Thought That Came Unbidden

Yet another vague and unspecified threat from the Office of Homeland Security coming just two weeks before the Democratic National Convention. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

Michael Moore’s film Fahrenheit 9/11 while not perfect does include an eye-opening analysis of the period immediately preceding the onset of the current war in Iraq. Through a montage of news footage, Moore very rightly points out that the Office of Homeland Security issued numerous warnings about vague threats in the run up to the invasion of Baghdad. The purpose? Get us afraid because people who are afraid are more pliable. Pliable people are slow to object when you infringe on their rights. Pliable people are slow to object when you go to war so your friends can make a lot of money stealing oil from a dirt poor third-world country that has been run for 20 years by a dictator you helped come to power in the first place.

Just living in this country is starting to make me feel dirty in a not very good way.

No one can ever accuse Michael Moore of being impartial. Then again, September 11, 2001 is not a date about which it is possible to be impartial. Even with all the controversy surrounding this film, I believe that Fahrenheit 9/11 should be required viewing for anyone of eligible voting age in the United States if only so they can see how George W. Bush sat there for 12 minutes doing nothing but look blank. Whether or not those twelve minutes have made a difference in the long run in the chronology of September 11th is something that can, and will, be endlessly debated. Moore’s focus, though, isn’t really on September 11th but what the attacks have been used to justify: a obvious war for oil profits in Iraq.
[Read more…] about Fahrenheit 9/11

I admit up front that my knowledge of the Spiderman universe surpasses stickler and borders on fangirl which is why I was wary of Hollywood’s attempt to bring a character as complicated as the web slinger to the screen two years ago. I went, though, like legions of others and was pleasantly surprised that the corporate minds of the movie business hadn’t managed to screw up the mythology or to dumb down into non-existence the existential nature of Spidey’s inner conflicts. That’s why I walked into Spiderman 2 prepared for a juicy bit of smart entertainment. I was sadly disappointed.
[Read more…] about Spiderman 2

I read once, though no matter how hard I look I can not locate the source, that humans have an obligation to God to live the life He gave them as joyfully as possible. I find this concept to be intriguing on a number of different levels.

Merriam-Webster defines obligation, among other ways as “something one is bound to do : DUTY, RESPONSIBILITY.” The Oxford English Dictionary lists these:

5a: The fact or condition of being indebted to a person for a benefit or a service received, a debt of gratitude.
5b: A benefit or service for which gratitude is due, a kindness done or received.

That human beings have an obligation to God to live joyfully implies a couple of things:

1. that, based on the definition of “obligation,” life is a benefit worthy of gratitude, and
2. that some greater power exists at all.

Let’s assume that existence is a gift, that life is a kindness done, what, then, is someone who does not believe in God as defined in western religions (or even any sort of higher power) to do? Does that obligation still exist? And is it possible to have a formal contract or promise, as yet another definition of obligation states, made for you by another? If you look at how human society functions, promises are made for us without our consent practically from birth.

We’re born into a society that expects us to follow certain rules of law. Theoretically, by choosing to continue to live within society we’re obliged — we have an obligation — to obey those laws (I say theoretically as, based on current behavior, there doesn’t seem to be any penalty for not obeying those laws).

And that last bit, “as joyfully as possible” also opens an interesting door: what if one can not live joyfully? Let’s assume that God, or some higher power, exists. What sort of cruel diety would oblige his or her creations to live joyfully and then make some of those creations constitutionally incapable of fulfilling that obligation?
[Read more…] about Vie oblige

I freely admit that I’ve not read the Harry Potter books so I can’t say if Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is a faithful adaptation of the novel or not. What I can say, though, is that this film both exceeds and doesn’t live up to the previous two installments in the Harry Potter series.

Much has been made of Alfonso Cuarón taking over from Chris Columbus as director. Much has also been made not only of the edge of puberty on which both the characters and the actors who play them teeter but also of how that transition will be handled. It is definitely true that the actors are keeping pace with the characters’ aging: Daniel Radcliffe (Harry) may develop into a leading man if he can overcome his association with Potter; Rupert Grint (Ron) has the potential to be a long working character actor; Emma Watson (Hermione) is going to be a heartbreaker in about six years. Both the characters and the actors face a relatively dangerous time, a time when desires conflict with increasing adult responsibilities, when the choices made have the potential to affect the rest of one’s life. And while Cuarón has taken the necessary step away from the confection of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (2001) and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) he doesn’t fully capture that feeling of confusion that is being thirteen.
[Read more…] about Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban