Decompose

The Extended Edition of Peter Jackson’s film trilogy is superior to the theatrical release and contains, collectively, almost two hours of significant additional scenes. I recently re-watched them and, once again, was struck by how timeless Tolkien’s epic is and how well the movie embodies those elements.

In its eleven hours, there are many memorable scenes. My five favorites in descending order are:

• FIVE: Elrond’s council and the Fellowship of the Ring. The entry to Rivendell is, itself, breath-taking. Found midway through the first film, Elrond’s council pulls together several critical story elements. The races of Middle Earth are gathered — men, elves, dwarves and hobbits — and the history of the Ring is finally unpacked. But Sauron’s presence reaches even to that sacred place, bending wills and stirring dissension. Amidst the squabble, Frodo arises, small and insignificant amongst these mighty warriors, but resolved to assume the quest. It’s a great moment, as is the ensuing selection of the Fellowship.

• FOUR: The Stairs of Cirith Ungol. Perhaps the most frightening scene in the trilogy. Gollum leads Sam and Frodo to the teetering stone stairwell and they prepare to ascend. Ahead, the spires of the Morgul Vale are framed in pekid neon. A Black Rider rises upon a Nazgul whose sonic cry pierces Frodo and he staggers madly toward it. Gollum and Sam snatch him back as the gates open and an army of Orcs march out to pounding drums, a demented replica of the Wizard of Oz. The Nazgul whirls overhead as they drag Frodo into hiding. I was pinned to my seat when I first saw this.

• THREE: Shelob’s Lair. This scene closed the second book, but its placement in The Return of the King feels pretty natural. Shelob, like Smaug and the Balrog, are the most memorable of Middle Earth’s monsters (not sure if Ents are monsters), and they each play an important role. So her re-creation for the film was important. Perhaps the single best part of this sequence is when, after his apparent escape, Shelob quietly descends behind Frodo and stings him. Very creepy. Not to be overlooked, however, is Sam’s heroic battle with the creature, wherein we begin to see the courage and resolve Tolkien etched the humble gardener with.

• TWO: The Mines of Moria and Gandalf’s battle with the Balrog. Some LotR fans think the prologue to the second film, in which we follow the wizard as he plummets with the beast in battle, tops the first encounter. I think this scene in The Fellowship of the Rings is better for a couple of reasons. One is the backdrop of the Mines themselves, an eerie, desolate subterranean world wherein we begin to see the rich history of Middle Earth and its occupants. Secondly, is the dramatic confrontation. Once they awaken the Balrog, there is a tense build-up as the fiery demon marches through immense caverns and cathedrals seeking its prey. Gandalf hurries them onward before finally turning to confront the Balrog in one of cinema’s most epic standoffs. Gandalf’s descent into the smoldering underworld recalls Christ’s sacrificial death and descent into Hell.

• ONE: Eowyn slays the Witch-King. It could be argued that the Siege of Gondor and the Pelennor Fields contain some of the most cinematic elements of the trilogy. In this particular scene, King Theoden is rallying troops when the Nazgul descends and flings horse and rider to the ground. Pinned under his slain steed, the creature approaches to dine on the King’s flesh as Eowyn, reckless and bold, bounds between them. She decapitates the beast, inciting the fury of the Witch-King. He rises over her, pummels her with his mace, and draws her forward preparing to end her life. “You fool! No man can slay the Lord of the Nazgul! Die now!” To which she responds by removing her helmet and says, “I am no man!” before slaying the wraith. Her parting words to the fallen King are poignant, as he has risen from the darkness of Wormtongue’s deception, only to lead his troops and die nobly in battle.

Some other memorable scenes: Pippin singing his lament to Denethor, the Steward of Gondor, as the troops are slaughtered in Osgiliath. The freeing of Theoden from Wormtongue’s spell. Frodo being stabbed by the Nazgul on Weathertop. Aragorn summoning the Army of the Dead. And Theoden’s speech to his troops on the Fields of Pelennor:

Arise! Arise riders of Théoden!
Spears shall be shaken!
Shields shall be splintered!
A sword day, a red day,
ere the sun rises!
Ride now! Ride now! Ride!
Ride for ruin and the world’s ending!
Death! Death! Death!
Forth Eorlingas!

