Idol Chatter hardly needs to add to the barrage of quips, canned responses, and commentary about Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic outburst during his arrest early Saturday morning. Sadly, even in the 21st century, and even from stone sober blatherers, talking crazy about "the Jews" is about as surprising as a cyclist failing a urine test and, pathetically, less consequential: Mel will continue to make movies and Americans will continue to go see them. The folks who might have abstained from his flicks because of his "Jews start all the wars" tirade likely already abstain because of Mel's refusal to denounce his father's Holocaust-denial views, and because of "The Passion" itself.
Two questions, however fall clearly into Idol Chatter's orbit: how Mel's late-night chat affects the future of Christian filmmaking, and how to summarize Mel's career in the field, which is likely over. (His spokespeople are even sounding vague about his proposed series on the Holocaust, conceived as a sop to those who found "The Passion" disturbingly anti-Semitic.)
Much of the buzz "The Passion" created in Christian film circles, and the access to the wider cinema market it suddenly promised, will no doubt be harmed, if not quashed, by Mel's mumblings of Saturday night. None of the Christian filmmakers I've encountered have betrayed any of Mel's millennial mania, but if the scandal won't end Mel's career, skittish producers will be less willing to take risks with other, fledgling filmmakers who depict Jesus, lest they share the taint of anti-Semitism by association. This is a shame, since even those who disagreed with "The Passion" had to see that it promised, at least, more intelligent screen explorations of the Christian story and message.
Indeed, future films about Jesus (or old-fashioned Jesus figures) are the more sorely needed because of "The Passion." Mel's latest eruption betrayed just how lost he is amid the affinity many conservative Christians have developed toward Judaism and today's Jewish people, beyond the old Christian right's attachment to Israel as the custodian of the Holy Land. Theologically, some important evangelical voices see Jesus as one who came to the Jews as a Jew, bent on reforming his own religion and society; the world's salvation, some new thinking goes, came not in despite of his co-religionists' history, but completely on its terms, and on its wings. It's an exciting and interesting route to go down, and one Mel's ugly spiritual cataracts apparently prevented him from seeing.
Those of us who watch public television are fully aware of what a refreshing alternative it is to the mindless programming on most networks. Unfortunately, the federal government is making it harder for public broadcasting to continue doing its job. Most recently, PBS has expressed concern that it could face fines if it does not tone down/bleep/pixilate what the FCC considers inappropriate language, especially in an upcoming Ken Burns documentary about World War II. The fear of having to fork over to the FCC thousands of dollars that would otherwise be put toward worthwhile causes is forcing PBS and producers to self-edit, an act that will eventually compromise the quality of public television programming.
With all due respect to my fellow Idol Chatterer, Doug, this argument isn’t as simple as “PBS wants to cuss.” Those advocating the implementation of fines do not understand what the airing of these shows means for public education and awareness. Where else on television--where else anywhere--can you find an in-depth look at young men growing up in an impoverished Eastern Kentucky town; a non-biased examination of the AIDS pandemic; and a brutally honest portrayal of America-wide methamphetamine abuse?
These are serious topics, developed into shows for intelligent and inquisitive adults. Viewers are forewarned if a program contains mature content, and parents need to act accordingly if they do not want their children to watch. In fact, children should not be exposed to these programs at all. PBS stations carry daytime and evening programming. Children’s programming is aired during morning hours, while adult programming--news shows, documentaries, interviews--are aired at night.
We all have a right to choose what we listen to, read, and watch. The important aspect to focus on is that a choice clearly exists. The FCC is trying to take away that choice by forcing producers to create and viewers to watch watered-down versions of otherwise truthful and blunt portrayals.
PBS has always been a reliable source for airing the true essence of reality programming. In reality, people curse. And not because it seems like a cool thing to do or because they saw someone else do it. They curse because they have been in jail for years and are growing desperate. Or because they were caught in a cross-fire during battle and it was the first word to pop out of their mouths.
These are realities, and if PBS is being scared into not portraying these as they always have, then the FCC is doing a disservice to us all. If viewer dedication and respect could keep public television afloat, PBS would be around forever. Unfortunately the FCC, in a somewhat cowardly move, is punishing PBS by taking away what it needs most to survive. To me, this, not cursing, is something we should find offensive and vulgar.
After initial high hopes for "Hex," the BBC America's new budding-witch-goes-to-high-school series, my expectations have plummeted as the 10-episode pilot season comes to a close (the last episode airs next week). The series has all the makings of a supernatural hit: It's set in an eerie, gothic, British country mansion that serves as a boarding school for high school students; the central character, Cassie, discovers she's descended from a long line of witches dating back for thousands of years; her best friend Thelma dies in the first episode and comes back into Cassie's life as a ghost; and then there's the hottie Azaziel--the dark fallen angel who's in love with Cassie.
