Our culture is very media based and an extension of this is that we are flooded with images and movie trailers and okay music and viral videos that really don't amount to much or get us thinking critically about the world. Because of this, it takes some real work and research to find artists who aren't in your face as pop culture is and more often than not these artists are much more authentic and creative. For today's blog I want to talk about some of these artists, whether they be totally obscure or fairly popular, and share with you why they are worth your while. This list is in no particular order.
1. Charlie Simpson
Charlie Simpson started out in the pop punk trio called Busted, a popular U.K. band in the early 2000's. Busted is known for their boy band look, guitar-centric pop and typical teenage boy lyrics. But in 2005 Charlie decided to leave Busted and much to fellow Busted members Matt and James, the group disbanded. Charlie went on to another band called Fightstar but began a solo career in 2010. In my opinion, Charlie's solo career is what has taken him from typical rocker to a serious musician. He has now released two brilliant albums titled Young Pilgrim and Long Road Home. Both albums carry very folksy vibes with raw and fresh lyrics. Charlie is not only on this list for his creative brilliance as a musician bu also for his growth. I was never a huge fan of Busted and never expected any of the band members to have this much potential. Not only that but Charlie is continuing to create great music while Busted members have teamed with McFly, another popular British boy rock band, to form the really gut-wrenchingly awful McBusted. It is nice to see that Charlie has matured from simple guy wants girl lyrics to genuinely interesting and new lyrics that hold a lot more depth and musical ability. Seriously, check this guy out! He is definitely one of my favorite artists.
2. Elizabeth Olsen
Possibly the most known person on this list, Elizabeth Olsen is an actress you will most likely associate with Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen because she is their younger sister. But while Mary-Kate and Ashley have shown little to offer artistically since being the typical child stars and fashion designers, Elizabeth is different. She is by far the best actress I have seen in Hollywood in a long time. You have your Meryl Streep's and Jennifer Lawerence's and Anne Hathaway's and Amy Adam's and...too many others to name. And I believe Olsen can definitely be roped into this group. She is set to star in the new Avengers film and was also in the Godzilla remake which I have not yet seen. She also stars in two of my favorite films - Liberal Arts and Martha Marcy May Marlene. Martha was the first film I saw her in and it is brilliant. Not only is Olsen's performance intricate and solid but the story is good and the way it is set up is even better. If I could only recommend one of her film's it would be that one. Seriously, go buy it now on Amazon. It is by far one of the best films I have ever seen in the past 10 years. And be sure to check out Olsen's other films. You will not be disappointed by her performances!
3. Justin Lee
Justin Lee is an author, speaker and founder of the Gay Christian Network. Yes, that's right. You just read the words "gay" and "Christian" in the same sentence. Lee's book Torn has been one of the best books I have read about faith and culture in the past three years. The book document's Lee's coming out story and discusses the gay vs. Christian debate, arguing that the Bible is not against homosexuality. I've only read one other book on this topic and it could not stand up to Lee's work. Torn is part autobiography, part theology and part persuading. Lee not only establishes his expertise being a gay Christian man but legitimately writes a good argument for acceptance within the church. Not only that but he has extended his outreach to conferences and even has a podcast discussing different issues within the gay Christian debate and community. He is very tolerable of people who don't agree with him and encourages open and civil communication. He is definitely someone you don't want to overlook because not only does he have important things to say but is very creative in going about his mission.
4. Christina DeCicco
Out of all the people on this list, Christina DeCicco is the only person I can say that I have met. Well, actually that isn't entirely true. She is the only person I've met multiple times on this list. DeCicco is a musical theatre actress who deserves way more credit than she is given. Of course, please don't confuse the word credit with praise because praise is about the only thing she receives when people review a show she is staring in. I say credit because she is not nearly as recognized as Broadway actresses to which she easily measures up. Her high energy and personal acting style mixed with her powerful voice is just magic on the stage. She has acted in many musicals. Most recently she played Arachne in the Spiderman Musical and was the understudy for the title role in Evita. Other roles include Glinda in Wicked, Betty in Sunset Boulevard (my personal favorite role of hers), Belle in Beauty and the Beast, Maria in West Side Story, Eponine in Les Miserables and more! Not only can this girl act and sing but you can tell she is a master at her craft and a very down to earth and humble person. Seriously, keep this woman on your radar. She is destined for great things!
5. Doug Walker
Doug Walker is fairly well known in internet world. Most will recognize him as the Nostalgia Critic on YouTube but he also does many other videos and collaborations. Now I know the Nostalgia Critic isn't something new but I've recently become obsessed with the show. Not only do I love the comedy and the commentary on filmography and thinking critically, but I love the creativity put into each review. No review is ever a simple man sits in front of camera. Walker brings on guests and plot-lines and even sometimes has musical numbers. And these additions aren't random or silly but actually reveal a lot of truth and set Walker's reviews apart from most others. Plus, Walker is a very genuine guy. His points, while overly exaggerated on the Nostalgia Critic, are very well thought out and intellectually driven. If his critique is influenced by his emotions he usually addresses this fact with some comedy or simply calling himself out. It is obvious he knows the balance between taking his art and art itself seriously but not taking himself too seriously. This is also obvious from his simple man and camera vlog reviews where the Nostalgia Critic is stripped away and he speaks honestly about how he felt about a film. I would highly recommend watching the Nostalgia Critic. And shameless plug, his videos inspired me to be a critic of my own - the Literary Critic!
6. Marilyn Sewell
There is a documentary on Netflix called Raw Faith and sits in the faith and spirituality genre. I am all for this genre but more often than not the content is stale and cliche and dumbed down. I've watched a few documentaries in this category said to be really good but overall disappointing. For this reason I was very hesitant to watch Raw Faith but I made myself press play and thank God I did! Raw Faith is a documentary about a Unitarian Minister named Marilyn Sewell. Marilyn walks us through her day to day routines, talks about her life growing up, and tells us why she enjoys being a minister. But there seems to be something missing in her life and that is intimate companionship. Raw Faith has to be one of the best documentaries on spirituality I have ever seen. It truly is as it's title presents - raw and authentic faith.
Marilyn is a very fascinating person and is a voice that needs to be heard not just be people who identify as Christians. She has released a few books and used to host a podcast called Raw Faith Radio which I have been thoroughly enjoying. I would highly recommend you to check out her documentary and all of her other projects.
7. Ron Hansen
For the longest time I believed that Christianity in fiction would never amount to anything but Lifetime movie clones or atheist leanings. Luckily I took a class on Christian fiction in college and was introduced to many great authors who incorporated their faith into their fiction without shoving it down the reader's throat. One of these authors is Ron Hansen. Now, to be clear, I have only read two of his books. The first was Mariette in Ecstasy which I read for my class and really loved. Read my review here. The second book was The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. I wasn't a huge fan of this one but that isn't because of Hansen but my dislike of western's and this mafia-esque story line. But regardless, Hansen's writing was ridiculously good in this book! Read my review here. Hansen always brilliantly captures his characters and the setting of his story. I would compare my reading experience to that of drinking fine wine. He is a brilliant writer and one I would recommend to all lovers of books and words.
8. Wesley Blaylock
Wes Blaylock may be last on this list but he is certainly not least. I was introduced to him my first semester of college in 2009 when I heard his band Deas Vail's track called Birds. I ended up listening to the whole album on YouTube and fell in love. To this day Deas Vail remains one of my favorite bands. Their lyrics are incredibly poetic and their sound is very indie yet interesting and lovely to the ears. Wes is the genius behind this though, writing most of the song's lyrics and music.
