Why I Chose my Top 5

The majority of the blogs that I chose to classify as my “Top 5” for the year were written during my second semester at Penn State.  Here is an extremely short synopsis of each blog:

Finding Dory

This post discusses the upcoming sequel to the critically acclaimed film “Finding Nemo” as well as my emotional attachment to the first film.

When it Happens to You

This post was for my civic issues blog about gay marriage, and focuses on a republican Senator who found out that his son was gay.

Twilight

An explanation of what in the film series I find abhorrent.

Back in the Day

A comment on the change in style and quality of films released by the Disney Channel in recent years.  I think this is my favorite of all of the posts that I have written.

Do the Right Thing

A reaction to Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing.”  The film was screened for all students in the RCL course at the beginning of the year.

Finding Dory

FindingDoryLogoTemp_small-610x342

Oh yes.  Get Excited.  It is finally happening.

As an 18 year old college student I probably should not be this excited about the sequel to an animated movie, but, come on, its FINDING NEMO! (which is easily one of the best animated films ever made.)  Shockingly, the film came out ten years ago.  I can still remember the first time I went to see it when I was in the third grade.

As a reward for passing the Maryland School Assessments (MSA)s, all third, fourth, and fifth grade students got a free trip to see Finding Nemo in theaters during the middle of the school day.  We all walked as one colossal group up the massive hill that is Spartan Road towards Olney 9 Cinemas.  The theatre was sort of run-down and old but that hardly mattered – we got the entire theatre to ourselves and we could not stop gushing at how grown up we felt walking there. I sat with my friends and watched the movie and immediately fell in love with it.  I laughed so hard at Dory I nearly cried. It was the best thing an eight year old could have imagined.

tumblr_lp9otz7t7G1qmubjzo1_500Now times have changed.  My beloved run down theatre has been replaced with a Harris Teeter grocery store (one of five grocery stores servicing my town, all of which can be seen from the top of a hill).  My once charming partially rural home town has become over-populated and polluted.  My friends and I are spread out across the United States at college and my family is gearing up to move.  With so many changes, I am ready for a little taste of the good old days when the grass was green, the sky was blue, and my town/life wasn’t an armpit.  Finding Dory will do that.

 

Now to actually talk about the movie instead of rant about myself.  According to the ever reliable Huffington Post, Finding Dory will be a prequel, taking place about a year before Finding Nemo.  The plot is inspired by why Dory was alone in the ocean the day she met Marlin. She will be reunited with her loved ones and learn about her family, but the director promises that Finding Nemo favorites such as Marlin and Nemo will be back. The lesson to be learned from this movie, according to the director, is the meaning of family. “I have waited for this day for a long, long, long, long, long, long time,” said Ellen DeGeneres, who voices Dory, in a statement. “I’m not mad it took this long. I know the people at Pixar were busy creating ‘Toy Story 16.’ But the time they took was worth it. The script is fantastic. And it has everything I loved about the first one: It’s got a lot of heart, it’s really funny, and the best part is—it’s got a lot more Dory.”

The movies is scheduled to hit theaters November 25th 2015.

countdown

To tide you over, here are some wonderful Dory moments from the fantastic original.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/02/finding-dory-finding-nemo-sequel_n_2999649.html?ir=Entertainment

 

When It Happens to You

“That is something that happens to other people.”  If we all chose to be completely honest with ourselves, we could admit that at some point in our lives this thought has crossed our minds.  Whether it is meant maliciously or ignorantly, focused on a disease or a tragic accident, we have all had a moment where we thought “that is something I hear about, not something I will ever actually experience.”  And this self-assurance often shapes how we view numerous issues and the level of sympathy we afford them.  That is, until whatever we have comforted ourselves against actually happens to us – the seemingly unimaginable knocks on your front door.

Sen. Rob Portman's family, from left: son Will; the senator's wife Jane; the senator; daughter Sally and son Jed.

Sen. Rob Portman’s family, from left: son Will; the senator’s wife Jane; the senator; daughter Sally and son Jed.

