HOLY WEEK RETREAT AT DAUGHTERS OF ST. PAUL MOTHERHOUSE!

TEEN-FRIENDLY MOVIES FOR VALENTINE'S DAY

Happy Valentine's Day! Here are some suggestions of romantic flicks for a Valentine's date night or just to get in the spirit of things. (Be sure to check out "View Content Advisory" on www.imdb.com if you want more information about what you're about to see/hear. Also, www.fandango.com includes a breakdown by Common Sense Media for younger teens and kids.)

The selections below may seem like an odd collection (they are!), but that's partly because it's so hard to find romantic movies that are actually romantic and don't simply involve people jumping into bed with each other (definitely not true love). Many rom-coms are neither romantic nor funny. And, seriously, how many times can you watch "A Walk To Remember"? I tried to include movies guys would like. The following are NOT chick flicks. I repeat, the following are NOT chick flicks.

Enjoy!

WARM BODIES (2013)

RATING: PG-13
CAVEATS: Limited gross-out-ness and gore. But zombies do eat brains. Just sayin'. The name of our precious Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ--the only Name by which we are to be saved--is taken in vain about three times.
SYNOPSIS: This is a zom-rom-com (zombie romantic comedy). Even if you're not part of the zombie craze, you'll love this film.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: How true male-female love is "the cure."
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: Everything in this film.

My full review: http://hellburns.blogspot.com/2013/02/movies-warm-bodies.html#.Uvh-0PldWnY

TO SAVE A LIFE (2009)

RATING: PG-13
CAVEATS: None!
SYNOPSIS: This film starts off being about teen suicide, but works in many teen issues and themes organically, including a teen romance.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: What "choices" do men have when it comes to abortion?
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: List ALL the different kinds of true love displayed.

My fuller review: http://hellburns.blogspot.com/2013/11/dvds-to-save-life-2009.html

GROUNDHOG DAY (1993) "Le jour de la marmotte" in French

RATING: PG
CAVEATS: Having sex is implied once or twice. But at the end, sex is not the prize.
SYNOPSIS: In this CLASSIC film (a MUST for all serious film buffs) Bill Murray's character--an obnoxiously self-centered TV news reporter--is doomed to relive the  same day over and over again. It just happens to be Groundhog Day. He falls in love with a woman (Andie MacDowell) who turns him down over and over again (because he's so selfish).
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: Ned, the insurance salesman. The groundhog driving the pickup truck.
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: It's only when we do things unselfishly (not worrying about outcomes) that we become truly loving and lovable. SPOILER ALERT: The filmmakers were questioning whether or not to have the main characters have sex at the end. The director turned to a costume intern and she said: "No. You'll ruin the movie." So they did what she said.

THE VOW (2012)

RATING: PG-13
CAVEATS: Several scantily-clad scenes (also between unmarried people), male and female.
SYNOPSIS: Based on the true story of a Christian couple (but completely de-Christianized), "The Vow" is about a young married woman (Rachel McAdams) who gets in a car accident that results in amnesia. She does not recognize her husband (Channing Tatum) or remember that she is married. Together they try to piece their life back together, but it's not easy. The Christian couple's true story is available in book form!
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: "We don't talk to each other like that." Wow.
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: Although there is no mention of God, "The Vow" shows that marriage is a natural institution between a man and a woman involving public vows and deep love and commitment through thick and thin.

My full review: http://hellburns.blogspot.com/2012/02/movies-vow.html#.Uvh-B_ldWnY

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE (1995)

RATING: TV mini-series, so no rating
CAVEATS: You may experience an attack of British-mania and start talking like "Downton Abbey" all day.
SYNOPSIS: The guy and gal in Jane Austen's love story are fiercely attracted to each other, but are separated by class. Verbal sparring ultimately brings out the best in each of them.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: Colin Firth. You have to watch the Colin Firth version.
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: Getting our values and beliefs together is essential to the blossoming and harmony of a relationship. Relationships need to be egalitarian, without one feeling/acting superior to another.

BRIDE AND PREJUDICE (2004)
(A fun Bollywood version of "Pride & Prejudice"!)

RATING: PG-13
CAVEATS: Some scantily-cladness (both sexes) including in the context of sunbathing and dancing.
SYNOPSIS: The guy and gal in Jane Austen's love story are fiercely attracted to each other, but are separated by class, and in the Bollywood version: culture. Verbal sparring ultimately brings out the best in each of them.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: The hilarious "other" suitor.
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: Getting our values and beliefs together is essential to the blossoming and harmony of a relationship. Relationships need to be egalitarian, without one feeling/acting superior to another.

BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S (1961)

RATING: NR (not rated)
CAVEATS: Audrey Hepburn's and George Peppard's characters are elite female and male escorts. It is handled so discreetly that often people don't even remember this fact about the film. Lots of smoking and alcohol use.
SYNOPSIS: Holly Golightly (Audrey Hepburn) is a restless gold digger. Her philosophy of life is to try to please herself in a vacuum: just live in a detached, disconnected way and you'll never feel pain or get your heart broken. Money and luxuries can fill the hole where relationships are meant to be.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: The taxi cab proposal scene. What is more appealing: commitment or hooking up?
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: By illustrating the truth by contrast and watching people go about life the wrong way first, we learn that true love is still possible for everyone. And the fashion in "Tiffany's" is to die for.

HITCH (2005)

RATING: PG-13
CAVEATS: Some sex-talk and implied sexual encounters.
SYNOPSIS: A matchmaker (Will Smith) doesn't do so well in his own love life.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR: How does Will Smith's character treat women?
WHY THIS FILM IS AN EXAMPLE OF TRUE LOVE: Will Smith's character shows us that true love takes time, patience, humility, perseverance. And it's often awkward because it's supposed to be awkward. Substance abuse combined with sex before marriage only sabotages relationships before they can start. True love bumbles around before it becomes smooth.

SEMINARIANS SHOVELING

Yes, folks. These are our future priests.
(Be sure to turn on volume, upper LH.)

