ie:missional teaching. glocalizing. living. serving. repenting. incarnating. loving. repeating.

June 8, 2009

Thoughts regarding fallen pastors

Filed under: Bible,Church,Culture,Devotional,Family,God,Gospel,Idolatry,Leadership,Life,Movies,Sex — Tags: , , — Marty Duren @ 3:02 pm

Saw it again last night: a pastor admits to committing adultery, repentant and broken, but out of the ministry nonetheless. I’m not sure that there is anything that weighs on me like hearing that news. This particular pastor led a dynamic church that has seen 100 people saved in the last three weeks, yet he still succumbed to the same temptation that has torn down the mightiest of warriors.

Having been married for more than twenty-five years and having been in the ministry for twenty (next month), I thought it would be appropriate to review some of the things that I think about when I hear such news. These are in no particular order, but should be considered well when desiring to avoid marital infidelity.

1. Get enough rest. Mental and emotional fatigue are open doors to bad decisions, even sinful ones. Many a man “burns the midnight oil” for the kingdom, or so it is supposed, only to find himself in the hotel room or church broom closet with a woman not his wife having lost the will power to say “no,” or even to think it. Pastors, you are not superhuman and while each of us need differing amounts of rest, listen to your body and rest when you need to do so. You cannot push the envelope of energy continually lest you run the risk of mental or physical adultery.

2. Stay true to the Word. This one should be obvious, but there will never come a time that we do not need the Word. Early in ministry we are afraid to even attempt to live without it, but often in later years coasting becomes the norm. “If I can just make it to retirement,” becomes the mantra for too many pastors who’ve long ago lost passion, but are trying to ride out the wave. Don’t become a hireling! The only way to remain a faithful shepherd is to be guided by the Word every step of the way.

3. Be careful. Don’t allow the thirst for adventure to cause you to become careless in how you relate to women. There will never be a time when flirting becomes acceptable or when lingering looks become godly. Internet filters or tracking software (X3 Watch or Covenant Eyes) may be necessary to keep your mind where it needs to be and out of the gutter. Have the TV removed from your hotel room if necessary or at least disconnected from the cable. When your wife says, “Stay away from [a particular woman],” then stay away from her. Somebody else can take her phone calls and do her counseling or she can go to another church.

4. Love your wife always and make love to her as often as possible. Make sure the passion that brought you to marriage does not get swept away in the busyness of life and ministry. When Paul instructed Timothy that a man who ignored the needs of his family is worse than an unbeliever, are we to believe that he was only talking about groceries?

Continue to pursue your wife as if you are still trying to convince her to marry you. Don’t take the attitude of Ward Cleaver: “What’s the use in chasing the bus after I’ve already caught it?” When your kids are young, get them accustomed to early bed times so that you and your wife can spend time together and when they are old, lock them out of the master bedroom for the same reason. Have date nights and don’t apologize or feel guilty.

Keep sex on the leading edge of your marriage. I think we’d be shocked at how many pastor’s wives go to bed with a book because their husband wants to debate online whether or not sex is “gospel-centered.” I think marital sex is God-given, God-blessed and God-expected. Paul wrote to the Corinthians couples that they should only abstain in times of prayer and fasting “with consent” and then resume their normal activity so that Satan did not find a way to tempt them due to a lack of self-control-a lack of self-control that resulted from a lack of sex. I hardly think that once-a-month passion is what he had in mind. Regular sex with one’s spouse is self-control.

If you are a pastor, teacher or evangelist and you travel so much that you have to reintroduce yourself to your wife and children each time you return home and you have such infrequent sex that you have to get the manual out each time, then you are living in a state of foolishness that borders on outright sin before God. Did you miss the part about being tempted for self-control? It amazes me how many guys would pass up a woman in need (with a broken down car, for example) for afraid of “causing a brother to stumble,” but cause their wives to stumble regularly due to the lack of attention and affection shown by her husband.

5. Live your heart. If you are in the middle of a career of ministry and come to the recognition that your passion is no longer for pastoring a local church, then change. A friend and I were discussing this very thing at lunch today. Guys get wiped out, lose their heart, lose their passion and then, it seems, it is easier to commit adultery than to get out. GET OUT OR GET HELP. One or the other. I’m aware that the Bible says, “The gifts and callings of God are without repentance,” but honestly, does that mean a specific job? I could go today and work at Chili’s and still fulfill my life’s calling.

If you find yourself in the midst of a career-crisis as a pastor and you, deep down, know that you’ve no more to give as a pastor, then plan an exit strategy and start following it. Read Wild at Heart if you haven’t already.

