Music Series: International Disney

8/24/16: In the midst of life, I am trying to blog more. I have several posts in a series about Music in development, along with some random posts developing as well. I hope to get at least one out once a week for the next few weeks, but it may be more or less, who knows. Anyway, on with the blog!

J.R.R. Tolkien is famous for not only being the author of the stories about Middle Earth, but he is also well known as a professor of philology. He studied languages, their history, and what made words work. He was passionate about languages foreign to his own and found beauty in many of those foreign words, which influenced his creation of the different languages seen and heard in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. The Elvish languages can be heard featuring aspects of the Finnish and Icelandic languages for example.

What I imagine Tolkien was hoping Elvish songs would sound like.

Now, obviously the title of this post tells you that this is about Disney and not Tolkien. I brought him up though because I feel like I have experienced the enjoyment and the passion for foreign languages that Professor Tolkien demonstrated. And that is because of Disney. Specifically, songs found in Disney movies, sung in foreign languages.

Disney animated features have been famous for their music, most especially during the Renaissance in the late 80s and early 90s. Most everyone around my age can still sing along to all of the songs from Aladdin, Lion King, Little Mermaid, and Beauty and the Beast. There was just something catchy and attractive about the songs, kind of like combining the hooks of musical theatre with the hit power of pop radio (although the songs became more like pop radio in the last few years).

Exhibit A!

Why do I enjoy these songs in foreign languages? I think one of the elements involved is sound. These songs, while structured and pitched the same as in the English version, demonstrate how the sound of words change around the world. Words sound different because the mouth and the tongue is used differently depending on where you are. Another element is the beauty in mystery. I do not really understand what songs are saying in foreign languages, but I know they sound beautiful. I also know that translators attempt to match lyrics as best as possible, so I can still get the general idea of a song even if I do not really know what the characters are singing. I think there is also the fact that most of these sounds and words are new to me. Since I really only speak English, with some Spanish and Latin thrown in, all of these sung words sound new to me, and I think we all enjoy finding something new and mysterious.

Youtube is a fantastic site. One reason is because I can find videos of Disney songs in multiple languages. If Youtube was not around, I probably would not be able to hear an Icelandic or a French or a Japanese version of Disney tunes unless I came across a dubbed copy of those movies. The odd thing is, the best songs, or the most beautiful songs, to me are the princess songs. I am not sure if it's the allure of a pretty feminine voice or if the songs were just written very well or if there are just more songs for female singers in Disney than male singers.

Anywho, below are some samples of some of my favorite Disney songs sung in foreign languages. I chose to, for the most part, connect the language with the setting of the corresponding movie.

Arabic: Aladdin-A Whole New World

Mandarin (Chinese): Mulan-Reflection

French: Cinderella-So This is Love

Greek: Hercules-I Won't Say I'm in Love

Danish: The Aristocats-Thomas O'Malley 

Sure the movie is set in France, but I already picked one for that language. Anyways, this version sounds the closest to the cool vibe from the English.

Top 10 International Sports Games We Should Play

We all know about the major professional sports leagues in this country. There are standard youth and community leagues devoted to all of the usual suspects like Soccer, Softball, Flag Football, and others. Sports like Rugby and Lacrosse and even Ultimate Frisbee are starting to gain popularity in the United States because of their uniqueness and lack of playing that is standard with other sports like football and baseball.

However, there are so many beautiful sports in this world that we do not really hear of. Sure, there may be some small leagues in major cities, but for the most part, if I mentioned Hurling or Sepak Takraw or Shinty to you without any context, you'd probably look at me funny.

To remedy that, I have compiled a list of 10 sports, plus some variations and some honorable mentions, that are played in other parts of the world, but should be played more in the United States. I will just be giving a brief synopsis of each sport, along with a picture, to give you an idea of what they're about and why I think they're so awesome.

HURLING

I've told a lot of people about this, and I have played this sport in a league in St. Louis. It's a Gaelic sport popular in Ireland, and a lot of metropolises across the U.S. have teams and leagues devoted to this sport.

In Hurling, here are two teams on a soccer-type field, each team with 11 or 15 players. Each player has a hurley (stick) and they are all chasing a ball (sliotar a.k.a. slitter). The objective is to score the most points through the opposite team's goals, which is a combo of a soccer goal with field goal posts. Over and between the crossbars equals 1 point and each sliotar that goes into the net goal is 3 points.

There are various rules for how long you can run with the sliotar in hand, how you can pick it up off the ground, and how aggressive you can play. Ireland also offers Camogie, essentially a women's league version of Hurling, though back home some ladies played on both Camogie and Hurling teams. This game takes plenty of stamina, accuracy, and courage to play, but it's all fun!

GAELIC FOOTBALL

My people! Players from County Mayo in the green and red.

It's Soccer with your hands! It's Rugby without the scrums and rucks! It's another Irish sport! Gaelic Football has the same number of players, same rules of movement, and same goals as Hurling. The main difference is the ball this time looks like a volleyball, only bigger and heavier, and you can use both your feet and your hands to move the ball around the field.

I could also pick Aussie Rules Football. Aussie Rules uses a rugby shaped ball and is more of a mix between Gaelic Football and Rugby. However, because of huge and oddly shaped those fields for Aussie Rules are (Gaelic game fields are already big enough) and the greater risk of injury in Aussie Rules, not to mention more complicated scoring and posts involved, I would recommend Gaelic Football as a fun alternative to Soccer in the U.S.

PESAPALLO

Baseball may be America's past time but it has a variety of bat and ball games that it came from and that it inspired. Baseball mainly came from two English sports. One is Rounders, which has a similar base and running set up but has a smaller, single-handed bat. The other is Cricket, the second most popular sport in the world (thanks Britain and India), which used to be played in early U.S. history and has some clubs scattered in major cities today.