MOVIES: "GIMME SHELTER"

"Gimme Shelter" (not the Rolling Stones' song and documentary by the same name) is a rare blatantly pro-life story--with big name actors--to hit the theaters. Vanessa Hudgens puts in a gritty performance as castoff pregnant teen named Apple. This is a real street kid with an abusive street mother. Vanessa looks and acts every bit the part: disheveled hair, piercings, clothing to hide her gender (and pregnancy), hopeless stare, poor communication skills, eating from dumpsters, continually in survival mode.

Apple is trying hard with what little she has, but the deck is stacked against her every way she turns. Apple's circumstances are just the type that are used for automatic justification of abortion. Surely SHE should have an abortion, right? It's a no brainer, isn't it? She's a kid herself, she's homeless, she has no resources, no support system, no future. The baby will be raised in poverty and misery, just like Apple herself, and the child will wind up dead or in prison. Isn't this the de facto narrative?

Well, Apple is here to defy the system and break the cycle. Not because she's trying to make a statement, impose her will, or make things difficult for those around her. There's just a primal instinct in her that says: this baby could've been me. Was me. This is exactly how I came into the world. It's like killing myself. She's tired of being shuffled around, told what to do and treated like a problem that requires easy, expedient solutions. She just feels like the whole thing (abortion) stinks, and she's not having any part of it. It doesn't even play out like some "motherly" instinct. Apple is not looking forward to being a mother and having a cuddly little someone of her own that will finally love her back. She has been pushed to do plenty of wrong things in her life, but this is NOT going to be one of them. Apple is putting her foot down.

What makes Apple even more heroic is that she has absolutely no plan. She flees the abortion clinic not having a clue what she's going to do. A wise old priest (James Earl Jones), unfazed by Apple's anger and abrasiveness, tells her about a place for pregnant young women like herself.

"Gimme Shelter" is based on the true story of Kathy DiFiore (played by Ann Dowd) who opened a home for young mothers in New Jersey. The film follows Apple's hardscrabble road to the shelter where she finds safety, but most of all, what family means. Rosario Dawson is baneful as Apple's crazed, vicious mother. Brendan Fraser is her wealthy biological father, and Stephanie Szostak is chilling and spot-on as his society wife who can't seem to find a place in her heart for Apple. We get to see photos of the real characters at the end of the film.

Former Mousketeer Vanessa Hudgens proves herself a versatile and serious actress (after her roles in the racy "Sucker Punch" and dissolute "Spring Breakers").

The story is simple and linear. It's about the little things and everyday drama, everyday violence and everyday hope. The banality of life, death and desperation. It feels more like a solid made-for-TV story than made for the big screen, but definitely worth seeing!

THE BODY IN ART & MEDIA

MOVIES: "HER"

Writer/director Spike Jonez' "Her," is a rather extraordinary film. It's really a science fiction/love story about A.I. (artificial intelligence). Set in what looks like the near future, Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix doing his best work to date and visually carrying the entire film) works for a company called "Beautiful Handwritten Letters" that composes letters for people. Not business letters or formal letters: love letters and letters between family members. Why can't people write their own? Who knows? But this futuristic world is scarily bland, literal and unnuanced. Everyone and everything feels incredibly dumbed down into simplistic niceness. It seems that advanced technology and the seamless omni-insertion of technology into people's lives has turned humans into androids, while the androids are more “alive” than humans, and want to become more human.

Humans walk around (something like today, but much worse) talking to themselves, communicating only with their multifunctional earbuds.

"Samantha" is a Siri-like voice performed by Scarlett Johansson with such craft that there was a question whether her voice acting could be nominated for an Oscar (it couldn't). Theodore, lonely and undergoing a divorce, begins to fall in love with her, and Siri begins to evolve rapidly (having "experiences" and learning about the world through Theodore). Samantha is always there for him and seemingly deeply understands him (she reads all his email), and even fights with him like a real girlfriend would. Dating one's OS (operating system) becomes an accepted "thing" in Theodore's society.

But all shall not be well. I won't spoil the ending--one of the gentlest, tenderest, humanest sci-fi endings since "Blade Runner"--but it gives rise to the question whether humans and A.I. could ever truly interact on a purely and fully human level. Can Samantha ever truly “be” human and understand humans? Especially when it comes to love? Humans, it seems, are unlimited by their limits, and A.I. are crippled by their boundlessness. Haven’t we ultimately created them as their own inorganic “species” to do their own thing, which may even be outside of our control?

Now. A word about the PORN ELEMENTS. Yes. There are fleeting, quite perverse and quite unnecessary porn images in the beginning of the film (involving a very naked and very pregnant supermodel), followed by three different scenes of full-blown phone sex (mostly verbal). As I tried to "not watch" (very difficult when it flashes on unexpectedly), I wondered what Jonze was thinking. I wondered if he's a porn kinda guy himself. I wondered if he thought (like millions, and like the heartily-laughing audience in my cinema) that porn is "no big deal" today. It's "mainstream." Get over it. Ah, well, Mr. Jonze, here's a letter for you.

Dear Mr. Jonze,

Porn IS a big deal, and I will NOT get over it, but what we can both agree on is that it is MAINSTREAM. Not just on our 5-year-old's Nintendo 3DS and our 8-year-old's iPod and our 12-year-old's Xbox One or PS4, but in our one extant unifying storytelling carrier: "The Movies."

"Boogie Nights" was ABOUT the porn industry, "Magic Mike" was ABOUT male strippers, and "Don Jon" was ABOUT internet porn addiction, but "Her" was about A.I. There are plenty of porn references on primetime TV, but you, Mr. Jonze, SHOWED us some porn on the big, big screen. I know you're not alone, and I know we're just going to see more and more of this, but you know what? It's NOT okay. You are RESPONSIBLE for your art. And if you are not aware of the scientific facts about the effects of the scourge of porn on children, teens, families, WOMEN, husbands, wives, workers, um, everyone? You need to get yourself educated. Fast. The rest of your movie is beyond fabulous and creative. You ruined it. I will not jump on the "Emperor's New Clothes" bandwagon and "praise you" for this film because the Emperor HAS no clothes. We do not treat the human body this way. We do not treat the human person this way.

