Cute movie - except for the fact that Cameron Diaz sleeps with Jude Law five minutes after she meets him.
Diaz plays Amanda Woods, the owner of a movie trailer company (trailers, in this case, meaning previews of movies). She's a high stress, successful kind of girl. After breaking up with her boyfriend (Edward Burns), she decides she's gotta get away. On the other side of the globe is Iris Simpkins, played by Kate Winslet, who has recently found out that the man she is in love with, is engaged to be married. Iris decides she's gotta get away. So she puts her London home up for rent as a vacation home, and Amanda answers the ad. They talk, and decide to swap homes. The night Amanda arrives in London, Iris's brother, Graham, (Jude Law) drops by, totally unaware that Iris has rented the place out. Graham and Amanda immediately feel chemistry. When he kisses her, she throws caution to the wind and asks him to stay the night. The next morning is awkward. He explains that he's kinda "complicated" (he keeps getting calls from females). She tells him not to worry because she "will not fall in love" with him. But you can see they both want to be together. One evening, Amanda decides to stop by his place...and gets a surprise. (don't worry - the surprise makes you fall in love with the guy!)
Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, Iris is loving Amanda's fancy big house. She ends up meeting Miles, (Jack Black) a film composer that works with Amanda. They become good friends and spend a lot of time together. He is seeing someone, but soon finds heartbreak in that relationship. Together they help each other work through their pain.
It was a cute movie that wove the lives of all these characters in a funny, touching way. One of the funniest parts is when Iris is on the phone with her brother and he tells her that he "met" Amanda. Amanda calls Iris on the other line and Iris goes back and forth between the two calls. As she begins to "reprimand" Graham about hitting on her "renter", Amanda says, "Um...Its still me".
THE HOLIDAY definitely had an all-star cast. I love Jack Black in everything I've seen him in, even though he usually seems to play himself. So maybe it's because I'm too used to his usual characters (School of Rock, Nacho Libre, Saving Silverman, etc.), but in this movie he seemed a tiny bit out of place playing the suave sophisticated music composer. It came across as if he was trying hard to be on his best behavior. This seems to be the first romantic comedy roles for Kate Winslet and Jude Law - but they were well cast in this.
Maybe it was the cast that carried it, but I thought this movie was fun! A feel-good romantic comedy with a happily ever after ending!
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
BLESSED CHILD by Ted Dekker & THE GIFT by Richard Paul Evans
THE GIFT by Richard Paul Evans, reminded me of BLESSED CHILD by Ted Dekker, (and even a little bit of the movie, THE SIXTH SENSE ). They are both tales of boys with remarkable gifts of healing.
THE GIFT is the story of Nathan, a lonely guy with a tormenting secret from his childhood. He meets a young family - Mom Addison, daughter Lizzy, and son Collin. Collin has a gift of healing people, yet this gift comes with a cost; the more he heals, the more life drains out of him. In fact, Collin has Leukemia. Those who love him struggle to protect him from his "gift", while wondering if stopping him from helping people so that he can survive is the right thing to do. After Nathan meets Addison, Lizzy and Collin, his life is changed in ways he could have never predicted.
BLESSED CHILD is the story of Caleb. This little boy survives an attack on the monastery where he lives in Ethiopia and is brought to the U.S. by Jason (a peace corp worker), and Leiah (a red cross nurse). They soon discover how special this little boy is, and also that his enemies have continued to pursue him. We gradually learn who his enemies are, and why they want him, but that's only one problem. The other problem is that Caleb has powers - he heals people, and this has everyone who meets him debating where his powers come from. Millions of people want a piece of this boy - some for their own healing, and others for their own selfish profit. In the end, Jason and Leiah have to take extreme measures to keep him safe from all who want to harm him.
Both stories have similar characters. In THE GIFT, Nathan has scars from his childhood; In BLESSED CHILD, Leiah has physical scars - her body is disfigured with burn scars. But both of these characters struggle with feelings of inadequacy, and an urgency to help the helpless. In THE GIFT, Collins' deadbeat dad comes back when he finds out that he can profit from his son. In BLESSED CHILD, the minister who becomes Caleb's guardian organizes "events" at which people can buy high-priced tickets to come receive healing.
BLESSED CHILD is based on this scripture: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." Caleb has his gift simply because he has unwavering faith in God his Father and in the fact that God can heal. His relationship with God is very real to him.