Yet with all the potential of its lore, characters, and setting, the show is very, very low on the witchcraft and high on the sex obsession. The entire season has revolved around Cassie's sex life (and Thelma's lack of one now that she's a ghost): fluctuating between who Cassie will be shagging next and the dire consequences of shagging a fallen angel even though he's really hot (apparently even having sex with angels requires condoms).
The last several episodes, however, have shifted the series from tolerable to absurd. After Azaziel finally gets his heart's desire and 200 Nephilim (scary gargoyle-looking demons, not to be confused with the very human-looking Nephilim from ABC Family's television movie "Fallen," which aired earlier this week), a new character, Ella Dee, shows up to single-handedly cut down each and every Nephilim one by one. Ella even has a fighting stick that looks remarkably like a stake, and she also arrives with her very own ancient-looking chest of various weapons that she can use against the scary demon creatures. Sound familiar (ahem, Buffy)? Oh, and I shouldn't forget the matching attitude and sarcastic wit.
Don't the creators know that television viewers have been there, done that? That we can see how they are copying another famous slayer-girl character? Apparently not. I'll give "Hex" until its season finale to make a final decision, but I'm guessing my days watching "Hex" will be limited to Season One.
A little indie movie called "The Lather Effect" is making the rounds in art houses and is screening at the L.A. Independent Film Festival. It's a small movie in the true spirit of independent film. Its director (Sarah Kelly) has been a production assistant and doesn't have too many recognizeable credits. The actors have mostly artistic and television credits.
The drama behind the drama is that this could be a really great human-interest story about how some talented-but-unfamous people made meaningful movie that someday could become this generation's "The Big Chill," "The Breakfast Club," or "St. Elmo's Fire." It is made up of this decade's "Thirtysomethings" whose gathering include both partying and reflection. But the movie may well not make it into nationwide release.
Though I can't vouch for this movie in particular--it's possible that it's just no good--it strikes me that these days, the better a movie is, the less of a chance it may have to make it into wide release. We're a more diverse nation than we used to be, and that is good. But it also means that a film generally needs to paint its story in broad strokes to catch the widest possible audience and pay for itself. What passes for excellent writing, depth of relationships, and cultural comment may "work" for too small a segment to be profitable.
Or, who knows, years from now we may talk about "The Lather Effect" as this generation's "Brat Pack," actors we never knew of until, well, we knew them.
Every now and then, amidst the summer blockbusters and unrealistically romantic comedies, a small film comes along that promises to provide a respite from the wild explosions and happy endings of all films typically Hollywood. This summer's foray into the alternative, "Little Miss Sunshine," is a shining beacon of intelligence, layered performances, and great writing. Sliding its way into the family road trip sub-genre by way of VW Bus, "Sunshine" could, and should, become the sleeper hit of the summer.
The Hoover family is beyond dysfunctional: Dwayne (Paul Dano) is a teenage follower of Nietzsche and doesn't speak; Sheryl (Toni Collette) is never home; Richard (Greg Kinnear) is fixated on developing his nine-step program for success, Grandpa (Alan Arkin) is preoccupied with the prospect of his own death; and seven-year-old, beauty pageant-obsessed Olive (Abigail Breslin) is lost in the shuffle.
Adding some spice to the Hoover household is the arrival of Sheryl's brother, Frank (Steve Carell), who, after a failed relationship and subsequent suicide attempt, is left in his sister's care. That same day, Olive receives the biggest news of her young life; she gets to compete in the Little Miss Sunshine pageant in Redondo Beach, California. Intent on not disappointing the youngest Hoover, the entire clan boards a hilariously decrepit VW Bus and heads for California--with what's left of their sanity in tow.
Tight quarters can do a lot for forced interaction. Cramming six people in a VW Bus for two days is no exception. During the course of events, each family member succumbs to an evaluation of his or her own self-worth--and some are hit harder than others. To those hit hard, it's a horrific blow. Circumstances happen to make these revelations hilarious, but somehow, at the same time, both heartbreaking and eye-opening.
Directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris do a fine job; comedy replaces tragedy at all the right moments--important for maintaining that oh-so-delicate balance that makes black comedy work. In directing your first feature film, it helps to have the kind of stellar cast assembled for "Sunshine." Most notable amongst them is Steve Carell, whose serious turn proves yet again that comedians can take on dramatic roles--and quite successfully at that.
I encourage all those seeking refuge from the current bevy of over-budgeted Hollywood movies to check out "Little Miss Sunshine." If anything, it's sure to make you feel better about your own family.