The shocking, prolonged, full-frontal, hazy FEMALE nudity crotch shots at the beginning of "Flight" (a most disappointing plane wreck of a story and film) was sad. But it was just a naked woman walking around. You showed porn QUA porn ("qua" is Latin for "as"). And we were supposed to laugh. Sex can be funny. Porn is never funny.

I so wished I could like this film.

It doesn't matter how many awards you get for this. You blew it.

So sorry for your loss,

Sr. Helena

So, am I recommending you see this film? I usually don't give my opinion on this either way, but given the above circumstances: www.commonsensemedia.com rates this film "iffy" for 15+. I rate it "iffy" for 50+ unless those scenes are excised. Perhaps www.clearplay.com will make it available. ("Clear Play" sanitizes films with the blessing of the studios. I'm normally not in agreement with such measures--except for family viewing--but it's getting bad, folks.)

OTHER STUFF:

--Struggling with porn use/addiction or know someone who is? www.ReclaimSexualHealth.com

--I'm beginning to wonder if putting jarring, out-of-place nudity and porn in the BEGINNING of films is a new cheap trick to keep people titillated THROUGHOUT a movie. If/when your body gets revved up, it's going to make the whole movie experience more memorable or something? (Lookin' at you, "Flight": my full review of "Flight" http://hellburns.blogspot.ca/2012/11/movies-flight.html#.UyKA0vldWOA )

--The dumbed-down world of "Her" (with colorful prime and rainbow colors everywhere similar to Google Chrome, Google Play, the Mac spinning pinwheel) is scary because I see our society going this way. A book publisher wants to publish Theodore’s letters because he finds them so profound and touching while in reality they are one step above perfunctory. I’m one of those people who believe that if we lose words, we lose the ability to express ourselves and communicate with others in a very necessary, significant and irreplaceable way that makes us human. There are even studies where the ability to express oneself in words also works in reverse to help us actually think and feel and experience and know what we’re thinking and feeling and experiencing.

--The music is pretty amazing and often atmospheric. Who did the music? ARCADE FIRE. Okay, I agree they are a very Important Band.

--The Coming Attractions sported a film with Kate Winslet getting tied up by a criminal on the lam. And she liked it. WOMEN: WAKE UP! WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS OF THE 70’S????

--Jonez created a clever, tight, cohesive, believable futuristic world with lots of details and food for thought. The one thing he forgot is that if the porn addiction epidemic continues as is, the world will NOT look like that in the future. The world will be debilitated by it. He was showing us 2014 porn. Come to think of it, there are LOTS of adolescent boy sex jokes in this film. It didn’t even quite match with the “Leave It To Beaver” kind of simplicity of everyone. Unless all the characters (including women) are actually adolescent boys at heart.

--A lot Theology of the Body fodder here. (Samantha initially being envious and wanting a body—kinda like Satan, ha ha.) Samantha talks to Theodore’s little goddaughter and tells her “I don’t have* a body. I live in a computer.” (Transhumanism, anyone?)

“She’s not a computer, she’s her own person.” (Theodore about Samantha)

“You can’t handle a real woman.” (Theodore’s ex)

“You’re beautiful.” (Theodore to Samantha, which could ONLY be “inner beauty”!!!!)

“I like not having a body. I’m not limited by time or space. I can be everywhere, and I’ll never die.” (Samantha)

Samantha wants to move beyond the material world.

--Transhumanist overtones, but I don’t think that’s the point of the movie or that it’s being promoted. BUT I COULD BE WRONG ABOUT THAT. (The head engineer at Google, Ray Kurzweil, is a transhumanist.)

--Once in a while the visuals are on the screen too long and need to be changed. Just a little pacing glitch (kind of like “Where the Wild Things Are” which flirted on the edge of boring us).

--MEN ONLY “ALLOW” WOMEN CERTAIN LIBERTIES AND FREEDOMS IN THEIR “ROLES” (talkin’ filmmakers now). SINCE MEN HAVE THE POWER, THEY ARE NEVER GOING TO ALLOW WOMEN ROLES THAT DISPLEASE THEM OR DISPLACE THEM. THESE MEN MAY NOT EVEN BE AWARE OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING. AND I’M NOT SAYING THIS IS NECESSARILY A BAD THING ALTHOUGH IT OFTEN IS—IN VARIED WAYS. SOMETIMES, IN A GOOD WAY, IT EVEN POINTS TO THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCES IN MEN AND WOMEN THAT WILL NEVER BE OVERRIDEN BY ANY IDEOLOGY.

_________

*Neither do humans. We ARE bodies.

JESUS & HOCKEY

TORONTO: VOCATION DISCERNMENT SATURDAYS FOR 2014!

HEY, TORONTO! JOIN THE REVOLUTION!

MOVIES: "THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG"

“The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug” is, of course, Part Two in a three-part cinematic extravaganza of Tolkien’s beloved book: “The Hobbit.” How did Peter Jackson and Co. get three movies out of it? By drawing on “The Silmarillion” and other background information. Perhaps some Tolkien purists are not happy with this amalgam, but for the rest of us Tolkien schleppers, we’re just happy to get more, more, more!

“The Desolation of Smaug is a bit different from the first filmic Hobbit installment. It is not as cohesive, “talkie,” and some of the editing/cuts are just horribly jerky and unprofessional. I saw it in 3-D, and as scenes move between indoor (very dark, dreary and colorless) and outdoor (not much better), the resolution is so extreme and raw that it often looks like some strange telenovela. ALL the actors are exquisite as in Part One, but the whole texture of the thing (and poor editing) often makes them look ridiculous (e.g., holding grim, melodramatic stares for far too long).