No, I didn’t forget the Grey Havens. I thought the scene was a bit sappy and overly drawn. But either way, the Lord of the Rings trilogy gives us lots of great scenes to choose from.

Tags: The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Best scenes in the Lord of the Rings trilogy

I’ve been working on a piece for Novel Journey (I post this Monday), and am spring-boarding off the recent announcement that Thomas Nelson, the biggest name in Christian publishing, will be cutting its workforce by 10% and its new author titles in half. Michael Hyatt, CEO of TN, cites both the ever-changing industry and the need for better, not more, books. While I tend to find myself agreeing with the decision, it’s raised some interesting questions.

Among them is the issue of self-publishing and independent presses. With the big boys seeking, primarily, brand name authors with shelf cred and/or the cream of the “breakout novel” crop, it makes sense that novice and middlin’ authors should look more toward flipping their own bill. Heck, blazing the indie trail has worked for numerous musicians and filmmakers; in fact, some of the biggest names in the music/film business started with no-name artists, working on a shoestring budget. Problem: Unlike film and music, indie authors get little respect. But why is that?

Bookninja recently broached the subject in a post entitled, On Independence in the Lit World, which links to a fascinating article in The Guardian about indie authors. From Why Writers Can’t Go It Alone:

Doing it yourself is to be much admired in music and cinema. That mainstay of Hollywood, Robert Redford, was so enamoured by the growing movement of indie cinema in the United States that he set up the Sundance Festival to give the film-makers an outlet and an audience.

Without indie music, there would be no Smiths, no Happy Mondays, no Kylie, even (she was on Stock, Aitken and Waterman’s own indie label, PWL). Without indie cinema, there would be no Reservoir Dogs, no Ghost World, no Night of the Living Dead. Without indie publishing there would be no … who? Who are the big indie writers, those who refuse to compromise by not allowing The Man to dictate what and how they should write, and earn massive respect because of it?

The literary world only bestows acceptance, it seems, on those who are published through the traditional avenues. Independent and small presses get short shrift - national newspaper supplements seem loath to review indie books, the big high street sellers won’t stock them, unless the books are about the tough lives of mill girls or histories of public house names, which can be shoved on a shelf marked “local interest”.

Is that true? Does the literary world only bestow acceptance on those who are published through the traditional avenues? And why is it that independent filmmakers and musicians receive far more interest in their respective industries than do authors?

The Guardian author, David Barnett, speculates that the lack of respect toward indie authors is due to the fact that “books are a much higher art than pop or film” — an interesting premise that I won’t explore here. Nevertheless, I’d add a couple more possibilities to that list.

1. Writing is far more accessible to the average person than is music or filmmaking. I mean, everybody’s got a PC and some wild story. I may not have a guitar, an amp, a sound studio, an 8mm camera, special effects, and a stunt double, but by golly I can plop down at the kitchen table, tell a tall tale, and dream of being featured on Oprah. In other words, more amateur authors means, percentage-wise, less good books.
2. Independent publishing is far less costly than are music and film. Which reinforces the previous point — more novices can pocket the expenses of publishing their memoirs than can a film school student cough up enough jack for his first film, which means potentially more mediocre product.

Either way, it’s pretty obvious that self-published authors receive far less respect than other indie artists. But with us trending toward less books — at least, less books by new authors — perhaps we are poised to see an expansion of indie presses and, just maybe, a little more respect for authors who go that route.

Tags: self-publishing, indie authors, book industry, Thomas Nelson

That may be the defining question that separates liberals from conservatives. But if the recent Pew Global Attitudes Project is any indication, America has a long way to go.

According to the report, the United States’ “global image” continues to decline:

A year ago, anti-Americanism had shown some signs of abating, in part because of the positive feelings generated by U.S. aid for tsunami victims in Indonesia and elsewhere. But favorable opinions of the United States have fallen in most of the 15 countries surveyed. Only about a quarter of the Spanish public (23%) expresses positive views of the U.S., down from 41% last year; America’s image also has declined significantly in India (from 71% to 56%) and Indonesia (from 38% to 30%).

