Sunday, December 26, 2010

Books Roundup

If you are a fan of U2 and don't know much about them, do yourself a favor and pick up U2 by U2. It contains the most in-depth interviews with the whole band and has some wonderful pictures too. And splurge for the coffee table sized hardcover edition. It's worth it.

Tana French has written three Murder Squad books set in Ireland and this years' Faithful Place is her best. It is beautifully written and full of longing to belong. It stayed with me for days after finishing it.

And finally three books on Christianity:

John: An Expositional Commentary by R.C. Sproul. Dr. Sproul believes in the tradition of lectio continua and has been preaching through books of the Bible verse-by-verse at his home congregation, turning those sermons into books that contain a great deal of insight.
Christless Christianity by Michael Horton. A polemic against the sentimental, trivial Christianity preached in so many churches today, that forgets the Reformed confessions that put Christ and his atoning sacrifice at the center of faith (the five solas).
Dug Down Deep by Joshua Harris. An accessible introduction to the core doctrines of Christianity. It is patient and walks slowly through these teachings but stays true to an orthodox reading of Scripture.

Friday, December 24, 2010

2010 Movie Picks

The Stoning of Soraya M.
The Fallen Idol
Winter's Bone
The Road
Paranormal Activity

Storm Chasers: Season 4
Baseball: The Tenth Inning
Top Gear: Season 15
Breaking Bad (season 1-3)

Thursday, December 09, 2010

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Bono: A Review

Bono: In Conversation with Michka AssayasBono: In Conversation with Michka Assayas by Michka Assayas

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

The reason this book stands out is because Assayas doesn't keep his journalistic distance but presses into his friend and asks him the tough questions. He presses Bono on not speaking about Africa for over a decade and points out to him that colonialism in France was left-wing and championed by humanitarians. Bono doesn't really respond and dismisses the idea of irresponsible borrowing by African nations at one point but he does admit that aid created worse conditions and has propped up despots but he says that can be avoided by placing strict conditions on the money. At one point Bono says that he's not for a paternalistic attitude concerning Africa but later talks about rewards systems that sound paternalistic to me. He asks that we not see him as some wide-eyed idealist and then says we've got to starting bringing Heaven down to Earth now. Not surprisingly he's a bundle of contradictions.

At first blush it appears that he has reachable goals when it comes to charity: he explained to economist Robert Barro, and others, that the Jubilee 2000 debt cancellation was a one-time happening and would not encourage default on future debts; so why is there still a Jubilee campaign? Because not all debt was cancelled so just like all collectivists this is a plan that can never be fulfilled so these groups will never be satisfied in their social agendas and demands. One of my favorite passages is where he says that if you believe that aid is investment, that debt burden is unjust, in other words all his liberal suppositions, then the conclusion is that Africans will be able to take charge of their own destiny. Even if you follow all his rationale the conclusions don't follow from the premises. He believes that the West's treatment of Africans is the last bastion of inequality that we allow, says that we essentially have them chained to the ground, and insinuates that it is our racism that prevents us from giving more.

Bono claims that he's tired of begging for "crumbs" from the table of the rich but he sees giving almost exclusively in terms of governments-to-government transfers. He dubiously claims that a) America is at the bottom of spending on the poorest countries and b) that even if you include private philanthropy that America is still abysmally behind. In fact, in 2006 US charitable giving was $295.02 billion, which is twice as much as the next most charitable country, according to a 2006 comparison done by the Charities Aid Foundation. As percentage of GDP the US ranks 1st with 1.7% and Great Britain is 2nd at .73%.

He admits that the Sandinistas fascinated him because they were a majority and he was seeing liberation theology in practice. He was interested in socialism that didn't attempt to put down faith and used religion to inform the people of their rights. He was exploring his pacifism too and knows that Gandhi would say it is never appropriate to take up arms. He doesn't seem to know that Gandhi advocated that the Jews surrender to the Nazis in WWII, but this is a guy who praises the character of Bill Clinton at one point.