It’s obvious that the bulk of the time, work and attention in the film was given to the lengthy, often comical “Bilbo and the Dwarves Ride the Rapids in Barrels While Pursued by The Ugliest Orcs in Middle Earth History,” to much good effect. This action-packed, eye-popping caper alone is well worth the price of a movie ticket. Lithe Elves get into the act and show that brute strength (and fearsome ugliness) and massive Iron Age weapons aren’t everything.

FEMININE GENIUS

How is the estrogen count in Part Two? Galadriel puts in a fleeting cameo as she telepaths with Gandalf. Turiel (a general in the royal Elvish guard, played quite marvelously by a glowing Evangeline Lilly) has a large role defending the Elvish kingdom/territories. Not only that, she is sweet on a particular dwarf (and therefore sets out to save his life), as well as risks everything to fight against evil rather than passively remain safe and do nothing, as her liege lord commands her to do.

SMAUG

The dialogue is minimal and stilted—even though there were two women and two men screenwriters! (Did you know that screenwriters in the 20’s and 30’s were primarily women because we’re so good at dialogue? Yup.) Smaug has all the best lines. (Remember to pronounce it like the British--with at least ten syllables: S-S-M-A-A-O-O-W-W-U-U-U-A-U-G-H-G. The “H” is silent.)

Speaking of Smaug: bringing to screenlife that despicable reptile is another feat of today’s Visual Effects wizardry. Hope the Academy is paying attention. Too bad his scales were so dull. Even the coins and gems piled up inside his mountain lair were drab. Sigh. Digital. And what a chatty dragon! I thought that—like the other animals in “The Hobbit”--he would be, well, silent (but remember, in Tolkien’s world, mountains and trees might burst into life at any moment).

GANDALF

But who MAKES the film (as usual)? The great Gandalf the Grey (a masterful Ian McKellan that no amount of bad editing and/or lighting could ever vex, harry or perturb). Can’t we just have a “Gandalf” film? All Gandalf all the time? The elderly wizard is the one who seems to see the biggest picture, have the broadest vision, is most aware of what is coming and what is truly going beneath the surface. And yet—and this seems to me to be the whole message of Tolkien’s tales—he, too, is weak in the face of tremendous, vociferous evil. But it is the weak who win the day. The Elves even find the greatest grandeur not in the Sun or lightning (or fireball-breathing-dragons) but in fragile starlight.

It’s a paradox that those who live by no other code than “might makes right” and “the triumph of the will”; who are not held back by any mercy or ethical considerations, are actually the weakest. The wicked may flourish for a time, but the kind of persistent gentle Goodness that caused Herod to fear a baby and murder babies is what endures.

While the other denizens of Middle Earth go about their more or less important chores and quests, Gandalf is busy weighing how evil operates and organizes itself in order to sweep over the land and cause woe to untold numbers (the influence of World War I on Tolkien, no doubt).

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the quite stellar addition of Luke Evans as Bard.

This film is more gory and violent than the first one: gratuitous and “humorous” violence (e.g., the way Orcs’ heads get chopped off, etc.) doesn’t make ME laugh.

“The Hobbit” is also a study in greed and what can drive men to utter blindness and destruction of friends, loved ones, the future and everything around them (the Ring, the Arkenstone). Smaug portrays the larger, supernatural (spiritual warfare), demonic greed at work in the world.

This film is definitely about the nature of evil. And the nature of what conquers evil.

OTHER STUFF:

--Did I mention how frightfully ugly the Orcs are? Frightfully. They're like great white sharks. On land.

--May I say a word about Turiel and her ilk? I’m getting a LITTLE tired of hunter-warrior chicks. Women were the farmer-gatherers. ONE of the many reasons the Neanderthals didn't make it is because there was no division of labor. Very pregnant women went on the hunt, as well as those with newborns. Think about it.

--Awesome use of the adjective “fell,” meaning evil, malevolent, baneful. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fell

--I love how Smaug keeps calling Bilbo “barrel rider” and “thief in the shadows.”

--Do not see this film if you have arachnophobia. I repeat. Do NOT see this film.

--Orlando Bloom has filled out a bit. Looks older, better.

--“In our blindness, the enemy has returned.”

--"When did WE LET evil get stronger than us?" --Turiel

--Evil hides.

--Everyone talking like “BatDad” makes me wanna giggle after a while. J

--New Zealand has amazing terrain.

--Fun fact: the oh-so-Britishly-handsome Richard Crispin Armitage (named after King Richard III by his parents) who plays dwarf-heir-to-the-throne Thorin Oakenshield is actually 6’2”.

--The Elves and their starlight made me think of my main men Magi.

--THE Stephen Colbert has a bit part as a Lake-town spy! Ha! (I didn’t notice, but check out the full cast at www.imdb.com )

--I have been told that Fulton Sheen’s book: “Virtue and Vice” is about how the 7 Last Words of Christ overcome the 7 Capital Sins! Sweeeeeeeeet! Do all 7 Capital Sins operate in Satan? Or is it just “envy”? “It was through the envy of the devil that death entered the world” (Wisdom 2:24). Guess which words of Christ overcome “lust”? “Behold your mother, woman behold your son!” Sweeeeeet!

--"Love is the weapon of the future." --Yehuda Berg

MOVIES: "SAVING MR. BANKS"

Are we all agreed that “Saving Mr. Banks” is the Worst. Movie. Title. Ever? Good. First: Who is Mr. Banks? He’s the father of the little family in “Mary Poppins,” and the filmmakers must have assumed that we all had massive group recollection on that one. Second: “Banks” rhymes with “Hanks” who plays Walt Disney. Third: Tom Hanks was in the movie “Saving Private Ryan.” All so bloody confusing. Maybe they were trying to testosterize the title (seeing that the main character is a woman), but they didn’t really need to do that because just Hanks’ presence in the film is enough for moviegoers, AND there’s such a wonderful interplay of the masculine and feminine between them, as well as flashbacks to the authoress’ relationship with her own father.

