THE B-MOVIE CATECHISM

LIFE’S LIKE A MOVIE: THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Thu, 24 May 2012 18:45:00 +0000

So I crank up the engine the other day and and lo and behold, it seems my truck has decided to start communicating with me through binary…

Now I couldn’t quite place it at the time, but there was just something about the number 101010 that was familiar, which for me usually means there’s a related snippet of some movie or television show tucked away somewhere in my skull. And sure enough, once I had the time to look it up, the connection was obvious. It turns out that in the binary numeral system the number 101010 = 42. And 42, as any Sci-Fi fan worth his or her salt should already know, is the very number which is the answer to the ultimate question of LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING as calculated by the supercomputer Deep Thought in Douglas Adam’s Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Now, just in case you’ve managed to avoid science fiction for the past thirty years and are not familiar with the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy in any of its many incarnations, it’s the story of the last two earthlings in existence (our planet having been blown to smithereens by a Vogon construction crew to make way for a hyperspatial express route) who traipse around the cosmos in a stolen starship accompanied by the alien Ford Prefect, his cousin Zaphod Beeblebrox (the three-armed two-headed President of the Galaxy), and Marvin the Paranoid Android (a morbidly depressed robot with a self-proclaimed brain the size of a planet). This band of misfits eventually make their way to the planet Magrathea where they are indeed presented with the ultimate answer to LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING, only to be informed that nobody knows what the actual question is.

Now, lots of people have spent way too much time trying to figure out what Douglas Adams meant by making the answer to the ultimate question be the number 42. Was he referencing the angle in degrees at which light reflects off of water to create a rainbow (awww, sweet), or maybe the number of rules in the game of cricket (Adams’ favorite sport), or perhaps even the forty-two-lettered name of God from Jewish tradition (though an atheist, the author confessed a lifelong fascination with studying religion). Adams never said, passing the whole thing off as a whim. “The answer to this is very simple.” he related in an interview, “It was a joke. It had to be a number, an ordinary, smallish number, and I chose that one. Binary representations, base thirteen, Tibetan monks are all complete nonsense. I sat at my desk, stared into the garden and thought '42 will do' I typed it out. End of story.”

Of course, there’s still a lot of people to this day who refuse to accept Adams’ own explanation, so the speculations continue. But whether or not there is a hidden meaning to 42 is probably missing the point. Being that The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy was a farcical satire written by a (mostly) committed atheist, it’s seems more than probable that Adams was taking a potshot at what he saw as the seeming futility of posing such metaphysical questions in the first place. After all, if life has no externally determined purpose, as atheists believe, then to ponder what meaning life has is nothing but a big waste of time. Or as it plays out in the Hitchhiker’s Guide, if you ask something nonsensical like ‘what is the meaning of life’ then all you’ll get in response is a nonsensical answer like 42.

And yet, as noted, despite atheism’s general disdain for anyone’s claim to having at least some of the answers to life’s big questions, Douglas Adams admitted in interviews that he just couldn’t seem to stop thinking about God, philosophy in general, and the questions they both raised, things like why are we here and does anything we do really matter in the end? And that ultimately says something good about the man. Peter Kreeft, renowned Catholic philosopher, wrote that “anyone who is simply not interested in these questions is less than fully human, less than fully reasonable. Reasonable persons, even if skeptical about the possibility of answering them, will not dismiss them as unanswerable without looking (that is not reason but prejudice) but will examine the claims of philosophers to have given reasonable answers to these questions before settling into a comfortable, fashionable skepticism.” Professional atheist Austin Cline actually agrees with this, writing that “although there is a role for dispassionate research, philosophy must derive from some passion for the ultimate goal: a reliable, accurate understanding of ourselves and our world. This is also what atheists should seek.” So, while on the surface the eternally morose Marvin the Paranoid Android might seem like the epitome of atheism as he bemoans, “Life? Don't talk to me about life!”, the opposite is actually true for the mature atheist.

Which leads to a strange instance in which a thinking atheist can actually agree with something in the Catechism, at least where it states “Catechesis on creation is of major importance. It concerns the very foundations of human and Christian life: for it makes explicit the response of the Christian faith to the basic question that men of all times have asked themselves: ‘Where do we come from?’ ‘Where are we going?’ ‘What is our origin?’ ‘What is our end?’ ‘Where does everything that exists come from and where is it going?’ The two questions, the first about the origin and the second about the end, are inseparable. They are decisive for the meaning and orientation of our life and actions.”

The difference is that the subsequent answer to the ultimate question of LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING arrived at by Christians turns out to pretty simple, to know and love God, and from that to be able to know and love his creations. That’s how we’re to orient our lives (and we even manage to do so on our good days). But what about the atheists? By asking the same questions, yet rejecting the religious answer, to what ultimately are they orienting their lives? The pursuit of one’s own self interests? Meandering from one fleeting moment of happiness to another? Resignation to nihilism? I guess they still have a lot of questions to ponder, huh? Me, I think I’ll stick with the few answers provided so far by faith. They make a lot more sense.

And to think, I was reminded of all that just by looking at a odometer. Well, that and the fact that I needed an oil change, but still. Funny the weird places you find God in sometimes.

(Oh, and speaking of Binary, feel free to go here and listen to the song of that title by the Catholic folk duo Popple. It’s pretty catchy)

STILL VOICES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 22 May 2012 18:28:00 +0000

OUTTAKES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Mon, 14 May 2012 05:51:00 +0000

SHORT FEATURE: REVERSE PARTHENOGENESIS

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Fri, 11 May 2012 18:37:00 +0000

So, why has the Catholic Church teamed up with NeoStem, Inc. to promote adult stem cell research? Why does the Vatican continue to operate one of the oldest astronomical research institutions in the world? And why was the Pontifical Academy of Sciences founded in 1603? Good questions, and the makers of this short film (starring Buffy’s Amber Benson and Adam Busch) think they may just have an answer as to why the Catholic Church has had such a lifelong interest in scientific advancements.

Well, I suppose that could be the reason?

Or maybe it’s just because, as the Catechism points out, “Basic scientific research, as well as applied research, is a significant expression of man's dominion over creation. Science and technology are precious resources when placed at the service of man and promote his integral development for the benefit of all.”

Either way’s fine with me.

WEEKLY NEWSREEL – 3 1/2 TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 23)

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 08 May 2012 19:04:00 +0000

Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. After a brief hiatus, the theater doors are open once again. We’ll kick things off with another Weekly Newsreel, sponsored as usual by the fine folks at Acts of the Apostasy, home of the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday. Now off to press.

DATELINE: WROCLAW, POLAND – The Daily Mail reports that “a dentist pulled out all her ex-boyfriend’s teeth after he dumped her for another woman – who has now left him because he is toothless.” While the jilted tooth doctor faces up to three years in prison for abusing the trust of a patient, the victim himself most likely faces a whole lifetime full of incredulous people wondering just what the hell he was thinking when he kept a dental appointment with a woman he had broken up with only three days before. After all, the old quote “Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned / Nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.” may not actually be from the Bible, but we’re betting there’s a whole lot of ladies out there who think that it should be.

DATELINE: SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS – The latest theory to surface regarding what may have caused the Salem Witch Trials comes from a thesis written by By economist Emily Oster who speculates that the whole ordeal was caused by climate change. According to Oster, "The most active period of the witchcraft trials (mainly in Europe) coincides with a period of lower-than-average temperature known to climatologists as the ‘little ice age’… The coldest segments of this ‘little ice age’ period were in the 1590s and between 1680 and 1730… The colder temperatures increased the frequency of crop failure… [and] people would have searched for a scapegoat in the face of deadly changes in weather pattern." Danvers archivist Dick Trask isn’t convinced of this theory however, noting that people often use their present day concerns to interpret what was happening hundreds of years ago. Trask points out how, in the drug addled early 70s, a popular theory blamed the witch trials on the accidental ingestion of hallucinogenic fungi, while the socialist movement of the 60s advanced the notion of a greedy capitalist plot to seize land from poor farmers by accusing them of witchcraft. “These theories tell us more about the present than they do about the past.” Trask says. This same type of thing often happens in modern biblical scholarship where those predisposed to certain ideologies will often ‘discover’ their personal agendas buried (usually pretty deep) within Scripture, i.e. the recent ludicrous assertion by Anglican priest Paul Oestreicher that Jesus was gay. That’s why Pope Benedict XVI wrote that “If scholarly exegesis is not to exhaust itself in constantly new hypotheses, becoming theologically irrelevant, it must take a methodological step forward and see itself once again as a theological discipline, without abandoning its historical character. It must learn that the positivistic hermeneutic on which it has been based does not constitute the only valid and definitively evolved rational approach; rather, it constitutes a specific and historically conditioned form of rationality that is both open to correction and completion and in need of it.” Or in the simplest of terms, if the Church has taught something steadily for over 2000 years and you’ve amazingly just now discovered something that contradicts it, it’s probably best to go back and study a little bit more before you say something to embarrass yourself.