While this book contains the clearest presentation of the Gospel by Bono in any venue it still has the smirking nonsense he is known for. What is Christianity: "My understanding of the Scriptures has been made simple by the person of Christ. Christ teaches that God is love...and as much as I respond in allowing myself to be transformed by that love and acting in that love, that's my religion." Who is the Gospel of Jesus Christ for: "Jesus preached the Gospels for the poor." How to interpret the Old Testament: "the Old Testament is more of an action movie: blood, car chases, evacuations, a lot of special effects...those of us who are trying to figure out our Christian conundrum, is that the God of the Old Testament is like the journey from stern father to friend." Theological typology: "the Old Testament, it was more one of worship and awe, a vertical relationship. The New Testament, on the other hand, we look across as Jesus who looks familiar, horizontal. The combination is what makes the Cross." He's into deeds not creeds, spirituality and not religion. And like many of the topics outside of music, he holds sometimes interesting, sometimes quirky views but generally lacking wisdom or insight.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Walk On: A Review

Walk On: The Spiritual Journey Of U2Walk On: The Spiritual Journey Of U2 by Steve Stockman

My rating: 1 of 5 stars

Steve Stockman, a Presbyterian minister in Belfast, is a man clearly enamored with U2. He's thought a lot about the lyrical content of the band's output and has a few interesting things to say but hagiography is what he ends up with. He does the same thing that U2 does in their own book, U2 by U2, and that is to try and position themselves in a middle ground politically. The problem with this, of course, is that there is no neutrality when staking positions and it is a ploy to be free to criticize your "right-wing fundamentalist" opponents while not having to identify yourselves as members of the Christian Left.

As I see it, there are three main problems with the book:

1. The author, like his subjects, does not understand the doctrine of two kingdoms.
2. He proposes that evangelicals have wholesale rejected U2 but offers no sourcing for this.
3. He conflates left-wing red letter Christianity with simply normal Christianity and attacks all other sources.

Two Kingdoms

At the risk of oversimplifying, the doctrine of two kingdoms is that Christ is preserving the secular kingdom on earth rather than redeeming it. This means that Christians are free to engage in the culture and politics of this earth but are not to confuse those aims with the aims of the heavenly kingdom that they will be part of when Jesus comes back to rule and reign. In contradistinction to that, Bono and U2 believe that it is their Christian duty to bring the kingdom to earth now and this is manifest in the social gospel. In 1998 Bono spoke of the appearance together of two opposing Irish politicians as "victory Jesus won" confusing peace on earth with the Gospel. Stockman follows that with "U2 believes that the Gospel...has an agenda for peacemaking and justice and a kingdom coming. They also believe that kingdom could come now on this side of eternity." The reason they believe this? A misinterpretation of the Lord's Prayer, in which Bono identifies his favorite line: Thy kingdom come, they will be done on earth as it is in heaven. "Heaven on earth - now - let's have a bit of that," Bono exclaims. The Gospel (Christ's objective work on the cross to reconcile us to the Father) has nothing to do with what we do. We cannot live the Gospel. We cannot add anything to the work of Christ on our behalf. The author is cloyingly sympathetic to U2's views as he writes "[the band was] asking the Church to get out of prayer meetings and into the everyday dirt and pain of bringing the kingdom. This band believed in a kingdom coming...and they were going to run until they found what they were looking for: an earth as it is in heaven." And later he says that "Bono...longs for heaven on earth and tells his God he is tired of waiting." What I expect from a pastor is some Scriptural backing for these views but few verses are forthcoming.

Evangelical Bogeyman

On the first pages of the book it is asserted the band members' faith have been put in doubt by "the Christian press and Christians in general." The book goes on to suggest that evangelicals have caused U2 disillusionment for their concern for appearances over human suffering (pg. 5). When he writes that the band made a concious decision to deflect allegiance to conservative evangelical Christianity he fails to see this is because they are social gospel liberals who don't like being compared to people they oppose. There is no sourcing for such claims as the right-wing Church was forcing them to shut up (pg. 60), that Jublilee 2000 proof-texts from Leviticus are not taught in evangelical churches (pg. 151), or evangelicals spend a lot of time on being born again but little time on growing up (pg. 65). Stockman saves a special amount of vitriol for an editorial in Christianity Today that dared question Bono on his own record of giving and says that they shouldn't assume he doesn't give. But he assumes throughout the book that so-called evangelicals oppose U2 with nary a reason other than his conjecture.