What I love about Wes and Deas Vail is, like Ron Hansen, their ability to write about their faith without shoving it down your throat. They have even stated in interviews that they don't outright say they are a Christian band because they don't want to negative connotations that come with that. They want to produce good music and naturally their faith becomes apart of it because it is who they are. Wes has a YouTube channel where he posts cover songs and has also released a solo EP. Be sure to check him out!
Books - A Feast for Crows by George R. R. Matin, The Wisdom of Pixar by Robert Velarde, Gilead by Marilynne Robinson
TV Shows - Rev. BBC2
Podcasts - The Relevant Podcast
Music - Andy Mineo's Neverland (You Can't Stop Me), Royal Tailor (Remain), Loud Harp (Take Heart), The Way Way Back Soundtrack (For the Time Being by Edie Brickell), Luminous City (Your Love Moves, Kingdom Come), Tenth Avenue North's Islands EP (For Those Who Can't Speak).
**WARNING - SPOILERS FOR THE FIRST THREE BOOKS AND ALL SEASONS OF THE TV SHOW**
George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire book series is probably the last series you'd ever find sitting on the shelf in a Christian book store. Its graphic sexual content, vulgar language, and brutal violence are too bohemian for the strict and sacred values of the church. Where you stand on this, I don't know. But I do know that these books are among the best literature that is being dished out today. I have learned on my Christian walk that literature of all kinds is important to my growth in faith. In fact, literature was necessary for me because it taught me the art of seeing from anothers perspective, to sympathize, and to understand that people are not simply black and white and easy to explain, nor is the universe. Literature taught me to think outside the box and to expect the unexpected. I have learned that fiction is sometimes more truthful than the "truth." My faith has taught me a lot too. For example, Jesus didn't hang out with the people who claimed to be perfect or have it all together. He hung out with the messy people and the people who needed saving. And literature is the same way. We are readers, hanging out with fictional characters who are just screwed up and yet we relate to them, sympathize with them, and route for them. And A Song of Ice and Fire contains some of the most screwed up characters in the history of fiction (this statement is being made from my experience with fiction. Perhaps you know of characters who are even more screwed up?). The books are filled with so much immorality and imperfection and suffering but at the same time it is poetic and redemptive. There is beauty to be found within suffering. These are people Jesus would have been hanging out with. George R. R. Martin reveals their goodness and humanity just as Jesus revealed it in those he came in contact with. In many regards, an author is the savior of his/her own story. As the character Tyrion states, "I have a tender spot in my heart for cripples and bastards and broken things." There are many biblical connections throughout A Song of Ice and Fire that I have recently been alluded to and now have enough thoughts on the matter to write an entire blog entry! I first want to start with characters and what better person to start off with than the beloved Lord Eddard Stark of Winterfell - Ned. Ned is criticized many a time for not playing the game of thrones properly but that is why I love him. He values justice and what is right over power. His commitment to honor and doing what is right mixed with his calm, loving and collected demeanor outshine all of the other characters who seek their own happiness rather than that of the people around them and the realm. Ned is an honest man who keeps his word. Right when we meet him we hear him ask his son Bran, after beheading a man for deserting his post at the Night's Watch, if Bran understands why he had to kill that man. Bran answers by stating the obvious - the man was a deserter. Ned restates the question and puts emphasis on the fact that he personally had to kill the man. He then explains that the man who passes the sentence must swing the sword. He continues, "If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die." What Ned is explaining to his son is accountability and authenticity. You must live your words, not just speak them.
Ned's death very much mirrors the death of Christ. Ned has been wrongly accused and plans to give his life if it means being condemned for a crime he did not commit. The only reason he ends up falsely confessing is for the sake of his daughters. He is accused of crimes he didn't commit, just as Jesus was by Pontius Pilate. He is then killed unjustly even though he was a pure man - not exactly pure on the level of Christ but as a prodigal son type since no one is without sin as Jesus was. My second favorite character in the series is Daenerys Targaryen. Her plot seems to mirror the Crucifixion of Christ in an Easter Sunday sense. She steps into the flames of death which should have killed her but is reborn from the ashes. But what stands out the most for me is her name. In Matthew 22:15-21, the Pharisees try to trick Jesus by inquiring of him if it is lawful to pay census tax to Caesar or not in which Jesus sees right through them and is mad. He tells them to show him the coin of the census tax and "they offered him a denarius". Upon reading this, you may not have picked up on the similarity to Dany's name. I'm sure I would not have. However, I heard this verse spoken out loud. I first heard this verse in Jeff Bethke's video on YouTube titled Whose image is on you. It is a really great video so be sure to check it out. Moving forward, Jesus takes the denarius and says to the Pharisees, "Whose image is this, and whose inscription?" They reply, "Caesar's." Then Jesus says, "So give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Perhaps this is a prediction that Daenerys will rule...but she may become dictatorial rather than the fair Queen she was expecting herself to be originally.
Now let's move to the Lannister's. I want to discuss them as a whole rather than individually. Throughout the books, the Lannister colors of gold and crimson are listed hundreds of times. I wish someone would keep count of how many times the word crimson is mentioned throughout the entire series. But there is another medium which heavily emphasizes on the word crimson. Rapper and spoken word artist Propaganda recently released his sophomore album titled Crimson Cord and discussed the meaning behind the title song with the Relevant Podcast. He said he used crimson to symbolize Christ's blood. The phrase was a play on words of scarlet thread or a person's timeline or history being stained crimson or red with the blood of Christ. We are all stained with crimson on our timelines because each and every one of us killed Christ - yet we are redeemed. The Lannister's could be referred to as the ultimate sinners yet they are the color of crimson, symbolizing blood, and the color of gold which could represent alchemical gold or perfection. This points to George R. R. Martin using literary alchemy in his series. The definition of alchemy is transforming basic metals into pure gold. Literature does a similar things with characters in that they begin as flawed and sinning individuals who grow and become perfect, not in a conventional way but a authentic way. Alchemy is a very spiritual idea used throughout literature (very prevalent in Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame). Perhaps this points to the Lannister's all being redeemed by the end? So far we have Tyrion and Jaime redeemed, Tyrion from the start and Jaime from book 3 and I'd say Tywin and Joffery were redeemed in death. So is Cersei next? Cersei herself shows her true colors when she orders Robert's bastards to be killed. This can easily be compared to King Herod who was threatened by Jesus just as Cersei is threatened by Robert's airs and tells his men to kill Jesus. The final character I want to comment on is Jojen Reed. He guides Bran in the books and seems to have no concern for himseld. The show did a good job at portraying this when Jojen's hand caught fire, symbolizing his death yet he said Bran must keep going and live out his destiny and that he will be there no matter what. He is another Christ figure and possibly the ultimate Christ figure, laying down his life for his friends. I next want to focus on locations in the series. First, the Vale. The Vale is where Lysa Arryn lives, high above everyone else which makes her and everyone living there very safe. A veil in reality is, as most know, something a bride wears over her face before her wedding This veil symbolizes her
innocence and that she is protected and safe. When her husband lifts the veil she is now entering into the unknown word of marriage and transforming into a woman. The Vale in this series is sort of the same way. It sits up high, safe and protected where no one can touch it. No one will be removing the Vale for quite some time which will keep it safe no matter what. When Ned Stark is sent to the bottom of the dungeons in Kings Landing before he is executed, he sits in total darkness at the bottom and his experience can only be described like hell. I was listening to a Harry Potter book discussion and Dante's Inferno was mentioned and suddenly I realized that the dungeons of Kings Landing are a representation of descending deeper and deeper into hell. Ned is in the deepest circle where betrayers reside. Although Ned is innocent, he is accused of betraying the crown so it makes sense that George R. R. Martin placed him down there. Finally, I would like to discuss the major religions of Westeros. The first, and most feared among readers, is the Lord of Lights. This religion seems to be mirroring modern day American Christianity and George R. R. Martin is poking fun at it. The religion fools people with miracles but is controlled by a malevolent god. It requires good works to be in the Lord of Light's favor and Melisandre seems to be their messiah, carrying out the Lord's work. The Old Gods are a much more sacred form of religion and much older. Men and women who practice this form of folk religion by praying to the sacred heart tree. There are no holy texts or scriptures to follow. The only rituals they practice is prayer in front of the heart tree in the Godswood. Most Godswoods have been turned into secular gardens in the south, giving the old gods no power there. The heart trees, or Weirwood trees, have faces carved into them by the children of the forest and are considered sacred. The sap inside is red and runs out of the trees carved eyes, as if the tree is shedding tears of blood. The religion is very connected to nature and many say that the wind is a way the Old Gods speak to them.