Anyway, one of the sports that baseball helped to created is Pesapallo, which was established in Finland after a Finnish man watched Baseball in the U.S. The major difference between Pesapallo and Baseball is the base set up and the pitching. Rather than a diamond shape for base running, the bases are in a zig-zag pattern, where runners first go left, then right, then make their way back to the left and around to the home plate. The pitchers do not have a mound in the middle, but just toss the ball right next to the batter. This game also uses bats and gloves, though they have a different shape than the American versions. Also unusual or unique is Pesapallo players have padded helmets like boxers and the coach has an area of colored sticks to use for signaling. Pesapallo is meant to be a faster paced and more exciting version of Baseball, so people who enjoy the challenge of bat and ball games, but despise the pace of Baseball/ Softball can get behind Pesapallo.

As you might imagine there are many many bat and ball sports around the world. Besides the ones I included earlier, there is also Vigoro in Australia (Tennis meets Cricket), Oina in Romania (Pesapallo meets Cricket), Lapta in Russia (Baseball mixed with Oina), Brannboll in Sweden (Baseball meets Vigoro), and my personal favorite Kilikiti in Samoa/ the Pacific Islands. Kilikiti is based on Cricket, but it is played with larger more triangular bats that look like decorative clubs and players wear traditional lavalava skirts. Kilikiti is an example of a culture updating a popular sport and transforming it into part of the cultural identity, which is why I would recommend Pesapallo becoming a league sport in the U.S. over Kilikiti, since Kilikiti has deep roots in its culture.

FIELD HOCKEY

Sure this is one of the most popular sports in the world, and you may be telling me that we already have field hockey in this country, but really, outside of the Olympics or a school (high school, college, whatever) team, when was the last time that you saw field hockey being played in this country?

Field hockey, like its ice variant we see in the NHL, is about players chasing a small round object with a stick. Unlike ice hockey sticks, one side of the stick's bend is round while the other side is flat. There is a ball instead of a puck and you can only hit the ball with the flat side. This looks like another game that takes lots of stamina, strength, and flexibility to persevere, which makes it a great sport that you can get in shape from just playing.

SEPAK TAKRAW 

I believe I can fly!

Volleyball is fun and all, but how much cooler would it be to play it with your feet instead and do kick flips? That's what Sepak Takraw, a popular sport in Southeast Asia, is often described as. There are two teams with 2 or 3 players kicking a ball over a net into their opponent's side of the court. Like volleyball, there are only 3 touches allowed on one team's side and points are scored if the ball falls to the ground or goes out of bounds.

Unlike volleyball, a single player can take all 3 touches and, as mentioned before, arms and hands are not allowed. Similar to soccer, players can use their heads, chests, and especially their feet to move the ball (which is smaller than a volleyball and made of rattan material). Videos of games often show players spiking the ball over the net by flying into the air and flip kicking the ball.

As you might imagine, Sepak Takraw takes lots of skill, which might turn people off. A different game similar to Sepak Takraw is Bossaball. This game brings back the volleyball sized projectile but also allows players to maintain the kicking elements of Sepak Takraw. Instead of being played on an indoor court though, Bossaball is played on an inflatable court, with trampolines on each  side for players to bounce high enough to do their kicks. Bossaball also allows players to use any part of their body to move the ball around.

I love trampolines and inflatable, bouncy things. Both do require physicality to move around for a long time. However, I would usually associate those with carnivals or just goofing around in someone's backyard. A sport, to me, especially for clubs and leagues, should be a little more established or at least less cartoonish. That, and the cool ninja moves, are the reason why I would recommend Sepak Takraw over Bossaball.

BANDY

Do you love ice hockey? Well, what if the rink was a larger size so that 11 players could be on each team? Also, what if the goalie was not allowed a stick but instead had large fuzzy gloves only? Also also, instead of a puck, you skate around a ball and hit it with a stick that is bent but not curved, allowing you to hit the ball on both sides?

While I described the game in a joking manner, I think Bandy is a cooler, much more intense version of ice hockey that could catch on. For one reason, whereas Ice Hockey encourages physical contact, Bandy penalizes players for intentional pushing and roughing other players, which means that players have to be skillful at keeping the ball as well as taking it away while avoiding their opponent as best as possible. At the moment, Bandy in the U.S. only seems to be played in the Twin Cities of Minnesota, where they have the means to have a large outdoor ice rink and people willing to play Bandy instead of Hockey.

A possible alternative to Bandy is Ringette. Another Ice Hockey variation, this game from Canada has three major differences. Instead of a puck or a ball, the players chase a rubber ring. Instead of a bent or curved stick, the players essentially have a pole to allow them to stick it inside the ring and catch it. Finally, there are three different zones designated by blue lines that limit where players can move, depending on their position. However, Ringette was invented specifically for women to play (not saying that's a bad thing) while Bandy, as far as I'm aware, does not limit whether women or men can play.

SHINTY

The Scottish cousin to Hurling and Field Hockey, Shinty is another field and stick game. This time, instead of a hurley, players use a caman which looks like an alternately-designed hockey stick. Just like Hurling, the objective is to score the most goals by moving the ball up the field using your stick. If you can imagine hockey players attempting golf, you can probably imagine Shinty. The swings look like someone is driving their ball from the tee box.

Another offshoot of both Hurling and Shinty is Cammag, a game found on the Isle of Man (between England and Ireland). On St. Stephen's Day/ Boxing Day/ The Day After Christmas, citizens gather together into giant teams with whatever long sticks they can find (hurleys, camans, brooms, golf clubs, a tree branch). The teams fight to move a ball from one end of the town to the other without any solid boundaries. This is more of a Culturally Specific Honorable Mention since Cammag is only played on the Isle of Man specifically on December 26 and seems ran more on tradition than actual rules or guidelines.

HANDBALL

I also believe I can fly!