Notwithstanding the title, “Saving Mr. Banks” does succeed as a movie, which must have been a very difficult feat to achieve. Think about it: A prickly, precise, practically perfect British authoress does not want to sell (sell out) her “Mary Poppins” character to Walt Disney so he can turn her into a singing, dancing bit of fluff. And God forbid he should cast Dick Van Dyke or add animated, soft-shoe-ing penguins.  That’s the unexceptional premise. So how does the movie unfold?

At least half of the movie is set in authoress Mrs. Travers’ (a spot-on Emma Thompson who should get an Oscar for “facial expressiveness”) childhood. The flashbacks are mainly about Mrs. Travers’ relationship with her beloved father, who, although he loved his little princess and was probably responsible for her fertile imagination, was an alcoholic and did not provide well for his family. An alternate title for this film could easily be: “When Life Disappoints.”

Many of the laughs come from Mrs. Travers’ utter disdain, no, horror at all things American. She shuns our optimism, vulgarity, juvenility, food, and even our sunshine. But she is in a predicament where she desperately needs the money that selling the Mary Poppins character to Disney would bring her. However, Mary Poppins is “family” to her, so she postpones signing over the rights while still micromanaging every step of the script. Walt Disney and his collaborators know that she could pull the plug at any time, and that’s what makes it all so precarious every step of the way. She keeps recalling her father’s suspicious attitude toward money and his love of make-believe (what he called his “Celtic soul”).

Disney simply does not know how to please her, but as a fellow artist/creator, he knows how difficult it is to let go of a character. That’s exactly the way he feels about The Mouse. But that doesn’t mean he’s taking “no” for an answer. To arrive at “yes,” he must dig deep into Mrs. Travers’ soul and find out what makes her tick. Even here, it turns out, they are very much alike.

There are some fleeting visual glances intimating that Mrs. Travers might practice Buddhism, or be inspired by it. And her father’s “this life is just an illusion,” is a little disturbing. (Also, the bookends: “feeling it all happened before.”) If you’ve ever lived in L.A., you know that Buddhism is the religion of choice (for Westerners not raised in Buddhism). When Westerners graft Buddhism onto their existing Western mentality, it can quite literally mean that “we’re not real,” and “nothing really matters.”A fellow student  (Christian turned Buddhist) in my UCLA screenwriting program incorporated an abortion into his screenplay. Because of his belief in reincarnation, he reasoned: “It doesn’t matter if we kill the baby’s body, because its soul will get to come back in another body.” Ideas have consequences. But I diverge.*

If you enjoy behind-the-scenes looks at Hollywood, how things came to be, or hashing out stories, this is your film. It’s great to watch the writing/songwriting team trying to find the heart of the story. This is Disney Films telling a story about a Disney film story. As I watched, I thought: I’d love to see Walt Disney’s own story.

What is the takeaway? Forgiveness, letting go, healing, redemption through imagination (love this concept!), finding interior freedom, choosing joy over sadness.

______
*And don’t get me started on “Kung Fu Panda” and "Eat, Love, Pray"! What is the Christian view here? The world is NOT an illusion, but it is passing away “as we know it” (1 Corinthians 7:31). There will be a “new heavens and a new earth” (Isaiah 65:17, Revelation 21:1), but it is very dependent—for  us--on what we do in reality here and now.

OTHER STUFF:

--Look for the “Sleeping with the Enemy” scene!

--Stuffy London meets Swinging L.A in the 1960’s. Very funny.

--I am not a fan of Hanks, but he is very enjoyable in this film. Ditto Colin Farrell.

--The soundtrack is supercalifragilisticexpialidocious by the stratospheric talent of Thomas Newman. It’s old-timey without being sappy, grand, contemporary and fresh. One of the performances included in soundtrack is by the wondrous Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops. Yessssss.

--In the beginning, the flashbacks are very heavy-handed. EVERYTHING reminds her of her childhood and whoosh! we are transported back in time. But the uneven storytelling eventually evens out and we become invested in her early life.

--Good to see Kathy Baker! And Rachel Griffiths!

--So American! If a word doesn’t exist, we just make it up! (And just about everything else, too.)

--THEOLOGY OF THE BODY: Mrs. Travers sticks up for motherhood (when male writers want Mrs. Banks to have a job because she isn’t “doing anything.”)

--LOOSE ENDS: When asked if she has children, Mrs. Travers answers “not precisely.” Mrs. Travers keeps looking sadly at couples, but nothing it said of her love life, and it’s never resolved. The stakes of Mrs. Travers' needing the money to save her house (remembering how she lost her house as a child) should have been higher, more dire, more urgent, IMHO.

--Mrs. Travers: “Rain makes things grow.” Limo driver (Paul Giamatti in a very humble role): “So does the sun.”

--The reveal/conclusion/speech in Act 3 is a bit convoluted.

--Movies feels a tad long, but it’s only 85 minutes.

--This movie could have bored us to death, but it didn’t.

--May I just say that “catharsis” used to mean being able to experience the pain of OTHERS. Now it’s just about experiencing our OWN.

--Commerce and Art are NOT mutually exclusive.

--There are two kinds of people: those who love musicals and those who don’t.

--Oh-oh. I found myself identifying with Mrs. Travers sometimes. I prided myself on having lived in SoCal for 5 years and coming away unscathed by a visit to Disneyland. (I couldn’t imagine a place on earth that would make me UNhappier.) I’m more of a Warner Brothers girl: Roadrunner, Wile E. Coyote, Tweetie, Taz, Bugs Bunny and my fav: Daffy Duck. Thuffering Thuccotash!

--I would never have seen this movie on my own (were it not assigned me by sweet gig at LifeTeen) due to Disney and Hanks.

--Filmed in nice, bright, popping colors!

--Was Walt Disney really a nice guy?

--A woman savior! A strong maternal woman of mystery! Nannies rock. Everyone needs a nanny. Especially grownups.

--How we wish the ones we love would change, even just a little bit.

--"Don't you want to finish the story?" Our stories aren't finished yet....