The question I ask myself is: Should this matter? Should Americans worry about what the rest of the world thinks of them? This isn’t to suggest indifference toward the global community. But how far should the U.S. go to ensure a high favorability rating?

Think of it not on a national level, but on a personal level. Should YOU seek to be loved? The question isn’t “Would you like to be loved?” because, of course, everybody would like to be loved. But seeking to be loved means pandering to others, refraining from controversy, compromising our standards so as to not offend or anger someone else. Perhaps this is why Jesus said, “”Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way” (Luke 6:26 NASB). The idea is that when we live to please men, we inevitably displease God. In the biblical sense, we must do right, no matter how much it damages our favorability rating.

So why are Americans so worried about what the rest of the world thinks of them?

If the USA is disliked because she is stingy, unmerciful, power hungry, and bent on world domination, then statistics like the ones above should worry us. However, the last I checked, America helped end Communism, Naziism, abolish slavery, fight world hunger, and is still one of the most humanitarian nations on the planet. Hmm. Could it be the problem lies with those answering the question?

This election cycle, we will hear lots about restoring America’s place in the world. But when we elect presidents and decide policy based on how the rest of the world will feel about us, we’re screwed.

What happens when you combine The Exorcist and Night of the Living Dead with… Colonel Sanders and Fast Food Nation? Why you get Zombie chickens!

Just when I was tiring of Hollywood’s Original Recipe, Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead hatches something, um, atypical. From IMD’s plot summary:

When the American Chicken Bunker, a military-themed fried-chicken chain, builds a restaurant on the site of an ancient Indian burial ground, local protesters aren’t the only ones crying fowl! The previous tenants, fueled by a supernatural force, take “possession” of the food and those who eat it, and the survivors discover that they must band together before they themselves become the other white meat!

Oh well, there goes my “military-themed fried-chicken chain” concept.

Troma - the production company that brought us such low budget schlock-horror classics as The Toxic Avenger and Surf Nazis Must Die is ruffling feathers again. It’s being called a “satirical sexploitation zombie chicken gross-out musical extravaganza.” Socio-political commentary on the fast food industry battered with bizarre sex acts, projectile vomiting, and explosive diarrhea… what’s not to like?

Apparently, critics agree. The film’s received an unusually high 68% at Rotten Tomatoes and even garnered profuse praise from those stalwarts of cinematic critique, PETA:

A vegetarian-manifesto masterpiece… (one of) the top 10 films that’ll inspire you to go vegetarian!

(Memo to self: Begin list of Top 10 Inspirational Vegan Films.) Okay, I’m being bratty. What can I say? I still love the skin. Anyway, if you’re looking for a synop that’ll turn heads, an 8 piece pitch with sides to boot, you might take a lead from Poultrygeist and go straight for the gizzard.

* BLT — Blurbs, Loglines & Teasers

Tags: Poultrygeist, loglines

The 39 point drubbing at the hands of the Celtics was a fitting end to a disappointing NBA Finals. It was disappointing not just because the Lakers lost, but because what should have been a dramatic climax to a great season, as well as the renewal of an historic rivalry, became a string of ugly, anticlimactic grindfests that left Kobe and crew looking like a bunch of heartless wannabes.

After some reflection (and emergency therapy), I have some thoughts on the Lakers postseason, collapse, and future.

Pros

• They won the Western Conference — After the tumultuous preseason, no one expected this; and despite what myopic Bostonians will say, the West is still a lot better than the East
• They beat the defending NBA champs to get there — Sure, San Antonio is getting old, but they’re still one of the premiere teams in the league (and would they have rolled over like LA did in this series?)
• Lakers did all this WITHOUT THEIR STARTING CENTER — Call it sour grapes, but this series would have looked a lot different if Andrew Bynum would have been in the middle instead of Pau Gasol
• They’re one of the youngest teams in the league
• They have a good bench — Granted,Walton, Turiaf, Farmar and Vajacic looked awful in the Finals, but they had stretches during the season that carried the Lakers (it was also one of the reasons most pundits picked LA to beat the Celtics)
• Kobe Bryant — Still the preeminent scoring threat in the NBA and, when he wants, one of its best defenders (and, after this season, probably won’t be going anywhere)