THE GIFT is based on this scripture: God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. Collin crosses into the afterlife, and returns to this world with his remarkable gift. He also sees and speaks to dead people - hence my comparison to the SIXTH SENSE. Although you get the idea that the author is referring to God and heaven, he doesn't quite come out and say it.
Both books were great - I read both quickly. THE GIFT especially seemed to go fast. The chapters were short and it felt like I kept turning pages. BLESSED CHILD was non-stop action from the first line, as is Ted Dekker's style. His books are always hard to put down.
Despite the similarities, both books are worthy reads on their own merit, although I am a big Ted Dekker fan and would favor his book if you asked me which I 'd recommend more. Not that THE GIFT is not as good - it's just that I have been a Ted Dekker fan for a few years. As a matter of fact, I would definitely pick up another book by Richard Paul Evans now that I've enjoyed THE GIFT. While Dekker's book has action, suspense and plot twists - Evans' book was the kind that makes you ask yourself what choice you would make if you were in that situation. Similar themes, yet different experiences!
THE GIFT is the story of Nathan, a lonely guy with a tormenting secret from his childhood. He meets a young family - Mom Addison, daughter Lizzy, and son Collin. Collin has a gift of healing people, yet this gift comes with a cost; the more he heals, the more life drains out of him. In fact, Collin has Leukemia. Those who love him struggle to protect him from his "gift", while wondering if stopping him from helping people so that he can survive is the right thing to do. After Nathan meets Addison, Lizzy and Collin, his life is changed in ways he could have never predicted.
BLESSED CHILD is the story of Caleb. This little boy survives an attack on the monastery where he lives in Ethiopia and is brought to the U.S. by Jason (a peace corp worker), and Leiah (a red cross nurse). They soon discover how special this little boy is, and also that his enemies have continued to pursue him. We gradually learn who his enemies are, and why they want him, but that's only one problem. The other problem is that Caleb has powers - he heals people, and this has everyone who meets him debating where his powers come from. Millions of people want a piece of this boy - some for their own healing, and others for their own selfish profit. In the end, Jason and Leiah have to take extreme measures to keep him safe from all who want to harm him.
Both stories have similar characters. In THE GIFT, Nathan has scars from his childhood; In BLESSED CHILD, Leiah has physical scars - her body is disfigured with burn scars. But both of these characters struggle with feelings of inadequacy, and an urgency to help the helpless. In THE GIFT, Collins' deadbeat dad comes back when he finds out that he can profit from his son. In BLESSED CHILD, the minister who becomes Caleb's guardian organizes "events" at which people can buy high-priced tickets to come receive healing.
BLESSED CHILD is based on this scripture: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." Caleb has his gift simply because he has unwavering faith in God his Father and in the fact that God can heal. His relationship with God is very real to him.
THE GIFT is based on this scripture: God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. Collin crosses into the afterlife, and returns to this world with his remarkable gift. He also sees and speaks to dead people - hence my comparison to the SIXTH SENSE. Although you get the idea that the author is referring to God and heaven, he doesn't quite come out and say it.
Both books were great - I read both quickly. THE GIFT especially seemed to go fast. The chapters were short and it felt like I kept turning pages. BLESSED CHILD was non-stop action from the first line, as is Ted Dekker's style. His books are always hard to put down.
Despite the similarities, both books are worthy reads on their own merit, although I am a big Ted Dekker fan and would favor his book if you asked me which I 'd recommend more. Not that THE GIFT is not as good - it's just that I have been a Ted Dekker fan for a few years. As a matter of fact, I would definitely pick up another book by Richard Paul Evans now that I've enjoyed THE GIFT. While Dekker's book has action, suspense and plot twists - Evans' book was the kind that makes you ask yourself what choice you would make if you were in that situation. Similar themes, yet different experiences!
Friday, February 08, 2008
CATCH AND RELEASE
I caught the ending of this movie one day. And then, a couple of weeks later, I caught the beginning, and of course, had to sit through the whole thing. Both times I kept thinking...who is that guy?...he looks familiar. I'm not even sure I've seen him before, but he looks like someone... who? The guy I was wondering about was Timothy Olyphant, who plays "Fritz" in CATCH AND RELEASE. (It finally hit me that he looks like a young Lorenzo Lamas) When I looked him up, I realized that I'd seen him before in LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD. Quite a different role in that movie - he plays the bad guy. So in DIE HARD, I hated him. But in CATCH AND RELEASE? Loved him!
