Movie Review: Journey to Bethlehem

Journey to Bethlehem is a musical adaptation of the nativity story. Is the source material for Journey to Bethlehem found in Matthew 1:18-25, Matthew 2:1-22, Luke 1:26-56, Luke 2:1-39? I doubt it. Seriously doubt it. I am not sure despite their opening claim that the movie is "inspired by a true story the greatest one ever told." Did the script writers, the lyricists, the directors, the producers read from any gospel while working on the project? It feels more like they were remembering the nativity story as told from pageants of yore after decades of busy life. It does feel more inspired by Christmas hymns and carols [or even Christmas cards] than it does actual Scripture.

The problem is not the music. Let me reiterate that. In a lot of reviews, people were so focused on the musical numbers AND the tone of those musical numbers that they neglected to comment on any other aspect of the film. The concern being, the nativity story should be approached with AWE, with WONDER, with REVERENCE, with respect, with worship. It shouldn't be a romantic comedy with a meet-cute. It shouldn't remind you of George of the Jungle, Bride and Prejudice, or the Three Stooges. I want to revise my statement, the problem isn't only the music. The scenes that personally bothered me most were NOT the musical numbers. 

I have problems with what they left out. Which is almost the entirety of the biblical narrative. [See  Matthew 1:18-25, Matthew 2:1-22, Luke 1:26-56, Luke 2:1-39] One example being the Magnificat, Luke 1:46-56. This is a MUSICAL. This song of Mary's is one of the most well-known in the Bible. You don't get closer to the source material--Mary herself--than this bit of Scripture. In a movie that strives so hard to give Mary a voice, this one omits all of Mary's actual words from Scripture. Perhaps all is too harsh a word. Most. They don't even keep the scene with Mary and Elizabeth special greeting: Luke 1:39-45. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, her babe leapt in her womb, and she professed a great blessing on Mary. The shepherds are a no show as well.

I have problems with what they changed. I have problems with what they added. These two blend and blur. The Wise Men are a good example of things changed. It is not that they are absent from the Bible. It is that the writers/producers decided to insert the 3 Wise Men in almost all the scenes. They start their journey to worship the Child before Mary is even betrothed to Joseph. They alert Herod to this future king before Mary even goes to stay with Elizabeth. Herod spends at least six to eight months searching for an unmarried pregnant woman with the intent to kill her. Herod's soldiers--and son--arrive at Elizabeth's house searching for Mary. Good thing that Joseph arrives a few minutes ahead of the soldiers and is able to hide Mary under some hay. After Joseph saves her from immediate danger, Mary pops the question and proposes to Joseph. Zacharias marries the two immediately. The Wise Men head off to Bethlehem months before Mary and Joseph do. But I digress.

They made some unique/interesting choices when it came to plot and characters. One choice being Antipater (the son of Herod). Throwing out history, obviously, they turn him into an anti-hero of sort. If this was not a musical, he would be the "unsung" hero of the movie. As it is, he gets several songs and is found in many pivotal scenes. He is the oh-so-conflicted son who wants to stop his father from murdering women and children. The most problematic sequence of scenes, in my opinion, is Joseph and Mary's arrival in Bethlehem, the birth of Jesus, the arrival of the three wise men, and the flight into Egypt. What is not found in Scripture: a) Joseph seeing Antipater and other Roman soldiers in the front of the census line and deciding NOT to stand in line b) Joseph and Mary trying to sneak into Bethlehem through a secret tunnel c) Joseph scouting ahead to see if they can reach his parents' house safely d) guards being at Josephs' parents' home waiting for them, e) a DONKEY kicking a soldier as he approaches a laboring Mary, f) a donkey pacing back and forth outside the stable as he waits for Jesus to be born g) the angels appearing to the WISE MEN (not the non-existent shepherds), h) everyone being able to see the angels including Herod in Jerusalem and Mary's parents (and sisters) in Nazareth, including all the soldiers looking for the birth of a newborn king i) snow fall j) Antipater arriving at the stable to find Joseph, Mary, and the three wise men fast asleep, k) Joseph and Mary begging and pleading with Antipater to spare their lives l) Antipater deciding that he didn't have to be like his father and he could choose better m) Antipater placing the family under HIS protection and keeping his soldiers from harming them, n) the Wise Men and Joseph weren't warned in a dream so much as told by Antipater directly to flee the country. 