Could 30 days walking in someone else's shoes change what you believe? That's the premise of what is perhaps the one truly intelligent reality TV series on the tube this summer--Morgan Spurlock's ("Supersize me") FX series "30 Days." Premiering for its second season last night, "30 Days" tackles cultural hot topics by bringing together two people on polar opposite sides of an issue to live together for, that's right, 30 days, in the hopes of teaching them a lesson about tolerance and understanding.
The cultural hot potato of illegal immigration was the focus of last night's episode, in which a border patrol volunteer, Frank Jorge--who just happens to be a legal immigrant from Cuba-- moves into a one-bedroom apartment with an illegal immigrant family of six in east Los Angeles. He has to give up all of his I.D., work the same back-breaking jobs that they do, and make the same measly amount of money. Even as Frank eats, sleeps, and goes to church with the Gonzalez family, he remains resolute in his belief that it is better for America if millions of immigrants are returned to their homeland instead of taxing our society's resources. The Gonzalez's oldest daughter, Armida cannot understand this logic, because she is equally as passionate about her family's desire to achieve the American Dream.
Unlike much of reality TV, there is not a huge payoff or special twist at the end of each episode. In the case of Frank and the Gonzalez family, while Frank becomes emotionally attached to the family, neither side really changes their beliefs. Frank does decide to give up working with the Minutemen patrolling the border, but he still does not approve of the Gonzalez family's "undocumented" lifestyle.
But this is why "30 days" is as frustrating as it is fascinating--there are always more unanswered questions than answered ones at the end of each episode. But perhaps most importantly, the series--which promises to tackle topics such as abortion, atheism, New Age healing, and outsourcing in future episodes--embraces the notion that perhaps we can incite change in our culture one person at a time. It just may take a little longer than 30 days to see the results.
So, if you could have a life-changing experience by walking in someone else' shoes for 30 days, whose shoes would you choose?
What do Jerry Falwell and the Sci-Fi Channel have in common? Okay, you can enter your comments below, but the real answer is that they both figure to lose if the U.S. Senate passes a so-called cable TV reform bill that would allow cable customers to pay for their television by the channel, instead of having to buy packages of hundreds of channels at once. If the bill becomes law, according to an editorial by Rev. Falwell, it will likely force much Christian televangelism off the air. That, says the founder of the Moral Majority, would be a very, very bad thing.
Why would a Congress stuffed with born-again Baptists do such a thing? The GOP majority is convinced that cable is too expensive, and too crowded with nasty niche programming that corrupts our children's minds. They hope that by mandating a per-channel payment system, more kids will see better, more wholesome fare.
But like many government mandates, this one may backfire. As one member of Congress who opposes per-channel billing explains, "Most consumers would pay more for less, as the sweeping rules would decimate small and niche programmers while hiking prices." Why? because cable channels that now get a share of HBO's subscription audience would be cut out of the picture if that audience could buy HBO alone.
Religious stations would be in the same boat as these other low-drawing stations. "Faith-based and family-oriented broadcasting does not draw the same level of advertising," says the Faith and Family Broadcasting Coalition's website. If forced to compete in a per-channel world, religious broadcasters would have to charge customers much more than they pay now just to survive. That would cause some customers to drop the Rev. Falwell and his bretheren; others, of course, would simply have less money to send to the ministries' 800 number.
At first, it sounded like an unfair bureaucratic issue. Paula Kerger, the new President and CEO of PBS, has been speaking publicly about her fear that PBS may face fines for violating the "fine print" of FCC laws in its upcoming presentation of Ken Burns' World War II documentary. At first glance, it would seem unfair for the FCC to dictate how the story is told, let alone issue fines of over a half a million dollars per incident.
But it turns out that the issue is not about politics or historical bias: it's about language. Basically, PBS wants to cuss. As Kerger said, "In order to tell some stories, we may need to use language that the FCC may not think is so appropriate."
The issue is coming months after a PBS affiliate was fined $15,000 for using two common cusswords in its "The Blues" series. In June, President Bush signed off on the significant increase of the maximum fine.
I think it's about time for more significant restriction of television cussing. One of the cusswords in "The Blues" was about the most gross and vile of all cusswords. The other is so common it is often shouted loudly at sports events. Parents are well-known for correcting their kids when they cuss--especially at young ages--but rarely consider how often their kids hear cussing in the neighborhood, at school, in music, in movies and on live television.
There once was a time when television--especially during prime viewing periods--was a safe respite from the neighborhood's foul language for a young person to be entertained and (especially on PBS) even educated. They deserve it back. To think that history can't be re-told without cussing is like saying Sex Ed. can't be told without pornography.
And if adults require the R-rated language version, let them make the donation receive the unedited DVD in the mail!
