Friday, June 23, 2006

My Half Empty Glass

I recent months, I've realized that I'm a fairly negative person. Family and friends are probably shaking their heads right now, thinking "Really? We’ve only been telling you this since you were four!" But it's true.

I was rereading some of my blogs and I've realized that I rarely look at something in a positive light. That may be why I hate movies with downer endings... I'm already so negative it's hard to take on more. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not self cruising, nor am I beating my self up. Rather, I'm recognizing a trait that needs some adjustment.

Where and when did this start? Truth is, I don't really know. And the weird part of it is, this negativity really only applies to my own life and abilities- when it comes to others, I used to be pretty good at the whole moral support thing.

Negative thinking is never productive, unfortunately, nor does it help heighten a mood in any way. But it's still there. Perhaps it comes from dwindling hope, or perhaps it comes from a selfish reaction to a world that isn't the way I want it. I'm not sure. But once again it something I do know has to be changed. By thinking negatively of myself, I'm not really doing much credit to those who care about me.

So, I'm going to try to be more positive; starting now- so let me apologize to all the Napoleon Dynamite fans of the world; I’m sorry. You're not really as useless and idiotic as I've always thought. After all, if it weren't for you, I might have had to enjoy the movie, and that would have killed me. I'm also grateful for you because you help reassure me that when the apocalypse comes, there will be a large margin of people to burn before my name comes up.

From here on out, every day is a new day. Next time, the usefulness of bad sequels.

Posted by at 3 comments:

Friday, June 16, 2006

World Wide Serenity Day

Blogger's Note: the following was borrowed from the Serenity Day website. In an effort to help several charities and send a message to hollywood execs, Browncoats (fans of Firefly/Serenity) everywhere have arranged over 40 screenings of the movie Serenity, the proceeds of which will go to charity. The serenity day plan is actually threefold- See the movie at one of the screenings, send in a letter to fox execs (details can be found at
  • The Serenity Day Website
    • on the forums page) and buy a copy of the film. not only is this for a great cause, but it will help film execs know that we want and will support a sequel (or three) or a series. Remember- you can't stop the signal.

    Joss Whedon's Serenity on the big screen.
     On Joss Whedon's birthday.
    To benefit Joss Whedon's favorite charity, Equality Now.

    47 Screenings Confirmed As Of June 16, 2006
    Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, United States

    The Unprecedented Browncoat Event Of The Year
    You Can't Afford To Miss - Buy Your Tickets Today!

    There are two ways to fight a battle like ours. One is to whisper in the ear of the masses, try subtlely and gradually to change the gender expectations and mythic structures of our culture. That's me. The other is to step up and confront the thousands of atrocities that are taking place around the world on an immediate, one-by-one basis. That's a great deal harder, and that's Equality Now. It's not about politics; it's about basic human decency.

    - Joss Whedon

    All of us at Equality Now continue to be amazed by and grateful for the Browncoats' and Serenity fans' generous and committed support for our work. Their energy and enthusiasm is inspiring and these screenings are coming at a critical time when we are especially in need of funds! We thank each and every one of them and Happy Birthday to Joss!"

    - Amanda Sullivan, Equality Now

    Join The Effort! | FAQ | Promote | Merchandise | Press | Contact
    About | Flickr Group | News (Archive)

    Note: If you don't see a "Buy Now!" link next to a given screening, try the "More Info" link. There might indeed be tickets on sale and we just haven't updated the listing.

    June 17 (Early Bird Screening!) - HAVE FUN, SCREENERS!

    June 22

    June 23

    June 24

    June 25

    • Glasgow (Scotland) - Pre-Planning

    June 30 (Straggler Screening!)

    If you don't see your city listed, it might be up to you to make one happen. There is no central authority doling out screenings to these cities. It is entirely up to fans on the ground to organize a screening where they live.

    Cities above marked with a filled bullet instead of an open circle were among the 35 cities (although not necessarily the venues) to host the third and final special advance screenings of Serenity on June 23, 2005. Events listed in boldface are confirmed.

    Serenity

    A passenger with a deadly secret. Six rebels on the run. An assassin in pursuit. When the renegade crew of Serenity agrees to hide a fugitive on their ship, they find themselves in an action-packed battle between the relentless military might of a totalitarian regime who will destroy anything - or anyone - to get the girl back and the bloodthirsty creatures who roam the uncharted areas of space. But, the greatest danger of all may be on their ship.

    Equality Now

    Equality Now was founded in 1992 to work for the protection and promotion of the human rights of women around the world. Working with national human rights organizations and individual activists, Equality Now documents violence and discrimination against women and mobilizes international action to support their efforts to stop these human rights abuses.

    Posted by at 1 comment:

    Wednesday, June 14, 2006

    Marvel Sells Out


    In recent months DC Comics has set the comic world on fire with their hit series "Infinite Crisis" and its follow up events, "52" and "One Year Later." Making the most of the cross over format, DC revisited one of their land mark events, namely "Crisis on Infinite Earths," and created a sequel even that felt daring, original, and natural (due in no small part to the 3 year build up to the event).