Cons

• They’re soft! — Was anything more evident in the Finals than that the Lakers were being pushed around by folks like… Kendrick Perkins and Leon Powe??!!!
• Lack a second go-to guy — Heck, Celtics needed three of them! (and don’t tell me Gasol is a consistent go-to guy)
• Lakers are a sporadic, if not mediocre, defensive team — If I have to hear “Defense wins championships” again, I’m gonna puke; but after watching LA get shackled, stripped, bruised and boxed-out by the Celtics, they might want to make that their new mantra
• They have an inexperienced bench — Walton, Turiaf, Farmar and Vajacic looked like the JV squad against Cassell, Posey and P.J. Brown; that wasn’t the eye of the tiger under Sasha’s mop, it was the look of f-e-a-r
• They lack an enforcer — a nasty, dirty, blue collar, bang-it-up, throw-it-down thug who thinks the word “finesse” applies only to ballerinas
• Kobe Bryant — Yeah, KB is both a plus and a minus; he shot only 40% for the series (and face it: he shot them out of game four with one failed fade away after another); but until they get a legitimate second threat, Lakers fans must resign themselves to hold their breath while the Black Mamba jacks up another circus shot

So I guess there’s some light at the end of the tunnel. But whether or not this crew can get the train to the station is another story. Talk shows around here are dropping names like Ron Artest and Baron Davis. But it’s still too painful to think about. Okay, maybe not as painful as listening to those dreadful ABC announcers, but painful nonetheless.

This article has made Mark Steyn a criminal… at least, according to the Canadian Islamic Congress. The author is currently being tried in Canada for hate speech. The article in question was adapted from Steyn’s best-seller, America Alone, and published in Maclean’s, Canada’s leading news weekly. It argues that Western society is being threatened by Muslim immigration.

In a press release, Faisal Joseph, an attorney representing the complainants, said, “This article completely misrepresents Canadian Muslims’ values, their community, and their religion. We feel that it is imperative to challenge Maclean’s biased portrayal of Muslims in order to protect Canadian multiculturalism and tolerance.” It’s good to know there’s people out there protecting our “multiculturalism and tolerance.”

Americans — specifically of the religious kind — should take notice. What with the California Supreme Court overturning the ban on gay marriage, we’re on a similar crash course.

For instance, several weeks ago Alberta’s human rights commission issued this order against a Christian pastor named Rev. Stephen Boission who openly opposes the homosexual lifestyle and agenda. Paragraph 357 of the substantive ruling (which can be found here), states that “fundamental freedoms of conscience and religion, the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression… does not trump… protection against hatred and contempt.” In other words, the right to not be offended “trumps the freedom of speech.”

Get Religion observes a similar trend sweeping the USA:

Yeshiva University was ordered to allow same-sex couples in its dormitory for married couples. A Lutheran school has been sued for expelling two lesbian students. Catholic Charities abandoned adoptions services in Massachusetts after it was told to place children with same-sex couples. A psychologist in Mississippi who refused to counsel a lesbian couple lost her case and a doctor who refused to provide in vitro fertilization to a lesbian in California is likely to lose his case before the California Supreme Court.

At issue are two fundamental rights: “Human rights” and “freedom of speech.” Few of us would deny any group (Muslims or homosexuals) either right. However, what’s thrown a monkey wrench into the debate is the newly framed concept of hate speech. Somehow, opposition to a group / religion / lifestyle has come to mean “hate” and, thus, is a violation of one’s civil right. Now with “Gay rights” thrust back into the fore of the debate, opponents could be facing a difficult battle. However, in this debate, it’s Christians who appear to have the most to lose.

I’m referring to M. Night Shyamalan’s latest film, The Happening. Once again I found myself hoping that the ambitious director of The Sixth Sense could recapture the magic of his earlier films. The trailer did its job, and I contemplated coughing up eight bucks and two hours.

But then I remembered Lady in the Water, one of my worst movie-going experiences of ‘06. So I figgered the smart thing to do would be to check the buzz meter. And the jury had weighed in. Couple the Rotten Tomatoes rating of 20%, with Metacritic’s 35, and the decision was over.