6. Do not let your church (or religious culture) force you into a way of ministry that destroys your ability to minister to yourself and your family. Every pastor is different in structure, personality and function. As soon as you understand how you function best (early morning, late night, mid-morning) you should organize your schedule around it, then communicate it to your church. If you need to be in the office from 6:00 AM until 2:00 PM, then come in early, leave and go fishing or to the gym or whatever. Or go home and help your wife with dinner; or cook dinner so she can go to the gym. Or vacuum the curtains…I understand that is the sexiest thing a husband can do.

If all of your local associational meetings are at night (y’know, when the wife and kids are home and help is needed) then skip them. I see no biblical admonition to attend, but I see multiple biblical admonitions about being a husband and father. As a pastor you are on call 24/7 and often are doing work related to ministry while at home or up early. Don’t feel guilty about calling another pastor and going to the movie after lunch. He needs it and so do you.

7. How about let’s dispense with all the “rock star” talk? John Piper wrote a book called, “Brothers, We are Not Professionals.” Perhaps someone should write one entitled, “Brothers, We are Not Rock-Stars.” Our current star persona promotion of good speakers, exceptional church planters and mega-church pastors borders on idolatry and calling people “rock star” or something similar does not help. In fact, what we have created and continue to promulgate makes mental or moral failure probable if not inevitable. Jesus said, “He that would be the greatest among you must be the servant of all.” When James and John’s mother wanted to know if her sons were going to be rock-stars in the kingdom, Jesus asked about their ability to endure suffering and sacrifice. I’m sure that ticket sales would drop dramatically if torture were the promoted result.

God has called us to one primary calling and that is to love Him with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength. This can be done from an office or Starbucks, from a house or a boat, from a seminary or an urban center. When we lose that simple focus, rather than following wherever and whenever it leads, then downfall becomes, all too often, the norm.

November 29, 2008

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Movie review and analysis

Filed under: History,Movies — Tags: , , , — Marty Duren @ 7:22 pm

Mark Herman’s amazing Holocaust movie, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, is now in wide release. Drop whatever you are doing and go see it. This is a powerful, emotional film.

The story is introduced with boys playing in the streets, running as if they themselves are airplanes as boys often do. From these familiar beginnings we are taken, through the experiences of 8 year old Bruno, son of an SS guard turned Commandant of a death camp, to “the countryside.” The father, Ralf, has shielded his family from the deepest horrors of the Final Solution so that even his wife, Elsa, believes him to only be a soldier standing for “the Fatherland.”

After the family arrives in the country Bruno spies the camp from his bedroom window mistaking it for a farm. His observations relating to this “farm” are honest and completely believable as coming from an eight year old: “Why do the farmers wear pajamas?” as he mistakes the camp uniforms for sleepwear. “Why can’t I play with the children?” since he is bored. And to the prisoner helping in his own kitchen, “Why did you quit being a doctor to be a potato peeler?” Knowing what we know about the Holocaust, each of his questions has a raw power.

The focal point of the movie is the unlikely friendship between Bruno and an 8 year old Jewish boy, Shmuel, a prisoner in the camp. (The movie does not strive for absolute historical accuracy; most kids under 15 were killed upon their arrival.) While exploring one day, the young German boy happens upon the camp’s barbed, electrified fence finding the young Shmuel sitting forlornly behind a pile of concrete. Shmuel is not aware of all that goes on at the camp (for instance, he believes the ovens to be burning old clothes), but Bruno has absolutely no frame of reference for it anyway. He understands everything only from his own experiences. This friendship leads to several scenes of almost indescribable agony, one of which brought gasps from virtually all in the theater and the other brought tears to many including me. When you grasp what is about to happen at the end, it’s all you can do to stay and finish the movie. The scene between the two boys in which Bruno is informed by Shmuel that he cannot come to his house and play is as poignant as any ever filmed. Bruno simply does not comprehend that his friend is in a prison and asks him, “What did you do?” Shmuel replies, “I’m a Jew.” The silence that follows that exchange is punctuated by the looks of incomprehension on the face of the young German and resignation on the face of the young Jew. It is far more powerful than any additional lines of dialogue.

The final, gut wrenching scene features Elsa frantically searching for her son and weeping uncontrollably when she begins to realize what has happened. I could not help but think of all the Jewish mothers, grandmothers, wives and sisters who also wept for their lost loved ones. I also could not help but think that if one life was important, all lives were and if none were important, then neither was that of a cute German kid.