    Naturally, the biggest question on everyone's mind was not what DC would do next, but rather how Marvel would answer. And, unfortunately, that answer would come in the form of "House of M" (something most people want to forget) and Marvel's supposed world changing "Civil War." "House of M" was designed as nothing more than a money scheme; a chance for the company to put out more special books for the fans to buy. Civil War isn't much better.

    There was a time when Marvel, the legendary "House of Ideas," was innovative, creative, and daring. Today, however, they have become the ignored middle child, continually turning hurried and sloppy somersaults in order to get attention. The continuity of classic marvel used to be iron clad; every moment of every imaginary day was carefully mapped out- you could see the same character passing through different parts of the city in several different comics- a crossover in one book would mean that a character would be missing from their team book, and that their book would also mention that crossover. Today, however, Wolverine can be on FOUR (yes, Four) different super teams ("New Avengers," "Astonishing X-men," "Uncanny X-Men," and just plain "X-Men"), star in two of his own monthly books (Wolverine and Wolverine: origins), and still have at least 2 guest appearances a month.

    Anxious for the extra buck, Marvel will do anything to get attention even undermine their own characters.

    "Civil War" is centered around a government bill forcing all superheroes to reveal their identity, register with the government, and work for them. While DC was able to revisit a previous storyline with success, Marvel merely regurgitated the same storyline the supposedly tore the mutant world apart in the pages of X-men years ago. The conflict comes from the two sides of the argument, with cooperation championed by Iron man while rebellion is led by captain America.

    The fights so far have felt strained and forced, and the story felt rushed and compacted. Marvel swears that this series will change their comics forever, and they may be right. They are effectively making legendary characters into soulless money making logos.

    The latest travesty to come from this "earth shattering" event was something that was possibly the most anticipated blunder ever- the reveal of spider-man. That’s right, as of yesterday, the marvel world now knows that Peter Parker is Spider-man, thus removing an essential part of the character.

    This is a travesty. Not much more to say, other than "Marvel Sucks." God help us all.

    Posted by at 1 comment:

    Monday, June 12, 2006

    "Will He Ever Get Off This Sequel Kick?" or "The best sequel that never was"

    Continuing my pondering on the existence of sequels, I started to think about all the great filmed that deserved a sequel. It may be best that they didn't get them, however, since the sequel probably would've been done horribly anyway. Also, I'm too tired and lazy to number these, so following appear in no particular order.

    Serenity- This was one of the most original and fun sci-fi movies in ages. If I don't get a sequel to this movie I may have to start a riot.

    Unbreakable- while a sequel is completely out of the question, I would still love to see what happens next.

    Spaceballs- We were supposed to see them again in spaceballs 2, the search for more money. While it was just a gag, it would be more meaningful now than ever before.

    The Princess bride- again, unneeded, but it would still be cool.

    Ferris Bueller's day off- I see this happening in one of two ways... ferris playing hooky from work, or ferris playing hooky from work in order to catch his son who is playing hooky from school.

    The Phantom-     The first movie is cheesy, but still way too much fun. With the generational hero trick, could be cool.

    National treasure- face it, this generation needs an Indiana Jones series, and tomb raider ain't cutting it.

    Bill & Ted (3) - Oh, the possibilities...

    Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow- this film was both inventive and amazing... I would love to have more adventures of sky captain.

    Posted by at 1 comment:

    Tuesday, June 06, 2006

    The Return

    I have never seen Superman in the theater. But even in video form the movie had a huge impact on me. How huge? A couple of weeks ago I went to see mission impossible 3. As we were watching the previews, I suddenly heard the unmistakable voice of Jor El (marlin Brando) suddenly images began to hit the screen, and with them the music that have always brought a chill. By the end of the preview (although it felt like more of a spiritual experience) I was in tears. Why? Because the preview brought forth those feeling from when I was a kid and for a slight moment I felt like an awe inspired kid again.
    While many seem skeptical about the new movie, let me just say that I support it completely, if only because this movie look, feels, and sounds like the originals. A few people are just afraid that the new actors cannot fulfill what they remember, but that's not the point. The point is not the actors but the performance, the roles.
    How many people sit down after a hard day, look at their kids, and wish that they could be young again?
    For me, that's what the upcoming movie is- a chance, just for an hour or so, to feel like a kid again. I can't wait.

    Posted by at 2 comments:

    Friday, June 02, 2006

    10 Worst Sequels

    Shortly after coming up with the 10 best sequels ever, I had to go on and determine the 10 worst.

    10. Jurassic park 2: the lost world- taking nothing more than the title of the book, this monstrosity pulled in mad money- until everyone realized just what crap it really was.

    9. Superman III- I know, I know; Superman II is one of the best while its follow-up is one of the worst. No wonder     Bryan singer is doing something that may have never been done before- Writing a replacement sequel.

    8. Matrix Reloaded & Revolutions- The first movie rocked... the highly anticipated follow ups? Not so much. While the fight scenes were cool, all they did was establish a pattern of Fight, talk, fight, talk. While the story was still interesting, it kept getting stopped by inexplicably useless sex scenes and random rant in some foreign scientific language. The biggest fault, however, may be the final conclusion- that shamelessly leads into the online game. Oh well.

    7. Start trek V- While by far the most original movie in the series, you just can't stop waiting for Kirk to steal the spotlight back from William Shatner.