I find all the additions to the nativity story a) insulting (as if you could improve the story) b) distracting (taking all the focus away from the incarnation) c) exceedingly stupid. 

The overall tone of the movie is COMEDY. A blend of ROMANTIC comedy and SLAP-STICK. There are a few minutes here and there that counteract that tone. Scenes that stand in sharp contrast to comedy. A few minutes here and there where the true story does emerge. For example, there's a few minutes where the "three wise guys" stop acting like the three stooges and seem to genuinely be worshipping the Christ child. It's a blink and you miss it moment. 

Most of the scenes with the wisemen are so cringe that it's near unbearable. The jokes are so bad. 

You wouldn't expect the scene with GABRIEL the angel to be cringe. But you'd be wrong. This Gabriel is bumbling-stumbling. He practices his speech to Mary--fumbling about with the words several times--and then bumps his head when he does emerge in Mary's presence. When he fails to wake her from slumber [the Bible never says she was sleeping, but that is neither here nor there] he uses his super-scary artificial robot voice and makes his eyes glow. Hence why he needs to tell her not to be afraid. These are sacred moments of Scripture that are being turned [and poorly turned] into a joke. 

Joseph doesn't have a dream or vision confirming the truth of what Mary is saying. Not as you'd expect. In this "dream/vision" Joseph almost literally has a dance-off with himself. Okay, I exaggerate. It is Joseph versus Joseph. Mary is in the center--dressed in red, head to toe. One Joseph (dressed in black) wants to stone her and condemn her as a liar giving into all her desires. The other Joseph (dressed in white) wants to believe her because he loves her. They do dance. They do sing. They do choreographed battle. There's a fog machine--by my reckoning--and cruel soldiers and jeering peasants. You do hear Gabriel's voice speak out of dream-Mary's mouth, also her eyes glow blue. 

I mentioned that the movie seems to throw out history. I think they throw out culture as well. (And I think indirectly you can conclude my opinion that they threw out much of the source material--the Bible.) Mary comes across--particularly at the first half--as whining and thoroughly modern in all the worst possible ways. Why did I have to be born a girl. I'm so oppressed. I have no choices in life. My dreams are over. Her words exactly, "Every girl I know helped choose their husband. Why am I forced to marry someone I haven't even met?" and "What about my dream of becoming a teacher?" Her father responds, you're fortunate anyone wants you with your CRAZY IDEAS. She tells Joseph, "My whole life I wanted to be a teacher and then marry someone I actually love." His feelings aren't hurt though since he wants to be an inventor who changes the world with his inventions. He's being forced to marry by his parents. 

Some reviewers made a big deal out of the fact that these two have a meet-cute at the market place. Joseph and Mary bump into each other. He says "You're Welcome" (which is his catch-phrase that is repeated again and again and again). He offers to buy her a piece of fruit. She says, nope I'm engaged to be married. I can't accept a piece of fruit from you. He is like it can be a wedding present. Later when they meet again, she throws this in his face as proof that he can't be the one for her. He was FLIRTING while engaged. I just don't see why this alone from the movie is alarming. Not when there's so much other stuff to offend. It wasn't that flirtatious. And sure there could be layers of hidden subtext to make it mean something much, much, much more. But that would assume that the writers/producers were actually putting culture into the movie in the first place. If you look at the movie as a whole, first-century culture [Roman, Jewish] just seems non-important. 

There were some enjoyable moments. "Brand New Life" is a very catchy song. It plays at their betrothal party AND the end credits. "We Become We" is beautiful. This is the song that plays during their hasty marriage. "Mary's Getting Married" is equal parts cringe and delight. Very Bride and Prejudice. 

If the big-picture plan was to set up Herod [the Great] as [the first] Anti-Christ, I think they visually accomplished this. Is it historically accurate? Who knows. But they went hard in this direction. Always dressed in red and black. His throne room has an open-mouthed lion [sculpture?]. (The throne is in the lion's mouth). The eyes glow red. (As do the teeth when the lights go out). There are open flames EVERYWHERE. I think the intent was like let's make this look like a stereotypical image of hell itself. His song has the chorus of MINE IS THE KINGDOM, MINE IS THE POWER, MINE IS THE GLORY. FOREVER MORE. And this refrain pops up again in contrast. The Wise Men (who would have probably heard this song (Herod really likes singing about himself) sing to the Newborn king (in the melody of Herod's villain song) Thine is the kingdom, thine is the power, thine is the glory forever and ever. 