The Drowned God is worshiped on the Iron Islands. While the iron borns are very harsh in what they believe, their practices are very similar to that of baptism. As babies, the iron born are drowned in water and brought back up cleansed and resurrected. The faith, or the New Gods, is the most prominent religion in Westeros. There are 7 gods - 3 men, 3 women, and one ambiguous. They are as follows - the fathers, the mother, the warrior, the maiden, the smith, the crone, and the stranger. The number 7 is a very important number in the Bible. God created the world in 7 days. The Bible was originally split into 7 major divisions - the law, the prophets, the writings/psalms, the Gospels and Acts, the General Epistles, the Epistles of Paul, and the book of Revelation. In Matthew 13, Jesus is quoted as giving 7 parables. 7 psalms are ascribed to David in the New Testament. In scripture, 7 symbolizes completeness or perfection. There is also supposed to be 7 books in the A Song of Ice and Fire series, similar to other great fantasies like the Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter. Both of these series use literary alchemy and as I stated above, it seems this series is doing the same. It will be more obvious once all 7 books are published. While A Song of Ice and Fire is a dark series, it shows its many biblical references just as other fantasies do. It is a mark of smart fiction and I can't wait to finish the series! Do you see any biblical hints in the series? If so, comment with your thoughts! I would love to have a conversation with you!
Today I have just released Episode 11 of the podcast I am a part of called Talk Magic to Me. It feels surreal that my friends and I made it this far! 11 episodes seems miniscule next to other podcasts who have dished out hundreds to almost 500 episodes. I can only hope we make it that far. Although 11 is a small number in that regard, it is a big number from where I'm standing. We started this project in February and now it is almost June! I hardly can recall why the months have slipped right through my fingers. While life tends to speed by anyway, this podcast seems to have put my life in overdrive. Many good things have come from this podcast. The best part about it though, by far, is getting to have conversation with friends. Every week I get to watch a new movie and write my thoughts down for future discussions and it is awesome! I especially love when we discuss heavier topics (which may occur more with our new grubs section). Being able to put my opinions out there in a more approachable way is great. Another great aspect of podcasting is listener feedback. While we haven't received a lot, we already seem to have a few devoted listeners which is amazing. I can only hope that our podcast will be an inspiration for them as much as other podcasts have been for me. While podcasting has highs, it also has lows. I know my fellow host Jen will agree with me when I say that podcasting is STRESSFUL! It is especially stressful when it isn't your job and it sucks up all your free time. I find that I am more often than not extremely tired and so all my waking hours are either at my job or working with the podcast. This has forced me to neglect many things that I don't want to neglect like reading, writing, and of course blogging. I've gotten better at managing my time but it is still tiring. I have become sick of editing to the point where I put it off until the very last minute. No wonder I am stressed. Once I sit down and commit to editing though I enjoy the job. But at the end of the day, this is something I enjoy doing. I want to continue to have healthy conversation and talk about why Disney is so awesome with my friends and listeners. Who knows, maybe something great will come out of this one day (preferably a full time job or a trip to Disney World). Between all of the highs and lows, podcasting has given me room to grow as a person and an artist.
The experience has given me many teachable moments that I want to share. The first is that I can't judge myself too harshly. After recording our first few episodes, especially the Frozen episodes, I would wake up the next morning feeling crappy and as if what I said during recording wasn't good enough. It's a sucky feeling and I still feel it every now and then and am still learning that I can't be too hard on myself. I have also learned that I can't judge other podcasts too harshly either. Before Talk Magic to Me, I would often be nitpicky and annoyed when a podcaster forgot to mention something or say a fact correctly and now when I listen back I notice my fellow hosts and I making mistakes or forgetting important info. The next thing I have learned is that it is okay to be stressed. I mean...it is okay in context. I am stressed because I am trying to make the podcast great so there can't be anything wrong with that...right? It also teaches me to loosen up and learn from the stress. I now have to ask myself, what do I NEED to do and what can wait? Jen said to me a few weeks ago that podcasting is a labor of love. I would have to agree entirely. Finally, podcasting has pushed me to be more creative. Coming up with fun games and grubs and writing the basic script is working a lot of your creative juices. I'm being pushed in a new way and I can see a big difference in myself already. Ultimately, the experience has been good and I look forward to our future episodes and can't wait to see where the podcast takes all four of us!
