if it will get her a story. She appeals to Deeds' decency, pretending to be an impoverished damsel-in-distress who just happens to faint right in front of him. When he comes to her assistance, and falls for her charms, she uses her inside track to get scoop after scoop, without Deeds suspecting she's actually a journalist. But she starts coming around as she gets to know Deeds. And by the time he follows through with his plan to give the inheritance away – to one needy person at a time – she's determined to have his back, even if he isn't interested in her anymore. He'll need the help, as the big city men want to use his generosity to proves he’s insane and get him locked up. Cautions It's mentioned in passing that Deeds' late uncle, who he inherited the money from, was a womanizer who had as many as 20 women in the mansion at once. Deeds also gets into a dust-up, when a table of snobs invites him over just to make fun of him. Deeds also gets into the wrong sort of company, getting invited on a "bender" (think pub crawl) but while he's happy to go along, it's apparent he doesn't know what a bender is, and the next day he regrets accepting the invitation. That's about it. But while there's nothing much to worry about here, the 2002 Adam Sandler remake, Mr. Deeds, packs in some unfortunate additions – a dozen or so potty jokes, a foot fetishist, a pornographer, and at least a few instances of the Lord’s name being taken in vain. This is yet another instance where less is so much more. Conclusion This is a great film, still celebrated today for good reason. It's about a man sticking – with some hiccups – to his morals, even when everyone around is trying to tear him down. And while there are those "hiccups," they are delicately delivered, talked about rather than shown, making this one gentle enough for the whole family. But it is black and white. And it is 2 hours long. That means today's screen-scrolling dopamine-addicts might not have the attention span to enjoy this all-time classic. But for the rest of us, this 90-year-old film still has a lot to love and something important to say. Two thumbs up! ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Culture Clashes

Which conspiracies are true?

