An evil and destructive spirit named Hexxus (voice of Tim Curry) is imprisoned in a tree by Magi, the leader of the fairies, who believes that all humans have been destroyed. Many years later, as Magi is teaching Crysta, her apprentice (voice of Samantha Mathis), they find that the humans have returned, and are cutting down all the trees. Crysta shrinks one of the humans, a young man named Zak, to save him from being hit by a falling tree, and teaches him about the importance of preserving the forest.

Highlights include Robin Williams as the aptly named “Batty Koda,” and gravel-voiced rapper Ton Loc as a Goanna lizard singing “If I’m Goanna Eat Somebody, It Might as Well Be You.”

There are some very scary moments and the magic characters may distract kids from the lesson about environmental conservation, but it does provide a good opportunity for discussions that may help in increasing sensitivity to environmental concerns.

Ray Kinsella (Kevin Costner), who grew up in New York and went to college at Berkeley, stands in the middle of his first Iowa corn crop and hears a voice say, “If you build it, he will come.” He begins to understand that this means he must plow under the corn crop and build a baseball field so that Shoeless Joe Jackson, barred from baseball since 1919 and dead for years, can play on it. Ray and his wife (Amy Madigan) know this is a crazy thing to do, but they do it. And “Shoeless”Joe Jackson does show up, with his teamates. Jackson had been the hero of Ray’s father, a former minor leaguer, with whom Ray had never been able to connect.

The voice speaks again: “Ease his pain.” Ray comes to understand that this refers to an iconoclastic author of the 1960s named Terrence Mann (James Earl Jones), now a recluse. Ray finds him, and together they hear the voice say “Go the distance.” This leads them back in time to find an elderly doctor (Burt Lancaster), who had a brief career in baseball but never got a chance at bat in a major league game. On their way back to the farm, they find him again, as a young man, and together, they go home, just as the farm is about to be foreclosed. The doctor gets his chance at bat. Mann gets to tell another story. And Ray gets a second chance to do what he regrets not doing as a teenager, to play catch with his father.

Discussion: The themes of this movie are dreams, family, and baseball. There are echoes of Ray’s father throughout the movie. It begins with Ray’s description of growing up, using his refusal to play baseball as his teenage rebellion, and as a way to test his father’s love. Ray tells Mann that his father’s name was used for a character in one of Mann’s books. Ray builds the field to bring back Shoeless Joe, his father’s hero, the hero Ray accused of being corrupt because he knew that would hurt his father. And of course at the end, it turns out that the dream all along was not bringing back the greats of baseball, but of a reconciliation with his father that was not possible before he died. “I only saw him when he was worn down by life,” Ray says. His own understanding and maturity are what enable him to see his father as he really was, even before he reappears on the baseball field. Ray asks his father, “Is there a heaven?” and his father answers, “Oh yeah. It’s the place dreams come true.”

Family discussion: Why doesn’t Annie’s brother Mark see the baseball players at first? Why is he able to see them later? · What did Ray mean when he talked about how he needed to insult his father’s hero when he was a teenager? · How do you know when to follow a dream that seems crazy or foolish?

If you like this, try: Find out more about Shoeless Joe Jackson and the famous “Black Socks” scandal. “Eight Men Out,” with D. B. Sweeney as Jackson, tells this story sympathetically. The Ken Burns PBS documentary about the history of baseball also has a video devoted to the story. See also baseball history movies “Bingo Long” and “Sandlot” (both also starring Jones) and “A League of Their Own.” And listen to James Earl Jones as the voice for Darth Vader in “Star Wars.”

In “A.I.” we had a real boy, Haley Joel Osment, playing a robot. In this movie, we have computer animated figures playing real people. This is the first computer-animated movie to “star” actors. Instead of giving us glossy surfaced-toys or imaginary ogres, this movie gives us human characters, with pores in their skin and beard stubble, and they are so real that at moments you can forget that they are made up of pixels and not DNA.

Those are usually moments when they are not talking or expressing emotion. The movie’s effects work best when the “actors” are moving, because their movements are based on that oldest of animation techniques, rotoscoping (real actors act out all the movements for the animators). The characters’ movements do not interact with their environments very much, but since this is science fiction and they are sometimes weightless anyway, it is not as much of a distraction as it could have been.