This review with cool graphics: http://lifeteen.com/catholic-movie-review/catholic-movie-reviews-saving-mr-banks/

MOVIES: "NEBRASKA"

“Nebraska”--the latest offering from director Alexander Payne (“Sideways,” “The Descendants”)--is more of Payne’s unblinking look at the difficulty of human relationships and relatedness. Reminiscent of David Lynch’s “The Straight Story,” “Nebraska” is in the road trip film genre, a physical journey of an old man (a mesmerizing performance by Bruce Dern, of whom it has been said that he has an “unmatched natural acting style”) trying to set things right for himself.

Woody, the old man in question, is a flawed human being, but no more flawed than anyone else. He is completely average. His demon side is his drinking, and his angel side is that he wants to help everyone (and thus gets taken advantage of). Oh, and he also “believes what people tell him.” Because of this, he believes he has won a million dollars when he receives a sweepstakes mailing promotion. His son David (Will Forte in a serious role, enhanced by his sad, droopy eyes is a bit of a revelation) is an enabler, a dutiful son, a buddy, and almost a tender parent to his father. He humors him and goes along with the charade.

Does Woody REALLY believe he won a million dollars when everyone around him (except David) is telling him he didn’t? Somewhere down deep, probably not, but the sweepstakes letter has become his great hope, his raison d’etre, and he even sleeps with it. When you discover the reason for Woody’s fantasy (I’m no spoiler!), you will realize this film is NOT about dreams as I first thought it was.

The screenwriter has an incredible understanding of the older generation. I think we will all see our elderly parents, grandparents, relatives or neighbors in Woody and his contemporaries.

THEOLOGY OF THE BODY? Two contrasting views of marriage! Woody and Kate (Woody’s wife who is constantly berating him, June Squibb) knew that marriage was what you did. You commit and then you stick it out. David and Noel--his live-in girlfriend of two years who just moved out—aren’t as sure about commitment. But in both cases, the men are more concerned about sex and the women are more concerned about getting on with the permanency of the relationship. There are some good-natured digs at (along with some admiration of) Catholics being about having babies--(Yay! I wear that proudly!)—and then a questioning of the whole notion of divorce today (say what?—that’s even a question today??? In a film???): “Divorce used to be a sin. I guess God changed his mind.”

Don’t be turned off by the vulgarities you may see in clips of this movie. (Most of the vulgarities come from Kate, and are not all throughout the film.) I guess marketing figured it would be a selling point. But I know people who lost interest in the film because of these clips. Even if you’re incensed by profanity (and the name of the Lord being frequently taken in vain), I would encourage you to look beyond to this touching (and very funny) story about truth, hope, marriage, but mostly about a father and a son who have already reached an understanding even before they set out together on an impossible (or is it?) trek.

OTHER STUFF:

--“Nebraska” is a black and white film which suits it so perfectly. We are caught up in people’s expressions, and the small, rather desolate farming towns are bleak anyway.

--Pleeeeeeze give Dern an Oscar! I know there’s stiff competition with Chiwetel Ejiofor from “12 Years a Slave,” but pleeeeeze! Dern’s an old man! This is his last chance!

--Kate says the nastiest things with the most gleeful look on her face. You will criticize, judge, condemn, giggle with, forgive and applaud Kate at different times in this film. I would NOT be surprised if June Squibb is nominated for Best Supporting Actress. She is Woody’s perfect foil.

--I thought David’s brother, Ross, was Kevin Costner for the whole film. It’s Bob Odenkirk. Tell me he does not look uncannily like Costner. With a little plastic surgery.

--Life is tough. Love is tougher.

--There were several points in the film I just wanted to CHEER.

--This film is not about fading away gracefully or ungracefully or about closure. It’s about living. It simply doesn’t matter how old you are. We can always grow and change and LIVE. (Notice how much Woody sleeps and then when he finally perks up.)

--I cried when Peg Nagy almost did.

--Men will understand the theme of HONOR in this film.

--The most broken and ordinariest of lives matter. These two lines from “They’ll Know We Are Christians By Our Love” kept rolling around in my head during the movie: “And we'll guard each man's dignity /
And save each man's pride.” Watch how David does this for his father.

--You DO know that Bruce Dern is Laura Dern’s father, right?

--Another Korean war vet story (like “Gran Torino”).

--Watch how many times people say and do the exact opposite of what they just said/did.

--I would die in a non-talkative family!

--Woody’s sad, roughed-up childhood “doesn’t matter,” but he looks forward with hope to a bright future.

--Love the attention to detail (character has to get a chair and pull it up to the table), and the old-fashioned language: “cool your jets,” “it’s a total come-on,” “you dumb cluck.”

--Yummy, homey, homely settings.

--Is that what humans look like watching TV? Truly terrifying.

--This story is partly told in SIGNS. All kinds of signs: highway signs, store signs, neon signs. My favorite: “MONSTER TAN” in the middle of a sparsely-populated, dilapidated center of town.

--Payne went to UCLA for film. Me too! Me too!

--Payne has gotten kinder and kinder to his characters through the years. “Election,” “About Schmidt,” “Sideways,” “The Descendants.” So let me go on record that I pretty strongly disagree with most of Chris Nashawaty's review in "Entertainment Weekly," November 22, 2013.

--The only time Woody looks ashamed in front of his son (and he has a few things to be ashamed of) is when Woody’s old frenemy tells David—right in front of Woody—about Woody’s infidelity when he was married to David’s mother.

--Some interesting excuses for exposition: going to a graveyard and talking about the folks at their tombstones, driving down the road and talking about who lives in the houses.

--There’s a fair amount of unnecessary repetition in the film, but it’s not annoying. Only two lines stuck out as totally on-the-nose (and they happen toward the beginning): “He didn’t care s*** about us,” and the constant threat to put Woody in a “home.”

--“Nebraska” is a master class in set-ups and pay-offs in film. Payoffs are so often visual.

