The Maze Runner in Theaters Now

I loved the movie adaptations of The Hunger Games and Divergent, and the preview for The Maze Runner (PG-13, 113 min.) had me pretty excited. But much as James Dashner's endings in all the Maze Runner books fell short of my expectations and hopes, this movie disappoints. I think, perhaps, if I'd not read the book (especially as recently as I have), I would have liked the movie better. But watching the movie first and finding out the ending would have ruined the mystery and tension of the book. So, I guess my recommendation is this: If you are a movie person, watch the movie first. If books are always way better than movies to you, read the book first. Enjoy the story first in the medium you like best, and if you must, check it out in the other, too.

The story is this (taken more from my memory of the book than from the movie, though they are relatively the same). Thomas awakes in an elevator box of sorts, moving slowly and mysteriously toward an unknown destination, but the worst of it is, Thomas remembers nothing about his life. He knows how life works and the names of objects. He just can't remember anything specific pertaining to him except his first name. But everything is about to get stranger. When the box opens, he finds himself in a community of teenage boys who are all like him, no memories, and who are stuck in a giant maze full of monsters. Thomas is supposed to do what he's told, have a good cry if he needs to, and adapt to his part of making their community work. But Thomas is too curious for his own good, and he's not just going to sit by and do nothing.

The premise was fascinating to me. I like stories such as Lord of the Flies, and the TV show Lost. And out of this whole series, The Maze Runner, most similar to those, is my favorite book. The ending is decent enough in that it provides some answers without needing to resolve everything (overall, I don't like how Dashner resolves everything in the series, but if you take this first book by itself, it's fine). I figured the adaptation to a movie would be pretty straightforward, and I was excited to see the story come to life in that way.

Now, hear me out. I know you have to change things when you adapt a book into a movie. Things have to be shortened, focused. If a story takes place in a character's head in the book, you have to figure out a way to translate that to a medium that's largely outside the character's head (unless you provide character narration, which some movies do). So, I get it. I'm not one of those who swears the book is the only way to go. This blog is about books and movies because I really like both, and I love to see adaptations. Now, the adaptations don't always work for me, but I can generally see a movie as a separate entity from the book and not be too disappointed.

But...(you were waiting for it, weren't you?), The Maze Runner movie annoyed me just a tad. It started with small details here and there, different from the book. I was prepared for the big cuts, but the small changes were surprising. They seemed unnecessary and made less sense than the way the details were written in the book. I will try to avoid major SPOILERS here, but if you are concerned, stop reading now.

Some of the changes didn't hurt the movie, but I don't think they helped either. They were just inconsistencies that bothered me, especially when I couldn't see the point of the change (for instance, in the buildings the boys built for themselves). One of those rather minor details that I do think does hurt the movie, however, is the presentation of the mysterious medicine vials. In the book, the medicine comes up in the shipments of survival goods the boys periodically receive from the Box. When they are attacked by the monsters, the boys use this medicine. In the movie, another character arrives with two medicine vials in a pocket, and the movie uses them conveniently for two major characters. Aside from that seeming very coincidental and accidental in the movie, it changes the story and doesn't make sense, to boot. It makes more sense for the boys to already have medicine they use as needed.

Okay, so I'm going to have to go into SPOILER territory (more for the book than the movie, though). If you were braving it out until now, congrats but you've been warned. One thing that really bothered me is that the sci-fi technology is dumbed down. There are some really cool things in the book like telepathy and invisible portals. That's not a spoiler for the movie because those things don't exist in the movie. So, yay, I didn't spoil it for you. The movie only spoiled the book. I can't figure out why the tech was changed. Some things in the book are just not explained. Could that be it? They wanted a more believable world than what the book presented? But that change is going to affect the rest of the story even more than it did the beginning. Stripped of some of those details that make this world so interesting, they're going to have to make up stuff that isn't in the books just to fill in the cracks in future movies. I already thought the pacing was a little slow for this movie, and now some of what makes the book more interesting is gone. And if they bring it back, it will seem inconsistent and have me wondering why they took it out in the first place.