Sure, critics don’t know everything. But after Mr. Night’s previous entry, I think I’m better served re-watching Sixth Sense or Unbreakable (maybe Shyamalan’s best film). Who knows what happened (pun intended) — creative constipation, commercial pandering, egocentricity? Either way, this time it ain’t Happening.

With graduations galore, the one we attended yesterday was by far the most rewarding. Last year, at this time, we were celebrating Chris’ BS in Math from Cal State San Bernardino. Well, this year, he one-upped it… and then some.

The family got the VIP treatment. First we attended a special awards ceremony for outstanding graduates (five in all) where Chris received top honors as the College of Natural Sciences Outstanding Student of the Year. Then yesterday we got floor level seats with the graduating class as Chris delivered the class address. He got emotional while thanking me and Lisa, and so did we. I thought he nailed it when he said we created “an environment for success.” Maybe parenting isn’t so much about doing all the right things but, in the long run, cultivating an atmosphere where things can grow. Anyway, after receiving his Masters in Math (his thesis was on Poincaré duality), we enjoyed a casual dinner and he prepared to fly to the east coast.

So at 4 A.M this morning, Chris boarded a plane to Washington D.C. where he will spend 10 weeks in some think tank thingy for bionic brains. He’ll be moving back in with us on his return, where he will begin his PhD program (thanks to the full-ride scholarship he received). We’re all so proud of you, Chris! (Or is it, Doctor D?) Watch out for college parties, liberal professors and too much free time. And “In all your ways acknowledge Him and He shall direct your paths” (3:5-6). Godspeed to you in all your endeavors!

* * *

You can follow more of Chris’ DC adventures on his MySpace page, and find a video of the graduation HERE (his speech is about 1/3 of the way in under the Natural Sciences ceremonies).

The doctrine of the Fall and, consequently, the Atonement, are potentially the biggest areas of incompatibility between belief in God and extraterrestrials. If one believes what the Bible teaches, that the human race is fallen and Jesus has died for our sins and been raised from the dead, then those beliefs have serious repercussions upon the possible nature of life in outer space.

God’s redemptive program, which is the over-arching narrative of Scripture, is set in motion because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. Their fall not only damaged their relationship with God, but it set the entire earth out of whack. As a result, Satan is described as “the god of this world” (II Cor. 4:4) and “the whole creation groans” (Rom. 8:22 NKJV), subject to the backwash of Man’s rebellion. In this way, global catastrophes, disease and human suffering are often seen as the fruit of the Fall.

But how far did these dominoes tumble? Does Satan’s reign and the pollution of creation extend to the Milky Way and beyond?

The answer to this question is important because it forces us toward one of two conclusions: If extraterrestrials exist they are either fallen or unfallen, subject to the law of sin or not. (Of course, this assumes that they are moral beings infused with God’s image. If they are angels or animals, then our approach to them must be adjusted accordingly.)

This concept was explored by C.S. Lewis in his Space Trilogy, most notably the first and second books, Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra. In them, the fallen earth has been quarantined lest it pollute the rest of the cosmos. Thus, to the citizens of outer space, earth is the silent planet. Lewis conjectures that space travel only extends the arm of sin, and speculates what Man’s interaction with unfallen entities might look like.

So while the Bible teaches that sin’s power is corrosive and far-reaching, it is unclear how life outside our planet might, if at all, be affected. Once again, we must construct our conclusions by inference.

Scripture plainly declares that the Atonement was a one time shot: “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God” (I Pet. 3:18 NIV, emphasis mine). Because of this, Jesus cannot die multiple times, for multiple people groups — or extraterrestrial ones, for that matter. So once again we are left with limited options. If aliens exist, they are either (1) non-moral beings (animal, vegetable, mineral) outside the scope of redemption, (2) unfallen beings not needing redemption, or (3) fallen beings whom Jesus died for, meaning they are awaiting The Gospel of Earth (i.e., the proclamation of Christ’s sacrificial death on the third rock from the sun). Okay, now I’m more confused than ever!