III

DATELINE: HIDDEN UNDER YOUR HAT – So you’re fond of Captain Picard and Lieutenant Ilia but would rather look more like a tribble? Well, there’s hope for all you chrome domes out there. ScienceDaily has the story of a group of Japanese researchers who have demonstrated functional hair regeneration utilizing adult stem cells. “Reporting in Nature Communications the group demonstrate that bioengineered hair follicle germ reconstructed from adult epithelial stem cells and dermal papilla cells can regenerate fully functional hair follicle and hair growth. Their bioengineered follicles showed restored hair cycles and piloerection through the rearrangement of follicular stem cells and their niches. The bioengineered hair follicle also developed the correct structures and formed proper connections with surrounding host tissues such as the epidermis, arrector pili muscle and nerve fibers.” In short, this appears to be the first step in creating a working treatment that will cure baldness for those who want one. And it is being developed using, ONCE AGAIN, adult stem cells rather than embryonic stem cells. Ethical science that respects human life, you gotta love it.

1/2

Oh, and scientists, if this hair growth thing does work out as planned, please do us all a favor and keep the formula away from the Catholic blogsphere. As LarryD points out, it’s already hairy enough out there as it is.

Just saying.

And on that note it’s time to bid adieu to another Newsreel, as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.

SHORT (SORT OF) FEATURE: MULTI-TREKKING

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:15:00 +0000

As is probably obvious from the dearth of posting over the past two weeks, I’m stuck in the middle of one of my quarterly work related nightmares. So, basically, I just haven’t had the time to blog, or do much of anything else lately. So what’s a sci-fi geek to do when he’s short on time, but is really in the mood to watch some episodes of Star Trek. Why, watch them all at once, of course…

It’s kind of mesmerizing isn’t it? At least for awhile. But if your ears just can’t take the cacophony for too long, at least fast forward to the last couple of minutes where there’s a neat transition from all the chaos into a weird choral-like effect as each episode starts rolling the end credits.

Admittedly, it’s probably not the best way to watch two seasons of Star Trek, but sometimes you just don’t have hours upon hours to devote to something. Heck, even the study of your religion can get sidetracked due to the responsibilities of day to day life. So, if you happen to know somebody who’s interested in The Church, but doesn’t have the time right now to sit down and dig through 2000 years worth of material like the Bible, The Catechism, Ratzinger’s Introduction To Christianity, The Summa Theologica, etc., ad infinitum, then might I suggest passing along to them something I ran across on Amazon? The Catholicism For Dummies Mini Edition by Rev. John Trigilio, Jr., Rev. Kenneth Brighenti is a brief (I’m talking less than an hour to read), but very concise survey of the basic teachings and structure of the Catholic Church. And it’s only $0.99! (At that price I bought one for my Kindle even though I’ve already got all those other books on it.) But if that’s still too long for them, here’s a free cheat sheet from Catholics For Dummies that sums up most of the basic stuff in one page.

So there, see, problem solved. Just do me a favor and don’t let anyone try watching the above video AND reading the CFD Mini Edition at the same time. I just don’t know what that much information at one time would do to a person’s brain. Although, having watched Scanners, I have a terrible idea.

WEEKLY NEWSREEL – 3 1/2 TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 20)

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:40:00 +0000

Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. Welcome to the Weekly Newsreel sponsored once again by the fine folks at Acts of the Apostasy, home of the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday. Now off to press.

DATELINE: PERNAMBUCO - According to Fox News Latino, “three people accused of killing at least three women in the northeastern Brazilian state of Pernambuco said they ate some of their victims' flesh and also used it to make the empanadas they sold to their neighbors.” The accused claim they belong to a sect that receives orders from a "voice" to do away with women they consider evil, dining on their flesh as part of a purification ritual. Shows what I know. I’d always heard it’s us Catholics who were supposed to be the cannibals.

DATELINE: HOLLYWOOD – It’s the rare moment when pop science/entertainment site ion9 posts anything friendly towards religion, so it’s no surprise that “after weeks of hot debating, io9's readers have now officially picked the very worst science fiction movie of all time” and it turns out to be one with religious undertones. What is surprising, however, is the religion in question isn’t Christianity. Nope, it turns out that L. Ron Hubbard’s brainchild, Scientology, is the guilty party behind the most atrocious cinematic sci-fi offering ever. That’s right, after whittling down a list that included everything from Catwoman to Highlander II, it was Battlefield Earth which took top (or perhaps bottom) honors in the polling. Sorry, Scientologists. At least you’ll always have Tom Cruise.

III

DATELINE: SOMEWHERE TOO CLOSE TO ME - Over the course of my life I’ve been called a jerk by more people than I would care to count, and to tell the truth, most of them have been justified in doing so. But it appears one of the things I’ve been consistently rude about all these years may not have been completely my fault. The New York Times reports that “for people with a condition that some scientists call misophonia, mealtime can be torture. The sounds of other people eating - chewing, chomping, slurping, gurgling - can send them into an instantaneous, blood-boiling rage… The condition almost always begins in late childhood or early adolescence and worsens over time, often expanding to include more trigger sounds, usually those of eating and breathing… Aage R. Moller, a neuroscientist at the University of Texas at Dallas… believes the condition is hard-wired, like right or left-handedness, and is probably not an auditory disorder but a ‘physiological abnormality’ that resides in brain structures activated by processed sound.” So to all the friends and family who over the years have suffered my wrath at the dinner table, please forgive me. Apparently you were not, in fact, EATING LIKE A @#*%^@! GOAT WITH THE TABLE MANNERS OF A SPASTIC VIKING!!! It was just me and my messed up physiology. Fortunately, over the past decade or so, I’ve been able to train myself to suppress my angry outbursts when eating with others, although doing so often makes me appear distracted or uninterested in my tablemates. So if any of you reading this ever find yourself dining with me and I seem inattentive, please don’t take it personally. It’s not because I don’t like you… I’m just trying not to think about murdering you.

1/2

I view my little problem with the sound of eating as just another thing to work around. Everybody’s got their own little hang-ups, after all. But for those dealing with more serious issues, the National Catholic Partnership on Disability, established in 1982 to foster implementation of the Pastoral Statement of U.S. Catholic Bishops on People with Disabilities, has a ton of resources worth checking out.

And with that it’s time to sign off another Newsreel, as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.

BMC MOVIE OF THE WEEK: TAMMY AND THE T-REX

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:46:00 +0000

“A bizarre entry even for an area of film that specializes in the offbeat, this is the story of an ideal teenage couple, a cheerleader and a jock, who are abruptly separated when a jealous rival slays the footballer. At the hospital, a crazed doctor transplants the young man's brain into that of a giant robotic dinosaur as part of his immortality-via-cobras experiment. Unfortunately, the newly transplanted boyfriend is most unhappy with his new form and with the way things have turned out in general, so he goes on a bloody rampage for revenge. When he finds the cheerleader, he is somehow able to convey his plight to her. She and a pal decide to help him by finding a new body in which to place his brain (his old one was beyond repair). While the low-budget Tammy and the T-Rex has been for some reason marketed as a family-oriented comedy, parents beware. There is a lot of blood, violence, crude sexual innuendo and a striptease scene.” – Rovi’s AllMovie Guide

April 15, 2012: Second Sunday of Easter (Year B)

Well, everybody has to start somewhere right? For Denise Williams (Starship Troopers, The World Is Not Enough) and Paul Walker (Varsity Blues, The Fast and the Furious), that start was Tammy And The T-Rex, the film which represented their first theatrical starring roles. And I’m pretty sure they still remember making it to this day because, let me tell you, this movie is hands down one of the weirder low budget offerings to come out of the 90s.

For most of its running time, Tammy And The T-Rex looks and plays just like one of those teen shows you run across all the time on Nickelodeon. You know what I’m talking about. Stagey sitcom style acting, broadly written jokes even a six year old would get, and a cast comprised of the cleanest cut youth ever to pop out of a stage mother’s uterus (heck, even the juvenile delinquents in this movie look like they shower at least twice a day and buy their clothes from Abercrombie). But every so often, Tammy And The T-Rex takes a sudden turn into some dark territory that is definitely not meant for the youngsters. Imagine if you were watching the kids from iCarly doing their shtick when suddenly the door burst open and the cast from Fight Club rushed into the room and beat the living crap out of everyone. That’s what Tammy And The T-Rex is like.