Perhaps my biggest complaint is that the way the kids get out (and that's not spoiling because you knew they would) is totally different from in the book. Okay, "totally" might be an exaggeration, but it's enough different that it affects the story. And it's another change that just doesn't make sense with the way the maze is supposed to work and the answers we discover at the end of the story.

Well, I could go on. Even some of the last shots of the movie get details wrong, but those I actually do understand. It was done for the movie audience to have a better visual that the book doesn't provide. It was a change made for the movie to make a better movie. If you haven't read the book, it works. If you have, it's just one more way the tech is changed that disappoints.

Aside from being annoyed by detail changes, I do have one moral concern to share. The book and the movie have some pretty violent moments. Kids are killed, and the worst part is that hardly anyone stops to mourn or seems to care, except with the one character who's played up to get the audience to care. But PG-13 is an acceptable rating.

Having said all that, I'll admit I didn't dislike the movie entirely. It was enjoyable to watch one time and see the characters, like Newt!, come to life, though there weren't too many other stand-outs, even so. Here was a chance for the movie to improve upon a book that had a few faults of its own. It didn't. So, I give it a shrug and a throw-away three out of five stars.

Gravity on DVD

When you don't get to watch a lot of movies, it can take awhile to get to the more serious ones. Of course, 2013's Gravity won quite a few Oscars, including Best Director for Alfonso Cuaron, so I knew it was a quality film (which is not quite the same as a good movie). Additionally, I'd heard good things about it from people I knew, so I thought it would be interesting, too. When given the chance, I confess that for awhile I chose more lighthearted things to watch over this one, but I decided it was finally time to see what the fuss was all about.

Deserved fuss, by the way. This is definitely an impressive film. Tight and short (91 min.) and highly focused with just enough of an emotional center to make you invest in Sandra Bullock's character (she got a Best Actress nomination), played opposite George Clooney (Fortunately with no nakedness involved this time! Anybody seen Solaris? Don't. We have a long-standing joke about this in our family.). The cinematography is just brilliant, but I was deep enough into the movie to not pay it too much attention. With every shot, the director makes you begin to feel the enormity and terror of being lost and alone in space. My husband is right that this movie would have been awesome to see in the theater or, better yet, in IMAX.

There are a lot of noteworthy aspects one could talk about in Gravity, but one of the things I really thought made it superb was its simplicity. It isn't a complicated film like Inception (which was great, in its own way). Instead, everything but the basics is stripped away. A mission in space goes awry, and the goal becomes straightforward: make it back home. I guess that was the goal in 1995's Apollo 13, too, but this is more pared down. There are no flashbacks or scenes of other people on Earth. It's all about right now and the reaction to what's happening and the fight (or not) to live. Even the theme is very simple. The tagline is: "Don't let go." And that's exactly what it's about. Physically, hang on for your life. Emotionally, decide what's worth hanging onto, even if, ironically, that means you do let go.

Despite the movie's simplicity, or perhaps because of it, this sci-fi thriller is intense. It's rated PG-13, which I find appropriate. There is an instance where the F-word is spoken, and it's a circumstance one can forgive. There's also a scene of a guy with a hole through his face. Mostly, it's rated for scenes of high-stakes danger, and that's what keeps you on the edge of your seat.

Wish I'd seen it in the theater, but even on my small computer screen, its gravity pulled me right in. Four out of five stars.

Premium Rush in Theaters Now

If you like bicycles and going fast, you'll like the movie Premium Rush, in theaters now. It stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Wilee (yes, like the coyote), a likeable and dynamic New York City bike messenger who'd rather ride with one set gear and no brakes at 50 miles per hour than wear a suit and sit at a desk. I mean, if you put it that way, who wouldn't? But one day, his job lands him in more trouble than he's bargained for. When a dirty cop tries to stop him from delivering a package across town, Wilee becomes involved in a race that's about more than doing his job. It's about saving lives before he gets a bullet in his own head.