When Shameless first premiered on Showtime, I hated it. The show was unnecessarily crude and featured scenarios that I was not comfortable watching. I'm not sure what made me continue watching but I eventually made it to episode three and by the end, I was hooked. The third episode of season one brought humanity to these characters and this story that I had not noticed before. Finally I began to see how well crafted this show was and how ground breaking it was at the same time. It is among the many shows on premium TV today that are breaking the mold in what television is and will be in the future. Watching Shameless on Sunday nights during the winter has become an insanely awesome ritual for me. I gather some snacks and a drink and venture down into the basement where the big HD family TV is and I am allowed one hour by myself with my favorite TV show. Every season always captivates me and leaves me begging for more. Each season has it's own vibe to it yet they always remain completely and utterly the same. But season four was a lot different than any of the previous seasons. Shameless the TV show broke the mold and season four seemed to break Shameless's mold. No longer was I watching the show where a dysfunctional family sticks together through shameless acts and questionable ethics. Season four depicted a family still acting shameless but drawing apart and it really had me feeling crappy on Sunday nights. Every time I finished an episode I felt like I had hit a new low. This isn't a criticism of the season but just a general thing I noticed on a consistent basis. This week for Wasted Wednesday I want to talk about my thoughts about season four and how I felt about character development and the overall story. WARNING, this post WILL contain spoilers from all four seasons. Let's start out with Frank, our main man. Frank is the character we all love to...love, even though we hate him. Because Frank has his moments of redemption that glimmer on the horizon for a few seconds but always burn out and are short lived and if he does do something good, it is usually for his own benefit and not to help others or grow as a person. But this season was totally different. At the end of season three, Frank and his oldest son Lip get drunk and afterwards go ice-skating until Frank throws up an enormous amount of blood on the rink. He is taken to the hospital and told he must change his habits or he will die. This was a huge twist on the writer's part and also a huge risk. Putting Frank's life in jeopardy also jeopardizes the show. This isn't Game of Thrones where a main character can be killed off and still go on. Frank is the entire basis for this show and provides motivation for the other characters he impacts. I would be very shocked if they killed him off which is why I found his storyline to be very weak. As I watched Frank's life deteriorate before my eyes, I knew that somehow a last minute miracle would come and save him and sure enough, it did. Frank hit a new low this season, manipulating his son for drugs, manipulating his long lost and forgiving daughter to help him (and by the way, Sammi was an awesome addition to the show), and just his physical appearance each episode was enough to make me turn my head from the screen. Add to the fact that the story line was completely pointless for two reasons. One is that we know that the show is not going to kill off Frank. It's too obvious. They didn't leave me guessing if he was going to live or die. I knew he would live because while the other characters make the show and all are engaging, Frank drives the show. Everything these characters do stems from Frank and what he has done, does, and will do. Secondly, in the finale we see Frank receive a new liver and start up drinking straight away. He even makes a speech to God saying that he won the battle against the almighty creator as he holds his beer bottle toward the sky as if he is going to throw it into the river but then takes a big gulp and then passes it to his underage son. I get why the writer's wouldn't want to change Frank as a character but you can't give him such a life evolving storyline and then act like he wouldn't be changed in some way. It was very weak writing which is usually not the case with this show. Next up is oldest daughter Fiona. Fiona's story was hard to watch this season. Everything starts out
really well and I was so happy for Fiona. She had a great job and the Gallagher's were moving up on the poverty level. But then she went and cheated on her boyfriend with his brother, left drugs out that her baby brother got into and almost died, went to jail but then went to house arrest and then went back to jail after not returning home one night when she felt she couldn't take what the world was throwing at her anymore. But unlike Frank, Fiona's growth was awesome! She came to the realization that she does have her father gene's and she can't blame him anymore or anyone else. In the end she has to look to herself. I was very pleased with how her story ended for the season. Lip's storyline was awesome as well as his character development. His story was in my opinion the strongest of the season. Watching him struggle with college and juggling family crisis and learning to forgive Fiona for what she did and moving on from Mandy...it's a lot of pressure. And you see a different man sitting on the porch steps of the Gallagher household on the last episode. The only story that I feel measures up to Lip's is the relationship between Ian and Mickey. These two have been called the most realistic gay couple on television and I agree 100%. Shameless bravely took on these two as early as season one! Their relationship has bloomed since then and both have grown as people and so their relationship grew as well. Mickey's coming out scene made me cry. The two actors have a way of casting certain expressions on their faces that doesn't require any dialogue because you can read what they are thinking. And it isn't just these two. All of the actors are so incredibly gifted and clearly understand their craft. I have yet to see a bad actor on the show. Ian's storyline itself felt a bit forced, especially in the beginning and at the very end. I guess him
being bipolar like his mother Monica makes sense since Frank isn't his father so we won't be seeing any of those genes. I like that the show doesn't forget Monica even though she has been gone since season two. I'm a little nervous to see where Ian goes from here because Monica's storyline really rubs me the wrong way and I find it difficult to watch. I've grown to love Ian as a character and watching him go through this won't be easy. Debbie and Carl's both had hard to watch scenes as well. Debbie drove me up the wall. I don't think the writer's are at fault because they are perfectly depicting what middle school can be like but watching Debbie having a count down to when she will lose her virginity was frightening. I miss the old Debs! I really hope the next season we will see her getting rid of her dumb sex obsessed friends and see her make new friends and meet a boy her age...though I do like Mattie even though he is way too old for her to date. As for Carl, I found his scenes to be more agreeable which is weird to say. Carl's storyline has gotten better and better with each season. In season one he was definitely just a background, trouble maker character that only existed to cause trouble. But he is now growing up and we see him yearning for a relationship with his father and constantly being let down. I think the hardest thing to accept with these two is their defiance towards Fiona most of the season. They completely turn on her which doesn't help her story at all. Kev and V had a strong storyline. I wish there would have been more from them in the finale though. It seems like the writer's were like, Oh the babies are born and that is all you really care about so now we can forget about them. They should have been included way more toward the end. And I guess I should also comment on Sheila's storyline. Sheila is Sheila. Joan Cusack was wonderful as always. She always makes me laugh. Both of these were different than usual which fit with the direction the writer's took this season. The finale episode was by far my favorite of the season. One thing that made me super happy was seeing Jimmy/Steve...Jack at the very end. When season three ended, I was convinced he was dead and was happy about it. I was sick of him and ready for Fiona to move on with her new boyfriend, Mike. But this season went so far away from what I know to be Shameless that I found I wanted Jimmy/Steve back! I couldn't believe my own thoughts! I can't wait to see where his story goes in season five. The episode was also pretty great. It was titled "Lazarus" which is referring to a character in the Bible. The allegory behind this title is incredible. In Frederick Buechner's book titled Telling the Truth, he talks about this passage in the Bible. In John 11, Jesus arrives to find that Lazarus is dead and has been dead for four days. Jesus weeps for Lazarus, his friend. He weeps not only for losing his friend but for his inability to save him. The son of God himself who can do all things was unable to save his own friend and so he weeps. Afterwards, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead. In the Shameless season four finale, each of the character's finally gets their happy ending...and I say that very loosely. This is why this show is so incredible. Right from the beginning the show starts out great and we are happy for the Gallagher's but then suddenly their family begins to metaphorically die right before our eyes, just as Lazarus died and Jesus could not save him. But then, they are brought back to life in this final and triumphant episode just as Jesus brings Lazarus back to life. It is a very moving depiction and a very daring place for the writer's to take the show. The only complaint I have about the finale is something I already stated which is Frank's terrible speech to God when he drinks beer. It just seemed to be poor writing and confirmed my superstition that this entire season his story was utterly pointless. It was just there for the drama of it and Frank became a plot driving device rather than being a character driving force on the show like he usually is. Overall, different season but strong season. I hope they go back to their usual format though because I don't know if I can take another gut wrenching season like this one. I can't wait for season five. I hate these long premium channel hiatuses! Waiting until January is going to be terrible! Do you watch Shameless? What did you think of this season? Did anything stand out to you that I didn't mention? Let me know in the comments!
