February 23, 2017


Is the fĂȘted "La La Land" really so great? Yes, if you like sheer escapist  films and golden-era Hollywood films. Also, it's pretty much a quasi-musical. It doesn't try too hard, and is very tongue-in-cheek about what it purports to be, so it's an overall light and uplifting experience. Definitely the "feel-good" film of the year. However, there are some challenging conversations toward the end, and it will be imperative that you decide what YOU would do in Mia's (the ever-effervescent Emma Stone) and Sebastian's (Ryan "Hey Girl" Gosling) place. The writer-director is Damien Chazelle ("Whiplash").


Hollywood loves films about Hollywood and the whole process of filmmaking (remember "The Artist" and, more recently, "Birdman"? Both Best Picture winners in their respective Oscar years). But why do most people enjoy dreaming with the silver screen? Ah, this is one of the great draws of story and film. Just for a moment, just for a minute, we imagine and enter wonderful worlds and trip the light fantastic. As Berthold Auerbach said of music: "Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life." The music in question here is jazz (which I, for one, am wildly fond of). Sebastian is a classic jazz piano player who dreams of opening his own club. But classic jazz is dying. Mia dreams of being a successful actress, but she's in the company of thousands and thousands. What are her chances of standing out?

After having lived in L.A. for five years, I understood the drill: actors can't keep jobs because they have to keep going to auditions at odd hours. Actors are treated brutally and summarily dismissed with no explanation. (We screenwriters were told at UCLA that when our work is rejected, it's just our ideas, so get over it. Actors have their whole being picked over and rejected: looks, voice, walk, personality, etc.)


The soundtrack, which is critical to many plot points, helps lend an old-timey feel to the whole film--jazz, 40's romantic ballads, magical Fantasia-esque orchestra with a generous helping of chimes, oboes, plucked strings and flutes. The music and the visuals carefully play with various Hollywood decades and we float seamlessly in and out of them, even though this is firmly a present-day setting. Dancing weaves effortlessly in at opportune moments: tap, ballroom and little bit of honky tonk. The music and dancing are not overused. The camera is having lots of whimsical fun, too, sashaying and spinning about. An  element of nostalgia combined with unexpected story-turns is always lurking. LLL evokes the kind of celluloid daydreaming and stargazing people used to "live for" and "live off of." We are even transported to the Griffith Observatory in the Hollywood Hills--first in a film within the film, and then to the Observatory itself where Sebastian and Mia dance among the stars.

"La La Land" is a straightforward linear romance with no flashbacks or B stories--which is a bit of a relief in today's "Memento," toying-with-chronology-and-point-of-view" storytelling culture. LLL is a film about hope and wonder (the last film I saw about wonder was "Tree of Life." Wonder is a bit of a rarity as a film-subject, maybe it always was?) If you're like me, you'll smile frequently during this unusual film.


Sebastian and Mia meet in infamous L.A. traffic on a backed-up freeway on-ramp, and the movie starts off with a bang as people get out of their cars and begin dancing on them --synchronized and singing, of course--like so many commercials we've seen. Pure "fun" is the word that came to mind over and over. And charming. Definitely charming. Just as I was feeling like this was really a lovely throwback to a sweeter time (single girls living all together in an all-girl apartment! Girl roommates giggling over dates coming to pick them up!)--the filmmakers had to slip in a modern-day requisite, a fly in the ointment, a snake in the garden: hooking up and living together. Sigh. As though it were nothing. Sigh. Hooking up and co-habitation is really a blight on the whole enterprise with its terrible message of CONDITIONAL LOVE.


Will you agree with the ending? That it's a good ending, a "just" ending? At first I didn't totally agree, but then I realized it might have been a kind of "altruistic love" ending, almost an O. Henry "Gift of the Magi" type ending, but I mustn't say more than this, except that there's also a very clever alterna-ending.

I would love to discuss the ending more, but it would be a big spoiler. One thing I think we have to ask ourselves in general is this: When do we have to "give up" dreams? We only get one life. Best we make it real and good and beautiful as it is. How? By rolling it all up in a unified ball of faithful glory.

Best Picture at the Oscars? Only if it was a slow year for films, but it wasn't. We had "Hacksaw Ridge."


--This film is much better, more enjoyable than "The Artist."

