ftbear Reviews

The Hornet's Nest (2014)

This is not a movie; it is an experience.

[10/10 · 15 September 2014]

These men and women did it, and they're still doing it today. That is, put their lives on the line so that others may live in freedom; even those that disagree with them.

It has been said that the more things change, the more they remain the same. During the American revolution there were those that were opposed to fighting for freedom and independence from England. Before and during the Civil War that same "no war is good - don't fight" attitude was espoused by many people who would have refused freedom to men and women living in chains in the south. Have we learned from our mistakes of the past? No; it's not any different now. That same attitude is given voice by some people today. Seemingly, they never stop to think that the freedom to openly share their opinion (without fear of being dragged from their home and shot in the street by death squads) was bought and paid for by the same men and women that they are disrespecting today.

I can't imagine what it must be like for the family members of the men and women who died in Afghanistan to come here and read some of the totally insensitive comments that others have posted. God has already had mercy on those that gave their lives; they're safely home with Him. He will need to give even more mercy to those that have no respect for the priceless gift they have received. Greater love has no man, or woman, than to lay down their life for their friends. Yes, the word is friends. The bottom line is that there is no we and they; there is only us. It's time we started getting it right.

I wish every theater, school, church and meeting place in America would show this film. It deserves to been seen. This is war up close, in your face and personal. These are real men and women, real lives and the real reasons why they are there - honestly and sensitively portrayed. I consider it to be nothing short of a masterpiece.

Be aware that my next comment may be a spoiler, but I would like to share something about a part in the film when the soldiers are talking to a group of children. The children are telling them where the enemy has been, and perhaps where they stashed some weapons. While watching this I was aware that the wisdom of children often exceeds that of we so-called adults. These children KNEW who the enemy was, and it was not the Americans. The children were not afraid of the Americans, they were afraid of the Taliban - and they were doing what they could to help the soldiers. For me, that was a moment of absolute clarity. Is our being there serving a purpose? Just ask those children.

Angels Sing (2013)

Superb! A modern replacement for "It's A Wonderful Life."

[10/10 · 7 December 2013]

I don't know enough superlatives to accurately describe this movie. It is a masterpiece.

It's a perfect blending of the truth of Christmas with the joyous celebration of life, love and family.

Some years back, I was dismayed when "the Grinch" found a way to copyright "It's A Wonderful Life" effectively removing it from it's richly deserved attention at Christmas time.

IAWL seems to have been replaced by the 1983 film "A Christmas Story." I've watched and enjoyed ACS more than once. I like the film, but it's missing some key elements wonderfully portrayed in "It's A Wonderful Life." Namely, the value of the individual life and our relationship with God.

"Angels Sing" has, in my estimation, moved in to solidly fill that gap.

Christmas impacts different people in different ways. For our central character, wonderfully portrayed by Harry Connick, Jr; it's not a time of celebration but a season filled with painful memories.

His family wants to celebrate Christmas but he simply can't enter into it with them. Many of us, to one degree or another, carry emotional scars from the past. Our hero carries a big one.

His story, and the films ending, creates all the heart filling satisfaction - and conveys all the truth - contained in IAWL.

What's not to like? Humor, music, tragic loss and then life regained. This is indeed a story for the whole family. I hope to see it in widespread television replays in Christmas seasons to come.

SPECIAL NOTE: Willie Nelson creates a GEM of a character in this film. Willie,I didn't know you had it in you. Thanks.

Don't be concerned about the low rating. This is largely a result of the "drive-by shooting" reviews from people that never saw the film, or can't seem to figure out that a movie with "Angels" in the title might (horrors) have elements of Christianity in it. Surprise, surprise.

The Michael J. Fox Show (2013–2014)

Back to the Future it's not.

[27 September 2013]

Michael, Michael; what in the world is going on? Don't get me wrong. I like MJF. But I don't like this show. It is poorly scripted, poorly shot and BADLY in need of a genuine sense of humor.

After the first three parkinson's jokes the rest of them just fell flat. Enough was enough already. I didn't know if I was supposed to laugh, feel sorry for him or what. For me, it just didn't work.

The characters in the supporting cast are not well defined. I don't know who the heck they are or what they're supposed to be. They just kind of wander in and out of camera view doing a fast and furious set of blackout jokes; kind of like a rude and crude vaudeville routine.

Speaking of rude and crude about one third of the "humor" was on the level of nine year old toilet jokes.

Your show is not for me, Michael. You're better than that. Or, are you?

Lincoln (2012)

Politically correct revisionist version of Lincoln's life.

[5/10 · 21 January 2013]

It is clear that the majority of reviewers of this film either know nothing of Abraham Lincoln's real character, or they are simply "going along" with the politically correct crowd and kissing Spielberg's uh, feet.

Spielberg set a new low in 2001 by refusing to allow ABC television to show his film "Saving Private Ryan" unless they left in the "F" word. ABC stayed true to its policy of "as much as we can get away with" and caved in. Spielberg laughed all the way to the bank. We now "enjoy" the ripple effects of that landmark decision with a level of filth on television that was undreamed of only a few years ago. You can't open Pandora's Box "just a little."

The fact that the majority agreed with ABC is meaningless. The citizen "majority" threw the Christian's to the lions and pushed the Jews into the ovens. Observers of history will know that falling in step with the majority opinion on matters of morality and the value of human life often leads to self destruction as well as the destruction of others. Standing with the crowd can mean you're standing for nothing.