It's an Olympic sport and the U.S. doesn't even have a team in it this year! If we really wanted to dominate the Olympics, we'd make sure to have a team or person in each event to better our chances of getting all the medals! Okay, I really don't care if we win a medal, but Handball looks like a fun sport and it seems a shame for the rest of the world to have all the fun while we ignore this.

There are two teams of seven people each on an indoor court. As you can imagine, the object is to use your hands to move a ball down the court and score a point. There is a limit to how long a player can hold a ball or how many steps they can take before passing the ball to another player. Essentially basketball combined with soccer, Handball offers some sweet moments when watching people trying to score goals and is just as physical as any other popular sport in the U.S.

Also, in my internet searches of different sports around the world, I keep seeing Quidditch popping up as a growing popular 'game' to play. Let's substitute Quidditch for Handball as THE new hand ball sport to play, for multiple reasons. First and foremost, you're not actually flying in this muggle version of Quidditch. Next, you can stop holding the broom between your legs. Also, you're essentially trying to achieve the same thing in both sports Everyone is running around the field trying to get ahold of the ball and throw it into their opponent's goal to score the most points.

PATO

Perhaps this could be saved for my Culturally Specific Honorable Mentions, but it's just too cool and too little mentioned elsewhere. Pato (the Spanish word for 'duck') is a sport in Argentina. It is played on horseback, with two teams of four players each competing to score goals in a net on a post.

The reason why it is called Pato is because the players used to be fighting over and tossing around a real duck when it first started. Over the years, the duck was replaced with a leather ball with handles for gripping and pulling.

Pato, this blend of basketball and polo, seems a little similar to Buzkashi, a Central Asian sport also featuring horsemen fighting over an animal. Specifically, Buzkashi players battle over a goat carcass. From what I've glanced online, Buzkashi is translated as goat grabbing and is an especially big deal in Afghanistan as a traditional, national sport. Since Buzkashi has such strong ties to its culture and since Pato switched from tossing animal bodies to an actual ball, I say let's play some Pato, amigos!

IRISH ROAD BOWLING

Imagine getting a gutter ball in this game

Back during my time with Reach Youth Ministry, I played a game of Bocce ball with the rest of the guys in the ministry that year. We were out camping by a lake shore for the night, so we were surrounded by natural beauty. Instead of limiting ourselves to a designated field with boundaries, we would toss the balls all around the hills, trees, concrete (parking lot), dirt, and even into the water sometimes. It was great fun, one of my favorite memories from that time.

Irish Road Bowling sounds very similar to my experience with this variation of Bocce. A player is throwing what amounts to a shot from shotput (a small iron ball) down a course. Like golf, the player with the lowest score wins. As you might infer from the name, the game is played around roads and players try to roll the ball down the course like a bowling ball, though the throw has been likened to that of a cricket bowl.

Bocce seems popular enough in the U.S. that Irish Road Bowling can take off. Instead of being limited to the restrictions and boundaries of Bocce courts, players are only limited by the roads and courses they play on. There are some places in America (Boston, MA, La Crosse, WI and Ireland, WV for example) that have formed their own leagues or tournaments, trying to attach it to the Irish identity of the town. Also, adults seem to love beer leagues where skillful play doesn't have to get in the way of enjoying an alcoholic beverage, and Irish Road Bowling seems like the perfect sport for doing just that. Also also, small towns and rural areas could take advantage of their surroundings to create Irish Road Bowling events or tournaments around their town to attract tourists and visitors.

Honorable Mention Sports That Are Culturally Specific:

CALCIO FIORENTINO

Now played exclusively in Florence, Italy. The championship is held on June 24, the feast day of St. John the Baptist. I have nicknamed Calcio 'prison riot rugby' because, like rugby, two teams of tough guys are trying to carry a ball to their opponent's goal and, like prison riots, everyone is trying to punch, kick, and wrestle everyone else into a bloody pulp. At least when I call these guys Mr. Fancy Pants, I can say it with a straight face and risk my health at the same time.

KI-O-RAHI

Maori people are indigenous people from New Zealand. This sport of Ki-o-rahi is steeped in Maori tradition and culture. All of the game pieces are labelled in the Maori language and the gameplay, including the game's name, is based on a Maori legend. There is both a full tackle and a touch flag version of the game. It looks like variations of handball, rugby, and dodgeball, but I still have not really looked into this enough to really understand what's going on.

LELO BURTI

On Easter Sunday, in the village of Shukhuti in the country of Georgia, people gather together for a friendly game of Lelo Burti. The village splits into two teams, essentially a north side and south side, and the Orthodox priest blesses the ball before throwing it in to start the match. Just like Cammag, there is really no distinct boundaries of what the playing field is, just one end of town and the other. As you can see in the picture, a massive crowd is fighting over a single ball, so you can imagine the shoving, kicking, and injuries that occur. This is the closest thing in modern times, I have found, to what basic village ball games were like 1000 years ago in Europe.

To get the full picture of each above sport, I would recommend looking on Youtube for visual aid or even just Googling the rules and gameplay of the sports. On Youtube, you can find channels like Ninh Ly Explains or Trans World Sports to watch great videos about these sports. I only just learned today about an ancient Ethiopian field-hockey-ish sport of Genna and a new game called Padbol in Argentina, which is a meeting between tennis and sepak takraw, from Youtube, There is so much more out there than what is popular in the professional sports world in the United States. Go out there and play!

How Did Animated Movies Pan Out Recently?

Way back in 2014, I had done a series about animated movies, Disney, competition, etc. In the last part of that series (Disney Competition Part 5) I attempted to predict the future of animated movies. There have been a ton of animated movies that have come out since I did that series, just as there are so many animated movies soon to come in the next few years. I wanted to take a couple moments to reflect on the state of animated movies in the past couple of years, look at what's ahead, and see just how well I predicted the future.