--Truly VISUAL storytelling and some great use of AUDIO.

--The humor is sheer Midwestern deadpan.

--My favorite line is whenever Woody says: "It doesn't matter." #KnowingWhatMattersIsEverything

--Some of the ribald humor actually works well to comedic effect (and unexpectedly reveals something about Kate).

--Some very clever and creative mis-en-scenes: looking through the windshield while driver and passenger exchange places. Just LOTS of visually interesting shots. No shot feels perfunctory. Payne is meticulous and precise in everything he does, anyway. According to www.imdb.com, Payne is on a short list of directors who have final cut rights to their own films. “Nebraska” feels like an indie film. A welcome relief from the formulaic, super-shiny, more-android-than-human characters in so many Hollywood blockbusters.

--We need way more HUMANIZING films like this. Thank you, Alexander Payne!

--In Alexander Payne’s own words (I love his philosophy of filmmaking!):

I want all of my films to belong to me. There is an audience out there for literate films - slower, more observant, more human films, and they deserve to be made. Which is why I want Sideways (2004) to succeed, to encourage other film-makers.

While accepting his Director of the Year award for Sideways (2004) at the Palm Spring Film Festival: "I thank you for this award, though I think there may be a problem with a world in which making small, human and humorous films is 'an achievement.' It should be the norm".

We don't have movies about ourselves, and we don't have a national film culture. It shouldn't be an epic aspiration to make simple human stories, but it is.

Where is it written that if you are not getting your money from a studio you have more freedom? If I had tried to make Sideways with independent funding I would have had to secure foreign presales and cast big stars in order to get my budget. This movie took a studio to say 'We're gambling on you. Cast whoever you want.'

It's my hope that we're getting into an era where the value of a film is based on its proximity to real life rather than its distance from it. To do that, you need actors - stars, basically - who don't necessarily look like Ben Affleck.

When I'm shooting I don't care who the star is. I have an actor playing a part, and I'm serving the script, not serving anyone's career. My hope is that, after twenty minutes, perhaps the audience forgets it is George Clooney or Jack Nicholson and just sees the character.

One of cinema's greatest uses or values lies not just in it's ability to capture reality, but to capture or suggest dreams. And silent films excelled from the start in fully embracing the weirdness of real life and dream and how the two can be combined into a story, the likes of which I think, we've not seen in the talkies - a fuller, weirder totality of human experience.

Great interview with Payne about his getting into filmmaking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fw8oNps1qQ&list=TL0hPIRKnmjg0O_3apENiJiFLJ8B8a4tiG (Sadly, though, Payne also made "Citizen Ruth" because he thought the contention between pro-life and pro-abortion people made great fodder for comedy.)

DAUGHTERS OF ST. PAUL CHOIR ON (BOSTON) CATHOLIC TV

SNOWBALL RACE AT PAULINE BOOKS & MEDIA PUBLISHING HOUSE CHRISTMAS PARTY

6 second Vine: https://vine.co/v/hQl6zql3vi6

DAUGHTERS OF ST. PAUL CHRISTMAS CONCERTS 2013

Celebrate Christmas

Daughters of St Paul

2013 Christmas Concert

Ramsey, New Jersey

Tuesday, December 3 at 7:30pm

St. Paul Catholic Church

200 Wyckoff Ave.

Ticket information: Tel. 201-327-0976 | Web: stpaulrcchurch.org

Piscataway, New Jersey

Wednesday, December 4 at 7:00 pm

Our Lady of Fatima Parish

499 New Market Road

Ticket price: $20 / $10 children under 14

Tel. 732-968-5555

Staten Island, New York

Thursday, December 5 at 6:00 pm

Benefit for the Daughters of St. Paul

Staten Island Hilton Garden Inn

1100 South Avenue @ Lois Lane

Ticket price: $125

For more information: 718-477-2100 x 226

www.daughtersofstpaul.com/statenislandchristmas

Cleveland, Ohio

Friday, December 6 at 7:00 pm

Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist

1007 Superior Avenue

For more information: 216-696-6525 x 5510 | Email:heislman@dioceseofcleveland.org

Alexandria, Virginia

Monday, December 9 at 7:00 pm

Good Shepherd Catholic Church

8710 Mount Vernon Highway

Tel. 703-780-4055  www.gs-cc.org  Email: events@gs-cc.org

Framingham, MA

Thursday, December 12 at 7:00pm

St. Tarcisius Church

562 Waverly St.

Tickets: $5

Tel. English: 508-875-8623 | Portuguese: 508-875-6347 | sttarcisiuspar@gmail.com

Marshfield, MA

Friday, December 13 at 7:00 pm

St. Ann by the Sea Parish

591 Ocean Street

Tickets: $10

Tel. 781-834-4953

Boston, Jamaica Plain, MA

Now 3 performances

Saturday, December 14 at 7:00pm

Sunday, December 15 at 3:00pm AND 7:30pm

Daughters of St. Paul Chapel

50 Saint Paul’s Avenue

Tel. 617-522-8911

For more information, visit our Facebook page: facebook.com/DSPchoir

DVDS: "TO SAVE A LIFE" (2009)

See this film! See this film! See this film!

Suicide / abortion / hypocrisy / bullying / Theology of the Body / meaning of life / problem of suffering

NO trite Christian blather. Lots of realistic situations.

What "choice" do men have when it comes to abortion?

This is going in my "Theology of the Body Films for Men" list.

A boy grows up and becomes a man by the end of  high school. What a concept.

FEAST OF BLESSED JAMES ALBERIONE

Happy Feastday of Blessed James Alberione! 

3 min trailer: http://www.MediaApostle.com   

8 min interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4eGAXhxaoI … … #cathmedia

MOVIES: "HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE"

 “Hunger Games: Catching Fire”—the film series adapted from the young adult books--has changed directors! (New director: Francis Lawrence, “I Am Legend.”) The difference? A little more slick and polished rather than gritty, handheld. A little more lush, shiny “Harry Potter” and less “Where the Wild Things Are.”