--A lot of thought, planning and meticulosity went into this film, but the feel is so free-flowing--something that perhaps can only come about when discipline is employed. LLL is frothy, but you're forced to examine your own hopes and dreams and what you've done or not done about them.

--Tapdancing on the sunhorizon.

--An example of LLL's film-era mash-up: some of Sebastian's dialogue is of the "hard-boiled" variety.

--Lots of L.A. jokes, but not all insider jokes. Anyone can get them.

--Emma and Ryan have decent, complementary singing voices.

--Funny snatches of Mia's auditions.

--Watts Towers!

--A few great theme songs/melodies.

--Mia gets schooled on what jazz is all about.

--It seems Sebastian's music is emphasized and explored more than Mia's acting.

--The Griffith Observatory makes an appearance.

--Great build-up to their first kiss.

--Good lyrics, good movement, a good quasi-musical.

--The 1930's bungalow style apartment with the colored-and-black tiles in the bathroom.

--"L.A. worships everything and values nothing." However, I met plenty of film-historian types in L.A. within and without "the industry" who care deeply about Hollywood's past. Not L.A., mind you, Hollywood. L.A. is kind of ahistorical, continually erasing its past. So many transients! I heard it said that 1,000 people come to L.A. every day seeking fame and fortune and 1,000 leave daily. It's the "City of Broken Dreams." I remember once seeing a well-groomed woman walking down Hollywood Blvd., sobbing uncontrollably (and histrionically).

L.A. sometimes feeling like a non-existent place. The Pentecostal Movement started there among "people of every nation," led by the humble and prayerful William Seymour, and Los Angeles became known as another "Jerusalem." The buildings where it all transpired have been leveled. The downtown isn't really anything, but other scattered city-centers are where things happen: Century City, Culver City, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Venice, Malibu. The cardboard city of Skid Row is a tragic mini-metropolis of the homeless and crippled and cast off (hospitals were caught dumping John and Jane Doe patients, including the elderly in its streets when I lived in L.A. from 2000-2005). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skid_Row,_Los_Angeles

Incidentally, L.A. is known for its LACK of jazz and support of jazz. I heard Carmen Lundy (singer) and Regina Carter (jazz violin) at "The Jazz Bakery" in Culver City, and Carmen was bemoaning the fact!

--Ryan Gosling is better than Ryan Reynolds (both Canadians).

--Different people are getting different meanings out of the ending. :)

February 13, 2017


Denzel Washington's Oscar-nominated "Fences," is an adaptation from a Pulitzer-Prize-winning 1983 August Wilson play. Denzel both directs and acts in this quotidian, small town, seemingly small stuff character study. Set in 1950's Pittsburgh, Denzel's character, Troy, is a garbage man. He's a complicated mix of a gifted raconteur, a complaining curmudgeon, and a would-have-been baseball player. We learn about the sad circumstances of his upbringing midway through the film--bringing us further back to 1918. Troy is married to the lovely Rose (the splendid Viola Davis), his second wife.


I feel that a play/film of this nature, quality, sensibility couldn't be written today (Wilson was born in 1945). We have lost so much of the meaning of man/woman, husband/wife, the indissolubility of marriage--as well as the project of modernity and the American Dream. Although "Fences" is ostensibly about a subpar family life--due to Troy's bitterness and blaming everyone but himself, it is also hopeful--if we "take the crookeds with the straights," if we accept what life pitches at us and make the absolute best of it. However, is there a subtle apologia here for men not holding up their end of--not a bargain or a deal or a contract--but a relationship: namely, marriage? Or is this the playwright's forgiveness paean to his own father?

The period lingo, manners and mannerisms could all be researched for a story like this, but today's PC assumptions, agendas and dogmas would simply not allow for an unbiased, clear-eyed look-back into the inner sanctum of this hard-working, blue collar African-American Christian family. And even with all the good will in the world, I think the mentality and milieu of yesteryear would be almost incomprehensible to today's dramatist. Yes, I believe that that much has changed that much.

Change itself is an ever-present theme in "Fences." Troy will not believe that white attitudes toward blacks will ever change (even when faced with proof). Troy chooses to hold himself and everyone around him back, or rather "fence them in."