There’s other biblical positions that, I think, provide far more clarity to this issue. Not only does Scripture teach that Man is unique in the cosmos, but that the fate of the entire universe revolves around Planet Earth. The apostle Peter described Christ’s Second Coming as the consummate cosmological event:

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. (II Pet. 3:10 NIV)

Furthermore, Christ’s return and the final judgments of humankind herald the creation of “a new heaven and a new earth” (vs. 13). This Blue Planet is the theater of God’s power, love, and judgment; ultimately, the destiny of Man determines the Fate of the Universe and all life in it. In this light, extraterrestrial life appears somewhat inconsequential.

But what makes this talk of extraterrestrials so much the harder to swallow is the message typically attached to them. Nowadays, most aliens are portrayed as conveying a humanistic, anti-Christian, even occult, message. This is why, for believers, the authority of Scripture is central to this debate. The apostle Paul wrote:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! (Gal. 1:8 NIV)

Yes, there are beings not of this earth who have a message for homo sapiens. But even more important than the nature of these extraterrestrial entities is the message they carry. As much as I would like a close encounter of the third kind, if that encounter involves the conveyance of another gospel, it is not from God.

In summary, then, belief in God is not incompatible with belief in extraterrestrials. However, the real issue is not believing in alien life, but the type of aliens we believe in and the type of message they bring.

Tags: Belief in God and Extraterrestrials, UFO’s, The Bible and ET’s

Christians have traditionally assumed that belief in God and extraterrestrial life is incompatible, at least, tenuous. After all, when the apostle wrote that “God so loved the world” (Jn. 3:16), he was probably not focusing outside our atmosphere. However, last week the Vatican issued a statement saying that belief in aliens doesn’t negate faith in God.

Father Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory was quoted as saying the vastness of the universe means it is possible that there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones.

“How can we rule out that life may have developed elsewhere?” Funes said. “Just as we consider earthly creatures as ‘a brother,’ and ’sister,’ why should we not talk about an ‘extraterrestrial brother’? It would still be part of creation.”

In the interview by the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, Funes said such a notion “doesn’t contradict our faith” because extraterrestrials would also be God’s creatures. Ruling out their existence would be like “putting limits” on God’s creative freedom, he said.

Only 400 years ago, Galileo was being tried as a heretic by the Church for his heliocentricity. Now they’re saying you may have an “extraterrestrial brother.” My, the Vatican’s come a long way!

On the one side of the spectrum are Christians who claim the Bible Leaves No Room for Extraterrestrial Life. Aliens, they assert, are New Age, atheistic constructs designed to supplant God and undermine our theology. On the other hand are those who suggest the universe is a vast place, God’s wildly creative, and if E.T.’s real, he’s just one of God’s many creatures. So what gives? Is belief in God incompatible with belief in little green men?

(more…)

As if the Obama love-fest couldn’t get any worse, this San Francisco Chronicle reporter, in an article entitled Is Obama an Enlightened Being?, answers in the affirmative:

No, it’s not merely his youthful vigor, or handsomeness, or even inspiring rhetoric. It is not fresh ideas or cool charisma or the fact that a black president will be historic and revolutionary in about a thousand different ways. It is something more. Even Bill Clinton, with all his effortless, winking charm, didn’t have what Obama has, which is a sort of powerful luminosity, a unique high-vibration integrity…

Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.

I guess supporting infanticide is a prerequisite for enlightenment. Powerful luminosity? High-vibration integrity? A rare kind of attuned being? Damn, is this guy even human? Evolution awaits, mortals. The reign of the evil one is over. Save us, Barack!

Wittenburg Door’s 10 Worst Movies About Jesus is a sore reminder of how Jesus gets jammed into oodles of idiocy. As if this stuff wasn’t enough, some schmuck had to go and make Zombie Jesus and Jesus Christ: Vampire Hunter. Hmm. Not sure if He’s laughing or winding up for a lightning strike…

In my book, any films with black Jesus’s, singing Jesus’s, glowing Jesus’s, or girlie Jesus’s get the kibosh. And “Jesus documentaries” by PBS or the Discovery Channel automatically make my list of worsts, as do those “investigations” that promise the unfolding of “new” data about the real Jesus.  My only contention with WD’s list is The Robe which, as a kid, got me all goose-bumpy.