When the fragrance company Coty asked Russell Simmons, the hip hop zillionaire and yoga junkie, to create an alluring perfume for women, God was the furthest thing from their minds. This week's New York magazine reports that Coty expected something sultry and sexy, along the lines of Simmons' ex-wife Kimora Lee's fragrances. Imagine their surprise when Simmons made a potion of "spiritual" oils and called it Atman, Sanskrit for "divine self" or "God."
Coty freaked. "We had quite a standoff," Simmons told New York. "They told me God doesn’t sell, God isn’t sexy. I think God is sexy." But Coty relented when they saw that testers actually liked the stuff. A Coty exec told New York: "God wasn’t something that we thought was mainstream, but Russell was so passionate about it... and now it makes perfect sense."
It seems like the Coty execs just don't get what's happening with the mainstreaming of Eastern-tinged spirituality. Every bottle of perfume sells more than a scent--or we'd all just put on some nice-smelling baby powder and be done with it; it's selling a promise. And up till now that's been the promise of alluring pheromones, sophistication or naughtiness, class, and wealth. But now serenity, balance, and radiant inner beauty are what's hot--and Russell is a genius to put those in a fancy bottle and sell it at Macy's.
You can get your own God-in-a-bottle in September; Simmons will donate his proceeds to charity.
In the age of user-generated videos distributed to your computer via youtube.com, stupidvideos.com, and ifilm.com, employers might want to consider adding "forgiveness" to their list of hiring pre-requisites. Melanie Martinez is the perfect example of what the future will look like if they don’t.
Martinez, the former host of the PBS Sprouts network's "Good Night" program, was let go after she let executives know about one of two shorts she starred in entitled "Technical Virgin." The film is 30 seconds long and features Martinez comically explaining the things that a girl can do to technically remain a virgin. (She remains fully clothed throughout--the video is more sophomoric than risque, and actually kind of funny.)
By no means am I condoning the message conveyed in the film, but I am a firm believer in forgiveness. Martinez made the film seven years before PBS even knew she existed. I assume that her motive for making it was pure entertainment of the Saturday Night Live variety. This 30-second clip shouldn't be used to judge the content of her character.
It would be one thing if she was moonlighting as a pamphlet distributor on the streets of New York encouraging teenage girls to fornicate, but she isn’t. It takes seven years for debts to be cleared on credit reports, so why not let seven be the magic number of years for forgiveness? Why not forgive her for her trespasses?
We live in the age of user-generated content that can be created as easily as we receive it. We also live in a country where we are supposed to be protected by the first amendment's promise of freedom of speech. Are you telling me that the millions of people putting content on the web (some less appropriate than others) can one day expect to get a pink slip from their job because of a "for entertainment purposes only" video. I am not sure whether to abide or revolt. It's comparable to the ridiculousness of using someone's MySpace page as a character reference for a job application.
Verily, verily I say unto you, this revolution will be televised!
posted by Nicole Symmonds @ 12:02 PM | Permalink |
Most fans of "The Colbert Report" know by now that its hilariously truthy host Stephen Colbert moonlights as a good Catholic family man. Last night his Catholic leanings were put to the test by his guest, William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, who made quite an impression.
My curiosity was piqued when Colbert announced the name and affiliation of last night's guest at the beginning of his show. I wanted to see how the Catholic Colbert would fare sparring with an arch Catholic conservative such as Donohue, known for his media savvy and controversial public statements. Though the Catholic League's mission is to further "Catholic civil rights" and fighting anti-Catholicism in America, somehow that often translates to a lot of efforts against gay-rights initiatives such as same-sex marriage. And last night, Donohue's rhetoric didn't disappoint, as he went on and on about how the one thing that unites conservative Catholics, evangelical Christians, and Orthodox Jews is the evil, secular left. His commentary was sure to offend just about any group that might be watching, aside from religious conservatives like himself (including liberal women and Jews, gays, and people who are not in support of Bush right now). I searched for the clip on YouTube but so far, no one has posted it (though you can see Donohue go on about the "Jews and Hollywood" if you wish).
The biggest question I was left with following the show: What exactly did Mr. Colbert think of this fellow Catholic? He was rather silent last night and not nearly as hard-hitting with his guest as one might expect. Was he simply overwhelmed by Donohue's sharply stated views or was he somehow agreeing with what Donohue stands for? I certainly hope not. Listening to Donohue reminded me of the perennial question I am always asking myself: Whether there's any place for someone like me in a Church with powerful men who offend me like Donohue does. Public figures like Colbert generally give me hope that indeed there is room. But after last night, a girl has to wonder.