    6. Star trek Generations- Lame Lame lame lame lame. The follow up books are cool, but that doesn't stop the movie from being Lame lame lame.

    5. Alien vs. Predator- I remember waiting for this movie ever since I was a kid. There were video games (most rocked) and comics (also fun) even talk of an animated show. While the fans wanted it, it never happened. Until it did. Unfortunately after seeing the movie most fans have returned to their longing, essentially pretending that the first movie never happened.

    4. Highlander 2- Words cannot even begin to describe the idiocy of this sequel. Apparently there can be only one... until the studio needs to cash in on the franchise again. Oh well. I just don't understand how a studio can continue to make a series of movie that essentially does nothing more than retell the first movie in a different manner (although with the same ending...). Highlander 4, however, was a decent movie in comparison, but it should be seen as the movie version of Highlander: The Series.

    3. Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones- the title really says it all, doesn't it? Poor acting, poor story telling, and so laden with special effects it's hard to find the actors. Fortunately two great things came from it> The clone wars cartoons and Yoda's saber fight.

    2. Elektra- while more of a spin off, this movie may be one of the biggest disappointments to ever hit the screen (although some of that may have to do with daredevil's obvious absence and the mind boggling introduction of the new obsessive compulsive Elektra.




    1. Batman and Robin- Oy. I'm still trying to clean my mind of this disaster. Tip to future film execs- Fuzzy slippers do make the villain scary, just not in any way that helps the movie.

    Posted by at 2 comments:

    Sequel Season

    Every year I fall victim to the summer onslaught of blockbusters. I just can't help it. And like most summers, many of the Top (high grossing) movies this summer are or will be sequels. I've already got caught up in it- Already MI:3 and X-men 3 have lured me to the theater, even though I had low expectations for both (MI:3 proved itself worthy, though, while X-Men 3 may be one of the biggest let downs ever). The ride has not stopped, however, with Pirates: Dead Man's Chest and Superman Returns (Sequel, not reboot) coming out soon, and several more big sequels in the works.


    After seeing X-Men 3 I realized that with a few rare exceptions, most sequels are unworthy of the first movie. Listed below are some of those exceptions (Please know that these are only a smattering of the best- feel free to let me know if there is one I forgot or did not include).

    10. Rescuers Down Under- the first Disney animated sequel ever (and one of the few to make it to theaters), with awesome voice talent, a great story and ground breaking animation, this Rescuers put the first movie to shame.

    9. Shrek 2- perhaps the best animated sequel ever, this movie brought all the fun of the first movie along with enough pop references to keep anyone amused.

    8. Kill Bill Vol. 2- while not a sequel per se, Kill Bill 2 is where most of the heart and character development is found.

    7. Back to The future III- This movie broke the mould and in the process created a solid trilogy out of what was before only a couple of fun movies.

    6. X2: X-men United- this could be here just out of pure bias, but X2 really stepped up and pushed the story to a whole new level.

    5. Terminator 2- Straight up, this movie PROVED that sequels could rock hard if not harder than the original movie, not to mention having a nick name (T2) that inspired countless imitators.

    4. Aliens- While the first movie was scary; this movie is so good many consider it the only movie of the series to get the idea right. I agree.

    3. Superman II- A flawless sequel, this movie completes the first movie and helps you know not only that a man could fly, but WHY.

    2. Star Trek II: the Wrath of Khan- this movie is amazing... brilliant story, great acting, and a villain pulled straight out of Star Trek lore. Not too much more to say, other than "KHHHAAAAANNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

    1. Star Wars: The Empires Strikes Back- This movie is the best for two reasons- George didn't direct, and Yoda is the man.

    Posted by at 2 comments:

    Sunday, May 28, 2006

    Indirectly Getting to the Point

    I seem to surround myself with indirect people. This is amusing since I can be so aggressively direct that I often insult people. While tact is something I've learned over the years (especially since I've been married), I still expect people to tell me what they want. I don't know about you, but being asked if I want to take out the garbage 10 times in a row doesn't make me want to do it... in fact, it makes me more likely NOT to do it.
    My favorite, though, is when someone proposes an activity or game plan, but starts it with "well, do you want to..." instead of saying "hey, I'd really like it if..."
    With indirect people, half the time you have no clue what they really want because they're too frightened to actually come out an tell you. And then later when they're feeling picked on and ignored, it's you that gets in trouble for not listening to what they really want.
    While women or more commonly guilty of this, many men do it as well.
    So what is the answer? Obviously being literal doesn’t help, because the indirect people are aggressive enough to continue to ask the same question over and over until you get the point. So, I'm thinking that once again duct tape may be the answer.