In September of 2012, I wrote a blog defending the Disney Princess name. I was defending them for a number of reasons. In the blog I talked about society's definition of feminism and why it isn't necessarily a healthy definition and how it applies to the Princesses and their impact on girls. I then went on to address a blog condemning the Princesses by selecting specific points and proving why these points were essentially invalid arguments to say that these characters are bad role models. And finally, I stated why each of the Princesses are good role models and their virtues. If you have not yet read that post, click here. Well, it is National Princess week and this is as good a time as ever to post a follow up to my first blog. Note - although I posted this during National Princess week, the week after I wrote it I had a sudden inspiration so I rewrote much of this piece so it isn't entirely in it's original form. But it's a whole lot better now so I'm content. A lot has happened since I wrote Part 1. Two new Princess movies came out and both attacked the issue of feminism in their own way. There was also a Princess redesign that sparked a lot of controversy. This blog post will do accomplish three things. It will discuss the millennial generation and why the study of this general gives a good look at why people view Disney and their Princesses the way they do. Next, I will discuss the Princess redesign in comparison to the release of Average Barbie. And finally I will talk about the new films, how the new Princesses are good role models, and why these two new films aren't focused enough on making a genuinely good film. I was reading an article in Relevant Magazine by Jesse Carey titled Generation Rising. The article discussed the growing controversy of how the world defines the millennial generation. Either we're lazing and entitled or authentic and creative. There is no middle ground apparently. After presenting a lot of research and perspectives from all sides of the spectrum, it is implied that our generation feels like we were lied to. We were told to believe in ourselves and anything is possible. But that isn't true and I think Disney played a big part in sending this message out. One of Disney's biggest criticisms today is their message of dreams coming true with little to no work (magic) or, for a girl, finding a man to do the hard work for her. I think there is a bit of misconception to this idea which I discuss in my first defense of the Disney Princesses post but I digress. Reading Carey's article was a real wake up call for me because even though it had nothing to do with Disney, it screamed the answer as to why this debate exists between Disney and the public. The millennial generation is defined as being born between the years of 1980 and 2002. Disney peaked in 1989, right in the middle of the millennial generation, and they continued to capture children from this generation with their spectacular films. Essentially, critics believe that Disney held a stick with a hundred dollar bill tied to it and millennials kept chasing it, believing that one day they would catch up and get that hundred dollar bill. But it isn't that easy and neither is achieving your dreams. When the harsh reality set in, people became angry and the the public began to look for someone to blame for their misconception. Disney was the scapegoat. What bothers me about all of this is that there is something that people have failed to see about the movies Disney released during the years millennials were growing up. Yes, Disney promoted easy ways to reach dreams. It is Disney's market and signature and has been since 1940 when Gepetto wished upon a star for a real boy. To say that Disney has lied to our generation is an overstatement. You might as well say they lied to every generation (which I disagree with). But people fail to see what Disney did right during their Renaissance and through most of the corporations career in film and other aspects of entertainment. Disney has a keen sense of depicting the inner reality of it's viewers and making films that are just plain good. In other words, they are good at what they do. If we can learn anything from Disney, we can learn from their artistic depictions of the inner reality of the child within all of us. We can learn from the detail and research they put into their movies. We can learn from the hard work they put into their animation. We can learn from the well crafted musical scores and numbers. No, Ariel's choices are not going to necessarily push young girls on the right path. What Ariel's choices do is depict a human being - a 16 year old girl who yearns for adventure in the unknown and finds out the hard way that things are so easy. No, young children aren't going to have good advice from films that use magic to solve their problems. But whoever said we are to take fairy tales literally? When we read Harry Potter books, do we believe brooms will magically carry us away when a bully comes near? Of course not. And when we watch the Wizard of Oz, do we believe tapping our red shoes three times together while take us home? No. So why would we expect Disney to be any different? I fail to see why critics are being more harsh on Disney than any other fairy story. They have just as much right to stretch fantasy as the next story-teller. I think it okay for me to speak up as a millennial myself because I too fell for this lie that your dreams will come true no matter what. However, if I ever had to blame an institution for planting this idea in my head, I would blame the school system that told me one day I could be a writer and follow my dreams. Even in high school I was lied to when my teachers said when I went to college I would be able to focus on what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. Well, that is a clear lie for the simple reason that gen-eds exist. My point is that Disney should not be blamed for the so called ideas they plant in our heads. They are a company that makes fantasy films. It is time we stopped viewing these movies as kid movies and stick to Walt philosophy of making films for the child in all of us. Disney is not to blame for making kids a certain way. I think the millennial generation is a generation searching for authenticity and sometimes Disney movies don't come off as very authentic. Fair enough. A statistic in Carey's article says that 60% of millennials have abandoned religion and it is fairly clear as to why. Religion, like the idea of dreams in Disney movies, has proved to be a let down. Not only that but religion is represented by hypocritical people who constantly aren't who they say they are. My generation is searching for truth in places other generations have not looked. As a millennial who is still involved in religion, I can say that religious leaders are not what Christianity is and secondly, Disney actually dips into religious topics with their characters. I would love to talk about all the ways Disney brings Christianity into their films but I will stick to the Princesses in this post. A question many people are asking is if we should
be telling girls they are Princesses or not. Are we all royal in God's
eyes or is there a problem with this terminology? In my opinion, there
are two sides to calling a little girl a Princess. Of course God views
little girls as Princesses and little boys as Princes. He values them
and loves them and wants the best for them. However, we shouldn't
expect God to treat us as Princes and Princesses. We should expect God
to be God, to be fair in the ways he sees fit which won't necessarily
seem fair in our earthly ways. Another issue that I sort of skimmed
over in my last blog was the issue of following your heart. Disney
promotes this idea but points more toward doing the right thing and
saying that your heart will guide you toward doing the right thing. But
the Bible says otherwise. Jeremiah 17:9
states, "The heart is
deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who
can understand it?" I don't think Disney wants to promote getting your
way all of the time. Their films point to doing the right thing when
the easier choice is to do what you want. But their films also promote
this idea that if you want something and work
toward it and pray when it feels necessary, you will earn your heart's
desire. I don't want to get into all of the reasons why Disney distorts
Christianity though, I want to talk about how the films promote it.
Christian symbolism is littered throughout Disney movies, even in the
newer ones. Many of the Princesses present Biblical imagery whether we
are aware of it or not and I want to share this with you all. I will
not include some of the Princesses because I do not want to force
symbolism. If I saw it, I will include it. Let's start with Elsa.
Elsa is the prodigal son figure. She runs away and then returns
accepted and forgiven completely and earns redemption. Anna is a Christ
figure. As I said above, her love for Elsa never dwindles even when
Elsa mistreats her and in the end, she gives her life up for Elsa as
Christ did for his people on the cross. Rapunzel's tear could symbolize
baptism. When she cries onto Eugene, she renews his soul and gives him
new life and he is a new man. Pocahontas is a very spiritual Christian
figure. She teaches us to love and accept the nature around us and use
it to speak to God by listening to the wind or the flowing rivers or
the animals speech throughout the forest. Belle is another Christ
figure next to Anna. She gives up her life for her father when she
becomes prisoner in the Beast's castle. And finally, Snow White shows
grace. Her character is seemingly perfect and when others are not so
perfect, she still accepts them just the same as we all should love and
accept one another for our similarities and our differences.