For instance, the first time good hearted jock Michael and snarling punk Billy brawl over cheerleader Tammy, the whole thing is played mostly for laughs. Yeah, a few punches are thrown, but the whole episode ends with the two boys locked in a mano-a-mano testicle squeezing contest, neither boy willing to be the first to chance loosening his grip, while the whole thing is watched over with bemused delight by Byron, Tammy’s flamboyantly gay best friend. But just a few short minutes later after the chuckles have died down, Billy and his pals catch Michael alone on the street, violently pummel him with baseball bats, and then dump his unconscious body at the local game preserve to be mauled by a lion. Not exactly the kind of material you’d put on right after SpongeBob. And it’s not just the violence. Take for example the scene in which Tammy sits blissfully in her bedroom discussing the future with Michael’s disembodied brain, but then suddenly switches on a boom box and begins dancing around in a teddy while Michael’s mechanized voice cheers her on like some twice-drunk frat boy at a low rent strip club. It would be weird enough on its own, but since both characters are supposed to be in high school, the scene comes off as extra skeevy.

Now don’t get me wrong. There are scenes where the dark humor is spot on. There’s a great moment where Byron, Tammy, and the T-Rex attempt to retrieve Michael’s dead body so they can put his brain back in it, only to open the coffin and discover the corpse is completely decayed and swarming with rats (despite the fact that Michael’s only been dead a couple of days and the coffin was sealed). The frame of all three of the characters (including the dinosaur) simultaneously screaming in horror and disgust is pretty hilarious. But overall, the movie feels disjointed, like maybe the script started out as a clean teen comedy, slowly began to morph into something else, and never quite finished the transformation before they filmed it.

I’m just guessing, but I’d be willing to bet it had something to do with the animatronic dinosaur. As you can see from the one-sheet up there, the creature looks pretty good. On a piece of paper. The problem is, this is a motion picture, and except for the head and arms, the titular creature is entirely immobile. It’s basically a twelve foot tall statue that can wave and open its mouth. Most of the walking scenes involve close-ups of fake legs on sticks, and all of the moments where the T-Rex has to do something complicated with its tiny dino arms, like dial a phone or play charades, are accomplished by somebody wearing green mittens (that aren’t even the same color as the rest of the beast). I’m thinking once the effects crew wheeled this thing in, everybody else looked at each other and said, “We better ramp up the smut and guts, quick, or we’re doomed.”

Which raises an interesting question. If you don’t have the budget to pull off the effects, why not just write the story to involve something more doable than a giant T-Rex robot? In fact, even if you did have the budget, how does the dinosaur make any sense story wise in the first place? The central conceit of the movie is that the mad scientist has developed a way to transfer a person’s brain into a mechanical body as a way to spare mankind the pain and sorrow surrounding death (that and make a nice profit, of course). The idea is simple. Once your old bag of bones is done for, you just have your brain popped into a brand new body, one that’s actually an improvement on the original because the new one won’t ever age or get sick or develop any of those other pesky problems us meat sacks have to put up with. But why does Dr. Wachenstein insist on the new body being that of a T-Rex? How many people (outside of maybe a few guys hanging out in the back of a comic shop) would actually want to come back in the body of a giant inarticulate lizard with useless little arms? It doesn’t make any sense.

Now Jesus, there was a guy who knew how to make a new body the right way. When he shows up in his glorified body in this week’s gospel, it looks just like his old self, but it comes with a few interesting upgrades. Based on his study of this reading and a few others from the writings of St. Paul, St. Thomas Aquinas deduced that a glorified body has four basic gifts: (1) Impassibility, meaning it can no longer get sick, suffer, or die, (2) Agility, meaning it responds perfectly to the will, moving freely and quickly wherever it is directed, (3) Subtlety, meaning that while still a physical thing, it is no longer restricted by material reality and can therefore pass through other objects, and (4) Clarity, meaning it’s kind of shiny and radiates the beauty of the soul. So it sounds like we’re going to get a pretty good deal, much better than being a T-Rex because, along with all the improvements, we’ll still retain our individual appearances and can use our arms to scratch our own nose if we feel the need.

But so what, right? I mean, even assuming St. Thomas got it all correct, none of this glorified body stuff happens until after we’ve died, so why waste too much time thinking about it? Well, in the simplest terms, Christianity places so much emphasis on the ultimate fate of the body after death so that we never deemphasize its importance while we’re alive. Writing about the glorified body of Christ in in L'Osservatore Romano, Dominican friar Robert Gay put it this way. “If we accept this truth, then it follows that it will have an impact on how we conceive of the spiritual life. We can see that the spiritual life is not about an escape from my physical reality, as some New Age perspectives might propose, but about accepting and making use of that reality… [whereas] if we choose to reject the importance of the physical… then the sacramental economy ceases to be relevant. And this is problematic in several ways. Rejecting the material can easily lead to the same kind of dualistic ideas that St Dominic founded the Order of Preachers in the thirteenth century to preach against, namely a belief that the material world is somehow a bad thing. However, to hold such a view is to go against the sense of the material, sensible world that we get from reading the creation narratives, namely that what God created was indeed good.”

So, the belief that we’ll one day receive a glorified body isn’t important because of what it tells us about the future, but what it tells us about the world we live in right now. That what God created was good, and no matter what misfires and mistakes and tragedies occur along the way, it can be made good again. In fact, it can be made better. And that’s something worth believing in.

CUTAWAYS – INCUBUS

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 19:08:00 +0000

Incubus is one of those weird love-it-or-hate-it kind of affairs. It’s filmed entirely in Esperanto, a language none of the actors actually knew how to speak (and it shows). The only existing print of the film that wasn’t burned (no, seriously) has subtitles in the form of a big black box that’s placed almost squarely in the middle of the screen. And the movie has more pretensions than a whole night’s worth of Academy Award acceptance speeches. But on the other hand, it's also got some obvious talent behind the camera (courtesy of the same crew responsible for The Outer Limits television show) who keep the movie visually interesting. And in front of the camera, well, it’s William Shatner, and he’s always fun to watch (although he doesn’t go full-on Kirk until after he gets stabbed near the end of the film).

But, let’s be honest, the thing which probably places Incubus in the win column here at The B-Movie Catechism is the movie’s mixture of solid Catholic dogma (no, seriously) with age old Christian folklore, all presented in a simple, straight forward, no grey areas tale of good vs. evil. Basically, the story follows a young up and coming succubus named Kia who has grown tired of killing off sinners and longs for the challenge of destroying a truly good soul. Unimpressed with the less than perfect clergymen she has been spying on, Kia finally locates Marc, a wounded soldier with a pure heart. Alas for the poor demoness, although she manages to make Marc fall in love with her, the devout Christian spurns any sexual intimacy until they are married. When Kia refuses to get wed (demons aren’t too big on the sacraments), Marc picks her up while she is sleeping and carries her into the local church hoping to force the issue. Which leads to this great scene…

Okay, so as you can probably tell, Incubus isn’t exactly the movie for fans of subtlety (I did mention Shatner is in this, didn’t I?). But c’mon, you have to dig those crazy sixties lighting effects and background organ music. And subtle or not, it still has a ring of authenticity to it. You see, so solid is Kia’s delusion about how things should be, that when confronted with the truth of God as revealed through Marc’s expressions of love and faith, she is compelled to act violently in order to preserve her worldview (notice she even goes so far as to say his profession of love is an assault analogous to rape). As is entirely befitting a creature from hell, Kia’s reaction is that of the compete and utter narcissist.

According to the book Personality Disorders (WPA Series in Evidence & Experience in Psychiatry), “Several studies support the observation that people with high narcissism tend to have strong aggressive and violent reactions to threats to their sense of superiority or self-esteem. Aggressive reactions to criticism may be more or less controlled and obvious—ranging from cognitive reconstructions of events and subtle, well hidden feelings of disdain or contempt, to intense aggressive argumentativeness, criticism and rage outbursts, to more or less controlled aggressive and violent behaviour.” Or to put it in more layman terms, as Leon F. Seltzer, Ph.D. does in Psychology Today, “When criticized, narcissists show themselves woefully incapable of retaining any emotional poise, or receptivity. And it really doesn't much matter whether the nature of that criticism is constructive or destructive. They just don't seem to be able to take criticism, period… Although narcissists don't (or won't) show it, all perceived criticism feels gravely threatening to them (the reason that their inflamed, over-the-top reactions to it can leave us so surprised and confused). Deep down, clinging desperately not simply to a positive but grandiose sense of self, they're compelled at all costs to block out any negative feedback about themselves. Their dilemma is that the rigidity of their defenses, their inability ever to let their guard down (even with those closest to them), guarantees that they'll never get what they most need, which they themselves are sadly--no, tragically--oblivious of.”