In an article for The New York Times, Clive Thompson reports that video games--at least some of them--are turning their attention away from mangling bodies for pure sadistic pleasure and oggling impossibly endowed women for that other kind of pleasure. Called "serious games," these newfangled video games allow players to try their hands at solving the Middle East peace crisis--as either the Palestinian president or the Israeli prime minister--or fight the Janjaweed, in a game called "Darfur is Dying."
An Israeli-born developer for "Peacemaker" (which is about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict), Asi Burak, told Thompson that "people get very engaged [in the game]. They really try very hard to get a solution. Even after one hour or two hours, they'd come to me and say, you know, I know more about the conflict than when I've read newspapers for 10 years."
The United Nations gives away their own video game for free online called "Food Force," the subject of which is obvious from the title, and MTV is behind the popular "Darfur is Dying," also given away for free. Of the latter, Thompson reports that, "In the first month alone, 700,000 people played it. Of those, tens of thousands entered an 'action' area of the game--political action, that is--where they can send email messages to politicians and demand action on Darfur."
As a former video game addict myself (I had to give it up years ago so I could enjoy a normal life), I know how engaging games can be--drawing a player in for hours to solve a single task just to get to the next level. It's fascinating to imagine what hundreds of thousands, even millions, of young gamers might come up with if, all at once, they were engaged for hours on end, day after day, in solving the Middle East peace crisis. Maybe we'd actually get somewhere.
What Irish monks did for the ancient classical texts, a dedicated group of evangelical missionaries may be doing for the world's disappearing languages. Since 1939, the Global Recordings Network has been spreading the gospel to remote parts of Africa, Asia, the Pacific, and to migrant farm workers in California, people they call "tailenders" because they are the last to be reached by progress. The GRN missionaries believe nothing builds trust like the language of the hearth, so they distribute recordings of Bible stories and Christian teachings in their prospective converts' own tongues, building hand-cranked cassette players and phonographs to play in . As a happy side effect, GRN, the subject of a documentary showing on PBS's series "P.O.V." tonight, has been building what may be the largest archive of dying languages in the world.
Less happy, in the view of the filmmakers, is what evangelism does to the people it reaches. Even the missionaries say that Christianity makes locals more willing to compromise with corporations who come to despoil their lands, and their converts say they were drawn by Western prosperity--cars and town living--as much as Christianity. GRN's volunteers, after all, are concerned with the fate of souls, not rainforests. The filmmakers are so anxious to signal their disapproval that they begin to burden the film with simplistic critiques, portraying GSN's efforts---indeed, American Protestantism itself--as "a syncretism of Christianity and technology." Eventually their overt hostility bogs down a film whose images alone do more to expose the wariness, awe, and desire of the tailenders than any voice-over lecture.
"The Messengers," a new eight-part series on The Learning Channel featuring 10 of the nation’s up-and coming inspirational speakers, left me somewhat less than inspired. In the premiere episode, the contestants are left to live for 24 hours on L.A.’s skid row, after which they are given a few minutes to expound upon the night’s chosen topic in front of the voting, studio audience. This aspirational American Idol has its own panel of judges: Richard Greene, a communication coach dubbed "The Master of Charisma" by the Sunday Times (UK), and Robert V. Shuller, pastor of emergent ministries of the Crystal Cathedral Ministries. The winning “messenger” will be rewarded with a publishing contract and a television special on TLC.
The show attempts to establish a sense of gravitas with its opening montage of Buddhist monks praying, rabbis reading from the Torah, and yogis practicing their craft to the tune of Depeche Mode’s “Personal Jesus,” as interpreted by the late Johnny Cash. The contestants range from an ex-Raiderette cheerleader turned spiritual seeker to several Christian pastors.
We never really got to know the contestants before they were taken to skid row, and so watching them try to connect with the homeless felt prurient and almost exploitive, in a way. As one angry woman said when a contestant approached her, “Get your hands off me! We don’t have homes... you do! I’ve been on the streets since I was 11 year old.”
Back in the studio, we hear each person’s take on that night’s topic of “charity.” Both the pastors, Robert Rutherford and Darryl Van Leer, do very well, and Angelica Osborne, the quirky apartment manager from Alabama, is clearly a front-runner. Platitudes were abundant (“Charity is not what I can do for this homeless man, but what he can do for me.”), but there were also some lovely turns of phrases and some truly engaging deliveries. I was disappointed, however, that we didn’t get to see the full speeches of at least three contestants, including Iman Mafi, a Muslim youth lecturer, and Zahava Zaidoff, a former Orthodox Jew, and that their deliveries were so short.
I wholeheartedly agree with panelist Greene that rhetoric is quickly becoming a lost art, although I might not go as far as to say that it’s “important for the soul of our country.” Then again, I’m not “The Master of Charisma.” But does inspirational rhetoric make good television? So attuned are we to the vicious “vote-them-off-the-island” mentality of reality television, that it somehow feels wrong when a reality show pits people against each other in a spoken-word battle of feel-good messages.