“Hunger Games” is set in a world where young people are like gladiators, hunting each other down for TV entertainment and “distraction”* from their government-run lives of deprivation. (You really need to see the first movie first, 'cause this movie don't explain nothing to ya.)

Jennifer Lawrence (as Katniss, the main character) carries the story through like a pro, showing us why her Hollywood star just keeps on rising. This is a quality, pull-out-all-the-stops, blockbuster production. It’s mostly non-graphically violent, loud, but also very beautiful. “Catching Fire” is well stocked with seasoned and believable actors: Donald Sutherland, Jena Malone, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks and always-good-for-laughs Woody Harrelson. 

Katniss continues to be her noble self, doing her best to protect others and save lives (starting with her family and friends) in a brutal and impossible Catch-22 situation. But the Districts are starting to rise up—with Katniss as their icon, beacon and sign of hope—something she doesn’t want but can’t avoid. She feels partially responsible for every further death that occurs, but the revolution is bigger than Katniss.

Katniss’ strong romantic feelings for both Gale (Liam Hemsworth) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) continue. Who will it be?

The movie doesn’t have a strong beginning at all (visually, action-wise or dialogue-wise), which is a bit of letdown.  It’s even stiff and dry, until the conversation between Katniss and President Snow raises the stakes. But once it quickly gets into the groove, it takes off with a heart-pounding “turn” every  few minutes, all the way to the last frame, which, of course, is not the end of the story.

“Catching Fire” is long: 146 minutes, but extremely watchable and never tiresome. There seems to be an underlying theme of goodness and friendship: “Why can’t we all just get along?” But since we can’t, we must protect our own and forge allegiances, and then be fiercely loyal. It’s never just about saving one’s self, but often self-sacrificing to save others.

Why "Hunger Games" Is a Problem

The one problem with the series—and it’s a big one—is the underlying dystopian setting of young people killing young people (“Catching Fire” includes older tributes, also). There’s even a tribute who filed her teeth so she can kill by biting people’s throats. What are we telling/showing youth and why? That life is war? That this is a future we’re heading to? That we must be vigilant about authority, oppressors, totalitarianism? How to keep one’s humanity in the direst and trickiest of situations? Or is it just a juicy, dark story?

As with most Hollywood films, there is no God (or religion) in “Catching Fire.” Only people acting like God (the State). Of course, human beings are the image of God, so from that standpoint, every movie is filled with God.

Good is good and evil is evil in “Catching Fire.” The good guys are really good and the bad guys are really bad. There is a moral clarity here. But there is not much backstory for any of the characters to tell us why they are the way they are. People seem born good or bad and locked into that categorization. There have been no real transformations or conversions throughout these first two films.

Human dignity (not just human freedom) is what Katniss and her friends seem to be fighting for, so there is a comprehensiveness and a human richness to the “good guys” and their ideals that is lacking on the side of the grotesque, plastic, vain, shallow, ruthless rulers and denizens of the “Capitol.”

As I complained about the first installation of “Hunger Games,” Katniss is almost too perfect. Her flaws are negligible, and she always does the highest moral, heroic thing with great courage. (My friends who have read the books assure me that the books reveal more of her inner dilemmas and shortcomings.) Good storytelling must zero in on the main character’s weaknesses as well as strengths to be realistic.

Despite its shortcomings, “Hunger Games” is a very entertaining, life-is-worth-living-affirming tale.

Age appropriateness? Every child is different, but any 10-year-old used to loud noises and a fair amount of violence and “peril” in their media should be fine.
________________
*So, I thought to myself, I thought: "Here we are in a temple of entertainment (and trust me, the Cineplex at Silvercity, Yorkdale Mall, Toronto, is a TEMPLE) being entertained by a story about people who are being manipulated by, um, entertainment."
http://noam-chomsky.tumblr.com/post/13867896307/noam-chomsky-10-strategies-of-manipulation-by-the  

 OTHER STUFF:

--Wanna see this movie review in chill Web 3.0 rather than lame 1.0 graphics? http://lifeteen.com/catholic-movie-review/hunger-games-catching-fire/

--We missed you, Jena! You, too, Amanda Plummer (Christopher Plummer's daughter)!

--The wedding dress.

--Oh joy. "Hunger Games Theme Parks" http://variety.com/2013/film/news/hunger-games-theme-parks-could-be-coming-1200808710/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breakingnewsalert#

--Suzanne Collins (author of "The Hunger Games") dishes on her favorite young adult lit growing up (OMGosh, more than half were MY favs!) http://www.commonsensemedia.org/blog/our-friends-favorites-suzanne-collins-shares-the-books-she-loved-as-a-teen

--There just never was a more "us and them" movie. The game-maker, Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) even uses this very language.

--Lots of obvious overtones of decadent, ancient Rome this time, right down to the chariots. Can you say "bread and circus"?

--Culture of surveillance.

--I love how Katniss, even when totally gussied up, still looks, talks and acts like a tough backwoods gal.

--Most adorbs little baby and toddler with Mom and Dad in front of me in cinema. Toddler very well behaved, baby having a ball screaming and interacting with the ginormo screen. Was I bothered? Nope. The KIDS is what it's all about. We have forgotten this. It's all about THEM.

--Effie (Elizabeth Banks) has a soul. She is a fragile, pathetic, pitiful creature--that's why Katniss and Co. don't hate her. I wouldn't be surprised if she joins the other side....

--Excellent balance of SILENCE in story telling and dialogue.

--Dystopian young adult literature is "so over"? Really? Maybe 'cuz NOW 55% of readers are over 18. (No longer cool when Mom is reading it. Ha ha.) Dystopian literature is so over. What will be the next big genre in young adult fiction? http://ow.ly/qP351

--Hunger Games author, Suzanne Collins, gives a rare interview to TIME magazine, November 2013. Her father was a veteran and believed children should be taught about the realities of war. Can't read whole interview? You should probably subscribe to TIME! :) http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2157467,00.html