Now, given the recent issues involving religious freedom in the United States, some of you out there are probably expecting me to make the suggestion that much like Kia in the movie, more than a few of the enemies of the Church, especially those who seem to have a vitriolic reaction to her very existence, might just be suffering from a tad bit of narcissism. And you know, I could easily go there, because, well… it would be true. But Deacon Doug McManaman, teacher of Philosophy at the Father Michael McGivney Catholic Academy, finds that narcissism is a very real and present danger inside the Church as well. According to the Deacon, narcissists often “ascribe to a religion in an effort to understand their special status, which they believe they enjoy.” The narcissist may believe “he is a disciple -- chosen -- by virtue of a special quality in him, and not really by virtue of the mercy and gratuitous love of God.” In effect, the religious narcissist sees the Church as something which compliments his pre-existing view of himself and the world he lives in, not as something which shapes and molds that view. It’s a subtle difference, but one we should all be aware of, especially in an election year when our personal politics can so easily trump our religion.

So, how do we avoid distorting our religious experience through an over-elevated sense of self worth? Well, Deacon McManaman suggests one simple thing. Orthodoxy. “To keep oneself from being fooled by the narcissist whose facade includes Catholicism, we only have to remain faithful to Peter.” he writes. “The narcissist cannot help but defy authority… [so] by remaining faithful to Peter, one takes a path that ultimately the narcissist cannot follow." So yeah, basically, if you want to avoid the snares of narcissism, then simply follow the teachings of the Church. And if you just can’t bring yourself to do so, well… then don’t worry about it, there must be something wrong with them. As special as you are, it couldn’t possibly be you, could it?

SILENT AGONY

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 20:39:00 +0000

The agony of Jesus in the garden from La Vie et la passion de Jesus Christ (Passion and Death of Christ) (1903), the first movie to ever have colorized sequences and generally regarded to be the first ever feature length film, though it runs only a scant 45 minutes. You can watch the whole movie on YouTube or The Internet Archive, where you can also download it legally for free. However, if you do decide to give the movie a look-see this evening, do keep in mind the film’s short running time. Remember, Jesus asked us if we could sit with him for an hour, so you’ll still owe Jesus 15 minutes. Don’t short change God.

Peace be with you and your spirit during this holy time. See you after Easter.

OUTTAKES: THE AotA EDITION

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 05:03:00 +0000

Want to know how this ends? If so, then head on over to Acts of the Apostasy where LarryD has foolishly handed over the keys to the kingdom for a day so that we can take a few potshots at some of AotA’s favorite targets.

STILL VOICES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:50:00 +0000

WEEKLY NEWSREEL – 3 1/2 TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 18)

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 02:39:00 +0000

Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. It’s time for another Weekly Newsreel brought to you again this week by the fine folks at Acts of the Apostasy, home of the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday. Now off to press.

The Catechism tells us that "every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation." A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons - to commit such crimes.” Given that, we’re not quite sure what to make of the article published in the December 1946 issue of Atlantic Monthly (via Weird Universe) which chronicled how scientists working for the United States government in World War II tried to devise a bomb which would deliver swarms of bats with incendiary capsules attached to them. The idea was that the bats would find attics, lofts, and other hard to reach places to roost in, and then burst into flame, causing fires which would burn down countless numbers of Japanese paper houses. The Americans eventually abandoned the idea because they didn’t want to be seen as engaging in biological warfare (bats carry a number of nasty diseases) and we here are kind of glad they did so. While not being canon lawyers, we can’t help but see the dumping of hordes of flaming bats onto a civilian population as somehow being “indiscriminate”.

Fortunately, most scientists these days are working on studies and surveys rather than engineering animals for mass destruction (although, to be honest, the latter kind of scientist still makes for more entertaining Roger Corman movies). For example, back in November 2011, results were published from a study by the University of British Columbia that suggested that "where there are religious majorities -- that is, in most of the world -- atheists are among the least trusted people…” Unable to pinpoint exactly why religious people mistrust atheists, the lead author of the study group, Will Gervais, speculated that “while atheists may see their disbelief as a private matter on a metaphysical issue, believers may consider atheists' absence of belief as a public threat to cooperation and honesty.” Well, maybe. But perhaps the answer is more simple than that. Just a few days ago, an estimated 20,000 atheists and agnostics gathered in Washington D.C. for the first ever Reason Rally, at which time the keynote speaker Richard Dawkins called to those in the crowd to confront those who hold beliefs such as the true presence in the Eucharist and “Mock them! Ridicule them! In public!” How rational and enlightened. But maybe it goes to show that the answer Mr. Gervais’ question about why religious people don’t trust atheists might simply be because too many modern atheists turn out to be complete anti-social buttheads.

III

And finally, speaking of disgruntled atheists, a study reported earlier this year in The American Journal of Psychiatry noted that the offspring of Protestant or Catholic parents were 76% less likely than the offspring of non-religious parents to experience an episode of major depression. These results are especially interesting when combined with a just published study by Professors Sascha Becker (University of Warwick, U.K.) and Ludger Woessmann (University of Munich, Germany) which shows conclusively that Protestants have higher suicide rates than Catholics. The math seems pretty clear:

Atheists (are less happy than) Protestants (are less happy than) Catholics

Therefore, if you want the best chance of being happy, you should choose to be…

1/2

Now, for all of my non-Catholic readers out there, please don’t bite down on that arsenic capsule just yet. Take note that both the studies mentioned above have some possible geographical issues that might (or might not) possibly skew the results in favor of Catholics. So you see, even in your scientifically proven unhappier lives, there’s always hope.

And on that note, we sign off as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.

STILL VOICES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 05:26:00 +0000

LIFE’S LIKE A MOVIE: BROTHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 01:14:00 +0000

The acting is spotty (there’s a very fine line between authentic and downright amateur), the story meanders aimlessly like only an indie film can, and home movies probably have a higher budget, but you know, Brother From Another Planet is still pretty enjoyable. The movie tells the story of an unnamed mute three toed alien who flees to Earth in order to hide from his former masters, only to run into a whole new set of problems due to the color of his skin. Yes, The Brother From Another Planet is a ‘message’ movie about bigotry, but it’s a fair message. Plus, by the time the credits roll, the film goes a little deeper than just the basic black vs. white thing (though that is front and center) and embraces the whole immigrant experience in the United States. At the very end (SPOILERS), when it looks like the Men In Black (no, not the ones with the hit theme song) are about to capture The Brother, a large number of people dressed in various uniforms relating to their occupations emerge from the shadows and takedown The Brother’s pursuers. It turns out The Brother is not the only escaped three toed slave on our planet, and even though they all have experienced some bigotry since landing, it’s a whole lot preferable here than where they came from.

I couldn’t help but think of Brother From Another Planet while attending the Rally For Religious Freedom in downtown Atlanta today.

As you can see, down here in Dixieland we had to hold more umbrellas than protest signs, but that didn’t dampen our enthusiasm too much. Despite the rain, we still managed to get over one thousand people at the rally. Not too shabby for the “city too busy to care”. But more interesting than that was the speakers that were on hand. While we had the obligatory politician (actually, a nice guy who’s also a member of the Knights of Columbus), a good number of those who spoke turned out to be immigrants, including our very own Bishop Luis R. Zarama.

And, let me tell you, the immigrants are a little pissed off. The type of unconstitutional overreach which the U.S. government is attempting with the HHS mandate is not what these people moved here for. This is supposed to be the land of freedom, a place that’s better than where they came from. I think it’s safe to say they feel somewhat betrayed.

Still, even though their irritation was evident, the rally was a positive event overall. Which hasn’t stopped the local paper from trying to put a different spin on the event. Having no luck finding a dissenter in the crowd (assuming he was even there), the reporter from the AJC had to call up a representative of Catholics for Choice in Washington just to get an opposing viewpoint. Sigh. But that’s the fight we’re up against. The powers that be will do whatever they can to shape the narrative and marginalize our voices. That’s why today can only be a start. Please, everyone, keep sending those letters and making those phone calls, keep talking to whomever will listen, and most of all, keep praying. Let’s keep this land of ours a place where immigrants want to flee to, not flee from.

NOW SHOWING AT A BLOG NEAR YOU

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 21:01:00 +0000

So what’s showing at a blog near you? ME! I’ve been remiss in noting that about two weeks ago the nice people at Catholic Exchange began hosting my blog (yes, I warned them, but they wanted it anyway). For the moment, it’s the same old stuff you get here, but I told them at some point I’d at least post something once a week just for them. Which I will link to here when it happens, so you won’t miss it. But just in case you’d like to follow this blog over at Catholic Exchange, here’s the link…

THE B-MOVIE CATECHISM at CATHOLIC EXCHANGE

And if you do visit there, be sure to check out the other bloggers. They seem like good folk (even if they are all probably thinking to themselves “Oh well, there went the neighborhood!”).