Perhaps the producers counted on Floyd Nolan, student of spiritual development, to shake things up. Floyd strutted onto the stage and sat down, saying: “I don’t have a lot of time and that’s mostly because I have to pee.” To which Richard Greene responded, “You call that a speech?!” and waved his hand dismissively (or at least the film was edited to appear that way). Unfortunately, Floyd was voted off and no other “character” has yet emerged. While the format is odd, the show is intriguing in what it is trying to accomplish.
You may not have heard of him yet, but for the past year or so, filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici has hosted a television show in Canada--where he is huge--as "The Naked Archeologist," in which he is neither naked (thankfully) nor an archeologist (interestingly). The show's wanton title comes from its premise--to "strip down" Biblical archeology for the layperson, or as the auteur himself states on the VisionTV Documentaries website, "to demystify the Bible in general, and archaeology in particular, to brush away the cobwebs and burst academic bubbles."
But Canada isn't enough for this veteran of 30 documentaries; in his latest opus, Jacobovici takes on the biblical account of the Israelites' Exodus from Egypt. In its beginning moments, the film, The Exodus Decoded, taps into our cultural memory, evoking the iconic--if fictional--image of the Ark of the Covenant, as found by Indiana Jones. The Ark is boxed and rolled away by a nameless worker, vanishing into a government warehouse of similarly boxed items. The question is, what happens to the inquiry after that? The film goes a step further, analyzing the archeological and historical evidence surrounding the biblical Exodus. As executive producer James Cameron--yes, that James Cameron--explains in the introductory narration that the film is on "a mission to answer the question: is the Exodus fact, or fiction?"
Of course, the business of attempting to prove a historical basis for biblical stories may necessitate challenging the status of the events these stories portray, events that religious people of multiple faiths believe are miracles. For instance, the film posits that the Ten Plagues, regarded by many as the miraculous centerpiece of the pre-Exodus narratives, did indeed happen, but that they were the result of a geological event, the Santorini volcanic eruption. The plague of the rivers turning to blood was a natural gas leak causing the water to be red-tinted; the pollution of the water caused all the fish to die and the frogs to hop out to safety, because they were the only ones who could; that led to pestilence, etc.
Those who are unwilling to find natural causes for biblical miracles will undoubtedly rail against the premise of the film; others might be more willing to say that a historical explanation is not inconsistent with miraculous status. Perhaps, in the more expansive view, a natural event--with the proper amazingly appropriate timing--is what creates a miracle.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 5:58 PM | Permalink |
ABC Family's original movie, "Fallen" which aired last night (Sunday) and promised all sorts of exciting enchantments--prophecies, redemption, destinies revealed, and the lore of fallen angels--fell far short of my hopes for movie magic. In fact, rather than a movie, "Fallen"-- starring Paul Wesley as Aaron Corbett, a boy who wakes up on his 18th birthday to discover that he is half-angel, half-human, called a Nephilim--feels more like a series pilot than a movie that brings closure to its storyline.
The story begins with myth, narrated with images and a voiceover by Aaron who explains to viewers:
When God created man, jealous Lucier mounted a great rebellion in heaven. His army of angels was defeated and forever banished from Paradise. These angels, The Fallen, abandoned Lucifer, choosing to live on Earth among the pleasures of humans. They took more wives and fathered abominations--Children called Nephilim, with the power of angels, but the souls of men. Angry, the Creator flooded the Earth, killing the Nephilim and driving The Fallen into hiding. He sent The Powers, fierce warrior angels to hunt those that survived the flood. But there was hope for The Fallen in a prophecy. A Nephilim would be born who would redeem them and return them to Paradise. So the Fallen watched...and waited....
Of course, Aaron turns out to be the Nephilim prophesized as the redeemer. A large part of the plot involves Aaron discovering this unwanted destiny that will take him away from the family that loves him and put him in the treacherous path of The Powers who want to destroy him. Without the promise of deeper storyline development, however, "Fallen" feels thin on plot and unfortunately comic at moments, since a lot of the dialogue is conducted between Aaron and his dog Gabriel (yes Gabriel, like the angel). The dog-speak is finessed by the fact that Aaron, as the redeemer-Nephilim, can understand all languages including those of the animals, though it was a campy choice for a movie that takes itself very seriously.
Apparently it's not a coincidence that I felt I was watching a pilot episode rather than a fully developed film, since ABC Family plans to air a six-hour sequel mini-series next summer. So viewers have not seen the last of "Fallen," though why ABC would decide to air such an open-ended, "to be continued" story a full year before revealing more is a mystery to me.