I think my favorite brief moment of the film was Herod giving his son Antipater a priceless puzzled look when Antipater and the guards break out in the most ridiculous choreography. 

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

Movie Review: A Week Away

A Week Away (2021) is a new Netflix movie. I've seen some calling it a 'Christian' High School Musical. It stars Kevin Quinn, Bailee Madison, Jahbril Cook, Kat Conner Sterling, Sherri Shepherd and David Koechner. 

Will Hawkins is a troubled teen almost certainly heading straight for juvie, when he receives a last chance. Would he want to go to a week-long summer camp (Bible camp at that) instead? He says yes, but, he hesitates a moment or two. But a last chance is still a chance. So the SINGING and dancing begins.

The movie's soundtrack seems to be a blend of new and old. Old songs like "The Great Adventure," "Dive," "Baby, Baby," "Place in This World," "Big House," "Awesome God," "God Only Knows," are made new. Some of these are definitely rooted in Christian music. Perhaps with the exception of Baby, Baby. I think everyone remembers that as Amy Grant's break away with Christian music. For better or worse.

Other songs like "Good Enough," "Let's Go Make a Memory," and "Best Day Ever" sounded completely new-to-me. Perhaps written for this movie? Or new enough releases that I haven't stumbled across them on Christian radio? Assuming that they have a Christian background at all.

So I would say about 98% of the movie focuses exclusively on crushes and finding "true love." The other 2% focuses on being comfortable in your skin, finding your people, and embracing life arms wide open.

There's really only one scene that comes to mind that shows any spiritual depth. The campfire dance scene where the medley Awesome God and God Only Knows is performed. The two leads--Will and Avery--sing God Only Knows reflecting where they are emotionally in their story arcs while every other camper harmonizes on Awesome God. It's a great three minutes of film. The spiritual depth comes in if and only if you accept that the characters are truly feeling and experiencing the lyrics as spiritually intended. 

Perhaps I was unfair in saying that this movie is ONLY about romantic love--finding that perfectly attractive someone to fall head over heels in love with. It is also about friendship. Will becomes quite close with George. And their relationship matters significantly especially moving forward after the end credits.

But still. Most of the movie is about perfect choreography and harmony.

Is there depth to the Christian aspects of the film? The closest it comes is that one campfire scene I mentioned above. The other songs seem to be taken a little too literally with the figurative spiritual applications far, far removed. Or at least that's how I interpreted the film. 

For example, Steven Curtis Chapman's song DIVE is exceedingly literal. The main character is preparing to DIVE off a literal diving platform into a literal river. And he appears to be scared of heights and unsure about those next steps. 

"Big House" makes an enjoyable MONTAGE scene. Again the song is taken LITERALLY. But I don't know that I'd change a thing about its presence in the film.

I do think it would have been awesome if BREAKFAST by Newsboys had also found a way into the film!!! Surely those campers had BREAKFAST before heading out for the war games?! 

Although I'm not a big fan of "Baby, Baby" by Amy Grant generally speaking, I did LOVE that it was a dream scene in this one. George, who sings lead in this one, is a bit too shy to actually woo his "love" this way.

"Great Adventure" was a song with a few changed lyrics. Either intentional or un. I do think this one could be so ambiguously interpreted that the LEADER of the song could literally be a camp leader, camp counsellor, etc. 

Most of the songs have a wholesome-ish, feel-good vibe with their song and dance. 

One could easily walk away from A WEEK AWAY without being one step closer to hearing the gospel. For better or worse. 

What are the chances that a Netflix original would be written/directed/produced by someone who *actually* knew the gospel AND wanted to present it clearly and truthfully. No watering down. No compromising. No additions. No subtractions. Just straight up truth--risking offending viewers with subjects like sin and the wrath of God and one's actual need for an actual Savior. A true calling for repentance and belief. 