Do not go expecting a docu-drama or emphasis on the historical aspects of the Holocaust or Germany in the 1930’s. Very little is given. Knowledge of the historical events are assumed. This movie is an exploration of the emotional impact of what was famously called “the banality of evil” as witnessed through the eyes of a child.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is rated PG-13 for thematic material concerning the Holocaust. There is some violence, but most is off screen. There are no swear words, nudity or sexuality, but this movie would be difficult for kids younger than middle school. The movie features British and American actors who speak English. It takes a little getting used to, but, IMO, is better than a bunch of faked German accents.

July 18, 2008

The Dark Knight, Movie Review

Filed under: Culture,Movies,News,Uncategorized — Tags: , — Marty Duren @ 10:22 am

Timothy and I caught the midnight showing of The Dark Knight this AM, getting home a little after 3:00. I tanked up on a grande Double Chocolaty Double Blended Frappacino to make sure I stayed awake and then we hit the line at about 10:15 or so. I made sure to have a book so that I would not be compelled to make fun of all the fanboys then entire time.

First, this movie is dark. This is not Batman Begins with Bruce facing his fears of his winged tormentors or his perceived failures over his parents’ murders. This is a searing exploration of good vs evil, light vs darkness. It is not for the young, so leave the little blue hooded masked 8 year olds at home. There are numerous murders, several are up close right until the deed when a change of camera angle or off screen move hides the act from view. Nonetheless, the intensity is high even if the pooled blood is low.

Second, all acting performances are solid, even first rate, but pale beside the late Heath Ledger’s Joker. For pure sociopathology, Hannibal Lecter has been unseated (and possible Javier Bardem’s turn as Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men but, not having seen it, I cannot make the comparison). Ledger’s portrayal will further the comparisons to all those who have died young thought to potentially have been the actor of their particular generation. Go ahead and dust off the Oscar; it would be a travesty to give it to anyone else. If Daniel Day-Lewis was a shoo-in for There Will Be Blood, then Ledger is a lock for The Dark Knight. The Joker is brash, cut throat, without any shred of conscience, no sorrow. The silly girls that giggled through most of his scenes had no concept of the depth of depravity being conveyed in his “humor.”

Third, the Joker is probably the closest resemblance to Satan ever committed to film. Pure evil for the sake of being evil, he lives to make the “white knights” turn dark, to turn order into chaos. The more chaotic, the more maniacal, the better. There is no master plan, according to the painted one, only moving from one idea to the next. The trailers have done a good job of mixing up the scenes so that when you do see something familiar, it isn’t followed by what you might be expecting and it is always better.

Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman all reprise their major roles effectively, while Maggie Gyllenhall fills is admirably for the kidnapped brainwashed now married Katie Holmes. Unlike Batman Begins, The Dark Knight visits the death of a major character and it isn’t who you think.

As far as movies go, this is an instant classic and a study in the crafts of directing, producing, acting and a host of other inputs. The Dark Knight is rated PG-13 for violence, suspense, and a handful of swear words (about 1% of the number we heard while waiting in line).

May 2, 2008

Expelled, Movie Review

Filed under: Culture,History,Movies,News — Tags: , , , , , — Marty Duren @ 3:40 pm

Yesterday I took my 17 and 12 year olds with me to see Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the new movie concerning discrimination in the scientific community regarding some scientists who hold to Intelligent Design. Hosted by actor/comedian/talk-show host/activist Ben Stein, Expelled attempts to demonstrate that a “Berlin Wall” has been erected in science and that only those scientists and theories on the “Darwinian” side of the wall are able to get a hearing, tenure and publication in scientific journals.

First, the movie itself. It was better than I expected it to be, though not as good as it could have been. There was almost a consistent use of video clips, some of which were funny, but many of which were just distracting or overblown. The way I see it, those clips will merely feed those who see the movie as primarily entertainment, rather than a serious documentary.

Most of the interviews were enlightening and informative. Anyone who has read ID materials would recognize the names of Stephen Meyer, William Dembski and Jonathan Wells. To their credit, the producers also include agnostics like David Berlinski rather than those who can easily be traced back to religion or “young earth creationism” (which, it seems, no one in the movie holds). Berlinski, a virtual unknown to evangelicals, was thusly described by Slate magazine:

A secular Jew born in New York City, the 66-year-old began his career in academia. After earning a Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton, he spent time teaching at Stanford, working as a management consultant, and completing postdoctoral work in mathematics and biology. Nothing tookâ??as he describes it, he “got fired from almost every job [he] ever had.” And then, at some point in the last few decades, he decided to remake himself as a maverick intellectual operating out of a flat in Paris.