    Posted by at 3 comments:

    Saturday, May 20, 2006

    DNA and the God of Thunder

    It seems that throughout human history, cultures have a tendency of creating a multitude of Gods to represent the different things around them. The most popular have lasted until our day, with heroes such as Thor and Hercules still popping up in media today. While people often laugh at this concept, it's actually a very understandable and still very common human practice.
    The truth is that everyone wants to understand the world around them. So, in a world where science consisted of magic and religious believe, different Gods were assigned to each natural event. Soon a whole pantheon was established; with each God requiring different forms of worship (in that way man believed they could control the world around them). Once again, very common behavior.
    Today most people look back at the ancient cultures and shake their heads, wondering how the Greeks or the Norse could believe in such inventive stories. The more dominant religions today focus on one God, and most of those tolerate science, with some embracing it and other rejecting it outright. The funny thing is, we STILL do this today. Instead of assigning Gods to different natural, unnatural or unsettling events, we assign scientific explanations. In many ways, Science has become the new pagan religion of our day.
    Instead of a God of thunder such as Thor or Zeus, we have weather systems- equally mysterious and unpredictable. This weather system even has a following of priest, or Oracles, who tell us what we can expect from the almighty weather system from day to day.
    Instead of a God of love, we have the Hormone, a powerful creature that attacks us in groups and forces us to fall in love with random strangers. Only when we've satisfied the mad lust that we were made to feel against our will does the hormone leave us alone... at least for awhile.
    Instead of a God of war we have politics, with politicians its priests.
    Instead of a God of evil, hate, or trouble, we have DNA... DNA is the scariest of all, for like Zeus of old we never know when or who DNA might strike, or how it will change or affect the poor victim.
    The Gods of old did more than just put a name or face on the things that were feared, they took responsibility for those things that people refused to. If a man was a rapist and a murder in the old days, it would be said that the god of war, or the God of love, or a trickster god had influenced the man and made him commit those crimes. Today, we blame it on bad parenting, mental illness and behavior that may have been passed on genetically.
    We embrace these new scientific discoveries and theories just as much, if not more, than the ancient Greeks embraced their pantheon of Gods. In the end, people just need somebody to blame.

    Afterward-
    Now, I want to explain something before anyone takes offense. I do believe that there are something beyond our control, I do believe that mental disorders, handicaps, and behaviors can affect people and that these thing could be inherited. but I also believe that there are some who, instead of being a responsible adult and working on their issues, use that trial as an excuse to do nothing but complain about how unfair the world is.

    Posted by at 4 comments:

    Monday, May 08, 2006

    In the army now

    I should first say that I am not a politically minded person. As several of my friends will tell you, I could care less. This could be due to the fact that my mother was a democrat while my father was republican. As a result, politics weren't usually discussed much; which is alright... I have a sneaking suspicion that, given my parents, any political debate might have ended with the house in flames.
    And so, I don't really have a political stance. I think some things are wrong while others are right. One thing I have always been against is war. Personally I don't think the best way to bring someone to your way of thinking involves violence (unless it involves Napoleon dynamite fans, but that's another story). This could be because I'm not a violent person, well, not normally, anyway.
    A big source of contention between my father and I while growing up was my refusal to join the army. While I'm not sure what his point was, exactly, he always got angry when I would refuse to even consider joining the army. Who knows, maybe it would have been good for me. Personally, I don't think I would survive the army or military... I'm just not that type of guy (I break under pressure when pressure is defined and mean military men shouting at me..... Come to think of it I was never a fan of GI Joe either....). While I think my Dad thought I was condemning the military, I wasn't; it just wasn't for me.
    I always support the men and women to protect our country. It's the political leaders and decisions that direct the military that bothers me. I don't think we always have the best reasons to go to war, nor do I think war is always our best option.
    I have several brothers, four of which I grew up with. Two are currently in the armed forces, with a third to join here very soon. Our father was also in the military. I think the military is an honorable profession, as I said before, but it disturbs me that I know nothing about the politics that will ultimately decide my brother's fate. How sad would it be if, on the day of my brother's funeral, I was unable to explain to my child or nephew why their uncle or father wasn't coming home, or what he died for? I don't want to know about politics, and I think war and the reasons why we fight are childish. Apparently my brothers don't (or they also don't care and figure it's a paycheck... Who knows). I think I owe it to them to find out just what they are fighting for.
    I don't agree with war, but I suppose it's a little more productive than fast food (although I do believe that the cheeseburger could be credited for several inventions... But that's another story).
    Posted by at 1 comment:

    Wednesday, May 03, 2006

    The Passion of the Ignorant


    For those you may not know, I'm a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As such, I'm fairly conservative while being open to new ideas and approaches. At least, that's how it's supposed to work. Unfortunately, during my time in the "Mormon corridor" I've run across nothing but bias and close mindedness. While there is occasionally a cool person every now and then, for the most part the people here piss me off. I think my first push towards that direction came when someone, upon learning that I was from Maine, said "oh, it must be nice to be out here (Utah-Idaho) where the church is so much stronger." When I answered "no, the church may be smaller, but it's just as strong as Utah," I was given a knowing wink before the subject was changed.
    Personally I'm of the philosophy that size has nothing to do with strength. Those familiar with the bible may remember a story or two about that. I've found that those members that live in areas where the church may be smaller are actually stronger in their faith because they have to make a more conscience decision to live the gospel.
    A great reflection of this is sacrament meeting, especially fast and testimony meetings. It seems that many have a problem separating the spirit from emotion. My personal favorite is when a speaker will lower their voice and whisper what they are saying so they can be more dramatic and have more of an emotional response. Things like that sicken me. I firmly believe that if you're going to do something, you need to do it for the right reasons- not for the reward, not because you were told to, but because it's RIGHT. Moroni 7 says more than enough on this subject.
    It is this level of insincerity that really gets to me. A person can act as spiritual as they like, but in the end the spirit is not going to testify just because you say the right words in the right tone of voice.
    This whole issue comes to a head in my mind when I hear people explain why a movie such as The Passion isn't worth watching.
    First of all, the Lord has told us that it is not our place to judge, Also, Moroni has told us that if we must judge, we do it by judging whether something brings us closer to God or whether it drives us from him. With me so far?
    And so, it seems to be that while me must decide what we expose ourselves too, and no point does it become cool to judge something and speak against something that we know nothing about. My example her is "Million Dollar Baby." While I did not like what I was hearing about the movie, I did not consider myself authorized to comment on it until I saw it.
    I feel the same way about "The Passion." When the movie first came out, of course I felt uneasy and disturbed by what I was hearing about the movie. I loved how people called it evil and sacrilegious when it not only taught about Christ but stayed true to the gospel accounts. When I saw the movie, I was blown away. The Movie builds to the end, at which point we see the resurrection and the purpose of Christs actions. While the movie is absolutely emotional and does play to the heart, at the same time the spirit testifies of the message and story. Not only is this movie true events, but it's purpose is a righteous one- to bring men unto Christ.
    And so, imagine my amusement when people begin to speak against the movie. Interested, I asked them to cite example from the movie. Upon further investigation I discovered that these naysayers had never seen the movie. Yet the were speaking against it (a bible a bible, we have a bible and need no other). It was not until I heard their argument that I was really angered. The movie, they said, "played to the emotions, and people confused that with the spirit, and thus fail to realize how evil the movie is."
    Let's take a moment for dramatic irony, shall we? These same people who pretended to be spiritual, who play act on the stand during sacrament in order to impress the congregation, accuse a truly spiritual movie of insincerity? It was almost enough to make my head explode.
    It seems to me that as a people we have begun to lose the ability to think and reason for ourselves. We have lost and forgotten those tools, such as the spirit, that help us to recognize truth. It makes me sad when people take words and ideas that they like and feel comfortable with over the truth and the right.
    We must start recognizing the real reasons for why we are here on earth. As a people, we need to distanced ourselves from the "collective" and allow our minds and hearts to find the truth for themselves. Only then will we be worthy to enter the kingdom of God. If that's your thing, anyway. As for me, I just want to go see my father again.
    Posted by at 3 comments:

    Wednesday, April 26, 2006

    Okay, I admit it, we live in a Man's world (the "wo" variety of men, that is)

    All men, everywhere, have something to unite them- the mystery that is woman. No matter the culture, climate or planet, women will always hate men. No reason. They just do it out of principle. Occasionally we men hear the line that we live in a man's world and that women are still treated like dirt. While I am the first to say that many still treat women badly, let me make some interesting observations-
    1. I went into payless the other day to buy a new pair of shoes. It took me five minutes to find the men's section. It was squeezed onto half a shelf between the women's and kids (the other sections, btw,each took up half the store, with the women's section being slightly bigger).
    2. When I went to the eye doctor the other day I went in to get new glasses. Once again, one small rack for me, 3 racks for women, and two for children.

    I admit that these are small things, and some can still see them as racial discrimination by claiming that the corporations target women to make more money (it's okay, TV targets men, or so my wife tells me). But what really bothers me is-

    3. I am one of the few men who would love to be a stay at home dad. But, if I were to stay home, raise the kids and let my wife work,I would be a lazy slob who takes advantage of my wife. If I work and have my wife stay home, I'm a sexist that imprisoned his wife in the
    house in order to have complete control over her. And if we both work and put the kid's in daycare, I'm a bad parent. (and if I were to stay home, the only thing on TV would be soap operas and talk shows; how's that for discrimination?)
    Posted by at 2 comments:

    Monday, April 17, 2006

    Alone in a world of Napoleon Dynamite fans


    I consider myself a fairly rational being. The movies that I like (see last blog for more on that) usually have a point and a solid reason for why I like them. While I seem to like all the same "big" movies that everyone else does, such as action movies, big budget movies and franchises and the like, I do have more varied interests as well. But for the most part, I blend pretty well.
    except, I'm afraid, for comedies. I hated Seinfeld. I didn't laugh once during Meet the Parents and I absolutely refuse to watch White Chicks. When it comes to comedy, I that weird guy in the back who just isn't bright enough to follow the discussion.
    Now, don't get me wrong. I've worked hard to become a fairly funny individual (once again, see old posts). But my humor and the worlds seems to be located on opposite sides of the known universe.
    A year or so ago, Napoleon Dynamite was released in Idaho. And stayed released and stayed released. It was still in theaters a week after it was on DVD. I'm sure that the popularity had more than little to do with the fact that the movie was made and took place in Idaho. But still, that's a long run.
    My friends tried to get me to go, but I never had too much interest. I saw some previews, still no interest. Finally, once it was on video, I decided to rent it. I figured if I was going to be opposed to something, I might as well know what I was against. The movie, simply put, was HORRIBLE. It took me three days to watch. On fast forward.
    No point, No reason for existing, no moral, and most of all, no character growth. This movie was nothing more than a series of random images about a handicapped kid who was denied proper services.
    I would go on, but truth is, the movie really doesn't deserve the time or thought I would put into such a detailed critique. And in truth, it's not really the movie that bugs me. It's the fans.
    Now, before anyone gets offended, please know that many of my friends and loved one find this movie great; and for them I can understand their reasons. But some of the fans blow me away. For instance, those who like the movie because everyone else does. Or those who like but can't explain it.... Or those who refuse to watch The Passion of the Christ and call it evil yet consider Napoleon one of the best movies ever made. I just don't get it. Are these people just plain mindless?
    In a world where thinking is becoming more and more optional, one such as I find themselves constantly frustrated by the total lack of thought shown by humanity from day to day. Perhaps that is why Napoleon Dynamite is so popular- because finally there is a movie that gives the world a hero they can understand.
    Personally, I'll stick with Spike.
    Posted by at 3 comments:

    Sunday, April 09, 2006

    My Moral Criteria for Uplifting Entertainment


    Note- the following was the opening paper of my senior writing portfolio. Enjoy, if you can.




    Traveling Companions:
    Choosing Reading Material for the
    Journeys of Life

    On the roads of life we must constantly make decisions about whom we can trust. Many turn to literature in order to find advice and direction, however, many do not realize that when they choose literature they are choosing traveling companions, guides that influence the turns they take on the journey of life. The older I become, the more I wonder which works of literature I can trust as companions and guides in my own travels. In her article “The Absence of the Ethical” Martha Nussbaum imagines a world in which literary and ethical criticism is combined in pursuit of the question “how should one live?” (104). While many are already asking this same question of literature, they are doing so without thinking about what effects some works have on their readers. While there are many books and movies that offer good, reliable directions that help lead me in the direction of the man I want to become, there are other works that lead to dark roads where only the lost travel. This line of reasoning leads to two questions: “Which works can I trust?” and more importantly, “How do I tell the difference?”

    Ethics: Content

    I choose my traveling companions the same way I choose my friends: I surround myself with those that have the best influence on me and help me to see things in a positive and uplifting light. It’s essential to be able to recognize what type of people and what type of literature you can trust. The literature I read must be worth reading. Marshall Gregory relates literature to nutrition, it must be wholesome and worth consuming (57). I find it hard to believe that literature that is riddled foul language and sexual content can have any real moral value, unless of course there is a valid reason for its presence. Stephen King’s Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption contains a lot of content that I would consider filth and unnecessary. There are times, however, when only a “filthy” word will create the aesthetic the author is looking for. Shawshank is the story of a man, Andy, who is sent to prison for a crime he didn’t commit. After 25 years Andy eventually escapes through the prisons’ septic system, finally reaching freedom by crawling through five hundred yards of pipe filled with human waste. The narrator of the story later describes Andy as the man “who had waded in sh*t and came out clean on the other side…” (King 89). While the word choice might upset some readers, I found that the phrase was justified. After all, any other word would just make the sentence comical. Literature has a lasting influence on us, and the content of a story stays in our minds forever. As a result, when we fill our minds with waste, that’s what we’ll think about during those dull moments. Personally, I’d rather fill my mind with things of worth.

    Aesthetics: Presentation

    The content of a story is usually present in order to help the author make a point. As mentioned before, if negative material is contained within a piece, not only should it have a reason for being there, but it should be presented in such a way that it does not have a lasting negative impact on the reader. If the author needs to present the idea that “life sucks” in order to make his point, he needs to take care to present the information in such a way that it does not overwhelm said point. Many times a book observing the harshness of the world fails to do much more than depress me and make me lose hope. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a wonderful example of presentation. Buffy is an amalgam of several genres: comedy, horror, satire, and drama. While the show deals with serious stories and situations, it does so with a touch of humor and flair of style. While evil is presented in the show, we are still hopeful of the outcome when our hero is able to mutter a wisecrack while fighting vampires, demons, or the death of a parent.

    While it is often necessary to show the evils of the world in order to establish what exactly the good characters are facing, sometimes this information is relayed in such detail that by the end of the story the reader completely misses the point and remembers only the bad. The presentation of the moral of a story must be positive in the end if it to have an uplifting and lasting affect on the reader.

    Aesthetics/Ethics: Purpose

    If a book is meant to entertain, than it should do that. A book meant to teach should teach. The world is cruel and hard, and bad things happen, but I already know this from my own life experience. I also know that people die horribly, or commit suicide, etc. But if I am going to spend my free time reading about it, I want it to have a point. If the point cannot redeem what has been written, then the book can be said to have had a negative affect. Purpose is tightly connected to all of my criteria, for purpose is the only thing that might redeem something that is otherwise unfit for reading or viewing. A scene of horrible violence that is included in a piece for nothing more than shock value, for instance, lacks a valid purpose and thus has a negative effect on the reader. But if the violence in a piece and plays an important role in the story and the overall moral, then its purpose and presence in justified. While there are some moral values that can never be totally abandoned, ethical distinctions do not always depend on choices among the traditional moral values. For example, in The Fugitive, many of the things done by the Harrison Ford character could be considered illegal and wrong, however, when brought into context we see that the characters actions really serve the greater good. There are many books and movies where the situation of the piece changes the moral context. As a result, many literary works that I consider beneficial to me could be found immoral on another scale (Booth 95). It is purpose of the implied author and the story itself that helps to define those works. The Passion of the Christ is a work that many find offensive and intimidating because of the violence and its “R” rating. Upon watching the film, however, I found that the film had incredible worth, and that the violence in the movie only helped to drive home the point: that Christ loved us and went through hell in order to provide us with hope. While the film is admittedly told from a different religious perspective and may emphasize some things that my own religious beliefs do not, that does not eliminate the worth of the purpose of the movie. The only thing content may limit, however, is the range of the audience.