For Ohio Senator Rob Portman (R), this knock came when his 21-year-old son came out as gay.  Senator Portman previously opposed same-sex unions.  Though he was not outspoken about such opinions, “while in Congress, he supported a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and voted for a bill prohibiting gay couples in Washington from adopting” (1).  However, two years ago his son Will came out to his parents, saying “that he was gay, and that it was not a choice, and that it’s just part of who he is, and that’s who he’d been that way for as long as he could remember” (1).  The Senator and his wife accepted their son, and after much research and discussions with pastors and friends, Senator Portman announced last Friday March 15th that he had now had a change of heart.  “I’ve come to the conclusion that for me, personally, I think this is something that we should allow people to do, to get married, and to have the joy and stability of marriage that I’ve had for over 26 years. That I want all of my children to have, including our son, who is gay,” Portman said (1).

However, this change of heart has garnered much criticism from both the right and the left.  Bryan Fischer from Instant Analysis criticized the reversal and compared the situation to bank robbery. “Public policy should be based on reason, not emotion. If it turned out my son was a bank robber, I would not love my son any less. I might even have great sympathy for the circumstances that drove him to steal. I would come alongside him and help him in any way that was in my power. But I would not change my mind about the morality of bank robbing” (2).  On the other hand, many from the left felt unwilling to give Portman praise for making “the right decision for the wrong reasons,” as he only adopted this viewpoint after he discovered his son’s sexual orientation.  Shreveport Times scathes, “so one can’t help being frustrated and vexed by the senator’s inability to ‘get it’ until ‘it’ included his son. Will explained to him that his sexuality ‘was not a choice’? Lovely. But was the senator not listening when all those other gays and lesbians tried to tell him the same thing?  Apparently not. Like Dick Cheney, father of a lesbian daughter, Portman changed his view because the issue became personal. Which suggests a glaring lack of the courage and vision needed to put oneself into someone else’s shoes, imagine one’s way inside someone else’s life. These are capabilities that often seem to elude social conservatives” (3).

I find nearly every position mentioned above somewhat limited and distorted.  For Senator Portman, clearly he experienced the phenomena I first described, that certain things just happen to other people, as he was thoroughly shocked by his son’s announcement.  However, the fact that his son was gay made him shift his perspective and see the issue from another vantage point.  Now it was personal, now he could empathize, now he could understand, now he could trust the notion that sexual orientation is not a choice because the words came from his own son’s mouth.  This reaction, this shift in opinion, to me, is not for the wrong reasons.  Everyone can be judgmental and narrow-minded about a plethora of issues, but only when that issue lands on your front doorstep do you really understand it, and that does not make Senator Portman evil or lacking in vision as Shreveport Times claims.  It makes him human.  It makes us all human.  I see this development as powerful progress, and it demonstrates something that I have always believed; socially conservative individuals are not cold hearted or evil, they simply have their own beliefs.  However, as Senator Portman demonstrated, when an issue lands close to your heart, you can see it in a whole new light, and that should make all in support of gay marriage rejoice, not sulk.  Hey, if Dick Cheney could have this change of heart when his daughter told him she was a lesbian, I think anything is possible for gay marriage in the future.

 

And the notion that homosexuality is in any way comparable to robbery is absurd for innumerable reasons, and therefore was not explored in depth in the last paragraph.  Otherwise, this post would have degraded into a rant, and no one wants that.

 

 

(1)http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/15/politics/portman-gay-marriage/index.html

(2)http://www.instantanalysis.net/afa-blogs/2013/03/15/bryan-fischer-on-sen-portmans-reversal-on-same-sex-marriage#.UUMywpmBIkw.twitter

(3)http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/D2/20130321/OPINION01/303210052/Another-View-Right-decision-wrong-reason-Senator-Rob-Portman

Twilight

Unsure of what to write about this week, I decided to fall back on Old Reliable – Twilight.  Fear not blogging group, you will not have to endure 300+ words of drooling over Robert Pattinson’s hair or Taylor Lautner’s abs.  Rather, I will espouse a few reasons why the Twilight novels and films disgrace literature and film (I will explain why they suck in a way that hopefully does not come across as a rant).  I apologize in advance to all Twilight fans – I was one of you once.

twilight_final

For those of you who have never heard of Twilight (though I find that hard to believe), IMDB provided the shortest synopsis ever:

“A teenage girl risks everything when she falls in love with a vampire.”