Premium Rush is a popcorn movie. The plot is relatively simple, though somewhat unique, probably appealing most to sporty types. The issues at stake are almost bigger than the movie, but that gives an otherwise potentially ho-hum movie about riding bicycles at super-fast speeds between New York City taxis (which is cool, yes, but only for about five minutes) an extra edge. It's an action thriller with a bit of romance, the sweat and blood kind, which again probably doesn't appeal to everyone.

(Minor SPOILERS) At the end you can't think too hard about the movie because then you might wonder what the whole point was for Wilee to risk his life (because the person who sent him with the package arrives on the scene herself, so why didn't she deliver her own package and avoid calling attention to it by having a middleman?).

The movie is rated PG-13 but does have violence and language, including the f-word. It makes the police seem either stupid or evil, which I don't particularly like. Breaking the law becomes fine if you have a higher purpose, but that's very subjective. Who's to say that higher purpose is actually right?

So, the morals of the movie aren't great, and the action is so-so. There's no rush to see Premium Rush, but if you have the money, an hour and a half, and the inclination, it's as good an excuse as any to eat popcorn, especially during this time of year's movie "dry season."

Brief Takes on Man on a Ledge and Chronicle

Here are my brief takes on a couple movies I've seen recently. They aren't worth full reviews, but because interest in them might be high, they warrant a few comments.

Man on a Ledge (2012 drama thriller out on DVD now, rated PG-13): don't bother. From the previews, it seems kind of cool, but really, nothing much happens, and what does happen is forgettable. Premise: an escaped convict (and former cop) will go to any lengths to prove he is innocent of diamond theft. I guess going to any lengths means he'll enlist the help of his brother and brother's hot girlfriend. The only reason they pull anything off is sheer luck. Believability rating: one star.

Chronicle (2012 sci-fi thriller out on DVD now, rated PG-13, 84 minutes): depressing and messed up. The cool factor of this movie comes from the way it is filmed: entirely through personal video cameras, security cameras, and phones. It's very much like Cloverfield, only less jumpy. Premise: three teens get superhuman powers and begin to experiment with what they can do. Message: if you are a loner who's bullied by both father and peers and lacks social skills, getting a new handle on life doesn't make the anger go away. This is not a feel-good movie about superheroes. It's more about self-destruction. The creative filming sucks you in...right in...to a black hole. Positivity rating: one star.

In Time on DVD

I really enjoyed In Time for its concept. If you missed this one in theaters, it just came out a few days ago on DVD.

It's a world where everyone looks 25, but how long you've been 25 is the question. Time is the new currency. You might have 24 hours to live. You might have one thousand years. You might pay four minutes of your life for coffee. You might pay two months to buy a hotel room for one night. Or you might pay a year to cross the border from a poor time zone into a rich time zone. But when you get there, don't run; life in the richer time zones is more leisurely, so they'll know you don't belong.

Justin Timberlake plays Will Salas, a guy who lives day to day, always hours away from death, waiting for the next paycheck of time. In one night, his life changes, and he finds himself with over one hundred years of time on his clock. But where he comes from, that much time is dangerous, practically a death sentence. So, he heads for richer time zones. But the Time Keepers, the police force, are on his tail to make sure the status quo never changes. Will, a guy who's willing to give time away, is a dangerous man to those who horde it.

This concept is on par with the ideas behind the movie Inception. Unfortunately, it wasn't executed as brilliantly. In addition to the somewhat of a misnomer title (should be more like out of time), there are a few plot holes, some major scene skipping to get to the bigger plot points, and some minor believability issues. For instance, anyone can steal another person's time. In fact, people "fight" for time by holding each other's wrists, similar to arm wrestling. The person on top somehow sucks away the other person's time. I, myself, haven't tried grabbing a person's wrist and trying to turn it over and stay on top, but realistically, I don't think that type of arm wrestling even works. You try it, though; maybe I'm wrong. But, for the sake of the movie, I suppose it looks cool, especially with a person's clock embedded right into his forearm for anyone to see, and this manner of wrestling provides a cool background story about Will's dad, which, in turn, heightens the tension in a later scene. It is pretty intense to watch someone's clock tick down to two seconds as people gamble not just with time but with their lives.