Christian Left

One of Bono's more famous quotes is that "faith in Jesus Christ that is not aligned with social justice - that is not aligned with the poor - it's nothing." Early on the band becomes involved with Amnesty International and then later Bono starts his own advocacy group called DATA but the thread running through a lot of their work is alignment with center-left groups. Amnesty International believes that abortion is a human right and Bono himself is pro-choice, but you won't find that in this book. A stated goal of the ONE Campaign is to increase government funding for international aid programs but Bono and this author simply call this loving their neighbor. If by love you mean coercing my neighbor's government into taxing that neighbor at a higher rate so we can send his money to Africa. For a pastor to write a line of such low ecclesiology further solidifies in my mind that this book is hagiography more than anything else: "For Bono, The Edge, and Larry, the God that they met and have pilgrimaged a God who is bigger than Church..." Think I'm making too much of Stockman's wagging finger? He writes "It is scandalous that in trying to switch America on to justice issues like debt relief, HIV/AIDS, and trade issues both Bono and Ali have had to prove what advantage it would be to America rather than the good idea of ridding the world of poverty, injustice, and millions of senseless deaths." He is also, apparently, on board with Bono's questionable assertion that poverty creates terrorists. In a passage of breathtaking naivete he writes "The press too have been quick to have a go at him for his do-gooding, telling him to stick to the music. Condemning someone for trying to save lives and help others is a remarkable indictment on third-millennium priorities." I haven't seen this "condemnation" he's talking about but he can't seem to understand that Bono's being criticized for being a moral scold and a public nuisance. Having millionaire rock stars hector governments into transferring more of their wealth to poor countries for the dubious notion that poor nations can achieve parity in this way is annoying to a large swath of people.

While being maddeningly biased and parroting the same insights into U2 you can find in their own book your time is much better spent in U2 by U2.

Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Apple Color 1.5

For quite a while now I've had an interest in both film restoration and color grading. I think the restoration bug caught me when I saw Criterion's special edition of The Third Man and saw the stunning ways that they cleaned up this old film and made the viewing experience much more pleasurable. As far as color grading (also sometimes called correction or timing) I became aware of it when I watched the special features on the Se7en DVD and also when I saw O Brother, Where Are Thou? years later.

That brings me to discovering a few weeks ago that Apple now has a professional color grading application available in their Final Cut Studio suite. I have been going through the training available for it and it astonishes me that a program this powerful can be used on a home PC consumer platform. The exorbitantly expensive hardware-based solutions have been pushed out by the powerful software-based systems, that now allow consumers access to this technology. Color me amazed.

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Monday, September 27, 2010

Brietbart Confronts Maher on Being A Libertarian

In one of his scheduled breaks from fouling the waters of Hef's grotto, Bill Maher admits what has been obvious to even the most casual observer for some time: he's sympathetic to European socialism.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

The Kindergarchy

I find it hard to believe that, when looking around my blog today, I never mentioned reading this great essay by Joseph Epstein on raising children. In describing his own upbringing several generations ago he details the huge differences in emphasis from his time to now and contrasts the results. Not merely a cranky "every generation is getting worse" eulogy but a recognizable story for anyone who has spent time around parents and their children in the past 20 years. Things have changed.

His opening paragraph:
In America we are currently living in a Kindergarchy, under rule by children. People who are raising, or have recently raised, or have even been around children a fair amount in recent years will, I think, immediately sense what I have in mind. Children have gone from background to foreground figures in domestic life, with more and more attention centered on them, their upbringing, their small accomplishments, their right relationship with parents and grandparents. For the past 30 years at least, we have been lavishing vast expense and anxiety on our children in ways that are unprecedented in American and in perhaps any other national life. Such has been the weight of all this concern about children that it has exercised a subtle but pervasive tyranny of its own. This is what I call Kindergarchy: dreary, boring, sadly misguided Kindergarchy.
Epstein writes about the "craze of attentiveness" that brings to mind C.S. Lewis's unforgettable portrait of a mother's egotistical, demanding, smothering love in The Great Divorce.