A quick survey of X or the top YouTube-influencer-content on the Right reveals that conspiracy theories have never been so widely spread or fervently believed. You can hear Tucker Carlson claiming that the atomic bomb was literally (not figuratively) created by demons; Candace Owens attempting to claim that Erika Kirk is tied to the assassination of her husband, and that Owens herself was the subject of an apparently shockingly inept assassination attempt commissioned personally by the Macrons (Israel was involved somehow, of course); and plenty more. The phrase “conspiracy theory” itself is, naturally, controversial. Originating in the 1860s and popularized in political theory circles by Karl Popper in 1945, it has been (wrongly) attributed to the CIA as an attempt to deflect questions surrounding the Warren Commission on the assassination of JFK after the already-common term was used in a 1967 memo discussing theories about the president’s murder. Nonetheless, the phrase has been used to dismiss anyone asking serious questions about powerful movements, ideologies, and politicians. Provable vs. theory There is, of course, such a thing as a conspiracy – legally speaking, “a secret agreement between two or more people to commit an unlawful act.” A conspiracy theory is the suspicion or belief that multiple parties have conspired to some nefarious end. Some conspiracy theories turn out to be true as we acquire evidence. Some remain merely theories, which is to say, the evidence is weak, circumstantial, or non-existent. Distinguishing between provable conspiracies and conspiracy theories is, in our chaotic, addictive digital age, essential. Many find it increasingly difficult to distinguish between the two; others, because of the loyalty they have for certain influencers, are merely unwilling. Lack of trust is warranted It must be noted that the rise of conspiracy theories was made inevitable by the collapse of trust in institutions. There were the widespread deceits from governments and medical institutions during Covid. As I wrote for The European Conservative a couple of years ago, the collusion of the press, medical institutions, and governments to push transgender ideology has been another major catalyst for the collapse of trust in institutions. When law enforcement puts out a mugshot of a bearded rapist and tells the public they are hunting for a woman, the effect on public trust is predictably devastating. In short, many conspiracies do turn out to be true. The need to discern, not rebound And how do we know? Because we acquire actual evidence. Our institutions and mainstream press have an evidentiary standard that has been corrupted by pernicious, wicked ideologies that they have adopted, and when we acquire information from those sources, we must factor in that bias and re-interpret (most notably, but not exclusively, with Orwellian reporting on abortion and transgender issues) through that lens. But our solution to this information landscape is not to abandon any evidentiary standard altogether, but to rigorously apply the evidentiary standard abandoned by the institutions and the press. Indeed, the phrase “trust the experts” has become something of a sick joke, after all the provable lies and ideologically motivated mistakes perpetrated by said experts. But many on the Right have not actually abandoned a “trust the experts” approach; they have merely replaced them with new experts, without wondering whether these replacements actually have any expertise at all or whether their own credibility is rooted in a fidelity to truth and an evidentiary standard. Influencers such as Owens and Carlson deliberately play into this, constantly dismissing their critics not by addressing their arguments but by implying that they are members of the discredited expert class. But what is their evidentiary standard? Candace Owens, of course, has quite famously claimed that she has received investigative tips in dreams; that she can just “feel” when things are “off”; that she “doesn’t know, but she know knows.” Anyone genuinely seeking truth should take a moment to actually review her record of blatant historical error and deliberate deceit; if that record does not bother you, then you should recognize that it is not truth or a genuine evidentiary standard that matters to you. If someone can be proven so consistently wrong and maintain your loyalty, you are doing precisely what the Left does with their own idealogues: Choosing to believe someone for reasons other than their actual track record. Many conservative influencers have proven just as hackish and agenda-driven as their progressive opponents. That should matter to those who care about the truth. Otherwise, we do not have principles—we have preferences. What does it look like when a conservative influencer applies the evidentiary standard to a conspiracy theory? Consider some of Matt Walsh’s recent episodes. As he has pointed out, those seeking the “truth” about Charlie Kirk’s assassination have spent almost no time looking into the LGBT activist actually arrested and charged with his murder – and he laid out precisely why he believes Owens, who is his friend, is dead wrong: Compare Walsh’s method of investigation to what Owens is doing on her show. One has an evidentiary standard; the other does not. (Dreams, feelings, and angry, compelling language do not count and certainly do not add up to truth.) Even more devastating was Walsh’s rebuttal of Owens’ ongoing character assassination of Erika Kirk, which he ended with a powerful and moving plea for moral decency, publicly begging Owens – who, again, is his friend – to stop what she is doing: Unanswered questions doesn’t mean any answer will do Let’s take another major story – the Jeffrey Epstein files. The mysterious sexual predator, connected to countless elite figures, has become a lightning rod for conspiracy theories because there are so many obviously unanswered and open questions. Did he really conveniently die of suicide? Who did he work for, if anyone? How did he get his money? How did he get away with his crimes for so long? Was he running a sexual blackmail operation on behalf of an intelligence service? These are genuine questions. They deserve real answers. But many major influencers are not looking to actually find answers – they are insisting that the files released thus far prove whatever they were saying before the files were released. Where the files do not prove their claims, they move the evidentiary bar, claiming that the most incriminating material has clearly been destroyed, or has yet to be released, or will never be released. In short, the actual evidence is only incidental to the claims they are making. If it appears to support their theories, they wave it about as evidence; if it does not, that, too, is somehow also evidence. In short: Evidence is evidence, but no evidence is also evidence. In a massive analysis published in February, for example, conservative journalists Alex Gutentag and Michael Shellenberger noted that although they had first believed that Jeffrey Epstein was connected to intelligence services (“particularly Mossad and the CIA”), their review led them to a different conclusion. After summarizing the case for intelligence connections and citing the most compelling evidence in favor of that conclusion, they write: But after having spent several weeks reading through the files and related investigations, it’s clear to us that the totality of available evidence does not support the picture of a government-backed sex blackmail operation. Rather, it suggests that Epstein primarily served his own interests. If Epstein was a slave to anything, it was to his passions and perversions. Ward’s claim that Epstein “belonged to intelligence” is not reliable. She said she heard it third-hand from an anonymous source. Her former Vanity Fair editor and colleagues told the New Yorker that her reporting was not trusted, and said that she had provided inaccurate quotations in the past. Long-held feelings shouldn’t be misunderstood as facts If that conclusion makes you instinctively irritated or defensive before you even read their analysis, ask yourself if you have become ideologically invested in a specific conclusion. If the connection or lack thereof of a dead sexual predator to an intelligence agency is something you deeply care about to the point that you will not consider any evidence to the contrary, your view is not based on “truth-seeking,” but something else – loyalty to a podcaster who has captured your attention, loathing for the countries you have been led to believe were involved, belief that no evidence can ever be trusted. The nature of many conspiracy theories also means that the very theory itself becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. For example: Of course Epstein was an Israeli asset – that is precisely the sort of thing Israel does. And why do you feel that way? Well, in part because you have been told, for several years, by several prominent podcasters, that Epstein was an Israeli asset. A feeling that has become entrenched based on the theory now becomes a plausibility structure for the theory itself. Those consuming news and content in our chaotic information age must ask themselves a question: Why do I believe what I believe? Rebounding off a liar isn’t a way to the truth Every influencer these days – especially those on the Right – claim to be “truth-seekers,” while insisting that everyone who disagrees with them is lying or “one of them.” We know that progressives have biases, and we know that they lie: About gender ideology, about abortion, about the birth control pill, and countless other issues. But the solution to a corrupted evidentiary standard is not to replace it with a network of podcasters who abandon any evidentiary standard at all and merely replace progressive biases that are impervious to evidence with new biases that are equally impervious to evidence. If truth matters, we should pursue it. If evidence matters, then we should consider it – and the lack of it. If we are being led to conclusions through skillful narrative creation rather than proof, we should stop and consider where we are being led and why – because many influencers who identify as Christian have done more to confuse and corrupt their audiences than progressives ever could....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Drama, Movie Reviews