I love science fiction like this, even if it isn't perfect. This sci-fi thriller is rated PG-13 for partial nudity (skinny dipping where a girl's backside is shown and a scene with a girl in lingerie on a bed), language (I believe the F-word is used once), and violence. If you go on imdb.com, there's a detailed description of the sex and nudity in the movie, but it's wrong. Or maybe whoever wrote that saw an uncut version. From what I remember of the bed scene, it's cut short before anything can happen by the arrival of the police. The murder, mainly by the stealing of time, is possibly more disturbing than the other things for which this movie is rated PG-13. It's just such an odd way to die, so quickly; humanity becomes even more fragile than it really is. (Though, the irony of the situation is that we actually do have only so much time on this earth; we just don't have it displayed on our arms for all to see.)

It's a clever little movie with entertaining performances by Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried, and Cillian Murphy, whose face just lends itself to creepy characters. I'd be careful about letting kids watch this, but otherwise, if you enjoy science fiction, I recommend this one!

Three stars.

The Priest's Graveyard

Ted Dekker strikes good again! Actually, I'm a little late on reviewing this book, which came out in the spring. I read and reviewed his fall release first since I got an advance reader's copy in the summer. I like to receive Dekker for my birthday (he does write at least one book a year these days), so I waited on the spring release.

Lately, Dekker has been writing murder thrillers, geared toward a mainstream audience, and The Priest's Graveyard falls into that category. But no matter how crazy his books get, I always find gems about God and what it means to be a true believer within the pages of his crime stories. Really, that's why I keep reading. I absolutely love the way Dekker sees the world and God. He's not preachy, but oh, is there always a message! And a very good story. The message wouldn't be much without that first and foremost.

Dekker's surprises don't jump out at me as much as they did in his earlier books. I guess I know too well what to expect now! I could see some of the ending of The Priest's Graveyard a mile away, but what mattered was getting there, and it was worth it. In comparison to his other recent murder thrillers like Boneman's Daughters and The Bride Collector, The Priest's Graveyard is perhaps less dark but more soul-gripping. A book that makes you identify with the killer is a fascinating read, especially when it deals with issues we all struggle with, in this case, justice for evil. In those other two books, the villain is truly the villain, evil and psychotic, but the priest in this book is a man whose heart might match many a Christian's. He just takes justice into his own hands rather than leaving it to God or even to the law.

The priest is Danny, a survivor of the religious war in Bosnia, an immigrant to the United States. He meets a formerly abused woman, Renee, with justice and revenge on her mind, and the two form a bond over their mutual interests. I'll leave the plot at that for the benefit of those less familiar with Ted Dekker's twists and turns.

My husband often asks me when I finish a Ted Dekker novel how it compares to his others, particularly my favorites. Unfortunately, when I was first getting to know Dekker and he was first coming into his own, he had some really crazy story plots that I read with the proverbial rose-tinted glasses, so I don't know if anything he could ever write now would compare with those first impressions. But some are definitely better than others, in my opinion. The Priest's Graveyard is one to read, and when I rate Dekker novels between three and five stars and give this one a four, that's no average rating to scoff at.

Source Code on DVD (2011)

This was one of those movies that I stumbled upon while browsing Netflix, and it just sounded interesting to me. Source Code is science fiction, telling the story of an army pilot, Colter Stevens, who wakes in a spacey-looking capsule to find an unfamiliar face on a screen giving him orders to re-enter the dream he's just had. In fact, his mission is to re-enter the 8-minute dream as many times as it takes to find the bomber that exploded a train in Chicago earlier that day and is planning another attack. The dream takes Stevens into the mind of one of the men on that train just before the explosion.

But here are the catches. Stevens doesn't remember how he got into the capsule or where he is, and his mission controllers aren't giving him many hints. And then there's the pretty woman he keeps waking up to on the train. Each 8 minutes that he has, he gets to know her better, and he wants to save her life. But the source code, where his mind goes to solve the mystery, isn't like that, he's told. The events have already happened; he can't save her life. As Stevens begins to realize the truth, he finds purpose and focus and rises to the challenge of what he must do.