WEEKLY NEWSREEL: 3 1/2 TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 17)

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:19:00 +0000

Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. It’s time for another Weekly Newsreel sponsored once again by the fine folks at Acts of the Apostasy, home of the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday. It’s getting weird out there. Now off to press.

DATELINE: NORTH AMERICA – Much hoopla has been made (and rightly so) over the recent poll by the New York Times and CBS News which showed that a whopping 57% of Americans oppose the HHS mandate requiring religious institutions to provide contraception and abortion-inducing drugs. But buried in those results lies the question, just who are the 34% of Americans who actually believe the government has the right to force religious institutions to violate their teachings? Well, in what may be a related story, the latest Angus Reid Public Opinion Poll reports that “people in the United States are more likely than Canadians to consider that Bigfoot is real… In the online survey of representative national samples, three-in-ten Americans (29%) and one-in-five Canadians (21%) think Bigfoot is “definitely” or “probably” real.” So, basically, there’s only a 5% difference (margin of error anyone?) between the number of people who support the HHS mandate and the number of people who believe a secret society of super intelligent ape like beings are roaming the forests of North America. Coincidence? You be the judge.

DATELINE: UTAH – In other woodland news, a study out of Brigham Young University has determined that firing a gun is no more effective in keeping people from injury or death during bear attacks than not using a firearm. After analyzing 269 incidents of bear-human conflicts, “The researchers found no statistical difference in the outcome (no injury, injury or fatality) when they compared those who used their gun in an aggressive encounter (229 instances) to those who had firearms but did not use them (40 instances).” Given the data, the scientists reached a conclusion that only science could possibly provide, that the best way to survive a bear encounter is not to have one. So, after thousands of years of Judeo-Christian teaching, someone still felt the need to fund a study just to prove that it’s wise to avoid the near occasion of bears. Sigh.

III

DATELINE: SOME DARK CORNER OF THE WORLD IN WHICH YOU LIVE – In keeping with the animal theme (sort of), if you know someone who has been looking for that special drink to go along with their extensive collection of tentacle rape anime (and if that someone happens to be you, quit reading this and get your butt to confession immediately), then let them know their long tortuous search is over. The good folks at J-List are now offering their popular Tentacle Grape soda for sale over the Internet. The drink is a regular sell-out at sci-fi conventions, but now you can order yours any time of the day in six-packs or convenient singles. So, not only does pornography (as the Catechism reminds us) offend against chastity, pervert the conjugal act, do grave injury to the dignity of its participants, and immerse all who are involved with it in the illusion of a fantasy world… but now it can rot your teeth out as well. Isn’t that special?

1/2

Frankly, we got nothing after Tentacle Grape. Sometimes after surfing the Internet, you just have to call it a day and go take a hot scalding shower. “Cleanse me with hyssop, that I may be pure; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.”

And with that, we sign off for another week, as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.

CUTAWAYS: BLAZING SADDLES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 04:06:00 +0000

Given the low brow nature of many of the films we talk about here at the B-Movie Catechism, we’ve naturally never been ones to shy away from the delicate subject of flatulence. Besides, It’s not like we could avoid it even if we wanted to as the average person reportedly produces an average of 14 such events every day (now you know). The venerable practice of inserting fart jokes into popular entertainment has been around since at least the 5th century BC when Aristophanes let a few rip in plays like The Clouds and The Knights, and continued on through the ages, even finding its way into the works of luminaries such as Geoffrey Chaucer and Mark Twain. The Hays Code managed to keep the odorous subject matter out of motion pictures for years, but once the code was abandoned, it was only a matter of time before theater speakers everywhere were trumpeting Hollywood’s new found freedom to blast away. The honor of the first onscreen occurrence of audible flatus most likely goes to Pasolini’s 1971 adaptation of The Caterbury Tales (now you know that too, we’re full of knowledge today), but it was, of course, this scene that finally brought the gag into mainstream movies to stay...

Although it’s probably never been done better than Mr. Brooks did it (although I do have a fond spot in my heart for the Volare scene in Hollywood Knights), since the release of Blazing Saddles we’ve seen (or should I say heard) a non-stop barrage of freeps, rumblers, and breezers in movies, to the point where even a good portion of Academy Award nominees manage to somehow sneak at least one botty burp in.

Alright, by now, I imagine, some of you are probably wondering (assuming you’ve stuck around and read this far) what exactly is the point of discussing this. After all, is this really a topic for nice Church-going people to be wasting time on? Well, the great St. Thomas More certainly thought so. You see, back in 1518, this man whom Pope John Paul II once declared the "heavenly patron of statesmen and politicians", penned an epigram entitled In Efflatum Ventris, or as it’s translated into English, On Breaking Wind. In this satirical piece, the future saint explained, “Wind, if you keep it too long in your stomach, kills you; on the other hand, it can save your life if it is properly let out. If wind can save or destroy you, then is it not as powerful as dreaded kings?” The man for all seasons wrote this piece during the same period in which he was working on a scathing biography of King Richard III, a book many historians believe was intended as a criticism of the tyranny of all royalty. And while the biography was never published, the epigram was, and it gets the same point across quite nicely, that in the big picture of things, the power of kings amounts to the same as a fart in the wind.

More was only slightly more impressed with elected representatives than he was with kings, but he still found them preferable. He wrote in a more serious work, “A senator is elected by the people to rule; a king attains this end by being born… The one feels that he was made senator by the people; the other feels that the people were created for him so that, of course, he may have subjects to rule. A king in his first year is always very mild indeed. So it is that a consul - one who shares his power - will be at any time as good as a king is in the beginning of his reign. Over a long time a selfish king will wear his people out. If a consul is evil, there is hope of improvement.”

Now, if you’ve been paying attention to the recent debates surrounding the HHS mandate, then you’re well aware that our elected representatives (our consul) here in the U.S. have seemingly forgotten that they are our servants and not our rulers. They have forgotten (or ignored) the fact that an ‘unalienable’ right such as freedom of religion is something that pre-exists the state and is therefore something which can not be given or taken away by any government, but only protected. They have forgotten all of that. Or given the state of our educational system, maybe they never learned it in the first place.

Either way, we’re going to try and remind them. This Friday, March 23, I’ll be joining up with what will hopefully be a sizable number of people in more than 100 cities across the country for The Nationwide Rally for Religious Freedom. The purpose of the rally is simply stated, “Stand Up for Religious Freedom—Stop the HHS Mandate!” If you’ve got the time, feel free to join us. You can check where the rallies will be held in your state at this site. Come on down and help us raise a stink. Metaphorically speaking, of course. Not like, uh, well, you know…

SHORT FEATURE: DEVIL IN A CONVENT

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 05:41:00 +0000

Back in 2011, the British branch of the organization Aid to the Church in Need published a report entitled "Persecuted and Forgotten? A Report on Christians oppressed for their faith." The report claimed that 75% of the religious persecution taking place in the world today was directed squarely at Christians, with most of the life threatening instances taking place in the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Obviously we’re not being killed off here in the States yet, but considering the growing hostility of the American government towards religious institutions here in the Land of the Free (unless you actually believe what the Church teaches), that 75% is a pretty easy figure to accept.

So, they’re out to get us. But, as Pope Benedict XVI reminded us back in 2010, "Today we see in a truly terrifying way that the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from enemies on the outside, but is born of the sin within the Church.”

Now, after watching that short, a person might be tempted to ask, “So, is Georges Melies suggesting that Satan invented liturgical dance and puppet shows?” Wellll… maybe, but that’s beside the point. The main thing to remember is that we must always be on guard against Satan attacking us, even from within our own walls. To maintain such vigilance, His Holiness remarked, “The Church has a deep need to learn to do penance, accept purification, and to learn to ask forgiveness.” Which sounds an awful lot like what we’re supposed to be doing during Lent anyway, right? Hey, just because the new elect preparing to join the Church on Easter are undergoing the Scrutinies during Lent doesn’t mean they’re the only ones who need to be taking a long look at themselves.

Ultimately, Lent is about each and every one of our own ongoing conversions which, as the Catechism reminds us, “is accomplished in daily life by gestures of reconciliation, concern for the poor, the exercise and defense of justice and right, by the admission of faults to one's brethren, fraternal correction, revision of life, examination of conscience, spiritual direction, acceptance of suffering, [AND YES] endurance of persecution for the sake of righteousness.”

Yeah yeah, I know, they just had to throw that last little bit in, didn’t they? Unfortunately, sometimes, it’s just part of the package, something we have to go through as we grow closer to God. But as bad as the persecution gets (and we’ve got a long way to go before we’ve seen the worst), just like in the short, things can still turn out okay in the end. “We can expect that evil will always launch attacks from the inside and the outside” the Pope said, “but the forces of good are also always present, and in the end, the Lord is stronger than evil.”