Jennifer Garner plays "Gray", a young woman who's fiance, "Grady", has suddenly died. After his death, she temporarily moves in with his buddies since she cant afford her place anymore. Together they mourn and help Gray get through her loss. First she mourns the loss of the man she loved. Then she mourns the loss of the man she thought he was, because Gray soon discovers that she didn't know everything about Grady. Like, he had a child that he'd been supporting for a few years. And this child has existed for less time than Gray and Grady had been together. The "other woman", "Maureen", played by Juliette Lewis said, "I'm sorry. You could've just missed him and loved him and not known". To which Gray answers "Not known him".
Kevin Smith plays Sam, the funny sarcastic guy; Olyphant is Fritz, the playboy; and Sam Jaeger is the responsible guy, "Dennis". They are all likeable guys - but Dennis - hate to say it - was totally unnecessary to the story. The other characters' stories go somewhere by the end of the movie. But Dennis is just there. It would have been the exact same movie without him.
But all in all, this is actually a sweet love story of Gray and the man she is finally drawn to as she comes out of her mourning. It's probably predictable, and most probably a date flick. But CATCH AND RELEASE is also sad, funny, and romantic.
Jennifer Garner plays "Gray", a young woman who's fiance, "Grady", has suddenly died. After his death, she temporarily moves in with his buddies since she cant afford her place anymore. Together they mourn and help Gray get through her loss. First she mourns the loss of the man she loved. Then she mourns the loss of the man she thought he was, because Gray soon discovers that she didn't know everything about Grady. Like, he had a child that he'd been supporting for a few years. And this child has existed for less time than Gray and Grady had been together. The "other woman", "Maureen", played by Juliette Lewis said, "I'm sorry. You could've just missed him and loved him and not known". To which Gray answers "Not known him".
Kevin Smith plays Sam, the funny sarcastic guy; Olyphant is Fritz, the playboy; and Sam Jaeger is the responsible guy, "Dennis". They are all likeable guys - but Dennis - hate to say it - was totally unnecessary to the story. The other characters' stories go somewhere by the end of the movie. But Dennis is just there. It would have been the exact same movie without him.
But all in all, this is actually a sweet love story of Gray and the man she is finally drawn to as she comes out of her mourning. It's probably predictable, and most probably a date flick. But CATCH AND RELEASE is also sad, funny, and romantic.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
27 DRESSES
Did another Thursday morning movie with "Macy" - we went to see 27 DRESSES. Everyone said, "That looks likes such a cute movie!" And it certainly was a cute idea for a storyline! But Macy and I both agreed that it didn't reach its full potential.
When you see the previews to a movie like this, you already know how it's gonna go - boy meets girl, they endure a bit of conflict, but by the end of the movie, you know you're gonna walk away smiling! And so it was for this movie. But still, even for a romantic comedy, it was lacking a bit in substance.
One of the biggest flaws was that there was NO chemistry between the two main characters, played by Katherine Heigl and James Marsden. They are both adorable - but nope, didn't feel it with them. I never felt "caught up" in their relationship - throughout the film, I felt fully aware that they were two actors acting.
Heigl plays a woman who LOVES weddings. She plans all her friends' weddings, engagement parties, etc. She also works as an assistant to the man she is in love with, played by Edward Burns. Marsden's character writes the wedding column for the New York City Journal. He writes under a pseudonym, of course, so when he and Heigl meet, she doesn't realize that he is her favorite columnist. Instead, he comes across as a guy who is cynical about the institution of marriage. Which of course, really annoys her! They meet at a wedding one night, share a cab, she drops her planner in the cab, he sees that her social life consists of nothing but weddings every weekend, and he gets an idea for an article for his column! Since he thinks she's kinda cute, he proceeds to pursue her. But she despises him! In the meantime, her sister (who's a model) waltzes into town and falls in love with the boss - the one that Heigl is secretly in love with - who also falls for her, and they get engaged. The story then continues with all the complications of those circumstances.
But it seemed that there was so many details to this story that much of the plot was diluted . Her relationship with her sister, for example. Their childhood and how they felt about each other as adults - all that history was explained too briefly - and the information always seemed "rushed" - as if had to be included - it didn't flow naturally. And her sister wasn't too likable, nor too hate-able - so you just don't know how to feel when she gets what's coming to her, or when they reconcile. Might have been better to have Burns fall in love with a stranger so that the complicated history of the sister relationship didn't have to be written in.
In addition, Heigl's disdain for Marsden felt "forced" - like it was necessary to have some sort of conflict leading up to the happy conclusion. Moments that could have really been dramatic - like when she realizes that this man she hates is really the writer she loves - seemed glossed over quickly and not very climactic. Another such moment was when he admits that the reason he is so bitter about marriage is because of his own experience. That could have been an emotionally charged moment - but the moment arrived, and then it left, with no lasting impact.
This is not to say that 27 DRESSES was terrible - It had its cute moments! Judy Greer plays a good character as Heigl's friend who "tells it like it is" (she plays a similar character in 13 GOING ON 30!). I did laugh a few times! The scene where Heigl tries on the 27 dresses is pretty cute. And the bar scene where they sing "Bennie and the Jets" is pretty funny! I wouldn't avoid 27 DRESSES, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it!
When you see the previews to a movie like this, you already know how it's gonna go - boy meets girl, they endure a bit of conflict, but by the end of the movie, you know you're gonna walk away smiling! And so it was for this movie. But still, even for a romantic comedy, it was lacking a bit in substance.
One of the biggest flaws was that there was NO chemistry between the two main characters, played by Katherine Heigl and James Marsden. They are both adorable - but nope, didn't feel it with them. I never felt "caught up" in their relationship - throughout the film, I felt fully aware that they were two actors acting.
Heigl plays a woman who LOVES weddings. She plans all her friends' weddings, engagement parties, etc. She also works as an assistant to the man she is in love with, played by Edward Burns. Marsden's character writes the wedding column for the New York City Journal. He writes under a pseudonym, of course, so when he and Heigl meet, she doesn't realize that he is her favorite columnist. Instead, he comes across as a guy who is cynical about the institution of marriage. Which of course, really annoys her! They meet at a wedding one night, share a cab, she drops her planner in the cab, he sees that her social life consists of nothing but weddings every weekend, and he gets an idea for an article for his column! Since he thinks she's kinda cute, he proceeds to pursue her. But she despises him! In the meantime, her sister (who's a model) waltzes into town and falls in love with the boss - the one that Heigl is secretly in love with - who also falls for her, and they get engaged. The story then continues with all the complications of those circumstances.
But it seemed that there was so many details to this story that much of the plot was diluted . Her relationship with her sister, for example. Their childhood and how they felt about each other as adults - all that history was explained too briefly - and the information always seemed "rushed" - as if had to be included - it didn't flow naturally. And her sister wasn't too likable, nor too hate-able - so you just don't know how to feel when she gets what's coming to her, or when they reconcile. Might have been better to have Burns fall in love with a stranger so that the complicated history of the sister relationship didn't have to be written in.
In addition, Heigl's disdain for Marsden felt "forced" - like it was necessary to have some sort of conflict leading up to the happy conclusion. Moments that could have really been dramatic - like when she realizes that this man she hates is really the writer she loves - seemed glossed over quickly and not very climactic. Another such moment was when he admits that the reason he is so bitter about marriage is because of his own experience. That could have been an emotionally charged moment - but the moment arrived, and then it left, with no lasting impact.
This is not to say that 27 DRESSES was terrible - It had its cute moments! Judy Greer plays a good character as Heigl's friend who "tells it like it is" (she plays a similar character in 13 GOING ON 30!). I did laugh a few times! The scene where Heigl tries on the 27 dresses is pretty cute. And the bar scene where they sing "Bennie and the Jets" is pretty funny! I wouldn't avoid 27 DRESSES, but I wouldn't go out of my way to see it!
3:10 TO YUMA
I love westerns. Grew up watching them with my Dad - a big John Wayne fan. My sister and I have watched every episode of The Big Valley that there is. Even though they're a bit more bloody these days, I always look forward to a good western!
3:10 TO YUMA stars Russell Crowe as the bad guy, and Christian Bale as the good guy. Bale plays "Dan", a struggling farmer, who is in danger of losing his farm to a banker who wants to sell it to make way for a railroad. His marriage is strained, his relationship with his oldest son is difficult, and his youngest son has chronic respiratory problems. Through a turn of events, he becomes instrumental in the arrest of outlaw "Ben Wade", played by Crowe. A posse is formed to transport Wade from Bisbee to Contention to put the outlaw on the train to the Yuma prison. Dan, in order to secure $200, joins the posse. So with the outlaw's gang close behind, they set out through Apache territory. During their journey, we learn a lot more about Dan and Wade. For example, Dan needs the money, but he also needs to prove to his family that he is man enough to handle this task, as well as save their farm. Wade frequently quotes the bible, and we learn that the ruthless outlaw knows it because he read it cover to cover at the train station where his mother abandoned him as a child. A lot of things happen on this trip through the wilderness - and they arrive at Yuma with less men than they had when they set out.