They do less well when it comes to talking and, well, acting. While leading lady Dr. Aki (voice of Ming-Na) may have more facial expressions than some real-life actors (Monica Potter, for example), the very realism of the features underscores the disparity between computer animation and real life. In more standard animation, the conventions allow for a level of exaggeration and omission that allows us to project human-like reactions onto a character like Buzz Lightyear or Simba. But when we see something with so little difference from humans, it just makes clearer how important that difference is. Movie fans might also find it distracting to hear such instantly recognizable voices (James Woods, Ving Rhames, Peri Gilpin, Alec Baldwin, Steve Buscemi, Donald Sutherland) coming from faces so incongruously different from our associations. The dog Baldwin voiced in “Cats and Dogs” seemed more suited to him than this Ben Affleck-clone of a leading man.

Still, the technology is stunning. The monsters are extraordinary creations, somewhere between dinosaurs, dragons, jellyfish, and squid. A scene with a soaring eagle is breathtaking, genuinely touching. The post apocalyptic-settings are complex and believable. The dialogue is passable, delivered with panache by first-rate talent (Buscemi, as always, is a highlight). The problem is the script, which reads like a Pokemon reject, confusing gibberish about the earth’s spirit that does not do justice to the beliefs of environmentalists or pantheists.

Parents should know that the movie includes brief strong language and extreme prolonged peril, with the violent death of many major characters.

Families who see the movie should talk about whether the vision of the future it portrays could possibly become reality, and about how the discoveries of important scientists have been considered heretical. They may want to talk about the motivation of the General. Was he just acting out of rage at the loss of his family?

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy the Star Wars – Episode IV, A New Hope… trilogy and might like to see the first major studio science fiction movie, Forbidden Planet to compare the technology and the ideas of that era with ours.

There is nothing more appealing to watch in a movie than one character teaching another, except perhaps when two characters teach each other. This reliable formula is well presented in this fine film about two great writers, one who has not published anything for nearly half a century and one who is 16 years old.

A mysterious character lives in an inner-city high rise. Known to the neighborhood as “The Window,” he has never been seen to leave the apartment, and the local teens are curious about him. Jamal (Rob Brown) accepts a dare to enter the man’s apartment. The man surprises him, and he races out, leaving his backpack behind.

The next day, the backpack is thrown out the window, and Jamal finds that his private journals have been extensively marked up with comments, ending with “Where are you taking me?” Jamal has never shared his writing or his intellectual curiosity with anyone. All his friends know is that he is a good basketball player. Jamal goes back to “The Window” to ask for more comments, and, very slowly, a friendship begins. It turns out that “The Window” is William Forrester, author of one of the greatest books of the 20th century, who has not published a book since the first one won the Pulitzer Prize in 1954. He is a recluse, with no communication with the outside world beyond his window, his television, and delivery of groceries by his publisher.

Meanwhile, Jamal’s test scores bring him to the attention of a posh private school, which offers him a full scholarship, though they expect more from him on the basketball court than in the classroom.

Some of the students at the new school are friendly, especially Claire (Anna Paquin). But a teacher named Crawford (F. Murray Abraham) suspects that Jamal’s work is not his own, and when Jamal embarrasses him in class, he accuses Jamal of plagiarism. The only one who can defend him is a man who has not left his apartment in decades.

The strengths of this movie are its themes and its performers. Newcomer Rob Brown is up to the level of the Oscar-winning trio (Connery, Paquin, and Abraham) who appear with him. In addition to the pleasure of seeing Jamal and Forrester spar with each other, teach each other, and support each other, there is the guiltier pleasure of those moments, in which Jamal takes off his Clark Kent/boyz in the hood disguise and lets his Superman intellectual energy and prodigious reading skewer those who dared to have preconceptions about him. There are a couple of scenes that recall that supremely satisfying moment in “Annie Hall” when Woody Allen pulled Marshall McLuhan out from behind a theater sign to refute the man who had been pontificating about McLuhan’s theories. The theme of a character whose true value and genius is not seen by those around him is a recurring theme in stories with a lot of appeal for teens, who often feel that way themselves.

There are also scenes of real loyalty and connection, not just between Jamal and Forrester, but between Jamal and his brother (rapper Busta Rhymes in his best performance yet) and between Jamal and Claire.

The movie’s primary weakness is its climax confrontation, which is artifically constructed and unsatisfyingly unrealistic. Forrester’s explanation of his decision to withdraw from the world and his decision to change is weakly handled. Jamal may be just a little too perfect. And a brief in-joke appearance by a big star is distracting.

Parents should know that the movie has brief strong language and sexual references and situations (Jamal’s neighbors have loud sex on the other side of his bedroom wall). Forrester says that women will have sex with anyone who has written a book. Jamal and Claire take their relationship very slowly and show a lot of respect and concern for each other. Forrester drinks a good bit, and talks about a character who died in a drunk driving accident.