Although we can sympathize with Troy, at a certain point there are no excuses for his excuses. How he treats his wife and his two sons isn't right, but sadly typical and realistic, too. Women, wives and mothers are portrayed as the long-suffering, saintly creatures they are (or rather, were): the glue, the mortar holding everything together. I couldn't help thinking that in a few short years, that would all come crashing down and the Women's Movement would declare: Enough! (Of course, these dysfunctional male-female double standard behavioral patterns are not completely erased even today--where the woman is expected to and does hold the moral high ground while the man is his own arbiter of rectitude.)


In "Fences," like many other plays-cum-films, the screen adaptation has not changed the hyper-real dialogue much, and it downplays the visual--except for faces and verbal interaction. Instead, it showcases Denzel, the stage actor. The question simply is: Are you OK with plays turned into films pretty much as they are? The mini-speeches are long. The settings are few and almost entirely domestic. However, the camera angles do make it feel like more of a cinematic experience. In my humble opinion, good plays will make good film-plays--even if not given the full film treatment. Bad plays...well, you get the picture. "Fences" is a good play.

Plays--like television--are a talking medium: a series of monologues. rich, crafted dialogue and storytelling linked together by subtle action-shifts (often occurring offstage). When "Fences" begins, we are treated to Troy at the top of his game, chattering up a storm, with frequent references to the inequities "Negroes" routinely endure from "the white man." We feel there may be some confrontation, some terrible injustice around the corner. We feel a tension boiling. But nothing so easy is in the cards. Troy must confront himself. Troy must have the honesty and courage to confront himself. Will he ever?

"Fences" is definitely a father-son film, "How Not To Father," perhaps. How cycles repeat themselves. But right alongside this primordial relationship is the dynamic of husband-wife (the mother-son relationship is so overshadowed by the male-to-male dynamic of father-son that Rose is not "allowed" to exercise her feminine influence on either side of the equation, even though she tries).


And yet, Rose's impassioned and accurate "marriage diatribe" blows time-bound thinking and mores out of the water. She brilliantly, viscerally outlines the eternal, "perennial gift" (JP2) that marriage is and has always been. She skeletally describes its elevated dignity that will elevate all who fully participate in it. Not only does Rose comprehend--through experience and the practice of virtue--what the heart of matrimony is (love, duty, sacrifice, keeping one's word, modifying dreams and expectations, self-donation, honoring vows, cleaving to one person, giving one's best, meeting life's demands), she also understands what children need, what children are, and how our personal identities are formed: "We can't be other than what we are," meaning the raw material, our parentage, our childhoods, our families, our siblings, our formative experiences. But Rose also knew that these defining touchstones are not meant to fatalistically limit us. We can always reach for the more that's right in front of us.


--Lovely, transcendent character of "Gabriel," Troy's brain-damaged-from-war brother who lives in readiness for the next life, trumpet at the ready, fighting hell-hounds and communicating with St. Peter at the pearly gates.

--One of Troy's many excuses for his attitude and actions is a sad reduction of his marital/parental/family duties to money. He provides money and shelter, and that's all that should be required of him.

--The whole film is a negative Theology of the Body lesson.

--"Everything that boy does, he does for you. He needs to hear 'Good job, son. I'm proud of you.'"

--Marriage is becoming one. Pursuing hopes and dreams together (no matter how modest): not separately, not as individuals, living what is essentially a fantasy-double-life.

--Read more about the play (one in a series of 10): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fences_(play)

--Read about August Wilson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Wilson

February 7, 2017


The Oscar-nominated sci-fi film "Arrival" is a vacuous, insipid waste of time, in my humble opinion. I can't stand alien movies, but everyone assured me this wasn't an alien movie, or not your typical alien movie. (It is.) "E.T." and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" are so much better than "Arrival," even though they may not totally stand the test of time. Speaking of time, the theme of "Arrival" is majorly about time. But in a really bad, stupid, fictional way that doesn't translate into anything in science, physics or reality that might be even slightly helpful and useful to us human beings. "Inception" is a much better exercise of the moral imagination on the subject of time and a better use of your time.


I forced myself to watch this film on the recommendation of a theology-savvy, pop-culture-maven priest friend who absolutely loves "Arrival" and is (incredibly) mining its "depths" and finding gold there. I wonder if he has heard of "fool's gold." I began watching this slow-moving, boring movie with a grating, irritating, looping "other worldly" soundtrack--waiting for it to get good. But that never happened. Amy Adams does her earnest best to play a language expert who is called on by the U.S. government/military to decipher the aliens' language. Jeremy Renner might as well not have had a part at all (except for the weak, confusing ending). He is less ornamental than space debris. I like both of these actors very much and felt sad and embarrassed for them. "Arrival" was beneath their skill sets. This film could have used unknowns.