Russell Crowe has been in a lot of movies - and he is really a great actor. The roles he's played - Cinderella Man, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind - are really diverse and complicated characters! Other notable performances include Peter Fonda, who I hardly recognized at first, but who played a great - but quick - part. And Ben Foster...oooooh, I hated him. He was the second in command of Wade's outlaw gang. He was a great bad guy. He also played very hateable bad guys in Alpha Dog (which was a horrible true story - it haunted me for a while - I wish I'd never watched it), and Hostage. He kinda reminded me of Bruce Dern, who always played a great villain! And of course, Bale did an excellent job of playing Dan Evans - I could feel his inner turmoil as he fought for his dignity at being the man his family could respect.
The story was set in Southern, Arizona - which I always enjoy, as I grew up there! But when they showed the town of Bisbee, I thought, "Huh?" They showed a town in the middle of a plain. In actuality, the little town is nestled in the mountains. Which has nothing to do with the story told in the film, but I thought I'd throw that fact out anyway! (See, you learn things on my blog!)
3:10 TO YUMA was a great movie - (although the ending made me yell "NO!!! WHY??????")
If you can overlook some violence and bad language, I'd recommend it!
3:10 TO YUMA stars Russell Crowe as the bad guy, and Christian Bale as the good guy. Bale plays "Dan", a struggling farmer, who is in danger of losing his farm to a banker who wants to sell it to make way for a railroad. His marriage is strained, his relationship with his oldest son is difficult, and his youngest son has chronic respiratory problems. Through a turn of events, he becomes instrumental in the arrest of outlaw "Ben Wade", played by Crowe. A posse is formed to transport Wade from Bisbee to Contention to put the outlaw on the train to the Yuma prison. Dan, in order to secure $200, joins the posse. So with the outlaw's gang close behind, they set out through Apache territory. During their journey, we learn a lot more about Dan and Wade. For example, Dan needs the money, but he also needs to prove to his family that he is man enough to handle this task, as well as save their farm. Wade frequently quotes the bible, and we learn that the ruthless outlaw knows it because he read it cover to cover at the train station where his mother abandoned him as a child. A lot of things happen on this trip through the wilderness - and they arrive at Yuma with less men than they had when they set out.
Russell Crowe has been in a lot of movies - and he is really a great actor. The roles he's played - Cinderella Man, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind - are really diverse and complicated characters! Other notable performances include Peter Fonda, who I hardly recognized at first, but who played a great - but quick - part. And Ben Foster...oooooh, I hated him. He was the second in command of Wade's outlaw gang. He was a great bad guy. He also played very hateable bad guys in Alpha Dog (which was a horrible true story - it haunted me for a while - I wish I'd never watched it), and Hostage. He kinda reminded me of Bruce Dern, who always played a great villain! And of course, Bale did an excellent job of playing Dan Evans - I could feel his inner turmoil as he fought for his dignity at being the man his family could respect.
The story was set in Southern, Arizona - which I always enjoy, as I grew up there! But when they showed the town of Bisbee, I thought, "Huh?" They showed a town in the middle of a plain. In actuality, the little town is nestled in the mountains. Which has nothing to do with the story told in the film, but I thought I'd throw that fact out anyway! (See, you learn things on my blog!)
3:10 TO YUMA was a great movie - (although the ending made me yell "NO!!! WHY??????")
If you can overlook some violence and bad language, I'd recommend it!
THE BRAVE ONE
Jodie Foster's movie, "The Brave One", came out on DVD this week. The tagline is: How many wrongs to make it right? My DH, who always enjoys seeing the bad guy get what he deserves, ran right out to buy it! The storyline goes like this: Foster's character, Erica, is a talk show host who is about to be married. Her fiancee is played by Naveen Andrews, of Lost fame. One night as they stroll through the park, they are brutally attacked, and her fiancee is killed. Erica is left alone to recover from the horrific experience she survived. Surprising herself, she proceeds to hand out "justice" as she sees it unfold on the streets. But she doesn't start out with that agenda; her fear causes her to react, and then, well, it just becomes habit. Terence Howard plays the cop who's investigating these "serial" crimes, and in the course of the story, they become friends.