This movie is a little like a serious version of Groundhog Day, where one man keeps living the same scenario over and over. But it's fascinating, not boring. Each time is a little different, especially as he makes different choices. And the characters are fantastic. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Stevens. Vera Farmiga plays Goodwin, the lady behind the screen who sends him on his missions and begins to get attached, despite all efforts to maintain distance and secrecy. Michelle Monaghan is Christina, the girl on the train. And the set is minimal: mostly the train and a couple rooms in a top-secret military operations base. It all adds up to great sci-fi...until the end. The end is better than I thought it would be, but at the same time, it's a little "timey-wimey" as the Doctor would say. And while Dr. Who can get away with that, a serious hour-and-a-half movie cannot as easily. My husband and I have differing viewpoints about what really happens in the end. Regardless, it's an interesting, fun sci-fi thriller with a PG-13 rating for intense scenes, violence, and just a little language. I found the rating appropriate. Three and a half stars.

The A-Team (2010) on DVD

I didn't really know what to expect when I sat down to watch The A-Team. I'm not very familiar with the original TV series. But when I saw the previews for Knight and Day and Wild Target on the DVD, both of which I really enjoyed, I began to suspect that the movie would be entertaining.

Liam Neeson and Bradley Cooper (whom I best know from Alias) do great acting jobs in this action-packed thriller/comedy. They star with Quinton Jackson and Sharlto Copley, two actors I don't know. Their four slightly off-kilter characters make up the A-team, a group of military survivors who join forces to become the best secret ops team the military has until they are set-up on a mission that goes bad and end up in prison. To clear their names, they must escape and finish the mission right this time, but a few unpleasant surprises await them along the way.

I don't know how this interpretation compares to the original look and feel of the first A-team, but 2010's version is chaotic and over-the-top in believability. Still, as my husband pointed out to me, it's consistent within itself. It's always jumping over those boundaries of believability, from beginning to end. Why it works, I think, is because of the great characters. They are crazy, but they are crazy good, too. You really get the feeling that they can beat all odds, and they are mostly clean, moral people (except maybe for Face, Cooper's character).

The A-Team is rated PG-13 for intense action, violence, some swearing (including just a couple uses of the F-word), and the kicker: smoking. I always laugh a little when a movie is rated for smoking. I don't smoke, and I think it's a serious health risk, sure. And just maybe, smokers who are trying to quit would have a hard time watching other people smoke. But if kids are going to smoke, they're not learning it from the movies. I just think it's a silly thing to rate a movie for when all the good, clean classics are full of people smoking. Anyway, that's a side note.

Though the movie is unrealistic and maybe a tad long for the popcorn sort of movie that it is at almost two hours, it offers at least three and a half stars of enjoyment value.

Limitless on DVD

The idea of Limitless is fascinating. Eddie Morra (played by Bradley Cooper from Alias), a straggly-haired bum with a serious case of writer's block, stumbles onto a drug that lets him unlock one hundred percent of his brain at once. The average human uses something like twenty percent. So, he becomes incredibly intelligent, able to remember facts he picked up in passing and never realized were still in his brain, able to assimilate fighting techniques he only ever saw on TV. With such power, he has the ability to get rich quick, to maneuver his way to the top of society, perhaps even to become president if he so wishes. All he has to do is keep taking the drug on a daily basis or he goes back to his old bum self.

But the drug is obviously addictive and, therefore, extremely dangerous. Others have taken it before him, and they are now all dead or dying. Someone keeps hunting him down and trying to kill him. Not to mention the thug who gets ahold of one of his pills and then blackmails him to keep supplying. Eddie has a complicated life, and somewhere along the way, it's going to crack.

I thought this was an intriguing concept and a good, though exaggerated, way to get across the message that drugs are really, really bad. But the end kind of ruined the message, and I have to give SPOILERS here, so if you plan to see the movie, I strongly caution you against reading the section in brackets.