And I can't help wondering: What came first, the BBC's "Hex" or ABC's "Fallen"? I only ask because "Hex's" story arc revolves entirely around the Nephilim as well. I'm not sure television has room for two Nephilim-centered stories. One seems enough to me.
In the last few days, I have found more articles debating what in the world has happened to director M. Night Shymalan's career than I have found positive reviews about his latest movie, "Lady in the Water." Not exactly good news if you are Shyamalan. And while I tried to keep an open mind, "Lady In The Water" is, in fact, yet another huge disappointment from someone who has created some truly iconic movie moments (and no, I am not referring to his last box-office bomb, "The Village").
"Lady In The Water" is not a creepy thriller like the TV ads want you to think, and it is not quite a fantasy, like Shyamalan passionately insists it is in every interview he does about the movie. "Lady in the Water" is the tale of Story, a mythical creature who lives underneath the swimming pool of a suburban apartment complex, and is an odd mix of fairytale, drama, and not so-subtle commentary on everyone who has panned Shyamalan's work in the past. Story is discovered by the unhappy and lonely apartment manager, Cleveland, and with his help, she fulfills her purpose by connecting with a struggling writer, way too conveniently played by Shymalan himself, who needs inspiration so he can finally write the story that will change our culture.
Once she has completed her mission, Story finds it difficult to return home due to a dangerous creature lurking in the nearby woods. With the help of a snarky movie critic, Cleveland rallies others in the apartment complex to help Story return to her home and live happily ever after.
And while many critics are ranting and raving about Shyamalan's ego overtaking his talent--really, was there no room left in the budget to cast another actor, any actor, for Shyamalan's part in the movie?--I have to say one thing in defense of "Lady in the Water" and Shyamalan himself. As I watched this movie, I had no doubt that Shyamalan truly loves telling stories and sincerely believes in the spiritual power of telling stories to shape our culture. In fact, one of the many problems with "Lady In the Water" is that he beats us over the head with this sentiment at every turn.
In a recent interview where he was reflecting on the power of writers to shape events, Shyamalan said, "It's a beautiful thing and an empowering thing to be able to hear, if you could, the beauty of the spiral of things that happen. If God could tell you when you die, 'This is what you did,' it would be so cool." Nice sentiment. So I'll just keep the faith that his next movie might yet find Shyamalan back in top storytelling style.
(If you want to read two other interesting opinions about Shyamalan's latest, go here and here. And if you want to watch a wonderful but underrated Shyamalan film from his early days as an unknown director, go rent the little-seen "Wide Awake.")
The Mouse House is promising to become more family friendly than ever with plans to release 10 live-action and animated films per year under the Disney name--none of which will be rated "R." According to The Hollywood Reporter, Disney Studios has made a major staff change, with Oren Aviv--who had previously been on the marketing side--taking over as president of production for Disney. His predecessor, who was officially given the boot Tuesday, had brought in edgier directors and producers, such as Wes Craven and the Coen brothers ("Fargo"), who developed films that were not so family-oriented.
So what's really behind this big announcement? Is it another example of Hollywood listening to the audience that sent "The Passion of the Christ" soaring to unexpected box office heights? Perhaps a little bit. Has that Disney boycott that some conservative religious groups started years ago finally paid off? Not likely.
Christian organizations like the Dove Foundation have been collecting statistics for a while now proving that R-rated movies don't make as much as PG or G movies. Disney has simply learned that lesson the hard way. Much of its high-budget adult-themed fare has done dismally in recent years at the box office (anyone remember "Hidalgo," or "Pearl Harbor," for that matter?), while "Chronicles of Narnia," "National Treasure," and all of the animated films it has done in conjunction with Pixar have done extremely well. Like any smart business, Disney is simply committing to what has been most profitable. And keep in mind that nothing is preventing Disney from producing as many R-rated movies as it wants under its many other subsidiaries that do not carry the Disney logo.
So while some may wish to believe this is a huge step in closing the gap and the cultural disconnect between Hollywood and the religious community, I'm not convinced Hollywood is truly tuned in to what families or church goers want at the cineplex--yet.
One of this summer's great pleasures has been watching the progress of Underoath, the Christian "screamo" band whose third album, "Define the Great Line," debuted at #2 on Billboard's 200 chart. That feat earned them a spot on the main stage of the Van's Warped tour, the 12-year-old traveling festival dedicated to the rock genre known as emo (think heavy-metal with a suggestion of melody).
Not that it has been all roses for Underoath. "Bands that haven't met us before are kind of sometimes skeptical," Underoath vocalist Spencer Chamberlain told a fan magazine recently. "Like, 'Oh man, these kids are not going to be any fun.' They judge us for something that Americanized Christianity has turned into which is everything that we kind of stand against."