They were expendable

Drama / War 1945 / 135 minutes RATING: 7/10 John Wayne stars as one of the WWII naval officers intent on proving that small, fast “PT boats” (basically motor boats) could be an effective fighting force. While many details are fudged, the overall initiative – to set wood-hulled PT boats up against much bigger ships – is a part of history. It starts in 1941, with Lieutenant John Brickley's experimental squadron of PT boats getting their first showcase in front of the senior command. Despite a great showing, the admiral is unimpressed. The boats are maneuverable, he concedes, but he'd prefer to be in something bigger and more substantial. To make matters worse, Brickley's own executive officer, Rusty Ryan (John Wayne) feels the same. He wants in on the fighting, and if these boats are going to be in the battle, he wants a transfer. When the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor, it's all hands on deck across the Pacific, except Brickley's Philippines-based squadron – their boats are relegated to mail and message delivery. But as the Japanese advance on the Philippines, the squadron's base is attacked, and the PT boats finally get their chance to show what they can do, taking on a Japanese cruiser. Cautions Considering this is a war film, it's remarkable how minimal the concerns are. Sure, there is some violence, but nothing graphic. We see bombs and torpedoes and ships exploding, but that's all at a distance. We see fire and smoke, but not bodies. Maybe the one warning I'll offer is that this does not have the typical happy ending of most films. It ends on a downbeat, because the US has just gotten kicked right off the Philippines, and everyone knows there is a lot more fighting to go... and in the short-term it isn't going to go well for the US. But the film also ends with hope – they will be back. Conclusion While this was released after World War II ended, it was filmed early in 1945 while the fighting was still ongoing, and it shows. This was made to inspire friends and family on the homefront to keep up their efforts and push through to the finish line. While this is a favorite film for many, it is slower paced because, despite all the action onscreen, it isn't really an action film. This is a tribute to all those behind the development of the PT boats, who pushed on despite plenty of resistance from their higher-ups, and it shows how these boats went on to play a vital role in the Pacific war effort. That slower pacing, and that it's black and white, mean this might be a hard sell as a family film... though dad could throw it onto the TV while the kids are around and not worry about what they might see. This is for anyone interested in history, and films that educate even as they entertain – They Were Expendable highlights a chapter of World War II history you've probably never heard of before. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Animated, Movie Reviews