2014 Animated Movies

Disney had a strange year following Frozen. First, they released a lame sequel to the already lame Planes movie. Fire & Rescue had such little impact that summer that I'm sure that even kids who saw it completely forgot that the movie existed. Yet, Disney later released Big Hero 6, which was completely different from Frozen except for the CGI animation. While maybe not having as big of a pop culture impact as Frozen, Big Hero 6 did have the very memorable robot Baymax, fun nerdy action scenes, and a positive message about dealing with loss and friendship.

Dreamworks also had a productive 2014. After releasing Mr. Peabody & Sherman (still trying to figure out who the target audience was for that), Dreamworks released How to Train Your Dragon 2 successfully. Once again, a beloved familiar name brought Dreamworks tons of attention and money. This and Big Hero 6 were probably the most popular animated movies to be selected for the Oscars that year. After a hit franchise release, Dreamworks brought out another beloved franchise featuring a fuzzy black & white animal.

Except Kung Fu Panda 3 was delayed to 2016, so Penguins of Madagascar got pushed for release instead.

It received mostly 'blah' reviews and did not meet the same success or quality as How to Train Your Dragon 2, but it at least kept Dreamworks in business.

There was also room for random animated movies in 2014, some bland and forgettable, others artistic and well liked. Rio 2 and The Nut Job both featured animal lead characters as well as a poor reception in theater and DVD release. The Boxtrolls from Laika Company (Coraline and ParaNorman) was well liked and featured their now signature brand of claymation. I have no real idea what The Book of Life was about, all I know is that it featured a mix of claymation and puppet style animation in a Mexican, Dia de Los Muertos setting. Song of the Sea, from the same director and team that released Secret of Kells a few years ago, brought another shiny, 2-D, Celtic piece of art to the screen, though it probably was not really known until the Oscar nomination.

Oh yeah, and then there was The LEGO Movie.

Everything is awesome when you strike box office gold.

I still have not seen this movie all the way through, but everyone seems to love it. It offered a completely different approach of animation, though it blended CGI with realistic imagery, and yet it all remained very Lego-esque. WB previously released The Swan Princess and The Iron Giant, and now here is their successful hit CGI animated feature.

2015 Animated Movies

Pixar finally returned to the big screen, though just like Disney in 2014, Pixar released a mild dud and a huge hit. The Good Dinosaur looked nice and seemed to really step up Pixar's already progressive CGI animation techniques. However, the story and characters were apparently just meh. On the other hand, before The Good Dinosaur, Pixar brought Inside Out with much critical and public acclaim. I waited a long while to see this, but I wish I had seen it on the big screen. It was beautiful, emotional, funny, and just overall well deserving of being called one of Pixar's best movies. If The Good Dinosaur had been just as good as Inside Out, I would say that Pixar could have made a total comeback to make up for their lower-quality sequel releases.

2015 also seemed to be the return of pop culture cartoons. Alvin and the Chipmunks unfortunately got another crummy sequel.

Why would any parent choose to bring their kid to a movie where a chipmunk sings Sir Mix-a-Lot?

 Spongebob also got a new feature film and while I can appreciate the blend between animation and realism, as well as bringing CGI animation to a well established 2-D franchise, it looked bad and unnecessary. The biggest surprise was The Peanuts Movie (from the same people who presented Ice Age and Rio out of all the random movies out there). I wish I had seen this on the big screen and I look forward to seeing it on DVD. It looked fantastic, blending 2-D and 3-D artwork.

The Minions from Despicable Me somehow got their own release which was one of the summer's biggest movies. Yay for franchise successes, I type sarcastically!

Illumination Entertainment apparently took a page from Dreamworks' book to milk a franchise until it runs dray

Hotel Transylvania 2 also came to the theaters and why it was released in September instead of October I'll never know. It seemed like an unnecessary sequel to an unnecessary original movie, but at least it gave Mel Brooks something to do and was one of Adam Sandler's best performances in recent history.

Of course, there is always room for random original animated movies as well. Dreamworks released Home which looked like one of their weaker releases, but I feel like I've seen that alien character pop up in lots of marketing and imagery. There was Shaun the Sheep the Movie, from the same guys who created Chicken Run and Wallace & Gromit, and it received very good critical reviews, but apparently not as many families went to it as Minions. Strange Magic came out, which I looked up on IMDB because I think most people forget this is a thing. It was some fairy tale creature adventure with some interesting looking CGI, but just didn't get much recognition, in fact I'd say the most famous thing about Strange Magic is that George Lucas is a producer. Finally there was The Prophet, an adaptation of Kahlil Gibran's book, and is one of those high art indie movie pieces. It utilized different artists with different approaches, including Tomm Moore who did Song of the Sea, and it seems interesting enough to watch just for artistic value.

Common Threads:

Firstly we saw different franchises from various movie companies. In fact, one might say that these franchises are staples for the respective company. Penguins of Madagascar features familiar comedic relief from Dreamworks, Rio 2 is a somewhat new franchise for Blue Sky Studios (Ice Age is their biggest staple). Hotel Transylvania 2 is also part of a recent successful franchise for Sony Pictures Animation.

Another common thread is that we saw the return of classic franchises of past TV shows. This involved a rebranding of old pop culture figures in some ways, so that characters that were familiar in my or my parent's generations can feel familiar but different for the current generation. Mr. Peabody & Sherman, The Peanuts Movie, Spongebob Movie, and Alvin & The Chipmunks all fit this category.

Both Pixar and Disney remained at the top of animation domination. They released valuable original movies, and both had a track record of one weak release and one awesome release. For other movie companies, however, past couple of years were a reminder that original ideas do not always equal big bucks. The Book of Life, Song of the Sea, Shaun the Sheep, and Strange Magic all featured different, fresh stories, but for whatever reason were not as big as other releases. Part of it may be due to things like limited releases or poor marketing.

Animated movies also remained CGI heavy. With the exception of The Boxtrolls, Song of the Sea, and The Prophet, all of the animated movies released these past couple of years relied very much on computer imagery for the animation. A lot of the most popular movies also featured animals as main characters (Penguins of Madagascar, Nut Job, Alvin & The Chipmunks, Shaun the Sheep, and How to Train Your Dragon 2 if dragons count as animals).