Chamberlain would be referring to people like "Fat Mike" Burkett, of tourmates NOFX. "I like to point out to the crowd when we're on stage that Underoath doesn't believe that dinosaurs existed," Burkett related in an interview.
Rank-and-file headbangers, however, show signs of accepting Underoath, dinosaurs or no. During the Warped stop in Los Angels, the L.A. Times' reviewer, after making pro-forma cracks about Chamberlain's "Christ-like locks" and Underoath's "youth-group-revival feel," praised the group's "lush keys and daunting complexity," noting that the group's performance of their song "'I'm Drowning in My Sleep' isn't exactly 'Kum Ba Yah' by the campfire." High praise indeed.
The Christian power-house publisher Zondervan, together with Media Group, has plans to release a star-studded audio-version of the New Testament with Samuel L. Jackson playing the voice of God, and Forest Whitaker as Moses--to name just a few Hollywood luminaries showing up on their voice-roster. Also included are: Angela Bassett, Blair Underwood, and Oscar-winning actors Denzel Washington and Cuba Gooding, Jr.
In a recent press release, Zondervan explained the motivations behind such a grand endeavor:
"Inspired By Media Group, producers of the project, selected the TNIV (Today's New International Version of the New Testament by Zondervan) version based on its superior combination of accuracy and readability. The goal of utilizing the TNIV is to increase the audio Bible's reach to the 18-to-34 demographic while simultaneously creating a product that will appeal to the mature consumer."
The All-Star Bible is due to release some time during this October.
New York City's public radio station, WNYC, has a wonderful segment today on a hair salon in Dyker Heights, Brooklyn, that doubles as a Catholic shrine, crammed with ornate renderings of the Virgin Mary, Jesus, and the archangels, including a statue of the Infant of Prague that has 12 outfits that the owner changes each month. Says one customer, "It makes you feel safe in a way. I feel like I'm in church sometimes, but it's a good feeling."
Why was Jennifer Aniston's production partner, Kristin Hahn, visiting Ken Wilber, the founder of the Integral Institute, author, and Beliefnet columnist well known among people interested in integral spirituality and body-mind-spirit connection? Talking movies, according to Ken's blog. Specifically, talking about bringing Ken's "Grace and Grit" to the big screen, with Aniston in the lead role.
"Grace and Grit" is Ken's book about his wife Treya's battle with breast cancer, her transformative spiritual journey, and her eventual death. Amy Cunningham, who writes Beliefnet's Chattering Mind blog, took a moment out of her well-deserved vacation to email me her thoughts on "Grace and Grit":
What's so moving about the book is that it lays out how a couple wildly in love grows and heals in challenging circumstances, using conventional and holistic healing techniques, and how in the end, the wife dies a transcendent, inspiring, beautiful death. He promises to find her again one day. As a love story, it's unbelievably sad. They meet, they can't keep their hands off each other, they marry, and three weeks later she gets diagnosed with breast cancer. No reader can put this book down.
Aniston would play Treya, a difficult role that obviously requires her to show the physical toll of the illness as the movie progresses. According to Ken's blog, "The project is in an early stage at this time as drafts of the screenplay are currently being written. But, one thing is certain; there is a mutual desire of all involved parties to find a way to tell this remarkable story."
I am not an avid watcher of "South Park" though I do catch an episode now and then if it airs leading up to The Daily Show. But I admit I was curious about the now-infamous Scientology-Tom Cruise episode, "Trapped in the Closet," which aired in November 2005 and caused all sorts of hype in the media, sparked threats of lawsuits from Cruise, and led the man who played Chef (Isaac Hayes)
Idol Chatter hardly needs to add to the barrage of quips, canned responses, and commentary about Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic outburst during his arrest early Saturday morning. Sadly, even in the 21st century, and even from stone sober blatherers, talking crazy about "the Jews" is about as surprising as a cyclist failing a urine test and, pathetically, less consequential: Mel will continue to make movies and Americans will continue to go see them. The folks who might have abstained from his flicks because of his "Jews start all the wars" tirade likely already abstain because of Mel's refusal to denounce his father's Holocaust-denial views, and because of "The Passion" itself.
Add to Del.icio.us 
Digg This 
Fave on Technorati
After initial high hopes for "
Every now and then, amidst the summer blockbusters and unrealistically romantic comedies, a small film comes along that promises to provide a respite from the wild explosions and happy endings of all films typically Hollywood. This summer's foray into the alternative, "
What 
"
In the last few days, I have found more articles debating what in the world has happened to director M. Night Shymalan's career than I have found positive reviews about his latest movie, 
One of this summer's great pleasures has been watching the progress of 
I am not an avid watcher of "