Back in April/May last year, Disney gave their Princesses major designs. The results were shocking. Disney has always milked the Princesses for marketing. They release videos with the Princesses, dolls, McDonald's toys, clothing and shoes, posters, notebooks and pencils, backpacks, etc. The Princesses are always dolled up in their signature dresses and many have complained that this takes away from their character. I would have to agree with that. I would love to see Belle in her village outfit with a book or Cinderella in her maid outfit but at the same time, I'm okay with the glamor because a lot of girls like to dress up their dolls and it seems fitting. I'm not okay with the Princess redesigns though. The Livejournal blog titled "Oh No They Didn't" spoke out straight away about the new Princesses, saying things like, "This is the Kardashian-ization of the Disney Princesses" and "It can be subtle (Rapunzel) or it can look like cosmetic surgery. Cinderella now looks strangely like Taylor Swift, while poor Belle - I can't decide if she looks more like Kim, Kourtney or Khloe." And I have to agree. Most of the changes are horrifying and it isn't just for the reason that they look like culture clones and that their redesigns take away who they are as characters. Not only that but they all look like they were designed to be sexually objectified. This redesign begs us to ask the question, what is beauty? Because the definition of beauty has changed over the years. Another big issue is with the popular doll, Barbie. I grew up playing with Barbie dolls and I never had any issues as an adult. But apparently some people feel differently and so not long ago Barbie was redesigned and sent out to toy stores with the name "Average Barbie." You know, there is Dentist Barbie and Scuba Barbie and now there is an Average Barbie. But apart from her figure, people say she doesn't look much different than any other Barbie. Her face is still our ideal model of beauty, which begs the question - is Average Barbie really average? She is still thin, still has a typical beautiful face, and wears nice clothing. What about the girls who don't dress "nice" and like to wear all black or prefer not to wear bright blue or plain old blouses? What about the girls who are heavy? What about the girls who aren't white? In my opinion, there is a screaming problem with this whole thing. Constantly we think that telling girls that everyone is beautiful will solve things, yet that isn't true. Too many girls are learning that they define themselves by what they look like. They are still learning to identify with their outward appearance rather than being taught to find beauty in other places. Hannah Anderson, author of the book Made For More, said in an episode of the Christ in Pop Culture podcast when discussing Average Barbie that "we are so focused on womanhood, we forget to focus on personhood." This is the argument I was making in my first blog. We need to stop looking at ourselves by what makes us different but rather what unites us. Yes our skin may be different colors and gender differs but it is who we are on the inside that matters. We are all people when it comes down to it. The reason these Princess redesigns bother me is that they take away from these characters their personhood. They have become culture clones rather than their individual selves that people can relate to. They are a tool used to make money off of kids. Disney has been
criticized for years about their female characters, specifically the
Princesses. We have now entered a modern age where Disney faces public
scrutiny from every direction. People are so focused on films being
politically correct, especially Disney movies. I think people are more
critical of Disney because they are seen as a company that makes kids
movies. I think the real issue with all of this is, 1. a film shouldn't
be judged by how it represents people/places/or things and 2. animated
movies should not be judged as kids movie because many kids movies are
animated. Number 2 I touched on in my first point and is not an issue I plan to discuss any further in this blog but
it is something to be aware of. Number 1, however, is a real issue with
animation today, especially when it comes to Disney movies. Instead of
critics and moviegoers paying attention to the film's artistic
integrity, they are only focusing on it being politically correct. In
this case, people are expecting a female character to not be rescued by a
man and be her own hero. I am all for doing something different. It
is known that Disney typically has male and female characters interact
very intimately and that men are usually there to either save the day or
help save the day. I am okay with Disney changing it up instead of
doing the same thing over and over again (though while Disney does this
style over and over again, they change up the way they come to the
conclusion and in my opinion, they do a really good job with each story)
but what I am not okay with is them creating a story that conforms to a
certain expectation from outspoken moviegoers. In my opinion, it
takes away from the artistic integrity of the piece. It shows that
Disney is working around this limitation rather than just making a good
movie. This is particularly apparent in Disney's newest Princess movie,
Frozen, when they adapted the story The Snow Queen, which
had a strong female character already in it and Disney changed it. The
film would have had a strong female character if Disney had stuck to
the story yet they went in and changed it completely and in my opinion
ruined their chances of making a strong female movie. It was still a
strong female movie...but a particularly silly one. It will be hard to
take seriously in years to come. Disney's newest Princesses are very
much in the expected feminist Princess mold and the public seems to be
eating it up. Just look at the bucks Frozen brought in. Money
doesn't lie. I'm happy that Disney has been successful and I am happy
they are changing things up...but I'm not happy with the reasons for
doing it. Disney has taken a new approach to advertising their new Princess films as well. They are trying to veer away from their typical Princess movie and instead make a general family movie for both genders and all ages to enjoy. This theory in itself is silly to me since Beauty and the Beast didn't try hard to do this yet was a genuinely good film and was enjoyable by all ages and both genders. Today, Disney creates silly movie trailers that give little to no detail about the actual film that will be released in order to give their new film a particular look. They want to portray a family cartoon. I see their reasoning behind this tactic but like many choices Disney has made in the past ten years (like switching to making movies in CGI permanently because Home on the Range was a poor movie made in 2-D animation), it is a poor one and won't work in the long run. Soon they will be searching for new ideas. The newest Disney Princess movies have not fallen victim to the redesign. Although Merida was given a new look, people became infuriated and Disney cowered under pressure and switched her back to her original design. Why just Merida though? Why didn't all of the Princesses get some defense? Well, maybe we will find out by looking at the newest Disney/Pixar Princess movie Brave and Disney's newest animated feature, Frozen. I saw both of these movies in theaters and want to comment on both. First, let me talk about the story in each one. Brave's story was all over the place which made it very weak. Some of Disney/Pixar's best films are simple ones and Brave was trying too hard to be all kinds of stories rather than telling a good story in itself. The movie borrowed too much from different places and didn't have time to return back to the things they borrowed from which made the film feel incomplete. Frozen fell victim to the same issue where it tried too hard to accomplish many things and ultimately left us feeling unsatisfied. Both films only fixed one of the issues they created and everything else was left unexplained. Of course, many people didn't notice this because the things these two films accomplished had to do with feminism and as far as today's moviegoers and critics are concerned, that is all that matter. Never mind telling a good story, right? The characters in Brave were typical and forgettable. Merida was...unique. I definitely think she is an awesome Princess but once again her character was simply created to fit a gender ideal for our modern day. I cared more about Merida's mother than Merida herself though. It seemed to be a story about a woman struggling with the job of motherhood and how she could learn not only to accept her children for who they are but also learn to teach them without making an enemy of them. The characters in Frozen weren't as strong as the characters in Brave. Again, very generic apart from Elsa. Elsa was the only character worth caring about. Anna has depth to her character but her silliness ultimately ruins it for me. I did like however that Anna wasn't an obvious feminist character. Besides her annoying silliness, she surprised me at the end when she found that true love didn't always have to be romantic love. At least Frozen did something right. The music in Brave isn't really worth commenting on as it didn't drive the movie. It had the cultural Scottish instruments and fit the movie well. Frozen's music started out epically and then all too quickly became a generic pop phenomenon, lacking any culture that it had previously established. The lyrics were very ditsy and American. The instrumentals could have easily had a culture feel but there was none. I won't say I don't enjoy the music but it doesn't hold up next to most Disney films and will be forgotten in 50 years. And finally, I want to comment on the animation. Both films were beautiful but my biggest issue is character animation. Brave is a Pixar film and so I knew what I was getting into and they didn't disappoint. Merida's character design bothered me though. Why is her face so circular? Frozen had terrible character animation in my opinion, specifically for the girls. Why are their eyes so huge? And why all the makeup on Elsa? I mean, I get that the animators were experimenting but couldn't they have experimented with a short film? She looked like Shakira with her sexy hips during "Let it Go" and almost like...well, like a redesigned Disney Princess. Overall, as you can probably tell, I don't hold either of these films in high regard. They are both okay at best.