[The drug has severe side-affects if you stop taking it, leading to sickness and often death. But if you take too much and don't watch your health in other ways, the drug makes you lose hours of your life, not knowing what happened or where you were. When Eddie gets to the point of collapse, he realizes he has to dose down slowly, but by then, it's almost too late. His pills are stolen, and he's being chased by another guy who's on them. There's no way he can win. Through a very disturbing scene you will undoubtedly cringe away from, he drinks blood filled with the drug and manages to escape torture and death.

Then the movie skips ahead twelve months to Eddie running for senator. The basic gist of the end is this: Eddie beats the drug and manages to retain an incredible amount of intelligence without being on it. He wins, which is what you want your hero to do, right? But it doesn't feel right. For one, Eddie was never really a hero; he was a druggie. He didn't just get off the drug; he manipulated the recipe so that when he finally did get off, his brain would still function at those high levels. He still used the drug to get higher up in life, and in the end, he became something he wasn't, something no normal human is supposed to be. It's kind of cool, but it's also wrong and sends the opposite message about drugs than I thought the movie was sending: if you're smart enough, you can beat the drug. So not true.]

SPOILERS END.

So, even though this movie is science fiction, I would use caution in letting younger viewers see it. It's rated PG-13, but there is some sexuality, violence (stabbing), disturbing imagery (drinking blood, for one), and language.

Three stars.

Rango and Unknown

I'm cheating a little this time by not writing full reviews on these two movies I've seen recently. Both Rango and Unknown are new DVD releases. I just have a few words on each, but I will say I enjoyed them.

Rango is an animated film, rated PG, starring Johnny Depp as the voice lead. It's about a nameless chameleon who is accidentally tossed out of his owner's car into the desert, where he attempts to become someone greater than himself to save a town of desert animals from a water shortage. It's funny but somewhat crude. If you took your kids to see this in the theater, I apologize for not being able to warn you sooner. This movie should be rated PG-13 and is an animation for older teens and adults, who will appreciate the humor and storyline. I heard a kid raving about Rango recently and had to cringe because I don't believe it's appropriate for younger ages, despite being animation. It's a bit violent and scary with adult themes kids won't get anyway and inappropriate language. There is some minor innuendo, particularly the top half of a naked Barbie doll. But for adults, this is an entertaining three-star movie.



Unknown stars Liam Neeson as a man who goes to Berlin with his wife to attend a Bio Tech conference and ends up getting into an accident and sustaining a head injury that takes him out of commission for four days and erases part of his memory. When he wakes from his coma without any identification on him, no one believes he is Dr. Martin Harris, especially when his own wife is calling another man by his name and seems not to know him. Things go from strange to dangerous when this other man produces passports and family pictures with his own photos instead of Martin's. Some people have gone to a lot of trouble to make sure Martin Harris disappears from the world, and they're willing to kill anyone who gets in their way. This movie is rated PG-13, mostly appropriately, although I would still advise caution for younger teens. There is a love-making scene in a shower, but nothing is exposed on camera. Also, there is a certain amount of violence and murder. Again, for adults this is an entertaining, suspenseful thriller. Three stars.

Variant

Lord of the Flies was an intriguing book to me, and because of that, I love to pick up young adult books that remind me of it. Gone, by Michael Grant, was one of those, and Variant, a novel by Robison Wells, is another.

Variant kept me interested purely through suspense. It's a dystopian, somewhat futuristic novel about a double-walled private school for teenagers. Benson is sure that his sad life moving from foster home to foster home is over; he's applied for and received a scholarship to Maxfield Academy. But things go from weird to horrific quickly. When he arrives at the school, he finds it heavily secured under lock and key with cameras everywhere, but what's worse is that there are no adults to be found. Maxfield is run by kids. They cook, clean, repair, and teach the classes. Certain groups have monopolies on the good jobs, including security. The only adults they see are the lady who brings the new kids by car and Iceman, who appears on a screen to give them commands. The scariest thing of all is that broken rules have severe punishments, including detention, which nobody comes back from...ever. Benson has just entered a prison, and he's determined to get out, even if it means risking his life.