For an entertaining and wide ranging interview with Berlinski see here. It didn’t take long to determine that he was probably the smartest person being interviewed in the film.

Interviews with Darwinists were also enlightening. One, with a prof named Provine, easily demonstrated that Darwinists are as closed minded as they accuse Christian fundamentalists of being. Atheist Richard Dawkins’ arrogance comes across as clearly here as in his books and debates. Interestingly, he does admit that an intelligence could be responsible for “seeding” life on earth, but said intelligence would likely have been beings from a super-advanced civilization from another galaxy who would “necessarily” have evolved according to Darwinian evolution. How does he know this evolution would be necessary? He doesn’t say.

(In an interesting turn, ID theorists tend to reject the idea of “alien seeding” even though the theory itself does not rule out that very possibility. Upon rejecting the possibility that super intelligent aliens could have planted the first cell which became the common ancestor, they have nowhere to turn for the intelligent source but God which then becomes self-fulfilling of the accusation that ID is mere religion in cheap scientific terms or creationism in sheep’s clothing.)

Second, as might be expected, the basis for the movie (loss of tenure and/or grants for ID promoting professors and scientists) has already been challenged. The website Expelled Exposed is claiming that there were plenty of extenuating circumstances in each situation that renders the claims of ID discrimination impotent. I am not persuaded by each of the arguments, but if you are going to debate the veracity of Expelled, you need to be aware of the objections as there are always two sides to each story.

The most important part of the movie, IMO, is not the ID issue, but the inextricable tie between Darwinian thought and both Nazism and eugenics. This was not news to me, but it will be for many who see the movie and while critics will cry “foul,” it will make no difference, it is absolutely true. But further, if Darwinism is true, then there was nothing wrong with either the holocaust or eugenics. Survival of the fittest, we know, is an ugly, bloody, violent concept and whether you are talking about lions, tigers, bears or humans, the ones who adapt and find a way to maintain their existence are the ones best suited for survival. Ergo, it matters not that huge gas chambers were built all over Europe and vast ovens for the disposal of corpses, the Nazis were simply better suited to survive than 13 millions Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and crippled. The same with eugenics: why cry over the fact that scores of imbeciles were sterilized? The strong and smart were simply asserting their superior fitness to survive. As ugly as it is, that is the logic of naturalistic Darwinism. To appeal to morality or conscience is to recognize an objective law or truth outside ourselves.

The reality is that we don’t need Darwin as an excuse to kill and maim each other; as sinful creatures we did that quite efficiently before he ever came around.

Expelled is rated PG for a curse word, thematic material and holocaust film footage.

April 11, 2008

Favorite Movie Scenes

Filed under: Life,Movies — Tags: , — Marty Duren @ 8:50 pm

I think my favorite scene from any movie is a simple but powerful scene in To Kill a Mockingbird. At the end of Tom Robinson’s trial, the courtroom has almost emptied as his defense attorney, Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) picks up his papers and packs up his briefcase. Remaining attendants are only those seated the balcony (excepting his kids and neighbor Dill they were all African-Americans who were not allowed to sit on the main floor). As Atticus turns to walk out the door, all those in the balcony begin to slowly rise. In just a few seconds everyone is standing except for Atticus’ daughter Jean Louise (Mary Badham), better known as “Scout.” An elder African American man leans down and semi-whispers, “Stand up, Miss Jean Louise. Stand up-your Father is passing.” Unfortunately, I cannot find the clip online. If you don’t already on this movie on DVD, you probably hate your Mother, too. Get it here.

Another scene I really like is the singing of “La Marseillaise” from Casablanca. Another favorite movie, this scene puts me on the verge of tears every time I watch it. Some exiled French, holed up at Rick’s Cafe Americain, are being subjected to a terrible rendition the German anthem by some Nazi officers. A few measures into it, Resistance leader Victor Lazlo (Paul Henreid) instructs the house band to “play La Marseillaise…play it!” They do with stirring results

Last of my faves is one of the most powerful scenes ever committed to film. A scene that is as emotionally and physically exhausting for the viewer as it must have been for the participants. The original scene is 10 or more minutes long. This clip, missing the beginning, is a little over eight. Anne Bancroft as Annie Sullivan and the astounding Patti Duke as Helen Keller in the breakfast scene from The Miracle Worker.

What are your favorite movie scenes?