 

The atrociousness of the series breaks down into two categories: the story’s lack of heart and the horrid acting.

1. The story. The novels have engaged and touched millions of people across the globe, particularly tween and teenage girls, and understandably, at that age we tend to idealize the pop culture that we fall in love with – something is not good but rather OMG THAT WAS SO F***ING AMAZING.  However, in this case that passionate love and support is even more unwarranted than usual. The Twilight series centers entirely around the love life of Bella Swan and her decision between Edward and Jacob.  Not only does this make the story lack substance, because nothing outside of the trivial really occurs, but the characters themselves do not have enough substance to support such a flimsy story.

Bella –  The consistently awkward damsel in distress, is neither emotionally strong, sassy, confident, or endearing – she merely wines about Edward.

20100731000855!Bella_Swan

Edward – People too frequently overlook Edward’s stalker qualities because of his looks and charm, but tween girls should not find it okay for a boy to sneak into your room uninvited and watch you sleep.  That’s not romantic, it’s disturbing.

Jacob – While more tolerable than the others, his only roll in the novel is to helplessly and pathetically pine for a girl who has no interest in him.

Unbelievably this odd love triangle and flimsy storyline took 4 large novels and 5 long movies to play out.

2. The Acting.  In many ways I pity Kristen Stewart, Pattinson, and Lautner for receiving the daunting task of transforming a giant pile of crud into something of cinematic quality.  However, their acting turned a relatively insufferable story into an unwittingly hilarious film series.  Stewart’s blank stares and total lack of emotion, Pattinson’s thinly veiled accent and constipated expression, and Lautner’s ability to pull his weight in the film by merely taking his shirt off was entertaining for all the wrong reasons.  More skilled and experienced actors may have been able to work more magic than these three, but they did have to work with a script that gave them lines like “We’re the same temperature now.”

50-shades-of-greyWhile numerous other reasons exist, and more detail could be given to the two reasons above, I believe that it presents sufficient evidence as to why the series should not have been made or written, as it proved a torturous experience for all.  Finally, although a side note, it does seem worth mentioning that this disastrous story spawned a Hell child (and no I do not mean Renesme the half human half vampire baby).  I mean 50 Shades of Grey, which originated as Twilight fan fiction.  Just another reason to hate Twilight – it produced one of the most disturbing “books” I have ever heard of.

Back in The Day

“Back in the day.” It’s a phrase I am almost certainly too young to use, but one I find myself saying constantly, particularly in regard to film and television.  Perhaps I am biased due to the blinders of nostalgia, or even worse I have become one of those grumpy old people that irritably shouts, “Kids these days!!” But I find that film and television targeted towards younger audiences has not just gone down hill – it has taken a swan dive off a cliff into the abyss.

The most apparent change in programming quality has occurred at the Disney Channel. (Saying this I realize I will now never get hired for that Disney semester internship where you get to work at Splash Mountain for four months, but it is a necessary sacrifice).  I will stipulate that regardless of the year, not every Disney Channel Original Movie was a gem – some were down right awful – but from 1995 – circa 2005 many of the films were actually good. I do not mean good as in complex, full of plot twists, unpredictable, or Oscar worthy, but I mean good in the sense that they did not talk down to their audience.  Many of them had substance. They were worth watching.

the-four-diamonds-296035The Color Of FriendshipThe most powerful example of this is 1995’s “The Four Diamonds,” based on Christopher Millard’s battle with cancer and the story he wrote symbolizing the qualities one needs to conquer the disease – honesty, wisdom, courage, and strength. That movie is about something REAL, something worthy of everyone’s time, and has lessons that we could all learn.  A similarly powerful film made in 2000 (set in 1977) discusses apartheid in South Africa. It centers on a young white South African girl who, through an exchange program, lives with a black family in D.C. and comes to understand the horrors of apartheid and racism. The film goes so far as to mention the brutal murder of Steven Biko (a prominent black singer who was horrifically tortured and beaten to death in South Africa at that time).