But let's talk about why the newest Princesses are good role models. I had a hard time with these three ladies but I think I have come up with unique attributes for each of them. I will start off with Merida. Merida is a good role model because of her belief. Right away we see her believe in herself and she has confidence. She believes when she goes out to get a potion to change her mother's attitude, she believes when she takes her mother to the woods to change her back from a bear to a human, she believes when she lets the wisps guide her, and she believes at the end that she and her mother will mend their relationship. Anna is a good role model because of her unfailing love. All throughout her life she is seeking love from her sister who does not show love in return but gives Anna the cold shoulder. In a desperate attempt to accept love whenever it comes her way, she clings to Hans who immediately shows her love and wants to be with her for the rest of his life (seemingly). Then, when she becomes aware that Elsa has been lying to her for her entire life, Anna still goes after her sister and believes she is not a monster despite what everyone else is saying. Then, she jumps in front of her sister to give the ultimate sacrifice of love by giving her life. And finally, Elsa is a good role model because of her humble nature. While teaching her to fear her own powers was never the right away to go about things, her experience was almost a mirror to Harry Potter's. Harry was shut in a cupboard under the stairs while the Dursley's hoped to stomp the magic out of him. When he discovered he was a wizard, he came from a mindset that he wasn't good enough and therefore went into the world always thinking himself to be average because he had been led to believe that he was never special. Elsa as well was taught that she wasn't special in her powers and that they needed to be contained, just like Harry's magic. When she becomes free in the mountains, she tests what she can do and does this without hesitation because she is alone. Once it is recognized that she is not to be feared, she gives her magic to the people but not to gain anything for herself or take any credit and therefore shows her humble nature just as Harry shows he is humble when he doesn't take full credit for the things he has done when recognized. After looking at these three Princesses by discussing their movies and now their attributes, I want to bring up the question off goodness. Do we want a Disney Princess to be relatable or to be a good role model for young girls? In my opinion, these three new Princess are more relatable than good role models while the Princesses previous are genuinely good role models while also still relatable. I believe that Disney doesn't reflect our outer reality in terms of their stories because we know no one can create ice with their hands and people don't turn into bears but Disney reflects our inner reality and that should be what matters because it is good fiction. That concludes my Part 2 post of Why Disney Princesses are Good Role Models. Do you have anything to add? Do you feel the newer Princesses are better or worse role models than their predecessors? Why or why not? Do you see the Christian symbolism that I mentioned? Was there some I left out? What do you think of the newest Princesses movies? Did they exceed your expectations or do you think Disney is losing it's touch? I would love to hear your feedback and what you have to say!
I'm back! Finally! I've missed writing Wasted Wednesday blogs... So, I don't think it is a surprise to hear that most television is a bit manipulative. Most story lines seem to be written to hook people rather than to write a good story. How I Met Your Mother is the king of this writing style. The name itself screams - MARKETING PLOY! MARKETING PLOY! MARKETING PLOY! With the recent season finale of this show, I figured it was a good a time as ever to write about my true feelings toward the celebrated comedy that I just never quite got. I want to start with the title of this show. Right from the beginning the audience knows that eventually all things will lead to meeting the mother. I'm sure the writer's were aware that with a
Pssht, a love story in reverse? Easy slogan
show like this, they could hold on to their audience with a fishhook. They could take their audience on all kinds of twists and turns that excite and bring tears as long as in the end, the audience met the mother. They could drag it on and on and know that people will watch because the audience really wants to know who the heck the mother is. Nine seasons is a long time to hold on to a fishhook but boy did some people hang on tightly. I bet some people feel like they were caught with the series finale and cooked for a nice family dinner rather than letting go with a triumphant bang and swimming away full of content and a feeling of closure. Not many shows can hook an audience the way this one did...or at least not in the same way. The classic 90's hit, Friends, one of my favorite shows, did a similar thing as How I Met Your Mother except they did it with an idea. The idea - that Ross and Rachel were meant to be together. I won't open that can of worms, but what I will do is state that this attribute is not the only thing Friends and How I Met Your Mother have in common. In fact, there are so many similarities between the shows that I could not name all of them if I tried. And to me, that is a problem for How I Met Your Mother. I'm all for drawing from past material and re-spinning things, but this was so overly obvious and on top of it, the show claimed to be not doing it on purpose. I'm going to guess some of the same writers for Friends were on this writing staff as well? I'm not sure. It seems too obvious to be an accident yet they play it off as an accident. It's just lazy writing but I guess the writers had that opportunity giving the fact that, as I said, they knew they had people hooked for a good five seasons at least. And finally, I want to discuss the God awful series finale. One of my close friends is a fan of this show and was ultimately let down by this sorry excuse for a finale. He felt betrayed. He had grown to love these characters and felt very attached to them and suddenly everything that happened in nine seasons was reversed and ultimately didn't matter. For example, the character Barney was a ladies man who never was in a relationship because of his sexual desires. But when he married Robin, she changed him and he grew from that. Then the finale sweeps in and says..."Oops, sorry just kidding. You guys get divorced and Robin ends up with Ted, the end." Why make a show at all if every single episode between the pilot and finale were utter garbage to the plot and essentially don't matter at all? Well, I can't say I didn't see that one coming, right? Yeah, the finale was a cheat. The writers tried to make it this surprising twist of an ending but, as my friend says, it reversed everything that had happened...all of the character development and plot points during the course of nine seasons was tossed in the trash for the apparently well-thought-out series finale. It was a cheat. Those are my thoughts on the show, How I Met Your Mother and the series finale. What do you guys think of the show? Are you on my boat or did you enjoy the show and why? If you did watch the show, what did you think of the series finale? I would love to hear your thoughts! P.S. - News flash! The series is also starting a spin-off called How I Met Your Dad. Can we say money spinner?! I want a show called, How I Write Easy Comedies and Earn Millions!