March 10, 2008

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Movie Review

Filed under: Movies — Marty Duren @ 5:40 pm

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford stars Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck based on the novel of the same name by Ron Hansen. Amazon lists the book at 320 pages and I’m sure the movie was at least that many hours.

The story centers on the last few months of James’ life, from September 7, 1881 through April 3, 1882, the date of his death. The adjective “assassination” is used rather than “murder” or “shooting” due to the notoriety that the outlaw had received following his 20+ bank and train robberies (with brother, Frank, and the “James Gang”) and his self-proclaimed 17 murders.

The movie uses, not effectively in my estimation, a lot of narration that is supposed to sound old and western but really just sounds uninteresting. Pitt is believable as the weary warrior, who at the age of 34 is already well along the down side of life. He does a good job of avoiding the smirks of his Ocean’s series character so you never get the feeling that he’s just collecting a paycheck on this one, and he does admirable work portraying James at times of overwhelming mental stress, anxiety and paranoia and as the family man forever hidden under the alias Tom Howard.

Affleck, who was honored with a Best Supporting Actor Nomination for his portrayal of the young, conflicted, fame seeking Robert “Bob” Ford, has moments of sheer brilliance but the disjointedness of the story telling works against his overall performance, IMO. After his initial appearance, which is extended, there was one point where I thought, “Where is Casey Affleck? Isn’t he in this movie?” I always felt that the best actors could carry or change a scene with their eyes, facial muscles and vocal tones–he pulls this off well especially early when both Frank and Jesse seem to put him down as too young (he was only 19 at the time of the Blue Cut train robbery). A particularly good scene features Ford, with some amount of embarrassment, recounting the ways that he as a youngster had likened himself to James. I really felt empathy for this character who sought so desperately to be liked by the one he admired, but never earned that respect.

(As good as Affleck’s performance is it does not come close to the astonishing, screen filling turn of Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood and there were actually a couple of times early in the movie when the silly grin of “Bob” Ford reminded me of Ernest T. Bass more than a real gunslinger. Of course, that may have well been the intent as, initially, that is rather how Ford appeared to those around him.)

Ultimately Ford is about making a name for himself and, as the gang begins to implode, Jesse James’ continued patronizing of and veiled threats toward the younger outlaw brings him to a point that no man had dared go: the betrayal and killing of the man he once admired as a hero. By the time the titular scene arrives, however, it is all one can do to stay awake. This movie is really long, 160 minutes worth and the last 30 minutes or so are a record of the self-aggrandizement of Ford after reaching his desired celebrity. It is stated in the narration that not long after the killing, Robert Ford was recognized by a greater percentage of Americans than the president of the United States and was “more renowned at twenty than Jesse James after fourteen years of grand larceny.”

The killing itself is most bizarre. It is as if Ford is the uncertain tool of assassination under the direction of a choreographer who was Jesse James himself. I have no idea as to its historical accuracy.

Unless you are a fan of every western ever made or you desire a lot of action in that genre, or simply enjoy movies that move very slowly you might want to steer clear of this one. It is a talkie.

The primary strength of this movie is its cinematography. Filmed in both Winnipeg, Manitoba and Calgary, Alberta, Canada (the latter of which boasts some of the most gorgeous scenery on earth) the setting passes easily for the midwestern US in both summer and winter. The snow scenes are tremendous.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is rated “R” for typical gun violence, a dozen or so swear words (but I wasn’t counting). There is no nudity or sexuality but there are a couple of brief sexually oriented conversations.

October 22, 2007

Gone Baby Gone, Movie Review

Filed under: Books,Culture,Movies — Marty Duren @ 10:59 pm

Friday marked the opening of the second Dennis LeHane book to be made into a major motion picture. Following the Clint Eastwood directed Mystic River comes Gone Baby Gone (see other reviews here), directed co-written by Oscar winning screenwriter (Good Will Hunting), movie actor and tabloid star, Ben Affleck. Affleck, in his first turn in the director’s chair, has given his audiences a remarkably well made film. I can’t remember a single wasted shot or scene and a scant few lines that I thought might have been better written. He is said to have used many locals for bit parts and it would not take much convincing of me to believe the truth of it. There are very few “actor looking” people in this movie.