My movie reviewing skills were also squandered on this film, and I took fewer notes on this film than any film in recent memory because there was nothing to write about. The story unimaginatively commences like a sequence from a low-budget TV show: We find out what's happening through various news broadcasts: scenes of hysteria, panic and states of emergency. Twelve huge pods suddenly appear on earth, hovering in disparate locations around the world (Montana, USA--where we spend most of our time, Russia, Pakistan, China, Sudan, Greenland). No one knows what these vessels are, what they mean, why these locations were chosen.


The military of each country is, of course, assessing the threat level, veering toward extreme caution, suspicion, taking no chances and assuming hostility. Communications with the beings in the pod are difficult because they use a very unusual form of language (both sounds and script). Do they come in peace? Do they come with a message? Are they offering technology? Do they know something we don't know? How much time are they giving us before they attack? Are we angering them by our miscommunication? Are we misunderstanding them completely? Oh, and the "aliens" are laughable and ridiculous looking. Sorry.

There is a thin, thin A story and no B or C story, except for continuous flashbacks involving Amy Adam's character's daughter, whom she lost to cancer. The love story is Disney princess overly romanticized. The grandiose idea/choice of war vs. peace is simplistically trotted out and simplistically dealt with. The U.S. military are stereotypically impatient, trigger-happy and ready to declare war, putting a time lock on the language-scientists to accurately decipher the aliens' intentions. But nothing feels urgent because the story, acting, tropes and visuals are so trite and tired and unengaging--and we've seen it all before on the small screen. There is nothing fresh and new here. There is abundant use of voiceover (a big no-no at my film school, UCLA), but it comes across (in Amy Adams' ethereal voice) as desperately trying to be profound and spiritual and contemplative and say something IMPORTANT. It fulfilled none of these objectives for me. I did not feel one iota reflective watching this film--many of the sentiments expressed fell on my ears like a sappy greeting card: "Don't take anything for granted." "Every day is a gift." "I embrace the journey now, every minute of it" [but it's a non-linear journey, folks, see the rest of this review]. And the ending--which plays with time--kinda sorta angered me, not because it was some impossible twist or disjointed from the rest of the film, but because it trashes reality while wanting us to believe this trashing is an actual possibility that can help us in some way examine on our own experience.


So here's what got me totally irked. What was presented, in the end, was a totally non-Judaeo-Christian worldview. Which is fine, because there are other worldviews out there! However, I guess what really irks me is not just a poorly-made film with a strong non-Judaeo-Christian worldview, but that Jews and Christians do not even realize how "alien" films like these are to their worldview. They embrace these films as though they contain some amazing meta-wisdom for us when they do not. (Not that we can't learn some truth, beauty and goodness contained in other worldviews, but overall? Nope.)

In "Arrival," Amy Adams' character (who has "secret knowledge" because she has "been here before," and "lived this already") clearly states: "I don't know if I believe in beginnings and endings anymore." This is a classic pagan* worldview: matter is eternal, everything just repeats itself over and over again in a never-ending cyclical pattern. Reincarnation. Time and history are non-linear. This is not the Judaeo-Christian understanding at all, and also not what cosmology and the Big Bang Theory tell us. Time, history, salvation history and each of our lives are linear. There is a beginning and an end to the story of Creation, of the world, and each of our precious life-stories. Jesus Christ is the Alpha and the Omega.
*pagan--not a derogatory term--means literally "from the countryside," those who do not follow one of the Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity, Islam


--Some who love this film are telling me that the Amy Adams character is able to "see as God sees." I presume they mean that she has been given the "grace" to be able look backwards over her life, or lead her life in reverse, or know in advance why certain things happen or something like that. Um, no one gets that "grace." Is that even a grace? Isn't that what people go to fortune tellers for and why it's forbidden? No one sees life exactly as God sees it or understands the totality of the tapestry, and if we did, there would be no purpose for faith or hope. I would think this would be more of a curse, especially because we have free will and this "time travel" would allow us to alter the future, etc., etc. There's a reason there are no crystal balls.