Finding Nemo

Animated / Family 2003 / 100 minutes RATING: 8/10 This is an ocean-crossing epic, with a father willing to travel to the ends of the earth to save his son, and a host of clever, quirky characters who respect and love him enough to offer whatever help they can. It's inspirational, hilarious, and the deep-ocean animation is gorgeous. But.... it is also dramatic in a way that little kids will not be able to handle, starting with a life-couldn't-be-better opening scene where we meet clownfish couple Marlin and Coral. They've just moved into their new home, on the edge of the reef, with its great view of the ocean, and they're eagerly awaiting the birth of their first batch of babies. 400 of them! Cue the ominous music, and the arrival of a barracuda that changes everything. Marlin tells his bride to run, but instead Coral heads to the little cave sheltering their brood of eggs. Marlin intervenes to try to save her, taking on the barracuda. But it's 10 times his size, and with a flick of its tail, it knocks Marlin out. When he wakes up, Coral is gone. And 399 of the eggs are gone too. There's just one left, and even it's cracked, but Marlin vows he will protect his little son, his little Nemo. That's the opener, not more than 5 minutes long, but it was why we didn't watch this with our kids until our youngest was over 10. The story never gets quite that scary again, but little kids won't know that, and could be on edge the whole film through, wondering if this scene or that is the one where Nemo or Marlin are going to get eaten too. But for an older crowd, this is quite the adventure. It is a rescue film, with dad Marlin needing to cross the ocean to save his son, after little Nemo gets scooped up by a scuba diver and deposited into a dentist office aquarium. Along for the ride is Dory, a Blue Tang fish ready to help, but whose memory isn't up to the task – she has short-term memory loss, repeatedly forgetting what just happened. That leaves Marlin frequently exasperated, but Dory's cheerful nature is also just what he needs to keep up his search. And even as Marlin is searching the seas for his son, Nemo is doing his very best to escape the aquarium, so he can make it back home to his dad. Cautions Nemo is such a cute fish, parents might expect his film to have only a Paw Patrol/Curious George level of tension. But as noted, there are some scary bits, starting right from the get-go when the barracuda attacks Nemo's parents, knocks out his dad, and presumably eats his mother, and 399 of his still-in-their-eggs brothers and sisters. Add in a scene with a creepy Anglerfish (see the trailer below), and a trio of sharks that go from fearsome, to friendly, and then back again, and there's tension here that little kids will not be up for. There is also some parental disrespect right at the start, where Marlin, who can't help but be overprotective (though, is it really overprotective when your wife and 399 other kids got eaten?) won't give Nemo room to grow and learn. So, in a fit of kiddish spite, he quietly tells his dad "I hate you" and then heads out into the open sea where he's not supposed to go, where he's promptly scooped up by a scuba diver, and taken away... necessitating the epic rescue journey his dad undertakes. So, some disrespect, yes, but the immediate consequence that follows highlights how Nemo's rebellion was not a good thing. Finally, there are a few instances of potty humor. Conclusion There's lots to love here, from a parental perspective – Finding Nemo highlights the benefits of teamwork and stick-to-it-iveness, and tackles disabilities in passing in a helpful way – Nemo has one fin smaller than the other and his disability is presented in a straight-forward manner that could spark some helpful conversations with kids. Then there's all the sea-life on display. It's not all that educational, because the hundreds of different fish on display show up for only a moment at a time, and we don't learn much of anything about them. But I could see this inspiring a kid to go check out some books on fish from their school library. Another attractive element, and one that stands in sharp contrast to so many other films: the dad here is the hero, with his risk-anything love for his son. That said, there's also a message here for parents to not be over-protective because kids need space to grow. That's true enough, but I'm not really a fan of children's films where it is the parents, not the kids, who have some learning to do. But with parents along for the ride, we can steer our littles to what Nemo needed to learn (that his dad would risk anything for him, and that his dad was right about the dangers out there). So, I'd recommend this as a film that parents and kids can both enjoy, but mom and dad should check out the first 5 minutes to gauge whether they think their kids will be able to handle it. I would save this for 10 and up. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Drama, Movie Reviews