Throughout the movie, it's obvious she wants to get caught. And you get the feeling that the cop (Howard), is a good cop, and that even though he cares about her, he cares more about doing the right thing. You know that eventually, he'll have to make a difficult choice - once he finds out Erica's little secret.
The funny thing is that this movie made me think of another movie I had just seen - "Mad Money". Which sounds insane, but in that movie, Diane Keaton says, "The truth is we’re all capable of anything. We don’t realize it. But it’s true". In "The Brave One", Foster's character says, "Inside us is a stranger". These statements are true. Each one of us is capable of anything, given the right situation. We don't know how we'd react in situations like these - a brutal random attack, or in the case of "Mad Money", if we're in a situation where we're desperate for money. Do these situations change us, or do they bring out what is already inside? I guess that's what Foster's character contemplates when she says that we have a stranger inside of us.
The movie was very suspenseful - along the lines of "Panic Room" & "Flight Plan". I was a bit disturbed by one particular scene - when the couple was being worked on in the ER after they had been attacked, the scenes kept flashing back to a love scene. This went on for the duration of the ER scene: gentle touching...then bloody bodies...flash back to clothes being removed lovingly...then clothes being cut off in the ER. I'm sure they were trying to show the contrast of love and gentleness, against violence and brutality, but it was kind of creepy.
On one hand, it's a well made film. The acting is great, the characters believable. On the other hand, its quite bloody and violent. And I think the ending was unfortunate, as it made it seem like all the wrongs were somehow "OK". I walked away from "The Brave One" feeling like the good guys got suckered into being the bad guys.
Throughout the movie, it's obvious she wants to get caught. And you get the feeling that the cop (Howard), is a good cop, and that even though he cares about her, he cares more about doing the right thing. You know that eventually, he'll have to make a difficult choice - once he finds out Erica's little secret.
The funny thing is that this movie made me think of another movie I had just seen - "Mad Money". Which sounds insane, but in that movie, Diane Keaton says, "The truth is we’re all capable of anything. We don’t realize it. But it’s true". In "The Brave One", Foster's character says, "Inside us is a stranger". These statements are true. Each one of us is capable of anything, given the right situation. We don't know how we'd react in situations like these - a brutal random attack, or in the case of "Mad Money", if we're in a situation where we're desperate for money. Do these situations change us, or do they bring out what is already inside? I guess that's what Foster's character contemplates when she says that we have a stranger inside of us.
The movie was very suspenseful - along the lines of "Panic Room" & "Flight Plan". I was a bit disturbed by one particular scene - when the couple was being worked on in the ER after they had been attacked, the scenes kept flashing back to a love scene. This went on for the duration of the ER scene: gentle touching...then bloody bodies...flash back to clothes being removed lovingly...then clothes being cut off in the ER. I'm sure they were trying to show the contrast of love and gentleness, against violence and brutality, but it was kind of creepy.
On one hand, it's a well made film. The acting is great, the characters believable. On the other hand, its quite bloody and violent. And I think the ending was unfortunate, as it made it seem like all the wrongs were somehow "OK". I walked away from "The Brave One" feeling like the good guys got suckered into being the bad guys.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
THE SHACK, By William P. Young
I listen to a podcast regularly called "The God Journey", and I had heard those guys talk about a book called "The Shack" every now and then, but I didn't really pay that much attention to it. One day, I was talking with a girlfriend about different books we'd read, and she mentioned that she had just read a book called "The Shack", and that it was possibly the best book she had ever read. So that kinda grabbed my attention, and I went to the "God Journey" website to see what they had to say about it. In the meantime, I ordered it from Amazon to read it for myself.
I finished reading it last night at around midnight, and thought about it a lot this morning when I woke up. So what can I say about it if I don't wanna give the story away? I'll do my best.
I can't say that I would have read "The Shack" if I had just stumbled across it in a bookstore. The back-cover description says that the character's daughter had been abducted and brutally murdered. I generally steer away from books with those kinds of topics, but I was so curious as to why this was such a "life-changing" book - A novel at that!