In my next post, I recap my initial predictions, look at 2016 and future animated movies, and talk about where I went wrong or what I got right.

More Movies with Values, Please! Part 2

Definition References

Today's post continues examining movies with value, or what makes a movie a 'good' movie. This understanding of movies with value is aided by an understanding of definitions that the values of a good movie.

What is a good movie? Well, generally speaking, it is opposite of a bad movie. A good movie is one that is not only made with quality, but also contains either moral value or artistic value or both.

Artistic value can be judged based on the following question: Does it look good aesthetically, whether it is an animated movie or because of the direction and cinematography? Does the theme say something honest or truthful about the human condition? Does it have a good reason for existing?

Moral value can be evaluated based on these levels: Can this/ should this be seen by families? Is there a sensible reason for it to be made for adults or teens only? If religious, does it present spiritual truths well? Does the movie uphold natural understanding of what is good, true, and beautiful in the world? If there is a focus on a negative subject, does the positive good overcome in the end?

You may notice that these definitions actually involve questions. By looking at questions, we can discuss and discover answers. Below I pose other questions that people may have to determine whether the movies that they or other people watch carry that same value of a good movie.

Do movies need to be intelligent or ‘thinking pieces’? 

Not every movie has to be a thinking piece to be good. There are just as many boring, complicated arthouse movies as there are high quality dramas. Usually these kind of high-brow, thinking man's movies naturally carry some sort of artistic or moral value to it due to the increased detail and dedication devoted to it. At the same time, simplistic movies can be good without being stupid. There are just as many enjoyable blockbuster popcorn flicks as there are crass, rude comedies. Turning off your brain is not automatically settling for a low brow trashy piece unworthy of the name ‘Movie’. Some movies are just meant to visually entertain or are meant to draw us in emotionally without working our brains too hard. These non-thinker movies should still must contain some sort of artistic or moral quality to it though.

Do movies with value include objectionable content like violence, sexuality, and language? 

There are some people who object to a movie due to violent or thematic content. To an extent, that’s good. Some movies take it too far with blood and guts unnecessarily or provide an absurd amount of realistic sex or drug scenes. There are a few cases, however, where realism requires shocking content. In the case of violence, Saving Private Ryan shows us the horrors of warfare, especially at Normandy beach. I cannot think of an acceptable case for sexuality, where we are shown the physical movements and the nakedness involved in the act of intercourse. Only rarely is nudity acceptable for realism’s sake (a la Schindler’s List). 

Language is slightly more complicated, where depending on the type of movie and characters involved determines how much of it to tolerate. A movie like The Sandlot occasionally has a ‘damn’ or a ‘shit’ said by one of the characters, but the overall product makes that occasional slip of a light coarse word tolerable. Anything with more ‘adult’ language, and especially using mature profanities, blasphemous talk, and derogatory names, should not be tolerated and in fact most movies would be better without that kind of language involved. Sure, realistically people may use obscenities now and again, but scripts can be written in creative ways to express the same feeling or mentality without resorting to using the obscenities. 

Now, if a movie has a moment or two of objectionable content, but overall contains artistic or moral merits, can it still be a good movie with value? Depending on the movie, yes, but we also have to acknowledge these objectionable faults or negative aspects of the movie. In my posts about my favorite movies, I would try to point out reasons why I would caution people to not see my movie choices. For example, I explained that The Big Lebowski contains sexual content, a couple moments of nudity, coarse language, and drug use/ references. Yet, there are shining moments of witty humor, great character acting by John Goodman, Jeff Bridges, and Philip Seymour Hoffman, and the ridiculousness of the scenarios makes the movie memorable and quotable.

Shouldn’t movies just be escapist, feel good events? 

I think maybe if you’re a kid or someone suffering trauma and in need of relief, then movies should be limited to light-hearted, feel good entertainment. For others though, I think it puts too many limits or constraints on the value that movies can have in our lives by restricting our viewership to escapism or stuff that only makes us feel good. Movies are meant to entertain, yes, but too much pure entertainment can cause a bread-and-circus kind of environment like professional sports. Movies can help us feel good if we need the occasional pick-me-up, but they can also bring us on an emotional roller coaster and inspire or educate us through perilous, heart breaking journeys. Life is not always feel good, it involves learning, suffering, and growing. Escapism can causes stagnation if overused.

Favorite Movies That Fit Criteria

There are some movies that have been made in the 21st century that still carry the values of morals and arts. Some of them are on my favorite movies list. I will try to briefly explain why I think some of these movies demonstrate good value. I tried to pick ones made since 2000 that were released to the general public (a.k.a wide theatrical release).

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

Moral Value: The Harry Potter series has always been concerned with friendship, loyalty, and love, and this movie demonstrates the struggle to maintain these three qualities in the midst of a dark hour. The three lead actors, especially Rupert Grint, give adult performances that realistically live out these traits and the struggles with them. Plus there are a few moments involved where good is about to lose to evil when right at the last minute good is saved.

Artistic Value: The animation involved in the Tale of The Three Brothers.

Hot Fuzz

Artistic Value: Part of the entertainment of this movie is how dramatic it presents itself while still being one of the funniest comedies in this century thus far. This movie is a stealthy parody and it truly understands what it is parodying. Since it is a send-up of the ludicrous action movies of the 90s, all of the loony action scenes and goofy circumstances from those cliche movies are there. Unlike other parody films, like Mel Brooks' style of movie, this movie is able to provide a few winks and nods to what it is teasing while still maintaining a sense of independence in its storytelling and characterization.