    Ethics: Truth

    Truth exists everywhere, in everything. Even a story set in a completely fictional world can express and contain truth. A story should always be presented in such a way that the truth it contains can be seen and believed. As a reader of comics, I’m definitely not saying to only write about real life; the work just needs to make the material believable and true in its own universe. Every story takes place in a world that has rules of one sort or another, even if the only rule is that nothing makes sense, like in Alice in Wonderland. If a story creates its own world, it should stay true to that world. Many books and movies, such as the Highlander series and XXX alter their world or break an established rule in order to cash in on the property for a sequel (or two). When this happens, the story then violates the rules by which its world works, and thus ceases to be true.

    Not only should a story stay true to itself, it should also stay true to the reader’s world of experiences as well. It’s hard to learn from something if the characters and the events are so alien that the reader can’t relate to them. As a result, the story, no matter how far fetched, should contain truth that the reader can find and understand. By doing this the story then becomes available to a wider audience. As mentioned above, some truths are constant, no matter what world the story may transpire in. If a story presents an ideal that I find evil as truth, I then have trouble relating to the entire story. Of Mice and Men is an example of one such work. Steinbeck attempts to present George’s murder of Lenny at the end of the novel as a righteous and even Christ-like act. Yet no matter how many people try to explain and justify George’s actions to me, I will never feel good about his choice, and as a result, I feel that George’s actions are evil enough to nullify anything else the novel may have to offer.

    Ethics: Character

    Kip Hartvigsen, the head of English at BYU-I, once said that “learning is our theology” (Hartvigsen). I believe this, and believe that the character in a story serve as our vessels through which we learn the moral of the story. In a very real way it is the characters more than any other part of a story that truly become our traveling companions. Moroni, the son of Mormon, is one literary (and historical) figure that has become a true traveling companion for me. If the character of a story is a jerk, a coward, or honestly believes in the goodness of something that I feel is evil, I have trouble connecting. That does not mean that the character must agree with my own beliefs or morals, only that the character must contain some element of truth that I can identify with through the experiences of my own life.

    Identifying with a character is not always healthy for a reader, however. For example, a patient in drug and alcohol rehab is urged to stay away from movies and books that contain images of characters exhibiting those behaviors the patient is trying to stop. A Child called It is once such book that had a negative impact on me because I was able to identify with the character. Coming from an abusive background, A Child called It did nothing more than bring up images and memories from my own past that were better left forgotten. While I believe that the book can accomplish much, such as helping victims to overcome their past, the reader must be ready and prepared for that change.

    Aesthetics/Ethics Uplifting

    A story must be uplifting in some way. If a story ends with a sad ending that relays nothing more than “life sucks,” then I feel betrayed and let down, as if the time I had invested in reading was only a pathetic waste. I accept that bad things happen, and that a story must have opposition and contrast in order to make sense. But dwelling on those things do little to educate and uplift. What is required here is a sense of hope, a promise that the wrongs suffered in the story were not for nothing. Just as I wouldn’t want to travel with a naysayer who sees tragedy around every bend, I also don’t like reading a book or watching a movie that ends with sadness and no hope for happiness. Many novels and stories end with death or suicide. Some of these things can be justified, and many cannot. The Star Wars movies are good examples. Two of the installments, Revenge of the Sith and The Empire Strikes back both end with the bad guys on top. Yet In both movies, however, there is also hope for the future as we see the good guys preparing to fight the next battle. These examples are not to imply that all stories should have sequels, but rather meaningless death and tragedy rarely uplift and instruct.

    The Aviator was one recent movie that ends with no hope. The movie, which focuses on Howard Hughes, reached its climax when Hughes defied the world by proving that the “Spruce Goose” could really fly. The climax is especially fulfilling since most of the movie had focused on Hughes’ decent into madness, and the success of the plane’s flight seemed to signify Hughes’ partial victory over his mental illness. But instead of ending on this emotional high note, the movie plays for five more minutes, ending with Hughes descending into a psychotic break. While many viewers felt that the movie was amazing, I felt betrayed, as the story seemed to convey nothing more than the idea that mental illness will eventually prevail. A story must either have hope, or a purpose for a sad ending.

    Aesthetics: word choice

    No matter how good a story idea is, it must be well written in order to be enjoyable. J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy created a rich world and jump started a whole new genre of literature. While the trilogy is well developed, as is the world it takes place in, the writing sometimes fails to bring a reader firmly into that world. As a result, LOTR can be said to have had a negative impact on me as I read one book of the series and despised it. While a reader can sometimes make exemptions because of the quality of the idea, in the end it’s hard to find a substitute for good writing. Harry Potter is an example of an average idea with fun and inviting writing. Sometimes it’s easier to access a story when the author invites you in with a hug rather than a sneer of intellect.