BMC MOVIE OF THE WEEK: LOOKER

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 04:11:00 +0000

“This fun, silly thriller written and directed by Michael Crichton manages to combine the dramatic murders of beautiful models, a secret conspiracy to use TV commercials for mind-control, and an unusual seeing-eye device which makes the wearer invisible. Plastic surgeon Larry Roberts (Albert Finney) becomes the prime suspect after two models on whom he operated are killed. Larry becomes suspicious because both of the women came into his office asking for very precise and seemingly unnecessary physical alterations. Agreeing to operate, because the women's jobs depended on the surgery, Larry must now clear his own name and save his life and career. With the aid of a friend and model Cindy (Susan Dey), Larry discovers and foils the plot led by corporation-head John Reston (James Coburn). Larry must then fight for his life against Reston's thugs who are equipped with the devices, called "Lookers." This is good, if silly fun and Albert Finney does his best with a somewhat implausible script.” – Rovi’s AllMovie Guide.

March 3, 2012: Saturday of the First Week in Lent (Year B)

You would think a movie written and directed by the same guy who penned Jurassic Park, The Andromeda Strain, and Westworld would be better known than it is, but, sadly, the only thing most sci-fi geeks (the guys anyway) seem to remember about Looker nowadays is that it’s the movie in which Susan Dey (the girl who played Laurie from The Partridge Family) briefly appears nude (in a PG rated film, what the…). Pathetic, I know, but then again, what do you expect from a crowd who still pines away for Slave Girl Leia even though its been almost thirty years since Carrie Fisher could fit into that bikini. The funny thing is, that propensity for men to focus on a woman’s physical attributes is actually one of the things explicitly addressed in Looker. In one scene in particular, Albert Finney’s character is hooked up to a computer monitored headset which tracks what parts of the television screen his eyes are focused on. Needless, to say, when shown a commercial for a soft drink featuring a scantily clad young lady lounging on a sailboat, the good doctor’s gaze is found to wander over everything except for the can of soda itself. This being an obvious problem for the advertisers, the testers instruct the computer to reposition the can to a more, shall we say, strategic location slightly below the actress’ chin.

Now that setup probably doesn’t sound all that science-fictiony given that such scenarios most likely play out hourly on the MacBooks of every advertising agency in the world these days, but remember that Looker was made in 1981, a time when about the best home computer the average Joe could get ahold of was an 8-bit Commodore. So, given that Looker was released decades before moviegoers would see the likes of Gollum, Caesar the ape, & (ugh) Jar Jar Binks, it’s kind of interesting to watch a movie where the central conceit is that computer animated actors will one day come to replace human beings. Of course, this being a screenplay by accused technophobe Michael Crichton, there’s a sinister side to the technology (yes, even more sinister than creating characters like Jar Jar). As it turns out, the reason given as to why digital thespians will become so commonplace is that humans simply aren’t perfect enough.

You see, along with inventing the L.O.O.K.E.R. (Light Ocular-Oriented Kinetic Emotive Responses) hypnotizing gun and a method of brainwashing television viewers utilizing light pulses, James Coburn and the eeevil scientists at the Digital Matrix laboratory also calculated the exact physical measurements a person needs in order to be appealing to the broadest audience. That’s why Finney’s plastic surgeon character has a string of models coming into his office seeking reconstructive surgery for reasons such as their cheekbones are 0.4 millimeters too high or their areola is 5 millimeters too wide. But it doesn’t stop there. Even after all of the models receive the required surgical corrections, Digital Matrix determines that the illusion of perfection is broken once the women start moving around. In order to maintain the desired results, it’s decided that the bodies of the actresses need to be optically scanned into the computers and animated, as digital duplicates, unlike their human counterparts, can be programmed to maintain optimal positioning. Hence the scene in which Susan Dey, much to the delight of Partridge Family slash fiction aficionados everywhere (c’mon, it’s the Internet, you know they’re out there somewhere), doffs her clothing and steps into the world’s biggest scanner. Unfortunately, once all the models are properly pixelated, Digital Matrix decides it no longer needs the live women and begins killing them off to prevent competitors from acquiring their services.

It’s all kind of silly (do you really need a geometrically perfect woman just to sell floor wax?), full of plot holes (hey, we’re the police, but we think we’ll just follow the plastic surgeon around and watch him handle everything), and not well put together (the original theatrical cut of the film notoriously has the reason for the murders entirely edited out), but in the end Looker is still a pretty decent time killer. And in an offhand way, it does make the point that ultimately no man or woman can hope to achieve perfection. Just read Romans chapter 3 if you need to confirm exactly how lousy we all are at even when we try. Which makes this last Saturday’s gospel reading a bit disconcerting, because in it Jesus bluntly tells his disciples, “So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Does this reading mean Jesus is demanding the impossible of us?

Well, not really. See, this is another one of those cases where it would be handy to have someone majoring in Biblical language studies hanging around the house while you’re reading Scripture. It turns out that in the original Greek, the word we have translated as ‘perfect’ is ‘telios’ which does not mean being sinless or without any flaws, but rather means being completed or brought to full purpose. Taken in this sense, something is ‘perfect’ only when it is fulfilling its highest calling. For example, in Stephen King’s Sleepwalkers, the killer cat creature uses a piece of corn-on-the-cob to stab a policeman in the back. Now, while it might be possible to use corn-on-the-cob in this fashion (you know, in some alternate universe where corn is made of the same substance as Wolverine’s claws), that is not what corn is purposed for. Corn-on-the-cob is only ‘complete’ when it serves the purpose for which it was made… to be eaten. Preferably drenched in hot cholesterol packed butter. Mmmmm.

Sorry, I digress. This whole no nighttime snacks during Lent is getting to me.

Anyway, what this means is that when Jesus is instructing us to be perfect, he’s not suggesting we scrupulously get hung up over our most minute flaws, but rather that we make the attempt to fulfill our highest purpose. And to find out exactly what that purpose is, all we need to do is go back a few sentences and read a bit more of Saturday’s gospel. “You have heard that it was said, you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers and sisters only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.” In short, we are only ‘complete’ as human beings when we strive to love others in the same way God does.

Which, considering some of the jerks out there, is probably harder than reaching physical perfection or shoving a piece of corn through somebody’s back. But we have to try, right?

WEEKLY NEWSREEL: 3½ TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 15)

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:49:00 +0000

Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. It’s been awhile since we’ve had a Weekly Newsreel here at the B-Movie Catechism, but since we’ve been wanting to contribute to the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday hosted by LarryD over at Acts of the Apostasy for awhile now, this just seemed like the best format to do so. Now off to press.

DATELINE: WASHINGTON D.C. - It was announced by the Pentagon that The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has created a "Cheetah" robot which can gallop up to 18 mph… because, you know, having a robot that can outrun human beings couldn’t possibly be a bad idea.

Progress is fine, Pope Benedict XVI once said, but “the common good is the end that gives meaning to progress and to development, which otherwise would be limited to the sole production of material goods. Progress and development are necessary, but if they are not oriented to the common good, they lead to the negative consequences of the prevalence of consumerism, waste, poverty and excess.” And possibly Terminators, though His Holiness didn’t say as much.

DATELINE: NEW SOUTH WALES - A recent study by Dr Matthew Michael Large shows that people who gouge their own eyes out (a.k.a. self-enucleation) do not do so because of religious fervor (if thine eye offends thee…), but rather because they are, in fact, quite frickin’ insane.

While the Catechism does note that “there is no holiness without renunciation and spiritual battle [and that] spiritual progress entails the ascesis and mortification that gradually lead to living in the peace and joy of the Beatitudes”, the old Catholic Encyclopedia points out that mortification is typically considered “the deliberate restraint that one places on natural impulses in order to make them increasingly subject to sanctification through obedience to reason illumined by faith… One example is the law of fast and abstinence.” So, giving up meat on Friday, that’s mortification. Gouging out your own eyes… not so much.

III

DATELINE: SHINGO – Thinking of visiting the Holy Land this Easter to see the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Well, forget it. According to the Takenouchi Documents, a set of ancient papers discovered in 1935 and transcribed by cosmoarcheologist(!?!) Wado Kosaka (the man who once ‘contacted’ a UFO on live television), you need to travel to Japan in order to see the true burial place of Jesus. As revealed in these writings, “Christ first visited Japan between the ages of 21 and 33 (the Bible does in fact skip over large periods of Christ's early life, and many theories exist about what he did in the intervals). The document claims he studied the native language and culture before returning to Jerusalem, where he was crucified. Only it wasn't really him who was crucified. His younger brother, Isukiri (who makes no appearance in the Bible), nobly took his place on the cross, pretending to be the Son of God, while the real Christ fled to Siberia. A few years later, via Alaska, he arrived at the port of Hachinohe, just 40 km from Shingo. He made his way to the village, where he married, had three children, and lived to the age of 106.” While even most of the locals in Shingo admit to believing the whole story to be a hoax, you have to admit, it still sounds more plausible than The DaVinci Code.