On parental attention: "My mother never read to me, and my father took me to no ballgames...When I began my modest athletic career, my parents never came to any of my games, and I should have been embarrassed had they done so. My parents never met any of my girlfriends in high school. No photographic or video record exists of my uneven progress through early life."

On college entry in the Kindergarchy: "getting into a good college is the child's return on his parents' immense psychological investment in him."

On ultimate results: "As a teacher at Northwestern University (not long retired), I found the students in my classes in no serious way I could discern much improved for all the intensity of home and classroom attention most of them received under the Kindergarchy."

On significance: "Despite what their parents had been telling them from the very outset of their lives, they were not significant. Significance has to be earned, and it is earned only through achievement."

Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Mister Pip: A Review

Mister Pip Mister Pip by Lloyd Jones

My rating: 3 of 5 stars
I have complicated thoughts about this book. On the one hand, it has a natural appeal to book lovers because, after all, we love books. So a story about bringing the wonder and imagination of a great book to underpriveleged children is alluring. On the other hand, it has a point of view that would make Christopher Hitchens proud. Hitchens has written that literature is of infinite splendor and sustains the mind and soul and the lead protagonist of the book is a sheepish agnostic who stirs a crisis in the narrator Matilda's mind concerning her family's primitive faith.

This faith is a mix of Bible knowledge and primitive circle-of-life mysticism. Mr. Watts is the only white man on a black island and comes to his task of teaching with an assurance of his knowledge of Great Expectations and Mr. Dickens. He's the one who invites the natives in to speak on whatever topic they like. It is he who, although an oddball, is open-minded and has an allowance for other points of view. Whereas Matilda's mother wants to antagonize his skepticism and confront him directly about his lack of belief. She eventually steals his book and is responsible for multiple calamities brought onto his family.

But the story is more complex than this, because in the end Matilda's mother ultimately sacrifices for Mr.Watts. And Mr. Watts turns out to be less of a person than Matilda believes him to be. He is a hypocrite in the original meaning, an actor, a man playing a part. And so I came to the end of the book disappointed to see another author portraying the skeptic as a cool, contemplative character to be emulated.

Saturday, May 01, 2010

Dug Down Deep: A Review

Dug Down Deep: Unearthing What I Believe and Why It Matters Dug Down Deep: Unearthing What I Believe and Why It Matters by Joshua Harris

My rating: 5 of 5 stars
One thing is clear reading Josh Harris's new book - the years have changed and matured him. Since his first book came out when he was twenty-one (I Kissed Dating Goodbye) he has gotten involved in the Reformed movement and this book reflects his deeper thinking about the core doctrines of Christianity. The big difference I see between him and someone like Donald Miller is that Josh Harris is capable of transparency that includes embarrassment. In his chapter on the doctrine of the Christ he says that "we don't want to study Jesus. We want to experience him" and he goes on to explain how he often thinks about Jesus experientially. But then he admits that
"putting all my desired 'Jesus feelings' into words makes me sound like an emotional seventh-grade girl about to leave summer camp. That is not good."
His trajectory tracks with my own in some key areas. He thinks back to his time at a charismatic church and says that "over time the continual focus on looking for a fresh move of the Spirit began to wear thin." He said he "couldn't shake the sense that something was missing." I'm well familiar with that sense and also in the deep satisfaction he found in Reformed authors:
"this is what I'd been longing for but had never known how to name. My soul had been craving good, solid, undiluted truth about God and the good news of his Son's life, death, and resurrection. I didn't need to be entertained. I didn't primarily need to fall over at a prayer meeting. And I didn't need lifeless information. I need to know God."
These things for him, and for me, were the box-top of the puzzle. A provocation to understand what we were reading in a way that was comprehensive for the first time. It is a thoughtful and well grounded introduction to Christian doctrine.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Return to Rome: A Review

Return To Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic Return To Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic by Francis J. Beckwith

My rating: 2 of 5 stars
In early May of 2007 I found out that Frank Beckwith, then president of the Evangelical Theological Society, had converted to Catholicism. I knew of Frank’s name primarily from Greg Koukl, his co-author of Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air. I followed the story with interest for a month and it is just now that I’m getting around to reading Frank’s book about the reconversion.