As the horrors build up, Benson realizes just how much danger they are all in and, as the book's tagline aptly puts it, that he can "trust no one."

Pure entertaining suspense. I really liked this book...until the very last page. Wouldn't you know, it's only Book 1, so there was an ending of sorts but not the one I was hoping for. Worse, the end totally confused me. I must have reread that last page ten times, looking for what I'd missed. And every time I read it, I found another interpretation. I can't tell you about it because it's a huge spoiler...well, I think it is, at least, from what I can tell, it's that vague. But for certain, you don't want to read the last page first if you are the type of despicable person who does that (ha, ha, just kidding, but you are weird).

This book only comes out in October, so I'm not sure if I can go online yet to see what other people think of the end. Regardless, I couldn't tell you even if I found out. So, all I can say for the book is that if you like suspense, with endings akin to something the TV show Lost used to produce, this book is great. But I think Lost endings never had me quite as lost as Variant. Check it out for yourself, and then we'll discuss (in private, of course, wouldn't want to spoil anything).

This book has violence most appropriate to age 15 and older.

Forbidden

This is the first time I've ever had the pleasure of reviewing a Ted Dekker book that wasn't yet released. I normally have to read my Ted Dekkers in hardcover because I can't wait, but this time, my sister-in-law brought back an advance reader's copy of a book I've been excited about for some time. It comes out in September and is co-written with Tosca Lee, author of Demon: A Memoir, reviewed here. I heard Dekker and Lee speak about a year ago. At that time, I had no idea who she was, but Dekker was excited to be working with her and praised her books highly. If you don't remember me mentioning this before, Ted Dekker is one of my favorite authors for the way in which he pushes the boundaries of faith in fiction. I hesitate to call his works Christian fiction, not because he isn't Christian but because they are so different than Christian fiction, so much more in-depth and real and meaningful...while also being excellent thrillers.

Forbidden is the first in The Books of Mortals Trilogy, one book being released each year, starting this September. It reveals a world 500 years in the future from ours, a world in which emotion has been eradicated, except for fear, allowing there to be Order and peace worldwide. No one feels anger, so there is no war and there are no weapons. Everyone lives in obedience for fear that they won't receive Bliss when they die. There is no passionate love, only a sense of duty and loyalty to family members.

But there is a vial of blood that has the power to return some of these emotions to whomever drinks it, five portions for five people. Rom is thrust unwillingly into a position to protect the vial, and curious about its importance, unknowing of its power, he drinks a portion and seems to wake from the dead. When it becomes clear that there is more to fear than losing Bliss, that there are guards who will kill people with weapons that aren't supposed to exist for even knowing about the vial of blood, Rom runs, but in order to convince his friends that he's not crazy, they must drink too. Thus, five people wake from the dead and become embroiled in a plot to keep the throne of the world from another man who's been woken by other means, a man who feels anger, passion, ambition...but no love.

As usual, Dekker hasn't written just another thriller. With Lee, he has explored in new ways one of the deep truths of Christianity: Love and what it would mean to the world to live without it. In this case, his interpretation is that we'd all be walking dead. Forbidden is a love story, a thriller, and a statement of faith without once using the names God or Jesus. I'm sure it would rub some Christians the wrong way, but I love that about Ted Dekker. No other author I know tries to shake up and wake up the Church like he does. His novels aren't always even written for the believers. They're meant to bring everyone to an understanding of who God is, stripped of all we call religion.

Faith aside, on a purely fictional level, this is not my favorite book of Dekker's. He's been known to give surprise endings and twists or to take his characters to the lowest places of depravity, creeping the reader out with grotesque images of sin. This book is still plenty dark, don't get me wrong. I'll just have to see what I feel about the series when it is over. It's certainly a worthy addition to his collection, and Tosca Lee seems to be a great partner. Best Dekker or not, I highly recommend it to all readers.