Spielberg has done it again by putting filth into the mouth of Abraham Lincoln. Letters written by Lincoln to some of his Generals, instructing them not to use foul language in front of their men, are matters of public record. Even so, Spielberg has his version of Mr. Lincoln saying things that simply were not a part of his character, personal morality, or vocabulary. So, if we accept Spielberg's version, we must believe that Mr. Lincoln was a hypocrite who condemned the use of vulgarity by his general's but freely practiced it himself. I think not.

As he did with Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg simply forcing his version of "reality" on the viewing public. People that have a clean vocabulary are mocked and ridiculed today as being "prudes" or worse. So, Spielberg has to bring Lincoln down to the P C level with the lie that he was "a regular guy" who used foul language to express himself. It's simply not true.

Spielberg is also good at promoting his personal point of view by omitting the truth. Lincoln was a devoutly religious man. No, he was not a churchgoer. But, he was a bone marrow deep believer in God. Again, his personal reading of the Bible, his prayer life, and his practicing and promoting Christian values are matters of record. His letters, his speeches, his government documents and even the Emancipation Proclamation itself contain open and easily recognizable references to Lincoln's personal belief in God. His faith was the foundation of his life and the guide for his actions; privately as well as in conducting his duties as President. Spielberg would have you believe otherwise; so he simply left that part out.

Lincoln writes in the third from the last paragraph in the Emancipation Proclamation: "And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God." Hardly the words of the P C non-believer that Spielberg presents us with.

People that believe in God are not "politically correct" today. So, for the most part Lincoln's spiritual life is simply ignored. Spielberg gives us a false representation of Lincoln caused by the simple omission of truth.

Spielberg's movie making formula has become quite popular. He is not the only producer that follows this form. That is, to use a film to "propagandize" the viewers with the producers own politically correct version of an otherwise truthful subject.

After donating one million dollars to Obama, Spielberg shared a private showing of "Lincoln" with the President in the white house. Nothing more needs to be said about Mr. Spielberg's political agenda. This film serves that agenda.

So how does Hollywood "schmooze" the public into accepting their propaganda? (Spielberg is not alone in doing this.) They treat the making of a movie like the making of a pot of beef stew. That is, most of the ingredients are familiar and acceptable to all of us. Then the "chef" adds his or her own "secret spices" to give it the personalized flavor that they want us to swallow. With the film Lincoln, most of the ingredients are in fact good "beef and potatoes." That is, the main portions of the film are "true." But, truth serves only as a "base" to be personally "flavored" with Spielberg's P C point of view. When the news media does it that's called putting their "spin" on the subject. The recipe works well.

As the reviews here indicate, most movie goers have eaten a big bowl of Spielberg's stew with no notice at all of the "personal ingredients" he has flavored it with. Hence, all the high praise for his "great" movie making skills and the production of yet another Spielberg classic. You bet. Have another glass of Spielberg-Aid.

At the beginning of Richard Attenborough's great film "Gandhi" he says "No man's life can be encompassed in one telling. There is no way to give each year its allotted weight, to include each event, each person who helped to shape a lifetime. What can be done is to be faithful in spirit to the record and try to find one's way to the heart of the man." Mr. Attenborough remained faithful to those ideals.

Spielberg has given us a good deal of seemingly accurate information about Mr. Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation itself. But, he has not been "faithful in spirit to the record." This film is not even close to portraying "the heart of the man." Rather than seeing something of the real beauty in Lincoln's heart, we see a distortion warped by the politically correct agenda in Spielberg's heart.

Mr. Lincoln deserves better. So do we.

Taken 2 (2012)

He makes James Bond look like a sissy.

[9/10 · 18 January 2013]

I can only hope they make a Taken 3-4-5 etc. I don't know what the problem is with the reviewers that give this flick a low rating. It's one of the tightest written and well paced action films of the year. It's a worthy follow up to Taken 1.

The thing I like best is that (in both Taken 1 and 2) it hearkens back to the good old days when the "good guys were good and the bad guys were bad." None of this anti-hero trash.

I'm fed up with Hollywood garbage that makes heroes out of drug kings, street punks and sadistic sick-o losers.

To me, Liam Neeson's character is like John Wayne on steroids. And, he doesn't sink to the cesspool foul mouthed level that Stallone does in his last two sell-out imitation tough guy flicks.

Everyone in the film seems perfectly cast for their parts. Go see it; you'll get your money's worth and then some.

Last Ounce of Courage (2012)

If THEY hate it, it's got to be good!

[10/10 · 3 December 2012]

I got a laugh out of the couple of "interesting" people that posted childishly negative attacks on this film. Had I not already seen it, I would make sure I did after reading their silly imitation reviews. Hey, if guys like that hate it - it's GOT to be GREAT! Keep up the good work fellas; I'll follow your posts. If you hate it, I'm buying a ticket.

There are so many accurate and truthful reviews of this great film that I really don't need to go into a lot of detail. Many others have done a fine job.

Suffice to say that I was truly impressed. The need for giving our members of the military due recognition for their service and sacrifice is paramount. Good people have laid down their lives so that the "interesting" people mentioned above can run their mouths in a free country. This film gives our service people their just due; and does it beautifully.

Christian values in the film? You bet. We need films like this to be reminded that this country was first settled by people who came seeking freedom from religious persecution. Our founding fathers based the Deceleration of Independence, our Constitution and the Bill of Rights on Christian principals. All men ARE created equal; but only under God.

I hope the producers of this film will make many more. They have the talent and the touch to remind us all of what the real values are. The values that have been with us for about 2,000 years.