I want to focus on the theology more than the background Frank provides so I’m going to skip ahead to the fifth of seven chapters and dive right in. Here is his list of the main theological issues that originally prevented him from becoming Catholic: (1) the doctrine of justification, (2) the Real Presence in the Eucharist, (3) the teaching authority of the Church (including apostolic succession and primacy of the Pope), and (4) Penance (79).

He writes, “One may wonder where the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura factored into all this. To be blunt, it didn’t. Primarily because over the years I could not find an understanding or definition of sola scriptura I found convincing enough that did not have to be so qualified that it seemed to be more a slogan than a standard” (79). He then quotes D.H. Williams that the “Magisterial Reformers such as Luther and Calvin did not think sola scriptura as something that could be properly understood apart from the church or the foundational tradition of the church, even while they were opposing some of the institutions of the church” (79-80). This seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about the sola in sola scriptura. The entire idea is that authority comes from the Scripture alone so why should we think that Luther would think that the authority of Scripture alone is only understandable with assistance from the church? That’s what he was fighting against, and when being examined by Johann Eck he spoke in German - so the people could understand him - that a peasant armed with one verse of Scripture has more authority than a Pope or a church council who do not rest their doctrine on the Scripture.

Frank goes on to say, “I had for some time accepted a weak form of sola scriptura: any doctrine or practice inconsistent with Scripture must be rejected, though it does not follow that any doctrine or practice not explicitly stated in Scripture must suffer the same fate, for the doctrine or practice may be essential to Christian orthodoxy” (81). I would love to know what doctrine or practice that is essential to orthodoxy is not found in sacred Scripture. Once again the dividing line of Scripture and tradition is at the forefront.

“Luther and Calvin had unfortunately assimilated philosophical ideas that were deleterious to the Reformers’ noble intent for the proper restoration of the Church. For this reason, the task of proper restoration fell to thoughtful Catholic reformers that led to the Council of Trent and its successors” (77). However, the 4th session of the Council of Trent opens with a statement that the council “clearly perceives that these truths [of the Gospel] are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions…” and it originally read “these truths are contained partly in the written books and partly in the unwritten traditions.” Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church has binding authority on the conscience and the magisterial has the right to interpret Scripture. This lengthy passage from that same council makes that point abundantly clear:
“Furthermore, to check unbridled spirits, it [the Catholic Church] decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian Doctrine, distorting the Holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conception, presume to interpret them contrary to that sense which holy Mother Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation, has held and holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, even though such interpretations should never at any time be published. Those who act contrary to this shall be made known by the ordinaries and punished in accordance with the penalties prescribed by the law.”
Luther wanted tradition judged by Scripture but this passage shows the ultimate authority residing in the Church, where tradition would judge Scripture. On his web site, Frank approvingly quotes Peter Kreeft, "The Protestant Reformation began when a Catholic monk rediscovered a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book. The monk, of course, was Luther; the doctrine was justification by faith; and the book was the Bible." The problem with this, of course, is that it is a Christian doctrine in the Christian Bible. Frank ends up rejecting the Reformation and instead finding solace in the Church Fathers, who were closest in their thinking to Roman Catholic teachings. He found in that tradition the backdrop to embrace Catholic teachings and never does more than touch on Penance or the Eucharist, and completely ignores the doctrines of the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary and baptismal regeneration.

But earlier he did say that, “The other issues that most Protestants find to be stumbling blocks - the Marian doctrines and Purgatory - were not a big deal to me…because I reasoned that if Catholic view on Church authority, justification, the communion of the saints, and the sacraments were defensible, then these other so-called “stumbling blocks” withered away, since the Catholic Church would in fact be God’s authoritative instrument in the development of Christian doctrine” (79).

I could have spent as much time as I have so far on the discussion of justification but I will come to a close here with something I call Beckwith’s wager and it goes like this: “if I return to the Church and participate in the Sacraments, I lose nothing, since I would still be a follower of Jesus and believe everything that the catholic creeds teach...But if the church is right about itself and the Sacraments, I acquire graces I would have not otherwise received” (115-16). However Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, writes that there is but one Gospel and plenty to lose if you get this wrong: I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:6-9 ESV).