The Count of Monte Cristo

Drama 1934 / 107 minutes RATING: 8/10 This is based on the story by Alexander Dumas (who also authored The Three Musketeers), and while it is a rip-roaring story it takes place during the French Revolution, which many of us may not be all that familiar with. So let me give you a short backgrounder. The story begins in 1815, a year after the French Emperor Napoleon had been forced to abdicate and exiled to the island of Elba. In the opening scene we learn that Napoleon wasn't done yet, and was conspiring with his remaining loyalists to try to retake the throne. The twists in this story start early. Napoleon sends a letter to his followers via the captain of a French merchant ship, the Pharoan. Before the ship lands, the captain dies, but not before he entrusts the letter to his first officer, Edmond Dantès. Dantès knows nothing of politics, but loves his captain and promises to do as asked, completely unaware of who the letter is from, and the trouble the letter will soon cause him. When his ship arrives in port it sure seems like Dantès has everything going his way: he's met by his love, the beautiful Mercédès, and the ship's owner promotes Dantès to be the Pharoan's new captain. But good fortune is followed by bad. Three men join forces to conspire against Dantès, using the letter he carried as an excuse to throw him in jail as a conspirator against the King. The three men are: Danglars, who wanted to be the new captain instead of Dantès Fernand Mondego, who loves Mercédès too, but doesn't have a chance with her so long as Dantès lives Gérard de Villefort, the King's prosecutor, who discovers his own father was the intended recipient of Napoleon's letter, so he frames Dantès to cover up for his father's treachery. The three get Dantès thrown into the deepest and darkest of prisons. But wait, if he's in jail for supposedly supporting Napoleon, then won't he be freed when the Emperor does successfully (if only briefly) retake his throne? Yes indeed, except that de Villefort, to cover his own tracks, signs off on an official statement that says Dantès was killed while trying to escape. That, then, gives Mondego his opening to marry Mercédès, who only agrees to his proposal because her true love is dead, and her mother's dying wish was that she marry Mondego. But Dantès isn't dead. And in that deep dark prison he meets a fellow inmate, an Italian priest named Abbé Faria, who has been planning an escape for years... and it will take years yet before the two of them can finally complete their secret tunnel. But no worries – Dantès can pass the time plotting his very clever revenge against the three men who sent him here. But what does Abbé Faria think of his vengeful schemes? The priest rebukes Dantès' anger, and encourages him to instead seek God's justice, not his own personal revenge. When Dantès does finally get out, he re-enters French society under the guise of being the Count of Monte Cristo, and in that role befriends the three men who stole his ship, his wife, and more than a decade of his life. None of them recognize him, and no-one is ready for him. Cautions Dantès doesn't exactly seek vengeance, but he also won't let the three men continuing on as they have been, pursuing their own gain at the expense of others. But there does sometimes seem only a hairs-breadth of a difference between stopping the three, and getting revenge against the three. So, it is worth a discussion with any younger viewers how a text like Romans 12:17-19 would apply here: "Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, 'Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,' says the Lord." So how much is Dantès concerned with justice, and how much with vengeance? Conclusion The original 1844 story was so popular that it was filmed 5 different times in the days of silent cinema, with this sixth adaptation the first to feature sound. I get it. Watching it now, nearly two centuries after the novel was first penned, and almost a century after it was filmed, it was intriguing. I loved the unfamiliarity of the story, not being able to predict just where it was going to go – we just don't tell them like this anymore. So who would love this? If you have a young viewing audience who has never seen a black and white film, this might not be the one that wins them over. The plot is a bit complicated, especially at the start where it assumes you know at least a bit about Napoleonic times. But I showed this to my own kids who are, I won't say black-and-white film fans, but have appreciated a good number of them, and they, ages 12 though 16, gave this a thumbs up. So, a solid 8 for classic film lovers, and maybe only a 6 if you haven't watch B&W before. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Hundreds of Reformed Christians gathered on Parliament Hill to protest Bill C-9