The movie raises a lot of great issues for family discussion. Why do Jamal and Forrester hide their talents? How does the fact that both have lost family members provide an important connection for them? Why is it important for us to find people who can teach us? Why was Crawford so angry, and do you agree with Forrester’s comment about “bitterly disappointed teachers?” What prejudices are revealed by the characters? Do you agree that “people are most afraid of what they don’t understand?” Family members should also talk about Forrester’s advice that the first draft is written with the heart, the second with the head, and might want to try his technique for getting started on writing. They might also like to read some of the books Jamal talks about. And (note the way I started that sentence with “and” per Jamal’s comments on the subject) every teen should read “Catcher in the Rye” by famously reclusive author J.D. Salinger, the inspiration for the Forrester character.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy “Powder,” about another teen with extraordinary powers and “Field of Dreams,” another movie with a character based on Salinger. Mature teens will also like “Good Will Hunting” (very strong language and sexual situations) by the same director, also about a brilliant young man from a poor community.

Many great horror movies deal with families; that is where we are all most sensitive. This uneven film exploits that vulnerability but is ultimately unsatisfying.

The film opens on a dark and stormy night; Fenton Meiks, (Matthew McConaughey) a troubled-looking young man, has walked into the Texas offices of the FBI. He claims to know the identity of a serial killer, known as “God’s Hands” and he wants to tell his story.

As the story unfolds in flashback, Fenton describes growing up with his widower father (Bill Paxton) and younger brother Adam. It’s a generally happy household; Fenton and Adam are close, and kind to one another, and their father clearly cares for them both. Bill Paxton’s Dad character is convincing as a working-class guy with enough love and discipline to bring up his two boys alone, which makes his subsequent transformation very disturbing.

One night, he gets the boys out of bed to declare that an angel has brought him a vision. They’re living in the End Times, and God has selected the family for a special mission, to seek out and destroy demons, who are moving among humans in the last days. The demons look like ordinary humans, but Dad knows the difference — he says that he receives their names from heaven, and can see their sins at the moment he dispatches them by touching them with his hands. He uses a divinely selected ax and a lead pipe to perform the actual “destruction” of the demons.

Adam, the younger and more pious of the brothers, believes what his father tells him and immediately throws himself into the role of divinely appointed avenger. Fenton, older, keeps his doubts secret until his father actually drags home a bound woman and then executes her in front of his children.

Fenton is horrified, but forced to take an increasingly active role in the “demon” hunting. His initial rebellion against the new family business is handled by his father firmly, but lovingly. His dad has no doubts but realizes how difficult it is for his son to accept his new role in the universe. Nevertheless, as Fenton resists more and more, his father takes increasingly stern action, eventually locking his son in the cellar, to pray for a vision.

The genuinely horrifying premise of this film is undercut by its ham-handed writing, which makes the plot even less plausible. The dialogue is full of wooden homilies like “The truth is pretty unbelievable sometimes,” which Matthew McConaughey’s character drawls just before spilling the beans to the FBI. The dialogue is unintentionally funny at a number of points, especially when Bill Paxton is carefully delivering exposition on his insane plot. What is supposed to be a chilling matter-of-fact tone sounds more like a cold reading of the script.

This is not to say that the film is not frightening. The “destructions” are horrifying. The fact that we do not see the worst leaves the graphic details up to our imaginations. The scenes of Fenton locked in the cellar are extremely harrowing. But the most disturbing aspect of the plot is that the murders take place in front of the young sons, and committed by a beloved father. As Alfred Hitchcock said of the death of a child in an early film of his, “It was an abuse of cinematic power.” For a film as empty as “Frailty,” there is simply no excuse.

Many children will be disturbed by the spectacle of a loving father going crazy and becoming a homicidal maniac, and the consequences for the family. There are a number of shocking and tense moments among all the schlock.

Families seeing this film will want to discuss both Adam and Fenton’s reaction to their father’s revelations. What would you do if your father or mother told you they were commanded by God to kill the guilty? An especially troubling aspect of the movie implies that the father’s visions are real, and that God has actually selected a number of people to kill specific evildoers with an ax. Families of any faith will want to discuss the difference between the movie’s depiction and real-world religion.

Families who enjoyed this film will want to see “Psycho”, “The Brood,” “Carrie” and “Unbreakable”, four excellent films with similar themes.