I saw the new Hunger Games movie - Catching Fire - last night and have a few thoughts on the film that I would like to share. WARNING - THIS BLOG CONTAINS SPOILERS! Okay...Catching Fire, the second Hunger Games installment in film form. It has been a while since I read this book. I wrote a review for it in April 2012! Wow, I have had this blog for a long time! I have seen tons and tons of feedback for the film and all of it has been positive. Besides hearing about the amazing actors and the awesome soundtrack, the review I saw the most was that this film was practically 100% like the book. Is it true? I wish I could remember... That is the first thing I want to talk about. Going into this film, I thought it would all come flooding back to me but the truth is, I forgot a lot of plot events. This could be because Catching Fire is to the Hunger Games book series as Order of the Phoenix is to the Harry Potter book series. It introduces a whole load of new characters and a whole new complex story that, in my opinion, is not easy to get in just one read. It has to be read more than once. I would love to reread Catching Fire but right now I want to read new books and have just started reading the final book, Mockingjay. In other words, I don't have time. Anyway, when it came to the actual Hunger Games, I forgot most of the events in the arena and was like an average movie goer unaware of what was coming up next. When I left the theater, my first thought was that the movie was a bit overwhelming - the content was on overload and sometimes certain things felt rushed. Then a thought occurred to me - for the fans who had read Catching Fire and had looked forward to every single event being portrayed on the big screen, this must have been their heaven on earth. The movie truly seemed to keep every event from the book which is why I may have felt like it was overwhelming and rushed. Usually, I am on the other side of things. Usually, I am a nerd who can point out every single deviation from book to movie. Now that I have been on the other side, I have a sense as to why movie directors and writers have such a hard time keeping every single book event in the movie. For book lovers, this movie will have been an A+ and possibly movie goers who haven't read the books but love the Hunger Games will agree. This film stuck to the book and that is a rarity in Hollywood. But now I understand why so many book to movie adaptions don't stick to the book. Because this film stuck so close to the book, it did a lot of things that don't work for films and that I believe is why the film felt overloaded with content and felt rushed at times. I don't believe this film would or should win any academy awards (which isn't saying much because I don't think the academy awards do a great job at choosing the best films to represent the industry and are very biased) nor do I believe this film will be held alone as the best in it's own right. I think it is a film that Hunger Games fans will love (and I sure loved it but I still love the first film and first book the best). The average movie goer may not feel the same way because as a film, there could have been improvements. Regardless, the filmmakers did an excellent job and that is what I also want to talk about in this review - the things I loved, liked, and didn't care for. Let's start with the things I loved about the film. First - Jennifer-freaking-Lawrence! I love that girl way too much! When she was first announced as the actress to play Katniss, I had never heard of her and didn't know what to think of her. When I saw the first movie, I found her to be refreshing because I had never seen an actress quite like her. Her acting style was really unique. Then I saw her in Silver Linings Playbook, watched a bit of interviews she had done that not only are genuine but funny (including the hilarious Academy Awards question and answer speech) and finally began to understand why everyone loves this girl. She is freaking awesome! Which brings me to my point that she did a perfect job at portraying Katniss Everdeen. To make her portrayal possible though, the film needed some great writers and a great director to convey the psychological effects the Hunger Games have had on Katniss. These scenes which focused on Katniss's psychological well-being were well written, well shot, and well acted. My favorite was in the very beginning when Katniss is sitting calmly by the water with her bow and suddenly she hears a sound and instantly reacts as if she is still in the games but before she releases her bow, she realizes it is just Gale coming up from behind and she is no longer in danger. Besides Jennifer Lawrence, the other actors did a spectacular job as well. The other scenes I loved in the movie outside of a theme were when Katniss's wedding dress transformed into the mockingjay on stage and when Katniss went to enter the games and Cinna was taken away. Now for the things I thought were not so great. First - and this is no fault to the movie as much as it is the book - I still believe, as I said in my original book review, that the end of the story is a cop-out. The ending is too easy. Now for the movie itself I found a few faults but two stand outs that I want to talk about. The first was the elevator scene where Katniss and Peeta meet Johanna. Johanna steps on the elevator, complains about her outfit and then begins to strip out of it until she is completely naked. Was that in the book? I don't think so. It just felt awkward to me. Second - was it just me or did I notice an inconsistency when it came to the clock events? When Katniss, Peeta, and Finnick run away from the poisoned fog, they tumble down a hill and as the fog approaches them it hits an invisible force field wall. Later in the film Katniss and Finnick run into the section of the clock where there are jabberjays and as they try to escape, they hit the force field and they can't get out until the hour is up. How come they couldn't get out of their section with the jabberjays but they could get out of the section with the poison? Just an observation I have made. There are also two things missing from the film that I had looked forward to seeing. One scene I missed was the scene where Katniss has to jump the electric fence. The electric fence in District 12 is usually never on but when the Capitol learns of Katniss and Gale's trips into the forest, they turn the fence on suddenly while Katniss is in there and she must jump over it to get back home. The other big thing missing is that we don't get to see Haymitch in his Hunger Games. I would have liked to see that but I know they are splitting the last book into two films so they will probably bring it up then. I see that many people more prefer this movie to the first. I think everyone involved did a great job and I can agree that in terms of little details, this movie did a better job but I still prefer the first one. Many people disliked the shaking camera movement but I disagree. I liked that because it felt much more realistic and scary - like if you were the one running near Katniss in the Hunger Games. I also like the first book better than the sequel so that is another reason I prefer the first film. Overall, it was a great experience watching it and I know I will be watching it time and time again but I do not feel this film is necessarily better than the first. I believe they are equally good and work well together though the first movie is my personal favorite. Although much of this blog is criticizing this film, check out this blog post written by another person who feels that Catching Fire fixed everything that the previous film did wrong. I agree with most of the blog even though some of it clashes with my view of this film. Check it out HERE!
Ryan Seiler is most famous for his participation in the Harry Potter (wizard rock) band, Ministry of Magic - but his first solo record, Into the Wind, takes on an entirely new "adult" atmosphere full of folksy acoustic tracks that stack much higher compared to his past work in techno sounds and auto-tuned voices. Into the Wind is a compilation of crisp, acoustic songs that all come together to form a unique album that seems to be a prayer of sorts. Seiler does not forget his Harry Potter roots, nor does he forget his faith and does a great job combining the two. Of course there is a lot less Harry Potter and a whole lot more spiritual elements on this record. I chose this record for this edition of Thirsty Thursday because...well, because I love this album! When the album first came out back in 2011, I bought a few tracks but the stand out track for me was a song titled Greener. Greener is by far my favorite track on this record...among a few others. I can't say I listened to it much at the time though...but my music preferences have changed a lot since then. This past weekend, I sat at my computer and listened to this album straight through. The album put me at peace. I was sitting at my desk in my bedroom and the windows were open letting in a cool autumn breeze. It felt like pure bliss and I didn't want the album to end. Let's start off with the fantastic album artwork. Good album artwork isn't a must but I always love seeing the artistic choices made by the artist that represents their particular body of music. Into the Wind does just that. The simple water color image of a ship alone at sea being blown in the wind really represents this album because Seiler is like a ship at sea, tossing and turning from the winds of life but always staying afloat through it all and learning and growing stronger with each hardship. The title of the album, Into the Wind, seems to be saying that even though we are scared we must go out to sea and experience the rough waves in order to become true sailors. We must not be afraid to go into the wind and experience life for the good and for the bad moments that will ultimately make us a better person because of said experiences. Seiler's music on this album definitely reflects this theme. What I love about this album, besides it being peaceful, is that each song is a prayer and by the end the album as a whole feels like a poetic reflection on spirituality. The album starts off with the track July - a warm, simplistic tune that reflects on summer activities. The second track pays homage to Seiler's Ministry of Magic days which I love. He performs an acoustic track of the song Don't Leave, a song written about the final book in the HP series, Deathly Hallows. I'm so glad Seiler chose this specific song to be on this record because it is one of my favorite Ministry of Magic songs. The reason I love it so much is
because it isn't overly Harry Potter. Taken out of context, the song seems to be about friendship and childhood innocence. While I'm glad the song is on the record, it is the weakest track in my opinion for the fact that it contains stiffer lyrics compared to the rest. The album continues the acoustic vibe with more heavily spiritual tracks that all hold up very nicely not only musically but lyrically. If Seiler is recognized for anything with this record, it should be for his fantastic contemplative lyrics. Stand out tracks for me include And We Sing, Greener, Run Home, and To See This. Seiler also takes advantage of using repetition throughout this album. He does this through his lyrics and through the themes he sings about. The album ends with the song Cannonball Coming. At first glance this song doesn't seem to stand out like the rest on the album but as I listened further I truly began to sense a state of finality to the song. It is a perfect track to end the record and it, once again, pays homage to his Harry Potter roots. Harry Potter fans will catch this reference since the song seems to be about moving on yet never forgetting how you became the person you are today and to savor every moment in life. Into the Wind isn't the typical album you would see in a Christian book store and that is A-OKAY with me. It dares to talk about God and spirituality in a fresh and raw way and Seiler's rugged voice combined with his beautiful lyrics make for a wonderfully refreshing album! It is a must buy! You can pick it up on iTunes or listen free on Spotify. Physical copies are also being sold on Amazon! "Stay thirsty my friends!" Similar albums to Ryan Seiler's Into the Wind: Wesley Blaylock; Wesley Blaylock, Charlie Simpson; Young Pilgrim