The story starts four years after Mack's daughter has been murdered. Her blood-soaked clothes were found in a shack in the mountains. As you would guess, life has not been the same for this family. Mack lives with what he calls "The Great Sadness". One day, he gets a note in his mailbox, an invitation, to go spend the weekend with God at the shack. Mack wonders why in the world God would meet him there, of all places - the place of his greatest pain and despair. So Mack goes...and he is taken on a journey where he is confronted with the truth of who God is.
I'll have to admit, at first I was a little thrown off by the forms in which God appeared to Mack, but as He explained why He had done so, it made sense. He was what Mack needed, when he needed it. As Mack changed, so did the form in which God appeared to him.
"The Shack" isn't some religious "how-to" book. It is very honest, and will take you by surprise with its honesty. The dialog between God and Mack uncovers what many of us really think of God. And it also shows us that He is not how we think He is. It exposes our deepest and most hidden misconceptions of Him, even the ones that those of us who have been "religious" for a while may have. As Mack was shown things about himself, I found that they were things that I also had buried deep inside of me. Things that I never realized I felt until I saw it in print in front of me. At one point, God says to Mack, "You don't trust me, because you don't know that I love you". Simple, but true. We don't trust God, because we can't comprehend how He loves us. We're suspicious of what will come our way if we trust Him completely. That means we don't really know that He loves us.
One of my favorite parts was when the Holy Spirit, represented as "Sarayu", works on Macks' "soul". It was a beautiful analogy, but that's one part that I can't give away. It was the surprise element that gave it it's power.
As for the ending, I felt bittersweet about it. But it ended just the way it should have.
This novel has much truth about God, about life, about us, and especially about our preconceived ideas about God. But it's important to keep in mind that because it is a work of fiction, it's probably not an infallible representation of God. While I did see a lot scriptural truth in it, I wondered about certain details, such as God making sarcastic comments from time to time. But keeping all that in perspective, this is a beautiful story. It made me cry in a few places; it made me laugh in a few places; It made me repent in a few places. It showed me how God loves each one of us individually. The line on the front cover says "Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity", and that is a perfect description of this book.
I finished reading it last night at around midnight, and thought about it a lot this morning when I woke up. So what can I say about it if I don't wanna give the story away? I'll do my best.
I can't say that I would have read "The Shack" if I had just stumbled across it in a bookstore. The back-cover description says that the character's daughter had been abducted and brutally murdered. I generally steer away from books with those kinds of topics, but I was so curious as to why this was such a "life-changing" book - A novel at that!
The story starts four years after Mack's daughter has been murdered. Her blood-soaked clothes were found in a shack in the mountains. As you would guess, life has not been the same for this family. Mack lives with what he calls "The Great Sadness". One day, he gets a note in his mailbox, an invitation, to go spend the weekend with God at the shack. Mack wonders why in the world God would meet him there, of all places - the place of his greatest pain and despair. So Mack goes...and he is taken on a journey where he is confronted with the truth of who God is.
I'll have to admit, at first I was a little thrown off by the forms in which God appeared to Mack, but as He explained why He had done so, it made sense. He was what Mack needed, when he needed it. As Mack changed, so did the form in which God appeared to him.
"The Shack" isn't some religious "how-to" book. It is very honest, and will take you by surprise with its honesty. The dialog between God and Mack uncovers what many of us really think of God. And it also shows us that He is not how we think He is. It exposes our deepest and most hidden misconceptions of Him, even the ones that those of us who have been "religious" for a while may have. As Mack was shown things about himself, I found that they were things that I also had buried deep inside of me. Things that I never realized I felt until I saw it in print in front of me. At one point, God says to Mack, "You don't trust me, because you don't know that I love you". Simple, but true. We don't trust God, because we can't comprehend how He loves us. We're suspicious of what will come our way if we trust Him completely. That means we don't really know that He loves us.
One of my favorite parts was when the Holy Spirit, represented as "Sarayu", works on Macks' "soul". It was a beautiful analogy, but that's one part that I can't give away. It was the surprise element that gave it it's power.
As for the ending, I felt bittersweet about it. But it ended just the way it should have.
This novel has much truth about God, about life, about us, and especially about our preconceived ideas about God. But it's important to keep in mind that because it is a work of fiction, it's probably not an infallible representation of God. While I did see a lot scriptural truth in it, I wondered about certain details, such as God making sarcastic comments from time to time. But keeping all that in perspective, this is a beautiful story. It made me cry in a few places; it made me laugh in a few places; It made me repent in a few places. It showed me how God loves each one of us individually. The line on the front cover says "Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity", and that is a perfect description of this book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)