The Last Samurai

Moral Value: This movie is a story of forgiveness and redemption. Tom Cruise’s Nathan Algren is haunted by evil violence he inflicted upon a tribe of Native Americans and at first becomes enslaved by alcoholism and lack of care for his life. Then, through the time spent with the samurai village, Algren finds internal peace, asks for forgiveness, and finds value in his life by protecting the lives of those who helped him. His redemption comes from a second chance opportunity. Instead of passively allowing this clan to be massacred, he stands up to fight for the clan, even if it costs his life. In a way, the Emperor Meiji also goes through forgiveness and redemption. At first, driven by a desire for a powerfully modern Japan, the Emperor allows Omura to take over governing powers (in essence), also allowing the samurai communities to be desolated. In the end, after the climactic battle, the Emperor is driven by grief over his former mentor’s death that he stands up for the first time, to drive back Omura’s ambitions and halt the cultural implosion of Japan.

The Prestige

Moral Value: The moral value of this movie comes from watching the downfall of two men driven by revenge and pride. The main characters played by Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale are not necessarily meant to be despised, but they are not to be held up as models of honor and righteousness. Because of the desire to be the best, they are willing to sacrifice people, whether it is Bale with his family or Jackman with himself and his Scarlet Johanssen girlfriend. While the value comes from a negative examination of events, it still has value by showing us how prideful ambition can hurt not only other people but ourselves as well.

The Dark Knight

Artistic Value: The gritty realism of Christopher Nolan’s Gotham City. Before Christopher Nolan took on the Batman movies, Gotham City always had a cartoonish look to it, whether it was Adam West's 60s Batman, the animated series, or the 90s movies of Joel Schumacher. Tim Burton was probably at that point closest to making Gotham City look like a real place, but it still had unrealistic, bloated interpretations of metropolis cities. Christopher Nolan's version of Gotham City looks like a real place, and the characters inhabiting the city look and act like real people.

Moral Value: The battle of chaos-fueled evil Joker vs. rule-abiding good guy Batman. Seeing Batman struggle with trying to stop evil while holding on to the last remains of his ethics shows how dangerous and challenging the fight against evil can be, though the choice to do good in the end wins. Even Harvey Dent, until he went crazy over Rachel, shows confidence and trust in the good of law overcoming the evil of crime, even if he began to use questionable techniques to do good. Overall, this movie shows that while evil appears to be all powerful, the choice to do good is more powerful. 

Master and Commander (The Far Side of the World)

Artistic Value: The artistry comes through with a realistic sense of life on a 19^th century naval ship. There are small cramped spaces inside the ship and there is the vast ocean surrounding it. With the background music establishing the period and tone and the scenes of the ship steering through the vast ocean waters, even the slow times are enjoyable. The action scenes do not go over the top, but continue to add to the realism of the movie. Everyone acts like they belong on a naval ship commanded by the British Empire in the 19th century.

Now

In the year 2015, there were some movies that show that not all is lost, that there are still movies of good moral and artistic value out there.  Movies from 2015 that I saw with these values include Inside Out, Star Wars: The Force Awakens (artistic wise only), Mad Max: Fury Road, Sicario, and Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation. Movies from 2015 that I have not seen but I have heard show good value include The Martian, The Peanuts Movie, Creed, and Cinderella.

In the end, movies with value rightfully maintain a presence in our consciousness and are worthy of even more attention. What are the movies that we really remember over the years? What movies do we want in our DVD/ Blu-Ray collections? Wouldn’t Netflix be so much better if there weren’t as many duds as there were award winning pieces? Just think of the movies that are listed and remembered from the first 100+ years of film. We only remember and hold on to the good ones and their ‘classic’ standard is something that our modern movies should be held up to.

More Movies of Value, Please! Part 1

Disappointing State of Movies

When it comes to the overall selection of movies being created and marketed to the general public over the past few years, I have been disappointed. Many of the past family/ kid movies include blah options such as Minions, Dreamworks pictures (of late), and Dr. Seuss based movies that are all just color, noise, and annoying humor. Comedies have become so focused on what is called “adult” humor (which in reality is immature humor) that you’d think the only things people find funny are sexual awkwardness, physical pain, and alcohol/ drug-related situations. Christian movies, meaning the genre that stars and focuses on Christianity in a positive way, have become so safe and stale that even positive Christian movies are not top quality pieces of art. 

For every good movie in the general market, there seems to be ten more in the theatres ready to waste my time, energy, and money. I assume the movie industry has not always been this way. I personally cannot speak to the quality of movies since the beginning of film. The only way I can evaluate movies of the past is based on what has remained within public knowledge as well as looking at the lists of best movies of all time. I am no film connoisseur, I just enjoy watching movies. I enjoy watching good movies. What I don’t enjoy is having to search and dig around online in order to find good movies while a plethora of bad movies are easily accessible.

Definitions: Bad vs. Value

What do I think constitutes a bad movie? A bad movie is one that is lacking true quality, morals, or art. When I say quality, I mean in terms of acting, dialogue, editing, anything that involves the presentation. Morals, obviously, means whether the movie is age appropriate for the content or is lacking something due to immaturity, pushing-the-envelope-content, and indecency towards the general person. Art meaning how those first two values, quality and morals, combine into the total package of theme, purpose, and aesthetic. So, a bad movie means the presentation is bad, the content is not decent, and the artistry is lacking.

Is it not in the best interest of everyone in our community to stop supporting bad movies? Why waste our time on something that dulls the senses? Why waste brain power and money on a ‘movie’ that insults our intelligence, insults our general code of ethics, and claims to be worth the money people pay to sit in the cinema?  Major studios will only fund movies that they think will earn money, meaning what they think people will go see. If we stopped seeing bad movies, maybe there would be an increase in good movies.

What is a good movie? Well, generally speaking, it is opposite of a bad movie. A good movie is one that is not only made with quality, but also contains either moral value or artistic value or both.

Artistic value can be judged based on the following question: Does it look good aesthetically, whether it is an animated movie or because of the direction and cinematography? Does the theme say something honest or truthful about the human condition? Does it have a good reason for existing?