Also, folks are saying "Arrival" is so pro-life. I have no idea what they're talking about. "The Girl on the Train" is pro-life. Yes--I thought that film was going to be as bludgeoningly bad as "Gone Girl," but it's actually not bad. (My "micro-review" coming soon.)

FURTHERMORE: God is not even intimated. There are just aliens--who, although butt-ugly--are more peaceful and better at time-twisting or understanding the "true nature of time" than we are or something like that because they're "highly evolved" beings that don't have to care what they look like. Rubbish. I guess I'm just fed up with God being left out. But I shouldn't let myself be fed up (even though "The Young Pope" spoiled me with the amazing overt God-talk and God as a character), because, as Charles Williams once said: "Shakespeare expressed supernatural values in natural forms," as does any good art.

If you struggle with issues of "free will" and "is man truly free"? Read David Foster Wallace's defense of free will vis-a-vis determinism and fatalism: https://cup.columbia.edu/book/fate-time-and-language/9780231151573

--I'm just re-reading my sparse notes from the film. I spy "hokey," "cheesy," "ham-handed," and "schmaltzy" scribbled in the margins.

--One good Theology of the Body aspect: Adams' character clearly represents the feminine principle of "intuitive" knowledge while Renner's character represents the masculine principle of "analytical" knowledge. Both are indispensable. Adams is pretty much the only female surrounded by male scientists and military. Obviously a message here.

--I think I read once that the physical form that aliens take in sci-fi movies is irrelevant. They're even made to be uninteresting because we're supposed to focus on something else. But still.

--Those circles drove me NUTS. I kept waiting for a different shape, a squiggle, anything!

--One interesting language theory is put forth.

--Supposedly a big revelation: "There are different ways to interpret that statement [from the aliens]." (DUH.)

--I was left with HUGE plot questions that I can't put here without totally spoiling this "film."

--Some say our obsession with aliens and alien movies is an attempt to make sense of the mystery in our own lives. Some say it's an attempt to deal with our worst fears of invasion and aggression and all-out war and annihilation. Others say it's an escape from God: the "I'll believe in anything but God" stance. I haven't quite figured it out yet. (And maybe all these explanations are true.)

         "It is appointed for man to die once, and after this, judgment." --Hebrews  9:27

February 3, 2017



Why keep up with "Catholic news" from (trusted, authentic) Catholic sources? Why also get "secular" news from a (trusted, authentic) Catholic perspective? (If you're reading a Catholic blog, I'm probably LITERALLY preaching to the choir, but here goes.)

1. There's a lot going on in the Church and in the world today, good and bad. We just can't afford not to know. Ignorance is not bliss, it's blindness. It's not knowing where we're going or why. Lack of knowledge leaves us open to be easily manipulated, misled, disillusioned.

2. There's a lot going on in the intersection of the Church and the world today, good and bad.

3. If we don't keep up, we'll drift from our Faith and even become confused. Because we weren't keeping up. If we love something, we want to know it always better and keep pace with it. If we love Jesus' Church, we'll do the same.

4. We need knowledge first and then wisdom to understand the times we're living in and the challenges and opportunities for the Faith.

"The sons of Issachar, who were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do...." 1 Chronicles 12:32

5. Jesus admonished those who couldn't "read the signs of the times."

6. We have today a phenomenon of "the magisterium of the laity"* (phrase coined by a priest friend): a plethora of Catholic YouTubers, authors/speakers and social media influencers of every ilk with huge followings telling us what is true Catholicism. Many of these intelligent and fervent Catholics are disturbed (and rightly so) by the degree of confusion, heresy and corruption at varying levels of Church officialdom, academia as well as "in the pews," and are doing the following: 1) unearthing/reporting no small evildoing, malfeasance (doctrinal, sexual, financial) 2) teaching what they believe is true Catholic doctrine (which may or may not be) 3) interpreting the entirety of the Catholic Faith: doctrine, morals, worship, history, etc.

This "magisterium of the laity"--which I believe is 99.9% extremely well intentioned--is often muddying the waters even more--and yet, without some serious investigative journalism, horrors like clandestine systemic clergy sex abuse could be flourishing. Heresy could sound like genuine "development of doctrine." The glorious intellectual tradition and comprehensive teaching and wisdom of the Catholic Faith could lay fallow: untouched, untaught and untransmitted in favor of the latest spirituality/theology/sociology fads or, quite simply, religious pablum. Today's laity are the most educated in history and can't be talked down to, condescended to, patronized, gaslit. They are too smart (and good) for that. But, there is no such thing as the magisterium of the laity. The Magisterium is the pope and bishops in communion with him. It is they who hold the teaching office of the Church.