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Psalm 131 and the anti-psalm

Dr. David Powlison, in an article on Psalm 131, poses what it would look like to turn this psalm around, the anti-psalm:

my heart is proud (I'm absorbed in myself),
and my eyes are haughty (I look down on other people),
and I chase after things too great and too difficult for me.
So of course I'm noisy and restless inside, it comes naturally,
like a hungry infant fussing on his mother's lap,
like a hungry infant, I'm restless with my demands and worries
I scatter my hopes onto anything and everybody all the time.

Read the original Psalm of David here to see the brilliant contrast.

Monday, March 15, 2010

Westminster in iTunes U

Westminster Theological Seminary now has a presence in the iTunes University. You can listen to lectures by Carl Trueman, David Powlison, Edmund Clowney, Greg Bahnsen, and others. Click this link to open the page in iTunes.

Wednesday, March 03, 2010

Internet By The Numbers

Just how big is Facebook? Find out that and other staggering statistics below:

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Ash Wednesday

Mark D. Roberts gives a good, basic introduction to this day that starts the season of Lent.

Friday, February 05, 2010

A Nation of Racist Dwarfs

This is the title of Christopher Hitchens's review of B.R. Myers's new book about North Korea, The Cleanest Race. Key graph:
All of us who scrutinize North Korean affairs are preoccupied with one question. Do these slaves really love their chains? The conundrum has several obscene corollaries. The people of that tiny and nightmarish state are not, of course, allowed to make comparisons with the lives of others, and if they complain or offend, they are shunted off to camps that—to judge by the standard of care and nutrition in the "wider" society—must be a living hell excusable only by the brevity of its duration. But race arrogance and nationalist hysteria are powerful cements for the most odious systems, as Europeans and Americans have good reason to remember. Even in South Korea there are those who feel the Kim Jong-il regime, under which they themselves could not live for a single day, to be somehow more "authentically" Korean.
Read the whole thing.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

The Shack Reviewed

I was a latecomer to reading The Shack and I'm not the only one. Recently Al Mohler, Tim Keller, and Books & Culture put together some reviews. You can find those below and here is what I wrote after reading it:

The three main elements of the book can be broken down into the categories of silly, mistaken, and dangerous. There is much cross-pollination between the last two and here are some examples:

Silly: the author has a low view of scripture (65-6) and seminary (91), values emotion and experience over intellect and propositional truth (93), teaches woman was hid inside of man from the start, just waiting for the Trinity to release her (148), we learn to hear the Spirit's thoughts in our own thoughts and become better at this as we grow in that relationship (195-6), all the tearful times are healing and tears are the best words the heart can speak (228).
Mistaken: God doesn't desire to punish sin (120), not only are all parts of the Trinity in submission to each other but they are in submission to us, their creation (145), man's desire to be over women is in their sin nature as part of the Fall (147), Jesus doesn't want Buddhists and Mormons and Muslims who love Him to become Christians (182), forgiveness of another person is a prerequisite to their redemption (224).
Dangerous: heretical view of the Trinity and the incarnation where all three spoke themselves into human existence and died on the cross (99), there is no concept of final authority in the Trinity and no hierarchy (122), the Greek goddess Sophia is a personification of God's wisdom and part of the mystery of the Holy Spirit (171), God's purposes are ever and only an expression of love (191).

This is not to say that the book has nothing of value to say but finding these things in all this muck of backward, heterodox, and finally heretical thinking is not worth it, to my mind. For a good, discerning review I recommend Tim Challies essay here.

Tim Keller
Books & Culture
Al Mohler

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

David Simon's Treme

HBO decided to pick up the new show by David Simon (creator of the outstanding series The Wire) and the new site is up. It includes a teaser trailer that tells us virtually nothing but I can't wait for April.

Monday, January 04, 2010

2009 Movie Picks

Theater Best:
The Hurt Locker
The Blind Side

Theater Worst:
Angels & Demons
State of Play

DVD Best:
The Wrestler
Slumdog Millionaire
Inglourious Basterds

DVD Worst:
Lake of Fire
Synecdoche, NY
Waltz with Bashir