Moral value can be evaluated based on these levels: Can this/ should this be seen by families? Is there a sensible reason for it to be made for adults or teens only? If religious, does it present spiritual truths well? Does the movie uphold natural understanding of what is good, true, and beautiful in the world? If there is a focus on a negative subject, does the positive good overcome in the end?

Past Models

One of the main inspirations for my categories and definitions of moral/ artistic value is the Vatican Film List. The Vatican Film List was assembled in 1995 and lists 45 films, organized by the categories of Religion, Values, and Art. This is not a ‘best of’ or ‘favorite’ movies list, but rather is just an assembly of movies that have been made during the first 100 years of film from around the world that fit a particular category. The list includes some well-known or award winning movies in America, including The Wizard of Oz, It’s a Wonderful Life, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Gandhi, Ben-Hur, Chariots of Fire, Schnidler’s List, On the Waterfront, Fantasia, and Stagecoach. Each of these movies exemplifies the definitions of a good movie that I listed above. All are made with top quality, many successful experimented with new artistry, and many uphold positive moral messages.

Steven D. Greydanus, a Catholic film critic who wrote a piece on the Vatican Film List, also recently wrote an article discussing how priests and the Church have been presented in movies over the years. In the past, starting from the 30s and especially during the 40s and 50s, movies involving priest and the Church were positive pictures. Some, like Going My Way with Bing Crosby or The Song of Bernadette with Jennifer Jones, were nominated for Oscars because of the quality filmmaking, positive morality, and excellent acting, among other reasons. The article slightly goes into the fact that around the turn between the 50s and 60s, religious life was beginning to take a turn towards negative critiques. Today, most examples of priests and religious in movies released to the general public involve goofy characters, criticism of religious life or the Church, and shining a more positive light on secular life. Can you automatically off the top of your head think of a movie widely released these past few years starring a good priest character that wasn’t an exorcism movie?

The Impact

One of the big reasons why I think there needs to be an increase in good movies is because we have to become more conscious of how movies impact us personally, on a social, mental, emotional, and spiritual level. I think desensitization can truly happen if people view certain content long enough. If all someone watches are immature comedies with foul language and sexual innuendos, I can safely bet that the viewer will start using foul language more often and use sexual innuendos as jokes more often. If someone watches nothing but violent action movies and gory horror movies, how calm and personable do you think that person is going to stay? If someone only watches indie films and rare arthouse masterpieces, doesn’t it make sense that they will turn into a snobby, arrogant, opinionated weirdo?

My point is that what we watch does have an effect on us. Just like with food, the more we ingest bad movies, the more we absorb bad qualities. I have written before about how the media we consume influences our lives. If we avoided bad movies and gravitated towards good movies, movie studios would start paying attention to the market and begin funding more movies with moral and artistic value and release them to the general public. Good movies may be hard to find, but they’re out there. Let’s make more!

Links to articles mentioned in this post:

http://decentfilms.com/articles/vaticanfilmlist

http://www.cruxnow.com/life/2016/01/29/priests-religious-and-the-academy-awards/

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4525440805562516256#editor/target=post;postID=776954875059918323;onPublishedMenu=posts;onClosedMenu=posts;postNum=4;src=postname

http://nonnobisdominesednominituodaglorium.blogspot.com/2014/04/modern-stories.html

P.S.-You may notice that the title says Part 1. There is a Part 2 that I am working on releasing soon. You may be wondering what else do I have to say on the subject? Well, Part 2 will be more focused on breaking down elements involved in various good movies as well as provide concrete examples of what I think are good movies that have been released to the general public in recent years.

A Defense on Food and Internet Fasts

So, we have begun a new journey of Lent this 2016. All sorts of people are trying to sacrifice something or do something good in order to grow as a disciple of God this Lent. There are some Lenten sacrifices, however, that have become somewhat cliché in this day and age. There are people who are giving up some favorite food or drink, whether it is chocolate, sweets, meat, soda, or beer. Other people are choosing to fast from or give up social media platforms, most especially Facebook.

Now, for whatever reason, there are some critiques or sarcastic feedback from people when they hear someone is giving up food or social media for Lent. Here are a few example memes about the subject https://churchpop.com/2015/02/17/16-hilarious-memes-to-kick-off-your-lent/ (ChurchPop is generally a great website though, I overall enjoy it).  I personally have had some experience with both fasts. There have been some times during Lent where I have given up meat or soda. This Lent, I am fasting from social media by limiting myself to just one time per day on Facebook and Twitter (versus the ten plus times I would normally be on both sites). Moreover, I am continuing another Internet-based fast I did last year of giving up Youtube completely. Youtube has been my bigger vice struggle since I came across it freshman year of college.

Where else am I going to see cats doing goofy things?

I am curious though. What’s up with the critiques, sarcasm, and criticism of people who choose to fast from these things during Lent? I remember one year when I gave up soda during college a non-Catholic acquaintance had posted this meme on Facebook:



It was a tease, but I was still confused why random people make memes like this to put down someone’s choice act of sacrifice. Also, that meme statement does not fully explain why I chose to fast from soda.

There have been multitudes of different food fasts that have been associated with Christian and Jewish cultures over the past several millennia. According to the Little Black Book I use for prayer and reflection this Lent, past Catholic Christian rules of fasting have included abstinence from fish, eggs, and dairy products, prohibited consumption of meat on Sundays, and limiting the number of meals to just one in the evening. Today, the Catholic Church abstains from meat on Fridays (including Good Friday as well as Ash Wednesday) and limits food consumption to one regular sized meal and two small meals on Good Friday and Ash Wednesday. Obviously, the internet and social media has not been around long enough for any doctrines to made about it yet.

Though with Pope Francis on the case, who knows. We may see something about it in the next encyclical.