    The new Peter Pan movie shows how great ideas and characters can go wrong with bad writing. Peter Pan is loaded with special effects, amazing music and cute children actors. Aesthetically the movie is incredible, until you try to watch it. The dialogue in the movie is wretched (one segment features 5 minutes of the entire cast yelling “I do believe in fairies, I do, I do!); at times it is bad enough to drive the viewer from the room. Good writing helps to clarify the point of a story and make the purpose clear. In picking a traveling companion, I prefer one that makes sense as opposed to someone that babbles on incoherently.

    The point of my tirade is really very simple. What we read stays with us. In effect, whenever I open a book I am inviting a new companion into my mind and heart, and that person is going to speak up every now and then whether I like it or not. If I collect many companions with the same opinion, chances are they will over power me and turn me to their way of thinking from time to time. That is why it is imperative to find those literary works that are safe to travel with. In the end, I’d rather be in charge of where my life is headed.

    Posted by at 1 comment:

    Wednesday, April 05, 2006

    Scrubs and My Interior monologue

    Recently my wife and I have fallen back into love with "Scrubs." We had watched the first season a while ago, and recently a friend lent us the second. Not too keen at first, upon watching the first episode (the opening credits, actually) I immediately fell back in love with the show. Not only is it dang funny and original, but it's got a dang good soundtrack, too. But that's not what I want to talk about. Ever since finishing the second season (which I did the first night I borrowed it, sad but true) I've had a continual interior monologue going on in my head. Almost a weird "wonder years" theme seems to run through it as something would happen and I would think "it was then that I realized that teaching juniors would be harder than I thought." while I realize that this is odd, I've actually come to enjoy it.
    You see, women are always asking men "What are you thinking?" whenever they see us staring off into space. Apparently many men appear studious when they're actually sitting there thinking something along the lines of "duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhh........." And when we actually fess up to the truth (as opposed to making something up on the spot) we get in trouble because obviously we didn't trust our wives enough to tell them the truth. In reality I guess the problem is that women just give us way more credit than we deserve.
    But, anyway, as I was saying, the interior monologue is great because it's a nice change from the normal periods of blankness. Instead of having no thoughts to share with my wife (and thus get myself into trouble ), instead I have thoughts that deserve to get me in trouble. For instance, thinking about how much simpler teaching would be if duct tape was integrated more fully into the classroom.
    I love television.
    Posted by at 4 comments:

    Tuesday, April 04, 2006

    DC's Infinite Crisis

    Twenty Years ago DC comics did the unthinkable- They killed off more than half of their universe and completely rebooted their continuity. "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was the crossover that industries have tried and failed to copy ever since. The series was earth shattering; literal. "Crisis on infinite earths" restructured comics into what they are today.
    DC has tried many time to duplicate the success of the original "Crisis," but they've never really succeeded. Until Now.
    Over the last year or more DC has been slowly guiding it's entire "universe" towards a single looming event. With hints scattered throughout the continuity of various books, cryptic messages and odd occurrences, fans have been waiting eagerly for what comes next. And they were not disappointed.
    DC once again changed their universe with "Identity Crisis," a book that shed light on several dark truths that had existed in he DC universe, especially among the Justice League. Fans were also shocked by the deaths of a few heroes, including some favorite supporting characters such as Sue Dibney from "Formerly know as the Justice League." "Identity Crisis" ended, but not before DC let fans know that the wave of change was still on it's way.
    The company finally let the fans get a taste of what was coming with "Countdown to Infinite Crisis," a 99 Cent book that blew everyone away and converted every comic fan on earth into a Blue Beetle fan. Focusing on Blue Beetle, the book shows Ted unraveling the mystery behind several recent events and end with his shocking death. With several more countdown series spinning directly out of the book, fans were now worked into a frenzy. What was this "Infinite Crisis?" And just how much would change?
    With the release of the Infinite crisis Mini series, DC has officially answered that question: EVERYTHING. A direct sequel to "Crisis on Infinite Earths," DC heralds the new age of comics with the most courageous and inventive event in comic history. "Infinite Crisis," featuring the return of the golden age Superman along with a few friends, several hero deaths and amazing art and writing is comic gold. I warn you, don't pick this up unless you are ready to become addicted. DC is back, and if "Infinite Crisis" is any indication, the future of comics is in their hands.
    Posted by at 4 comments:

    Sunday, April 02, 2006

    Me and the wacky title of this page

    As I may have mentioned above, my name is Mike Cherniske- yes, I'm the one with the dark hair. The beautiful red head in my arms is my wife, Lanae. Yes, I know, how does a fat ugly short guy get such a hot wife? Well, I can't actually say. Not because I don't know, but because I'm currently working to patent the formula. If all goes well you may see it in stores by Christmas.
    If you're wondering if I'm serious or not, I'll let you figure that one out on your own.
    Now, you're probably wondering about this crazy title. Truth is, I thought it'd be funny. Also, it seems to be the best description of what I plan on talking about on this page. While I'll probably focus on Movies, Comics, and the reasons why people tick me off, I have no mission statement, no divine purpose to guide my writings. And so, after you've read one of my posts, I expect that you'll find yourself asking "And what does that have to do with the price of eggs in china?" Call it my contribution to the world.
    Posted by at 4 comments:
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)