1/2

And on a final note, we here at Eegah, Inc. decided that during Lent it would be a nice idea to replace night time snacking with praying a rosary. It’s been two weeks now and let me tell you… those beads are starting to look awful yummy.

And with that, we here at the Newsreel sign off, as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.

STILL VOICES

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 04:31:00 +0000

BMC MOVIE OF THE WEEK: PHASE IV

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:34:00 +0000

SYNOPSIS

“Saul Bass had a fascinating career as an animator and as designer of title sequences for a number of notable films, including Psycho, Vertigo, Anatomy Of A Murder and Seconds. However, Phase IV was his only credit as director of a feature film. A visually inventive science-fiction story, Phase IV concerns a group of research scientists working in the Arizona desert who find themselves confronted by an Army of super-intelligent mutant ants. The results are more intelligent than the description would lead you to believe, and Nigel Davenport and Michael Murphy turn in good performances as the embattled men of science.” ~ Rovi’s Allmovie Guide

February 26, 2012: First Sunday of Lent (Year B)

In 1971, the Academy Award for best feature length documentary went to The Hellstrom Chronicle, a film which utilized groundbreaking macrophotography to document the epic struggles which occur every day in the insect world. But as fantastic as the imagery was (and still is to this day actually), what really turned the Hellstrom Chronicle into a cult classic was the script penned by legendary screenwriter David Seltzer (The Omen, Prophecy). Rather than go with the staid voiceover so typical of other documentaries, Seltzer instead had the film narrated by a fictional near-manic entomologist named Dr. Nils Hellstrom who bleakly informed the audience that he was morally compelled to present the results of his years of study of insects, despite the ridicule and harm it would inevitably bring to his career. You see, after decades of observing the highly organized societies established by insects, Hellstrom had come to the inevitable conclusion that the greatest threat to humanity wasn’t nuclear war or environmental disaster, but the barely noticed bugs crawling beneath our feet. In short, if the insects were ever to declare war on mankind… mankind was hosed.

And that’s basically the idea behind Phase IV, which begins with a vague, undefined event in space that has a profound affect on the intelligence of the ant population in the American desert.The change goes relatively unnoticed by the scientific community for awhile, but after various species of ants which would normally be hostile too one another begin to work together and make things hard for some of the local ranchers, the government takes notice and decides to send in a pair of scientists to investigate what is going on. Now, if this were any other old bug invasion flick, this would be the point at which the movie became nothing more than a series of scenes involving people fighting an advancing horde of creepy crawly things. But that’s not how Phase IV creeps and crawls. You see, while the poster (above) may have promised carnage, what the movie actually delivers is a back and forth chess match wherein the men study and test the ants, and the ants in turn do the same to the men, may the smartest minds win.

And for my tastes, that’s what makes Phase IV so darn good. Take for instance the sequence which begins with the ants chewing through some of the generator wires in an attempt to cripple the scientists’ computer systems. The head scientist responds by coating the landscape with a new form of insecticide to prevent the ants from coming in too close. After an initial retreat, the ants send back scouts to retrieve some of the poison so that the queen can analyze it and produce offspring resistant to the toxins. Once enough of the new eggs have hatched, the ants then begin to construct… Okay, I know it sounds a lot less exciting than watching ants crawl all over Suzanne Somers, and in lesser hands, maybe it would be. But the combination of Saul Bass’ direction, Dick Bush’s cinematography, and Desmond Briscoe’s somber score produces something special. Rather than being a snooze fest, the scene I just described actually becomes mesmerizing. For almost five full minutes the camera follows a series of worker ants as one by one they transport a single piece of the dried poison through their tunnels, each wrenching the deadly package from the clenched mandibles of its dead predecessor, each knowing they too will perish before the task is complete. It’s all shot in glorious macro close-up and plays out to the strains of a mournful adagio that adds just the right touch of pathos to the workers’ sacrifice. On paper, it’s just a few ants crawling and dying. Onscreen, it’s practically impossible to turn away from.

Look, I enjoy watching William Shatner over emote to tarantulas as much as the next guy, but Phase IV just has so much more going for it in the ideas department than most of the other bug movies combined. While it never dwells overlong on any one topic, it still manages to touch on everything from game theory to class warfare to man’s place in the universe. Plus, Phase IV does make you wonder, even if just a little, if something like this scenario could be how humanity finally meets its end. As an inveterate sci-fi fan, I realize the honor of mankind’s destruction usually falls to asteroid collisions, global pandemics, alien invasions, and things like that, but as The Hellstrom Chronicle (phony baloney though it was) so duly pointed out, insects outnumber us and are far more organized. So why should an apocalypse by ants be out of the question? It’s as good a guess as any.

Now, of course, someone out there is probably thinking, “Hey, what about the Bible? Doesn’t it tell us exactly how the world will end?” Well, kind of. Remember, this week’s first reading only tells us how the world’s grand finale WILL NOT occur, “that the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all mortal beings.” But notice that it never actually gets around to saying how it WILL. And as for the verses we find scattered throughout the rest of scripture that do address the end times, let’s just say they can be a little vague. Oh sure, it’s pretty clear that at the very final moment there’ll be a big blow-out between Jesus, Satan, and their two respective forces. As the Catechism explains it, “On Judgment Day at the end of the world, Christ will come in glory to achieve the definitive triumph of good over evil which, like the wheat and the tares, have grown up together in the course of history.” But as for the events leading up to the big finish, that’s a bit more sketchy.

So, assuming something obvious like a militant uprising of ants doesn’t occur, how will we know the end is approaching. Well, skipping over all that pre-tribulation rapture nonsense that’s been all the rage amongst some evangelical protestants for the past couple of centuries (another post for another time), about all we can really say the Bible tells us about the end times is that there will be wars and rumors of wars, some natural disasters, and that the Church will be persecuted, undergoing a trial that will shake the faith of many believers. Which, when you stop to think about it, pretty much sounds like most any time in Church history. Which is sort of the point. As Jesus tells us in this week’s gospel, "THIS is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel." You see, its been the end times since Jesus ascended into Heaven some 2,000+ years ago, and it could remain the end times for who knows how long. "Of that day and hour no one knows” Jesus once said, “neither the angels of heaven nor the Son, but the Father alone."

So, what to do until the final cosmic throwdown actually does role around? Well, these end times, the Catechism reminds us, are “a time still marked by ‘distress’… a time of waiting and watching”, but also, “according to the Lord, the present time is the time of the Spirit and of witness.” Which means, basically, that rather than spend too much time sitting around fretting about the details of Armageddon, we should just get down to the daily tasks of repenting, believing, and witnessing which God has given us. And you know who already understands the importance of taking care of what needs to be taken care of, don’t you? The dang blasted ants. That’s why the Bible tells us in Proverbs to “go to the ant, O sluggard, study her ways and learn wisdom.” Come on, folks. Get busy. Don’t let the ants prove themselves smarter than us.

SHORT FEATURE: MOVIE: THE MOVIE

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:13:00 +0000

It probably won’t surprise anyone that the best thing about the Academy Awards last night wasn’t actually on the Academy Awards, but happened a little later. (For my Baptist readers, be warned, this has an ad for vodka preceding the clip. For my Catholic readers, sit back and have a drink, the clip starts in about 60…)

If only this were real, it might just be the movie that would make me willing to shell out 30 bucks for tickets and snacks and the opportunity to sit in an auditorium full a bunch of attention deficit teens armed with cell phones.

Now some might say there’s just too many genres represented in Movie: The Movie, too which I could only respond, “Please, I’m a Bible reader.” You see, while a lot of people who never actually crack open the good book think of it as nothing more than a big “how to” manual, the fact is the Bible is an assortment of books collected over centuries containing a myriad of genres.

Felix Just, S.J., Ph.D. breaks them down this way:

Major Genres within the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament):

Foundational Myths & Legends - stories about the origins of the world, the first generations of humans, or the early years of a nation, intended to provide a foundational world-view upon which people base their communal and individual lives (Gen, parts of Exod, Num, Deut)

Legal Codes - collections of laws and instructions by which the people are to live (Lev, parts of Exod, Num, Deut)

Genealogies - lists of inter-relationships between peoples, either of successive generations or of different nations (parts of Gen, much of Num)

Annals - semi-historical narrative accounts of select events in a nation's life, focusing especially upon political and military exploits of its leaders, since usually written under royal sponsorship (Josh, Jdg, 1 & 2 Sam, 1 & 2 Kings, etc.)