Paragraph 1438 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “the seasons and days of penance …are intense moments of the Church’s penitential practice [and] are appropriate for…voluntary self denial such as fasting and almsgiving”. Paragraph 2043 of the Catechism says “The fourth precept [of the Church] (‘You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church’)…helps us acquire mastery over our instincts and freedom of heart”. This means that, as part of our penitential acts during Lent, we voluntarily choose to deny ourselves of something. The purpose behind this self-denial is to become more self-controlled and to free ourselves from whatever things of this world are keeping us from performing our spiritual and religious duties. Isn't that what Lent is all about?

What is the purpose of Lent? Even as someone who has grown up in the Church, I cannot give a truly perfect definition, just my understanding of what the season of Lent is meant for. During Lent, we are asked to decrease ourselves and increase God in our lives. We take a big step on our journey of discipleship and self-sacrifice by devoting ourselves to forms of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving during Lent. These three elements of the Lenten journey are meant to go hand-in-hand, so our fasting fuels our prayer life which fuels our almsgiving. It’s all tied together. Fasting is just one of the ways that we can grow as a disciple of God through the sacrifice of something that is hard for us to let go of.

The truth is that some people struggle when it comes to food and the internet. How can anyone choose what is good for them in spiritual matters when they cannot even make good basic choices with food? Can someone really learn how to depend on God if they depend upon their soda or coffee just to get them through the day? By fasting from certain foods and drinks, people are taking just a small step to master their addictions and vices in order to closer to God. The same can be said for social media/ internet usage. What if I know I spend too much time on Facebook but cannot push myself on my own to get away from it? Is it really a good use of my time if I am looking at Youtube videos all weekend? Lent can be that time to begin stepping back from those things that can cause major distractions or waste a lot of time in people’s lives. Their time will be better spent away from screens and perhaps people can understand how to discern whether what they are doing on Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube are helping them spiritually or not.

But how else am I going to get my inspirational quotes and spiritual insights if not here?

Everyone has different struggles. Each individual person, perhaps with the help of friends and family, should identify what their addictions and temptations are in order to begin the process of overcoming them. We are called to serve people, to build a strong community, and live out our purpose in life. Our lives aren't meant to be spent sitting behind a screen. Our time and money should not just be spent solely on beer and treats.

Giving Up Youtube

I did not really discover Youtube until my freshman year of college. Then all of the sudden a new world was open up to me. Music I could not find elsewhere, clear footage of live performances from my favorite bands, and funny videos focusing on video games, movies, and TV shows. Like many other people I know, I found a few channels that I dedicated my time to watching. Recent channel favorites include Honest Trailers/ Screen Junkies, TeamFourStar's abridged parody of Dragonball Z, and the Nostalgia Critic's critical reviews of movies.

As the Arctic Monkeys once said: "We can't take our eyes of your t-shirt and ties combination".

Recently, however, I have resolved to give up these favorite videos and the rest of Youtube all together. With the aid of potential rewards (which I am still trying to figure out) I hope to not only give up Youtube for the next 10 days, but for the next 100 days, 1000 days, etc. 

This is because I have just found too much of my free time being WASTED on online videos. Even when doing mundane things like folding my laundry, cleaning, or getting ready in the morning, I would have my laptop open and would try to find something to distract myself. Even on days when I have other things going on, I would rather sit in my room and watch online videos rather than focusing on my work or using my break times for things like reading, writing, or even socializing.

Pictured: Current social life

A big part of my struggle to free myself from Youtube videos has not just been overcoming my general laziness, but it also been this feeling inside of me swelling up. I have this feeling of wanting to be productive. I have this burning desire to use my free time for a worthwhile effort. Some of these desires require me to be on my feet and physically invested, other activities may require me to sit down and be mentally/emotionally/spiritually invested (cause you don't have to be physically active all the time in order to be productive). The point is that there are so many different things I can do in this world and I do not feel like I have enough time to do it all.

There are so many books worth reading, so many cinematic masterpieces worth watching, so many places to see around the world. I can relearn to play the saxophone, become a guitar hero, and even learn an unusual instrument like the bassoon (cause why not)! I can become the next world renowned Shakespearean actor. I can learn to paint landscapes like Bob Ross. I can make a pilgrimage on El Camino de Santiago. I can get in shape and do parkour. I can write the next breathtaking young adult novel series that will eventually be turned into a dozen movies that earn $100 million each even though there were only six books in the series.

At least I'll be in good company, right?

Shoot, I don't even have to do any of that stuff to be productive. I can volunteer at a soup kitchen or walk the streets giving food and blankets to homeless people at night. I can visit sick people in the hospital or visit prisoners in jail. I can go to a poverty-stricken country and do manual labor for people in need. I can help a church in need of repairs, either by physical means or financial means. I can go to a city and preach the Gospel to people who do not believe in God.

The problem is: I don't do any of this stuff right now! I'm used to being so busy watching 10 Nostalgia Critic videos in a row or watching all of the Honest Trailers and not making any time for something more worthwhile.

Pictured: Me being busy watching videos.

I have a problem and I know it. I'm calling myself out! I'm working on controlling myself so that I can be more productive in this life and I can make more of a difference.I know I wasn't created to stare at a screen all day for no good reason.

Here is what I was created for: "He said 'Master, you gave me five talents. See, I have made five more.' His master said to him, 'Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master's joy.'" (Matthew 25: 20-21).

Talent=Coin money in this case.

I was given gifts by God. I was made to share those gifts with other people, to help them and to glorify my Creator. I do not necessarily have to read every great book ever written, watch every fantastic movie ever made, or travel to each beautiful part of the world to share and use my gifts. God has called me to be faithful to Him and to use my gifts in a multitude of productive ways.

Would it hurt to watch a Youtube video every now and again? No, not really. However, to help myself maintain self-control and to use my gifts properly, I am taking this opportunity to step away from the online videos and focus on many more important things in life. 

Now to stay on the computer and write my next four blog posts