Is it better to leave out the gospel than to present a false one? Maybe. Perhaps. This film isn't about Will hearing the gospel, accepting Jesus in his heart, praying a prayer, making a commitment. This isn't that film. (And I'm not saying that should be that film. I'm really not. I don't know that praying a prayer, signing a card, pledging one's life to Jesus should be part of the summer-camp-package.)

The doctrine of sin is absent from the movie, though mistakes are not. One could choose to believe that Will *will* be exposed to the gospel one way or another after the credits roll as he begins a new life. Or not. Again the focus isn't on Will becoming a child of God so much as it is on Will opening up his closed up heart again and being brave enough to let others in. 

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

Watching the Gospel of John

Can I talk about the film adaptation Gospel of John without gushing? I'm not sure. I just love it that much. What I love most about it is that it is word-for-word the ENTIRE gospel of John. The translation chosen for the film is the Good News Bible. As one of the simpler, most-basic translations in English, it does make it accessible for a wide audience range. The film--like the gospel--is intentional, evangelistic. (A good thing, a very good thing in my opinion.) The Scripture is enough--more than enough; you can't improve upon it.

The Gospel of John has always been a great why gospel. Why did Jesus come? Why did he face so much opposition? Why did he have to die? Why believe? Why have hope for this life and the next?

John was written "in order that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through your faith in him you may have life." (John 20:30-31) All twenty-one chapters of John line up with that goal. In other words, all twenty-one chapters tell readers here is why you should believe that Jesus is the Son of God, why you should put your faith in him; He is who He says He is, He is the I AM.

I thought the film did a great job in showing why people would be drawn to Jesus, why it would be so easy to LOVE him, to follow him, to worship and adore Him, to believe that He is the Son of God. Here we see a charismatic Jesus. But. At the same time, I thought the film did a great job in showing why he faced so much opposition. This was not a mild, timid Jesus. People may try to make Jesus "just a good man" or "a good teacher." But here you will see his offensiveness reflected. He was loving, kind, and compassionate to those who saw themselves as blind, as weak, as in need of a Savior. But he wasn't afraid of outspoken confrontation either.

I recently read a wonderful book called Jesus + Nothing = Everything by Tullian Tchividjian. One thing I appreciated about The Gospel of John was that it kept Jesus at the center, or as Spurgeon might say the "top and bottom" of its theology. It didn't try to add anything to the message of Jesus. Another film I recently tried to watch did not do this well. It was Jesus + Herod + Herod's Wife + Herod's step-daughter/niece + Judas + Peter + some zealots + some Pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes + the Sanhedrin, etc. The list goes on and on. The film didn't focus on Jesus enough. Instead of focusing on Jesus' preaching or teaching or parables, or Jesus' miracles and ministry, it instead chose to keep adding in scene after scene of things of lesser importance. For example, Judas gets a lot of time on screen. Almost from the start, viewers see he has an agenda of his own, an agenda he never forgets about, an agenda that he carries with him as he "follows" Jesus. The focus on Judas in conversation with others, in my opinion, is a distraction. There's definitely a different focus or purpose to this film. On the plus side, it does give time to many of the other disciples, giving personality to them.

Highlights from the Gospel of John:

When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed in the house. Martha said to Jesus, "If you had been here, Lord, my brother would not have died! But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask him for."
"Your brother will rise to life," Jesus told her.
"I know," she replied, "that he will rise to life on the last day."
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Those who believe in me will live, even though they die; and those who live and believe in me will never die. Do you believe this?'
"Yes, Lord!" she answered. "I do believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, who was to come into the world." (John 11:20-27)

"Do not be worried and upset," Jesus told them. "Believe in God and believe also in me. There are many rooms in my Father's house, and I am going to prepare a place for you. I would not tell you this if it were not so. And after I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to myself, so that you will be where I am. You know the way that leads to the place where I am going."
Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going; so how can we know the way to get there?"
Jesus answered him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one goes to the Father except by me. Now that you have known me," he said to them, "you will know my Father also, and from now on you do know him and you have seen him." (John 14:1-7)

As Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the desert, in the same way the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to be its judge, but to be its savior. Those who believe in the Son are not judged; but those who do not believe have already been judged, because they have not believed in God's only Son. (John 3:14-18)

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

Thoughts on Little House Season 1

I haven't watched Little House on the Prairie in many, many years. But this past month, I've been able to watch almost all of season one. (And the ones I missed were by choice.)