Prophetic Books - collections of the oracles or words of God spoken to the people through human intermediaries (prophets) and the symbolic actions they perform at God's direction for the people's benefit (Isa, Jer, Ezek, etc.)

Psalms/Odes/Songs - poetic lyrics of songs/hymns intended for communal worship and/or individual prayer (Ps)

Prayers/Laments - words addressed by people to God, esp. reflecting situations of crisis or lament (Lam)

Proverbs - generalized sayings and aphorisms containing advice on how to live well: "do good and avoid evil" (Prov)

Wisdom Literature - various types of inspirational stories that encourage people to live wisely (Job, Wis, etc.)

Apocalypses - symbolic narratives that interpret historical crises through God's eyes to provide hope for a better future (Dan)

Major Genres within the New Testament:

Gospels - proclamations of the "good news" about Jesus intended to establish and/or strengthen people's faith in him; quasi-biographical, semi-historical portraits of the life, teachings, and actions of Jesus (Mark, Matt, Luke, John)

The NT Gospels contain many sub-genres of literature (see below)

Acts - a partial narrative account about the beginnings and the growth of early Christianity; not a complete history of the early Church, since it focuses only on the actions of a few missionary leaders (Acts)

Letters - real letters addressing practical and theological issues relevant to particular communities (esp. Paul's)

Church Orders - collections of instructions for the practical organization of religious communities (1 Tim, Titus)

Testament - a document that gives a dying person's last wishes and instructions for his/her successors (2 Tim & 2 Peter)

Homily/Sermon - an exegetical sermon that cites and interprets older biblical texts in reference to Jesus (Heb)

Wisdom Collection - a collection of general instructions on how to live an ethical Christian life well (James)

Epistles/Encyclicals - more stylized works in letter format; "circular letters" intended for broader audiences (1 & 2 Peter)

Apocalypse - a vividly symbolic narrative that "reveals" God's views about a historical crisis, in order to provide encouragement for a difficult present and hope for a better future (Rev)

Smaller Genres and Sub-Genres within the New Testament:

There are many other smaller genres found within the various biblical books.

For example, the NT Gospels contain narrative materials, discourse materials, and some mixed genres:

Narrative genres include the following:

genealogies

narrator's introductions, transitions & summary passages

miracle stories

call & sending stories

conflict or controversy stories

vision reports

legends & myths

etc.

Discourse genres include the following:

parables & allegories

hymns & prayers

laws & legal interpretations

short exhortations: individual sayings or proverbs

longer speeches: discourses or monologues

etc.

Mixed genres include

longer narratives that contain extended dialogues

"pronouncement stories" or "apothegms" (short narratives that climax in a short saying or proverb)

Many of these sub-genres can also be further sub-divided; for example:

"Miracle stories" can include healings, exorcisms, restoration miracles, nature miracles, etc.

"Psalms" include enthronement psalms, processional songs, individual laments, hymns of praise, etc.

"Sayings" include legal sayings, eschatological sayings, prophetic sayings, wisdom sayings, "I am" statements, etc.

The above lists are not comprehensive, but include only the more prominent categories of biblical literature.

So, pretty much something for everyone no matter what their taste (though, to be honest, most of the good sex and violence is located in the Annals). So the next time you’re in the mood for something specific, don’t rule out the Bible. It’s got you covered.

LIFE’S LIKE A MOVIE: INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE

noreply@blogger.com (EegahInc) — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 06:00:00 +0000

ADVANCED WARNING: SKIP READING THIS POST IF YOU DON’T WANT TO LISTEN TO ME INDULGE IN A BUNCH OF NAVEL GAZING. BUT IT DOES HAVE A POINT. I HOPE.

I doubt if too many people reading this blog don’t already know the plot of Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade. Just in case, though, let’s summarize. The story kicks off after everyone’s favorite adventuring archeologist receives his father’s diary under mysterious circumstances. Following the clues contained in the book, Indiana manages to track down his missing dad and the two are soon involved in a series of adventures which ultimately leads them to the final resting place of the Holy Grail. The action scenes are great as usual and the interplay between the Jones’ is a blast, especially since the elder Jones approves of very little of his son’s actions, especially his choice to use the alias Indiana instead of his given name.

Now I’d love to say this post was about to segue into describing how I was preparing to embark on a series of globetrotting adventures involving ancient religious relics but, alas, that’s not the case. Instead, the only reason this movie came to mind recently was because of one thing…

Yep, the diary Indiana receives that once belonged to his father. Sorry, no Nazis, no zeppelins, no mystical knights still alive since the days of the Crusades. Just the book.

But to explain why I’ve had that on my mind, I’ll have to give you a little boring background on myself. See, I’ve made no big secret that there were times in my past when I wasn’t exactly living the Christian life, but I have managed to spare everyone all the messy details. And I’m not about to get too deep into them now. But I will say that many years ago I was involved in a relationship that I was way too immature to be in, and that it ended badly, especially for the girl. Don’t get me wrong, I was never violent or anything like that (I’d eat a bullet before I hit a woman), but I was a completely self-absorbed teenager oblivious to how my actions harmed others. I don’t want to say too much more, only that for a long time after that relationship was over, the poor girl still pursued me, even after I’d begun dating my future wife. I won’t say she was a stalker, because that’s too harsh and implies danger. Let’s just say she was obsessive, and because of that, I had to keep a low profile for awhile. So as you might imagine, when I started interacting on the Internet, I was very careful about handing out personal details, never stating exactly where I lived and almost always using aliases. It’s a practice I continued even after I thought it unnecessary because, not only did it give my wife peace of mind, but aliases on the Net can take on a life of their own. Take EegahInc for example. More than once I’ve left a comment on someone else’s blog only to get the response, “Hey, it’s the B-Movie Catechism guy!”

So when I was recently approached by a Catholic website that wanted to feature some of my writing, I had to give it a little thought because it would mean using my real name. I wasn’t quite sure what to do. And that was when my mother called and said she was mailing me this…

Back in 1984, a few years after my family had left its decadent days behind it and started going to church, my father was looking for something to carry in his shirt pocket to replace the ever-present pack of cigarettes he was giving up. So for Father’s day, I bought him this. Honestly, I never gave it another thought, but according to my mother, he carried this little book with him every day until he died some 18 years later, often bringing it out to discuss the wondrous things Jesus had done for him whenever the opportunity presented itself. I was never as close to my father as my older brothers were, so the fact that he kept something I gave him on his person at all times is a bit… overwhelming.

But to get to the point, on the night he entered the hospital for the final time, this pocket testament went missing. My mother figures it just got misplaced in the rush to try and save him, and in the days following his death, nobody really gave it any thought. That was ten years ago. A couple of weeks ago, there was a knock on the door at my mother’s house and there stood a man who used to do yard work for my father after he got too ill to do it himself. He explained how he had been having a conversation with a woman when she asked him if he still knew how to find my mother. You see, she had come into possession of something she thought my mother might want and asked him if he would deliver it. And so ten years after it disappeared, this little book of my father’s, dirty and much the worse for wear and having passed through who knows whose hands, had found its way home. And after holding it and crying over it for hours, my mother finally got up and called me, saying she couldn’t explain why, but she knew God wanted me to have it.

I’ve got it next to me right now. It’s just one of those little pocket King James New Testaments with Psalms that you can pick up anywhere. No big deal. But thumbing through it, I can’t help but notice the verses my father had highlighted, most of which I assumed he would use to share the story of his conversion. But then I ran across these from II Timothy 2: “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all [men], apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” I had to think about those verses for a minute, because those aren’t ones you’d read to a non-believer. Those verses are speaking to someone who has already accepted Christ, instructing them to be gentle and respectful with non-believers when we evangelize.

And we are supposed to evangelize, through our words, our deeds, and the way we carry ourselves during our day to day lives. But given the no-longer-hidden war on religion which has begun in earnest, a lot of us are going to have be a little more public with our faith than we have been in the past. Now more than ever, it’s important that the world see our faces. Oh, there’ll be much derision, sure. And probably some outright hatred. But it will all be to the greater glory of God in the end. And that’s why my father highlighted those verses, not for others but for himself, for when he faced times like these when evangelization isn’t all that appreciated. And, just maybe, for me to find all these years later right when I needed to. Thank you, daddy.

And with that, I have only one other thing to say…

Hi, my name is David Ives. I’m a Christian. And God has done great things for me, even though in my days I’ve been mean and selfish and hurt others who in no way deserved it. He brought me out of that. That’s just how much He loves me. And He loves you just the same. I’d be happy to talk to you about it sometime if you want.