7. Even some long-time, respected, established and "establishment" mainstream Catholic media are rather recently succumbing (2020) to BAD JOURNALISM which is mostly LACK OF JOURNALISM, NOT DOING THE JOB OF A JOURNALIST: NOT going to the sources, NOT fact-checking, NOT reporting accurately and impartially. It's getting harder and harder to give rubberstamp approval to any one (or even one!) Catholic news source that's going to get it right even most of the time these days! So...#1 Know your Catholic Faith. #2 Consult trusted Catholic sources/people. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is always the best go-to. #3 Trust but verify. Do your homework. Be your own journalist, fact-checker, etc.

What are some top sources for Catholic news? Here are my picks. 

These are not just websites, but can be followed/subscribed to on both Twitter and Facebook (you can usually just go to the site and sign up from there, as well as follow by email: they'll send updates into your email inbox).

www.Twitter.com is my #1 source of breaking Catholic news. Wanna get started on Twitter? It's pathetically simple to sign up. Then just "follow" me: @SrHelenaBurns and click on "Tweets" and then "Lists" at the top of my Twitter page. I only have one list: "news-secular-and-Catholic." Click on it and voila! You are instantly following 150 top Catholic (and secular news sites), as well as some very informed individual Catholics (including bloggers) who will keep YOU informed. I don't agree with ALL the sources/folks on that list, just so you know. I personally read "everything."

However, the following sources ARE vetted, and I recommend 'em:

www.WordOnFire.org   Bishop Robert Barron instantly comments on current issues with solid Catholic guidance via short YouTubes (see also his YouTube channel). Fr. Barron's YouTubes are easily shareable and very popular among young adults. It seems even young atheists will watch his stuff because "at least this guy makes sense." Or as Brandon Vogt says: "Fr. Barron is on a mission to show that Catholicism is smart, and has one of the world's most brilliant intellectual traditions."

www.CatholicWorldReport.com (from Ignatius Press--thoughtful in-depth articles about stuff I promise you you didn't know and need to. They discontinued their fine, fine print magazine which was my all-time favorite Catholic periodical. *sob*)  (You can subscribe via email.) See also: www.IgnatiusInsight.com

www.RelevantRadio.com  (Listen online!) Hi-quality 24hr Catholic radio station mostly in Chicago & Midwest. Get their app for iPhone & Android: www.relevantradio.com/app. Constant secular and Catholic news updates as well as in-depth instruction, talk shows and news analysis from Emmy-winning journalist, Sheila Liaugminas (show: "A Closer Look"). Shows are also instantly archived and easy to find on their website. I''m addicted to their "Father Simon Says" podcast: a Bible study of the daily readings. NOT a homily, a REAL BIBLE STUDY: what the Greek & Hebrew words are and what they mean, yadda, yadda.

Support Catholic radio in your area (and online)! Radio apps for mobile technology means you can take it wherever you go, too.

From U.S. Bishops regarding religious liberty (free): text "FREEDOM" to 377377 (for Spanish: "LIBERTAD")

(Augustine Institute) Some of the best Catholic speakers addressing some of the most timely issues directly affecting our lives. Can't recommend enough. In general, I'll listen to each talk about 3 times. CDs and .mp3s

--www.TOBinstitute.org and www.CorProject.com Keep up with Theology of the Body! (get on their e-newsletter list) AND simply put "Theology of the Body" in Google alerts!

www.EWTN.com Global Catholic TV and radio network. EWTN is the undisputed granddaddy of Catholic TV (excluding Archbishop Fulton Sheen, of course). Foundress Mother Angelica made an option for teaching: talk shows, talking heads. EWTN does what they do well. Very well. Multimedia, tons of resources, free real-time streaming online. Also in Spanish.

www.NCRegister.com  (Owned by EWTN) National Catholic Register (can subscribe via email) print edition also available. Simply the finest, most balanced, faithful-yet-super-contemporary take on Church and world news. Bravo.

www.Zenit.org (daily headlines from Vatican--unofficial, but quick & easy way to get Vatican news)

www.News.VA/en  The new, revamped Vatican media site. Includes the official Vatican Newspaper (L'Osservatore Romano), Vatican Information Service, Fides New Agency, Vatican Radio, etc.