The central characters of the story are Boston area private investigators Patrick Kenzie (Affleck’s brother, Casey) and Angela Gennaro (Michelle Monaghan), who are called upon to assist the police in finding a missing 4 year old girl, abducted from her bed while her mother visited with a friend next door. Morgan Freeman plays Jack Doyle, Captain of the Missing Children’s Unit, while versatile Ed Harris is ably cast as a Louisiana transplant, Detective Remy Broussant. So well cast is this movie that no part stands head and shoulder above the rest and with each performance being top notch. Freeman (of course he’s played God, so this should have been a piece of cake) in no way overshadows the others, as some might expect, and Casey Affleck (known to moviegoers as one of the “Mormon twins” in the Ocean’s movie franchise) is remarkably good in the primary role. Amy Ryan, as the conflicted, weak mother, with Titus Welliver and Amy Madigan as her brother and sister-in-law, round out the main parts.

To tell any of the story would be to tell all of the story, so I’ll tell none of it. But like the book, the movie deals fully in shades of gray. There is no black and white in the world of LeHane and Ben Affleck, while making a few minor changes in characters and some intricacies of the book, leaves the story a moral mess. Affleck explores the human condition and the emptiness of soul of people who have long since given up any clue about a holy God, choosing instead the full depth of depravity. The Kenzie/Gennaro series of books always leaves one thankful that there is a God who cares, though, apparently, He rarely makes an appearance in New England.

I would recommend this movie to pastors who are spending too much time cloistered away in the ivory towers of sermon preparation and need to be shaken and reminded as to the depth of sin. There is no sex or nudity in the film, but there is graphic violence, a particularly disturbing scene involving a child molester, suspense and pervasive bad language easily earning its “R” rating. Apparently Bostonians are partial to the letter “F” and have become very creative in ways to employ it.

When leaving today, I said to a pastor friend who attended with me, “What did you think?” He replied, “That’s the world we live in.” I did walk away thinking how we live in a world in which there are not always easy answers, everything isn’t always black and white and sometimes our field of vision is a little clouded on the grays around us, yet ever hopeful with the knowledge that the good news of Jesus can cleanse from the most vile evil and wickedness both in and among us.

September 14, 2007

3:10 to Yuma, Movie Review

Filed under: Culture,Movies — Marty Duren @ 9:55 am

I went yesterday to see the new 3:10 to Yuma starring Russell Crowe and Christian Bale. As most now know it is the remake of the 1950’s classic starring Glenn Ford and Van Heflin, based on a short story by prolific author Elmore Leonard. (See Rotten Tomatoes reviews here, Focus on the Family here, and ScreenIt here.)

The movie itself is not merely a western, not even like Unforgiven or Pale Rider. There is a psychological bent to this film and a type of redemption, though it clearly falls short of actual spiritual redemption in Christ. Christian Bale is Dan Evans, a Civil War vet who, having lost a leg, is now trying to make a go of it as a rancher in Arizona (the reason he chose AZ is not revealed until late in the movie). Russell Crowe is the suave but demented and deeply wicked Ben Wade, the leader of a gang of thieves who specialize in high dollar stage and train robberies. Their paths intersect early on in the story and form the basis for the action and exploratory dialogue that form the remainder of the film.

The story hinges on whether Evans will be able, with a diminishing posse, to deliver Wade to the town of Contention and get him aboard the 3:10 prison train to the Yuma pen. The entirety of the story seems to take place across the space of about 48 hours. If you favor high action like the more recent Die Hard movies, then there might be too much talking in Yuma; if you favor lots of talking, then there may to much violence and blood.

I personally evaluate movies like this as to whether there is clarity between the evil and the good. On one level here, there is: Wade, though a Bible quoter, is completely and thoroughly evil. He is as manipulative and cold and Hannibal Lecter ever dreamed of being, and, sans one sequence, can never be trusted. The problem with Wade, as several characters discover, is that he can laugh with you while talking about “the weather” one moment and end your life the next. It is unfortunate to me that the typical Hollywood pattern of a Bible quoting killer is used, though, in an unusual twist, the reason is actually made plain and it’s foundational to the criminal’s twisted conscience.

On another level the clarity is more murky: the hero is obviously operating in the realm of common grace, not saving grace. As a matter of fact, the “good guy” knows no scripture at all, though his family does observe their gratefulness to God in a blessing led by Evan’s wife (played by Gretchen Mol). Unlike Talladega Nights where everything having to do with God is played for laughs, this scene is utterly serious as the family gives thanks to God while one at the table ignores it. In the final resolution, as motives become completely clear, it brings out the most redemptive portion of the story and displays a moving portrait of the lengths to which Dads will go to win their sons.

3:10 to Yuma is rated “R” for language (including the “f-bomb” twice), violence and bloody gore including graphic shootings, an exploding horse (yep), and a bullet removal.

Powered by WordPress