Last week, ARPA Canada hosted a rally on Parliament Hill calling on the federal government to halt Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act. Despite cold temperatures and blustery winds, approximately 400–450 people gathered on the Hill to show their concern about the legislation. Supporters travelled from across Ontario to take part, including more than 200 people who came from Southern Ontario by coach bus. With the help of local ARPA chapters, four coach buses were organized to bring supporters to Ottawa and back in a single day. For many participants, this made it possible to attend the rally who otherwise would not have been able to make the trip. We were thankful to have Rev. Joel Dykstra, Mr. Rod Taylor of the Christian Heritage Party, and Christine Van Geyn of the Canadian Constitution Foundation as guest speakers. The rally also drew the attention of federal lawmakers. At least thirteen Members of Parliament attended the event. Eleven MPs stood together on the podium when MP Jacob Mantle and MP Andrew Lawton spoke to those gathered. Planning for the event began in January, long before it was clear when Parliament would be addressing Bill C-9. Providentially, the rally took place during the same week that the House of Commons voted to end debate on the bill and move it forward in the legislative process. The bill will now return to the House for third reading, and a vote is expected on March 23 or 24. This brief delay provides Canadians with additional time to engage with their Members of Parliament about the legislation. We encourage everyone to contact their federal MP, whether by email or phone call. Information and action steps are available here. Our primary concern with Bill C-9 relates to an amendment during the committee stage. While the bill, as originally introduced, raised fewer concerns than previous hate-speech bills, a Justice Committee amendment removed the “good faith religious defense” from the Criminal Code. This defense had previously provided protection for those expressing sincerely held religious beliefs. Without that safeguard, there is concern that Christians and others could face greater legal risk for expressing biblical perspectives on moral and identity-related issues. Even beyond potential prosecutions, such legislation can create a “chilling effect,” where individuals choose to remain silent rather than risk legal consequences. For Christians, the concern is not merely political but principled. Scripture calls believers to love their neighbors while also speaking truth faithfully and with humility. The ability to express those convictions openly remains an important part of living out that calling in public life. Picture graciously supplied by ARPA Canada....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Family, Movie Reviews

The Black Arrow

Drama / Family 1948 / 76 minutes Rating: 7/10 Sir Richard Shelton is a young knight returning from  three years away fighting in the latest installment in the ongoing "War of the Roses" (1455-1487). He is a loyal soldier for the House of York side, the side which, for the moment, is the winning side. And their rivals, those who supported the losing House of Lancaster, are now having their lands and manors taken, and given over to York supporters. If you're not a big English history buff, that's okay, because that's all you need to know. What surprised me at the start was that Richard, clearly our hero-to-be, is fine with Lancaster lands being taken, even when they belonged to a long-time friend and neighbor Sir John Sedley. Before Richard arrives home an arrow narrowly misses him, striking the tree trunk next to him. Attached to the black arrow is a poetic warning: Sir Richard Shelton best beware When to Turnstall Keep he goes Treachery is lurking there – Take the word of one who knows. One home he discovers his father has been murdered, and his uncle and three trusted advisors all tell him Sir John Sedley did it, angered at his lands being taken. But what of this treachery Richard has been warned of? Can he trust the word of these four men? While he's not sure who to believe inside the castle, outside of it there is a roving band of outlaws delivering more messages – some deadly – via their black arrows. So who are the bad guys? Who should Richard trust? The warnings from the Black Arrow band? Or his own uncle, who supports the House of York just as he does too? The choice might seem obvious... but then Sir John Sedley's daughter enters the scene. Now the question is, how can the daughter of the man who murdered Richard's father say anything that would sway him? This is a good story, and got a bit of depth to it, even it is is a very truncated version of the Robert Louis Stevenson (185o-1894) novel of the same name. Cautions As might be expected in a medieval swashbuckling epic with "arrow" in the title, there are lots of folk getting shot with arrows and also lots of knights and soldiers falling to the ground via a well-placed sword thrust. All these deaths are bloodless – there is no gore – but there are still quite a number of them. Kids 10 and up won't find it scary, but it might be for youngers. Conclusion There's some echos here of Robin Hood for sure, though this Black Arrow band laughs a little less. The film's short length, loads of action, touch of true history, and the fact it was based on a classic work of fiction means there's could be something for almost everyone in your family. Our family all liked it, but also weren't gripped by it. We liked it, but I don't know that we'll watch it again. I couldn't find a movie trailer, but did find the clip below where Richard is forced to duel his old sword-fighting instructor. It highlights how, even though this is a black and white movie, the strong crisp contrasts make this an attractive watch. There are colorized versions available, but they mar, rather than improve, on the original. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Family, Movie Reviews