Much less powerful but still worthwhile is 1999’s “Horse Sense,” about a spoiled rich college student who lives on his cousin’s ranch for three months to learn the value of hard work and family. When he learns that the ranch is swimming in so much debt that his family will have to sell it, he learns about pride, about earning rather than simply receiving, and humility.

motocrossed2 In the early 2000s the Disney Channel tackled gender stereotypes.  First with 2001’s “Motocrossed,” about a girl who poses as her twin brother in order to compete in a motocross tournament so she can assist her family financially.  This movie too showcases the importance of family, believing in yourself, and that women can do anything men can do. Second was “Eddie’s Million Dollar Cook-Off” in 2003, which attempts to destroy the stereotype that boys do not cook and only participate in sports. Third, also in 2003, was “Right on Track,” about two sisters who compete in junior drag racing, a male dominated sport.

Disney-Frenemies-PosterEach of these films, and many others, discuss real issues and teach real lessons.  That is why I can still watch “Johnny Tsunami” at age 18, because moving, making new friends in a place where you feel like you don’t belong, and struggling with family are all relatable issues.  However, instead of portraying real issues and teaching real lessons, now the Disney Channel produces things like “Girl v Monster,” (a teenager cuts the power to her house in order to sneak past an alarm, which then somehow releases an evil monster. Oh and she comes from a family of monster hunters), “Frenemies,” (the title alone is horrid), or “Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure,” (do I even need to comment?).

What happened to the stories of substance? What happened to teaching lessons? What happened to not talking down to the audience? (I know it’s the Disney Channel and therefore every film has an obligatory happy and sugary ending, but really?). In my personal opinion, if the movies made now were anything like those created “back in the day,” we would see a film about teens struggling with sexuality. Or maybe we would see a film where someone struggles with getting teased for having two moms or two dads.  Perhaps that is too much to ask, but I miss the films that showcased something relevant, something daring, something worthwhile.  Alas, that has not happened, and I am stuck irritably shouting “Kids these days!!” at my television like a withering old lady while kids watch “Harriet the Spy: Blog Wars.”

Do the Right Thing

When the credits finally rolled on Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing,” I found myself left with more questions than answers.  In this regard, the movie proved more descriptive than argumentative, as it gave no inclination towards what “the right thing” truly meant, particularly concerning how to deal with racism. Instead of attempting to pose a solution to racism and race relations, the film simply presents the dilemma and shows two different paths that society has gone down historically to try to deal with the problem – Martin Luther King Jr.’s advocacy for never using violence, or Malcolm X’s stance that violence can at times prove necessary.  As a result, Lee leaves it up to the viewers to puzzle through which characters truly did “the right thing.”

The movie explains that the answer to this question all depends on one’s perspective (or network of interpretation).  For much of the film Mookie seems to straddle the line between varying perspectives.  He sympathizes with the community’s point of view, as he understands Buggin Out’s anger towards Sal over the lack of diversity in the pictures on the “Wall of Fame.”  But at the same time Mookie also understands Sal’s anger towards Buggin Out for attempting to cause trouble.  Finally, Mookie also maintains a friendship with Sal’s son Vino.  As a result, this allows the viewer to sympathize with a character at one point in the film, and disagree with him in another.  This indecision regarding perspective becomes important during the climax of the film, when to me Da Mayor and Mookie represent the two different paths of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.  The viewer must then decide which character and thereby which path shows the right thing to do – Da Mayor’s attempts to remain calm and reasonable and quell the anger of the crowd, or Mookie’s decision to throw the trashcan through the window after Radio Raheem’s egregious death.  From my perspective, I identified more with Da Mayor, for he saw reason and truth and refused to be blinded by anger.  He understood that it was not Sal’s fault Radio Raheem died.  The fault belonged to the police.

While certainly much more can be extrapolated from the film – the over-the-top stereotyping, the breakdowns in communication, or the process of hatred brewing until it finally explodes into something physical – I felt more drawn towards the different choices the characters had before them.  “Do the Right Thing” feels like a command, and I suppose the beauty and the flaw in the film lies in the notion that no one answer exists as to what “the right thing” is.