A Harvest of Friends. Pa obviously didn't hear me telling him not to climb the tree to rescue the kite. Still. I liked this one. The ending is very emotional.

Country Girls. One of the best, best episodes ever. Laura's "essay" makes me cry every time.

 100 Mile Walk. I watched part of this episode. But not all of it.

Mr. Edwards' Homecoming. A good episode. Plenty of good moments! Though it's not my favorite Mr. Edwards' episode. That would be Ma's Holiday!

The Love of Johnny Johnson. Silly Laura! Why Johnny Johnson?! Mary has a funny line in this episode. I wish I could remember it but it was about there not being many cute boys to choose from in Walnut Grove.

If I Should Wake Before I Die. Not a favorite by any means. Though it is interesting to see how one woman can manipulate so many people. You could definitely see her point--to a certain extent--how sad it was that your own children and grandchildren could be so very, very distant.

Town Party/Country Party. I liked this one okay. But not as much as Country Girls or The Campout.

Ma's Holiday. I had forgotten how funny this episode is! I love Mr. Edwards as a babysitter! I loved how he "took care" of Carrie. I love seeing his friendship with the three girls--Mary, Laura, and Carrie.

School Mom. This was a good episode. I liked seeing Ma as the new teacher--even if it was always meant to be temporary. I sometimes forget how spirited/tempered Ma could be in the show.

The Raccoon. I skipped this one.

The Voice of Tinker Jones. Interesting to see the church bickering. In this episode, a suggested "improvement" or change of the church building causes fights to break out in the community. Neighbors and friends turning on one another because they see things differently. Some things never change.

The Award. In the books, Laura always thinks of Mary as perfect. On the show, not so much. This episode has Mary making a few bad choices. She's keeping secrets, lying, and setting the barn on fire.

The Lord is My Shepherd. This is admittedly an emotional two-part episode. A strange episode covering at least ten months. In the first ten or fifteen minutes, Ma goes from telling Pa she's expecting a baby to having the baby--a boy--safely delivered. But the baby fails to thrive. He's not gaining enough weight--no one knows exactly why. He dies and sends Laura to the top of a mountain. I have a few issues with this episode. It just doesn't seem very Laura like to me. I think Laura would have been smarter than this. Smarter than to think that she could die in place of her brother.

Christmas at Plum Creek. I liked this episode. I liked how the focus was on the real meaning of Christmas--Jesus.

Family Quarrel. One of my favorite parts of this episode is when Dr. Baker is trying to convince Mr. Hanson to court Mrs. Oleson. While this isn't a favorite--by any means--it wasn't without entertainment value.

Doctor's Lady. I liked this one. I didn't love it. But I liked focusing on Dr. Baker for an episode.

Circus Man. I didn't like this one much.

Plague. Skipped this one.

Child of Pain. Skipped this one.

Money Crop. I watched this one. And it's always interesting to see how the community acts/reacts. Sometimes they seem very kind and reasonable. And other times very silly and mob-like.

Survival. Skipped this one.

To See The World. Johnny Johnson. Did we really need another Johnny Johnson episode? Actually, this one is funny. Mr. Edwards has some great lines! I liked it because I could laugh at it.

Founder's Day. I liked this episode. But I can't help comparing it to Wilder and Wilder in season 6. I just love, love, love Wilder and Wilder. (Almost as much as I love, love, love Sweet Sixteen.)

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

An Observation

This past Christmas, I got a three movie dvd set--something that made me quite happy: the Tammy movies. Tammy and the Bachelor. Tammy Tell Me True. Tammy and the Doctor. What I noticed watching this time round--as a grown up--was how Bible-literate Tammy was. She's always quoting this or that or the other. And she talks about the Bible...and God...as something living and breathing...something vital...something essential. The references to the Bible--quoting snippets here and there, and the clear references to Bible stories--are something I didn't necessarily catch onto as a kid. Maybe I took them for granted. Maybe I shared Tammy's innocence and naivety. But compared to so very many movies out there--and TV too for that matter--I found Tammy to be so refreshing.