Snuf de Hond in Oorlogstijd (Sniff the Dog in Wartime)

Drama / Family 2008 / 95 minutes RATING: 8/10 If you came to this review as a huge fan of the Piet Prins' Scout series, this is not quite the movie you were looking for. It is based on Scout: the Secret of the Swamp, and like the book it has a Dutch boy named Tom who owns a beautiful, intelligent German Shepherd. And the two of them fight Nazis and aid the Canadian soldiers who have come to free the Netherlands at the close of Word War II. But while the book's Tom is a pleasant kid trying to deal with troubling times, in this film Tom is an orphan, angry at everyone after his parents were killed by German bombers. That's a way to give his character a bit more grit and depth, but does also make him less lovable. But it also gives his Friesan farmer uncle a reason to let him have a German Shepherd pup! Together the two of them set out to frustrate Nazi plans. But what can just a boy and his dog do against the German war machine? Well, more than you might imagine. They even have to contend with a collaborator pretending to be a Dutch loyalist. There was enough here of Piet Prins' original to win my approval and keep my interest. Cautions This is a a pretty tame story, but does involve a war, so the biggest caution would just be gentle hearts not realizing that there were wicked collaborators. However, this is in Dutch (no English dubbing) so it requires that viewers be old enough to handle the English subtitles. That means they'll need to be somewhere around 10, and that's probably old enough to deal with the reality of traitors too.. Conclusion This is hard to find, and not on streaming currently anywhere I can find. But that's always changing so here's hoping! If you do track it down, there are three more Snuf/Scout movies you may be interested in. Here they are, in order: Snuf de Hond in Oorlogstijd (2008) based on the book that, in English, was simply called Scout Snuf de hond en de jacht op vliegende Volckert (2008), based on Scout and the Flying Phantom Snuf De Hond en Het Spookslot (2010) which lines up loosely with Scout: the Haunted Castle Snuf de hond en de IJsvogel (2011), which I think is based on Scout: the Sailing Sleuths Our family has watched films 1 and 3, and really enjoyed both, even though we had to read the English subtitles throughout. We come from a Dutch heritage, so all these Dutch speakers sound very friendly and familiar. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Drama, Movie Reviews

Bad Day at Black Rock

Drama 1955 / 81 minutes Rating: 8/10 John J. Macreedy wasn't looking to start anything. But when he steps off the train into a one-road town in the middle of nowhere, plenty of strangers seem eager to start something with him. And he doesn't know why. He also doesn't seem able to do much about it. Macreedy's come back from the war crippled, losing his left arm in the fighting in Italy. So how can he stand up to a town full of bullies and liars? There are multiple mysteries here – why is Macreedy here, and why is every one in the town so on edge about his appearance – but what makes this a film to see is maybe what it shows of manhood. There's a range of specimens on display, from the sheriff who's a coward and knows it, to the town doctor who isn't willing to stand up alone but whose conscience won't quiet down. Then there are the town bullies, as scared as they are scary. And Macreedy, who repeatedly demonstrates the valor in sidestepping a fight. But some fights can't be avoided, and what's going to happen then? Cautions One of the 1955 adverts for this said, "not suitable for children" and that caught me by surprise. There's no sex, no language, and only minimal violence, but yes, there is growing tension that kids maybe 12 and under won't know how to handle. Conclusion This is a "slow burn" film, taking its time to, bit by bit, amp up the tension. It'll be too slow for many in our Tik Tok generation, but it's a treat for any who like learning their history through film. This is about parts of the Americas that soldiers returned to after fighting in World War II. Sometimes there were fight still to be had back home too. The reason to watch this is Spencer Tracy as Macreedy, putting on a show as a man who has to handle a whole town on his own. Another reason: to see how earlier generations thought through an age-old struggle we still have today: the temptation to stay quiet and duck down at the exact moment when you're being called to step up and speak out. This is a film Christians can be inspired by, for sure. ...

1 2 3 4 5