Blessed James Alberione reading his favorite newspaper:
L'Osservatore Romano (with Bro. Silvio de Blasio, SSP)
Below is L'Osservatore Romano (the official Vatican Newspaper, I believe it's weekly in English). Print edition is well worth the subscription price. It was printed in English in the USA (for USA and Canada) for a little while, but is now mailed directly from the Vatican. Full texts of Holy Father's talks and doings and other important stuff from the Vatican Offices.  

www.CatholicRegister.org (Canada) Voted BEST North American diocesan newspaper (weekly). From Archdiocese of Toronto, but goes all over Canada. Canadians are just so classy and literary and in-depth on the issues and such. Especially read Fr. Raymond J. de Souza column: it's incisive like a Ninja. Digital subscription available.

www.CatholicNews.com  This is the user-friendly "CNS" news service of the U.S. Bishops. This website compiles a lot of news resources, including movie reviews (which are short, dry and focus mostly on what is appropriate for children or family viewing, don't look for an appreciation of artistry). It includes links to top news stories from Origins and international  Church news. See at bottom of website: www.InterMirifica.net --int'l Catholic multimedia directory!

www.MarsHillAudio.org This is a high-brow, high-Christian, monthly NPR-style audio magazine (CD or mp3-download subscription, well worth the shekels) that keeps you up on the latest books (often by Christians) examining our culture under many different aspects. Great if you love PHILOSOPHY. Lots of interviews with authors and professors. MHA is not Catholic, but very Catholic friendly.

www.EnvoyMagazine.com Wicked fun, non-highbrow apologetics. Gorgeous graphic design. Patrick Madrid.

www.MercatorNet.com  Weird title, good info. Dedicated to any issue dealing with human dignity. In-depth, timely and thoughtful digest.

www.LumenChristi.org  Like philosophy? Me, too!!! Watch world-class Catholic (and other) philosophers on video. This amazing Institute (set up by Cardinal George at the University of Chicago, his alma mater) is revitalizing Catholic philosophy. Kind of a think tank. If you live in Chicago you can go to these talks in person. FREE.

www.OSV.com (Our Sunday Visitor) Weekly online and print. Looking for a FUN, positive, family-oriented, EASY-READ-but-still-informative Catholic news source? Look no further. Best of its kind.

www.SaltandLightTV.org (Canada) Catholic shows, news (English, French, Italian, Chinese)

www.CatholicTV.com (out of Boston) 24 hr, streaming online.

www.NETTV.net  (out of Brooklyn) 24 hr, streaming online.

www.CatholicVote.org Timely issues and essays.

www.CardinalNewmanSociety.org What's going on on "Catholic" college campuses....

www.Formed.org (Augustine Institute) Catholic Netflix! Endless resources. Get password from your parish.

www.CCO.ca (Canada) Catholic Christian Outreach: Young Adult Missionaries have great resources to share the Faith.

BEST CATHOLIC PODCASTS (huge compilation): https://hellburns.blogspot.com/2020/09/holy-catholic-podcast-pandemonium-or.html#.X5sm-4hKiM8 With the list is an accompanying explanation of why I listen to "everything," but can't actually tell you or recommend what I listen to!

BestCatholicWebsites.com  For excellence in various digital Catholic media (content and production values)

Oh yes, and a last-but-not-least reason to keep up with Catholic news:
Papa B asked us to be "an engaged, articulate and well-informed Catholic laity" 
specifically in the United States! He said this to a group of U.S. Bishops on their ad limina visit (January 2012)
because of  how religious freedom was being threatened in the USA. 

PUHLEEEEZE do not get your Church news from the New York Times. I was a long-time fan and reader of the Sunday NYT, but not any more. (Their embrace and incessant promotion of abortion is hard to stomach.) When it comes to religion (especially Catholicism) they are intellectually dishonest (misrepresenting, withholding information, pretending they don't grasp the issues) and hostile.


As a matter of fact, why trust secular news to:
1. report accurately (it's just all that draconic mumbo-jumbo that doesn't make sense anyway, right?)
2. care
3. comprehend
4. be honest (see #1.)
5. interpret what it all means for us?

Stop it, people! Time to wise up, keep up, and get your Best Catholic News Sources on!

End rant.