Controversy.

Dual Misconduct

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Can we get right into a nitty-gritty topic in this post?

Sexual abuse allegations.

I am not writing about this because of all the stuff on the media about it right now. I didn’t feel the need. I am actually writing about it because of the last episode of a show I’ve been recommending.

In this episode, a female intern gets propositioned and…touched awkwardly…by a male doctor.

You know the drill. She feels this is just a problem women face in the workplace, and if she makes an issue of it, she’ll get labeled a… a whiner, I’ll put it that way. And also difficult.

What struck me about this situation on the show was that the man in question knew that this intern had an…shall we say active sexual life, right there at the hospital, so he thought even though she was acting disinterested, he could persuade her to change her mind.

I refuse to be more explicit then that, you’ve all heard the story already.

Now to be fair, the situation hasn’t been resolved yet, so I can’t say whether the show will do it right or not. But I can say a continuous problem I see with shows that like to tackle this issue.

And that is Feminine Responsibility.

I will not downplay how serious a problem sexual advances can be. Even if they are invited, they are not always appropriate. But when they aren’t invited, it’s worse naturally.

But what about the other side of the coin?

Have you noticed how the women on these shows tend to throw themselves at men…and make advances on them. Invited or not.

The reason they get away with it is because the shows assume every man watching would be totally okay with a woman trying to seduce him. Even if he’s married, or has a significant other.

And of course, a lot of men probably wouldn’t argue that. But there’s a few out there who would be very uncomfortable if such a scenario actually happened. (And in my opinion it happens a lot less than the shows imply.

Which brings me back to the point of responsibility.

I have to tell you all, and without embarrassment, that I’ve never been sexually assaulted in any way, or propositioned.

I’ve never been asked out in a normal way actually.

And you have to understand, I’m not ugly. Everyone tells me I’m very good looking. And I’m not some wierdo who drives men off or anything.

So I think I can say with confidence that there’s no outward reason I’ve escaped this problem other than luck…or something more.

If women really deal with this so often, and if men like that are really everywhere, maybe we should consider our own behavior also.

And I mean we as a gender, because personally I try to conduct myself like a lady.

Now, no man, ever, should make an advance on a women who clearly says she doesn’t want it. Period.

But…. 

If women really deal with this so often, and if men like that are really everywhere, maybe we should consider our own behavior also.

Just on this show, I see issues with the intern’s jaded attitude.

First of all, she has a reputation clearly. If people know she’s sleeping around with some guy at the hospital, then that says a lot about what she’s willing to do on the job. No body but herself could have given her that rep. It was her choice to do that, the other intern didn’t force himself on her. In fact we see her be the more aggressive one in a different episode.

Again, unrealistic, but if women in real life were to do things like that, and it got around, they would raise certain expectations.

Now, you might say, men could do the same thing without being propositioned by other people at the workplace.

And you would probably be right.

But that’s because women don’t typically go after men the same way men go after them. The women who do get in sexual affairs may not be any less sick and twisted, but they will be in different and often less visible ways.

So, yes, men will do more things we arrest people for. But it doesn’t mean they are always necessarily worse than the women. Not at the heart of it. Sexual misconduct is not always aggressive.

Furthermore, the intern on the show is also known to flirt with other men on staff. By accident maybe, but people will pick up on that.

There is no nice way to say this, if you act like you are easy, people will think you are easy. That’s all there is to it.

See, I believe men, even the sick predators among them, can read women better than we realize. I think that’s why I have always been treated with respect by the opposite sex.

I notice that I, and my sisters and mother, are treated differently by most men than the people we know who are more… morally ambiguous.

It doesn’t mean there aren’t sickos out there who will still come on to us. Sometimes a sick mind takes pleasure in hurting the most innocent of people. But that’s more rare.

The fact is, more predators go for those they perceive as weaker in standards.

And as tired a subject as it is, I think how girls dress is a big part of that.

I think also girls who are less confident, or way too confident, have a certain look in their eye.

And men do too. I can typically tell a gentlemen by the expression on his face and the way he conducts himself around me just in the first time we meet.

Which also suggests that if women are getting a creepy vibe from a man, they need to act on it immediately.

And if they can’t protect themselves, they need to ask for help.

But, they do have responsibility. And also, if they’re job is more important to them than their safety and purity, as this show episode also suggested, then that is a problem.

In that scenario, they are choosing to keep exposing themselves to these advances.

It is no excuse to the men even if that’s the case, the issue should never have to come up at all.

But my point is, we need to make sure we aren’t inviting it either. Think how many female celebrities post provocative pictures of themselves online, or take movie roles that involve doing stuff, they need to realize what they are telling the world.

Anyway, this ran long, so I’m ending it here. Until next time–Natasha.

Wins vs Sins–2

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

So continuing from part one…

You all know the last thing I would be telling anyone to do is not question their entertainment. So, when I mentioned being receptive, that’s not what I mean.

Let’s look at the hard facts.

The love of money is the root of all evil…in the movie industry. Every time you see a bad movie, just remember, they made it to make money.

I really hope there are some screenwriters left who are in it for the good of mankind. But I wonder if there are any studios left of that sort.

Even assuming there are, it can’t be denied most of them just want to compete with blockbuster successes, and movies are only grossing more and more millions or even billions of dollars as time and inflation take effect.

That being said, it’s not a stretch to think that a lot of bad messages in entertainment are being shoved down our throats because they sell. Because dumb or immoral people will care a lot less about content. Making it easier to make movies and shows that are successes for no apparent reason, therefore making more money. So the cycle goes.

It’s not really paranoid to think this, it’s getting all too blatant.

And often the whole diversity and culture representation thing is thrown in just to get cheap points from certain demographics. (And I don’t mean the ethnicity themselves, but movie watcher demographics.)

Like Disney is criticized for having predominantly white protagonists.

The people who make those criticisms are ignoring the fact that Disney started off as a vehicle for retelling and bringing to life all the old fairy tales and stories people already loved. Which were, like it or not, mostly from European cultures. Because that’s what America started as, a land with European settlers. Complain all you like about the poor Native American representation in Peter Pan. But it is based off a book that literally has Indians in it just because kids liked imagining them. It’s not supposed to be accurate. (Also Walt Disney started making films at a time when certain ethnicity weren’t in movie entertainment all that much, so it’s not like he had much talent of that sort to choose from.)

This is one example of nitpicking that is harmful. What child really cares all that much about their culture being accurately represented?

I mean, let’s explore that: I am of mostly European descent. Should I get mad that my people are represented as singing with birds, living in the woods with no apparent contact with the outside world, and falling for the tricks of wicked witches every single time? (Come to think of it, two out of three of those sounds a lot like homeschooling.)

It’s not like old Disney films really make Europeans look smart, or even brave. A lot of them make us look silly for comic relief.

It would be like taking the court scene in Alice in Wonderland as meant to seriously represent the Law in the real world. No one would do that.

Or the tea party as meant to be actual tea etiquette.

Where’s the outrage here?

Another good reason black or Hispanic characters don’t appear in these movies is because they do not appear in the stories. The reason is, these stories, like Peter Pan or Alice’s, were written by Englishmen for English children. Children who would relate to English culture.

It’s not the story’s fault that its been brought to America with its melting pot of ethnicity.

And as far as more recent films go, the same rule applies to Tangled (German) and Frozen (Danish/Norwegian.) To realistically put black characters in there would be to make them servants. Who wants that message?

Okay, okay, so I’m over-defending Disney. But I could say the same about other franchises too. The poor writers who want to stick to the comic book, or historical, accuracy have a hard time because history is what it is; and comics were, again, written to promote American ideals.

(It would be a whole other discussion to wonder if that’s why people are coming down on them so much.)

To sum all that up, including a black or Latino character is not a virtue and omitting them is not a sin, unless it is ignoring a historical reality.

Before I end this, let’s talk about plots.

Even if you make it through the larbrithn of political correctness and good editing, people will be brutal to your plot.

There are three types of people where plot is concerned.

  1. Those who miss the point of it entirely.
  2.  Those who hate the point completely.
  3.  Those who try to make the point fit whatever their worldview is and ignore the goal of the story.

Most of us are one of these three at any given time. Even I fall into the third category a lot.

Missing the point can just be a fluke, people can just not comprehend the artistic style.

Often though it’s because they weren’t looking for a point at all. And I question if some popular franchise are even trying that hard to make one anymore.

But the second category is probably the most rare, but it’s also important.

When folks hate what you are doing, you are either right, or you are very wrong. There’s not really a middle ground.

The trouble is, when we are picking apart a plot because it wasn’t well paced, or it wasn’t progressive enough, or it was too cliche, we are missing the real point of storytelling.

Which is to show us stuff we can’t normally see.

Yes, an old tale retold is monotonous after awhile. But it is still important.

There are only so many good messages out there. That’s why in the effort to be new and different, books and movies have gone off into the dark, gritty, and uncertain territory.

Because picking a moral right or a moral wrong leaves you with only a few options.

The purpose of new stories is to reiterate the truth in a different way that will make sense to different people.

Truth however, doesn’t change.

Lies change, that is, they morph over time to disguise themselves so that we will keep being taken in.

Truth doesn’t need to do that. It stands on its own.

That’s why a movie like Frozen will break the glass ceiling, even though it falls into a lot of what we would call cliches. It has truth.

And it’s why a movie like Age of Ultron will never be that kind of success, though it had good actors, amazing special effects, and a new-ish plot. There’s no truth in it.

As much as people will argue now that truth is irrelevant to movies; the statistics will speak for themselves. The human mind is attracted to truth, to absolutes, to real meaning.

That’s all for now, until next time–Natasha.

Wins vs Sins–1

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

This may be an old subject with some of you, but I think it’s one of those that has to be revisited again and again.

And that is the subject of positivism vs negativity.

Since studies have shown that the former is clearly better for health and happiness than the latter, most of us have no excuse to be negative. But you’ve probably noticed that that hasn’t stopped the vast majority of people from being negative.

The problem is that it is and always has been a habit to be negative. I know people who will admit that they shouldn’t be that way, but will not put in the effort to actually change their attitude.

I started thinking about this last night, when I was watching a YouTube video (way later than I should have been, but sometimes it happens.) This video was criticizing this other YouTube channel that those of you who are big movie watchers have probably heard of. Cinema Sins.

I happen to have watched a few of their videos myself (what person hasn’t who looks up internet reviews?) I didn’t like them. Not for any of the reasons this guy was listing, but because the channel was hugely inappropriate in its humor. (And I mean gross levels of it. Not just that tongue in cheek kind of stuff.)

Anyway, so I wasn’t super defensive about hearing it criticized. And I thought the video made some legitimate points, but I won’t list them all here.

What I really was thinking about was the point that questioned if these wholly negative reviews were actually good reviews or good comedy.

I want to unpack that idea more than the actual video did, because I think it’s a whole missed discussion opportunity.

Judging both from the comment sections of YouTube, and actual people I’ve heard talk about this, many just don’t see the point of even caring about movie reviews or reviewers, and whether they are serious or not, because, in these people’s minds, movies should not be taken that seriously.

To those people I would say that when kids are kissing frogs and maniacs are planning crimes because of something they saw in a movie, we had better take it seriously.

Even if what we take out of that is that people are morons.

Well, to be fair, many of them are.

But stupidity, in my experience, is almost always taught. It’s not an innate trait of the average person to be an idiot. There’s always a few who just seem to be born without a clue, but usually it’s choices made between childhood and adulthood that shape someone’s intelligence.

Even so, intelligence is not a permanent thing. People can become stupider, they can also become smarter. We used to understand that before IQ tests cam along to tell us those things are set in stone.

So, the charge that movies are playing to the stupidest parts of human nature, and society, should be taken seriously. Because it reflects on us, what we find funny, and what we support.

People like Cinema Sins are right to be disgusted with cinema that is only there to be stupid and “funny.”

I think the dumbest thing anyone can say about movies is that they don’t matter and should not be taken seriously.

That eliminates about a third of the voices on this subject.

So, turning to the other two main opinions on reviews, I want to explain where I am on this.

At first when I started watching negative reviews, I liked it. I was frustrated with plenty of the entertainment out there, and I thought a lot of it was dumb. It was nice to be agreed with by a public source. Plus, it was funny; and I also learned some terms that people use and how movies and shows are typically rated. All helpful and interesting stuff to know for the movie goer who really wants to be careful about their time.

But the problem was, these reviews picked apart movies I did like as well as movies I didn’t. Sometimes I acknowledged they had a point. But other times, like with my favorite movie of all, it was really painful to hear it mocked to dust.

More recently I started seeking out more positive reviews. Cinema Wins, a spin off of the other, makes good review that are all focused on finding the bright side. Another good channel was How It Should Have Ended; which does poke a lot of fun at films, but ultimately they are positive, and just freaking genius some of the time. (If you like that type of humor. I won’t say everyone would like it.)

Now, Cinema Wins is sometimes naively positive about movies. But the guy knows he is, and admits it. Which is why I prefer it to these negative Nancy reviews I’m so sick of. A reviewer of movies should actually want to like movies. Otherwise how can they admit anything is of merit in any franchise?

See, at first it didn’t occur to me that watching movies expressly to find fault was a problem. But once I noticed that I couldn’t enjoy even movies I liked as much anymore now that I had all this negativity going through my mind, I got upset.

I’m not even a big fan of the entertainment industry as a whole. But when I find a gem, I don’t like it being picked apart.

Now everyone will have different standards for what constitutes a good movie. Often I think people go by the wrong things, but that’s because reviews have shifted to focusing on stuff that is minor.

How well a scene is shot, how colorful it is, or how melodic the soundtrack is are not really major things. And nitpicking every line of dialogue, or every element that doesn’t make perfect sense can completely miss the point both of the movie, and of storytelling itself.

When people used to gather around storytellers (like we do around TVs now) it didn’t matter how realistic the story was. The point was in what it meant. Was it a warning? Did it explain something about life? Did it give hope?

What’s ironic is that now, many movies and books actually use this older reason for storytelling telling as a plot point within their story.

Take that briefly popular The Giver book. The whole story turns on the past, the stories as it were, that the Giver shares with the Receiver.

The same thing with Ayn Rand’s little Anthem story. The books and tales of the past end up opening Prometheus’ eyes to the present.

It’s sad that even though this element of storytelling is used, it has to be done undercover, because people will pick the actual book to pieces over little things.

No one would fault the Receiver for accepting what the Giver tells him. (Or gives him. I haven’t actually read the book.) But in the real world, stories aren’t often received so well.

I think I’ll have to make a part two to finish this properly, so until next post–Natasha.

Happy Day.

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Hey, I won’t wish you a happy Halloween, but a happy day in general I hope you have.

I think I posted about this last year, but honestly I don’t remember what I said. I doubt anyone else does either. (Let’s be real, blog posts aren’t things that get revisited again and again like YouTube videos.)

I’m not a huge anti-Halloween person, but it’s the only holiday besides Dia de los Muertos that I wish didn’t exist.

Still, I’m seeing some other Christian bloggers saying Halloween is an opportunity. Since there’s pros and cons to this, it might be fun to explore both.

Let’s start with the cons:

Many elder adult Christians, and some younger ones, don’t like Halloween because, obviously, people over-hype it. And there is not getting around that many people do celebrate the wrong things.

Fifty years ago, celebrating your inner monster, or witch, or whatever, would have been appalling. And for a good reason. Those things are Evil.

Witches are not cool. I don’t care what movies say.

Monsters are not good. They are called monsters for that very reasons. They always murder, destroy, and pillage. (Sometimes there’s a bizarre sexual part of it too.)

Hey, I don’t care if I tick any monster lovers off by saying so. Facts are facts.

But Christians hate Halloween even more because so many of the things are directly or indirectly satanic. Demons, devils, black magic, superstition. Heck, whether you buy it or not, the concept of these things is at least bad. (Again, sorry.)

I’m explaining the position, I’m not taking it, yet.

My father also hates that a lot of the church now does things on Halloween because he sees it as compromising with the world. Trying to be cooler, more relatable, and not party poopers.

Frankly, I doubt the world at large cares whether we boycott Halloween or not, but our friends might. I’ve never lost a friend over that, but I do get some strange glances and I find people just don’t get why I could be so uptight.

So, in defense of what is definitely the more awkward position, let me say to everyone who is okay with Halloween, go easy on you Christian friends or family who don’t like it.

We have a lot of reasons to, and we don’t explain all of them because we know it sounds weird. When we do explain, usually no one gets it.

Which would be okay, except in my case it can make your own relatives roll their eyes at you, and that stings.

Even if you are Christian and celebrate Halloween for your own reasons, don’t call the people who don’t legalistic. (That’s biblical, by the way.)

there’s a lot of negative things about Halloween that even non-christian parents are concerned about, and there’s plenty of creeps out there on Halloween to justify being cautious about it.

There are real live people who are involved int he occult and who celebrate Halloween for that reason. It’s not pretty, and I don’t even know how common it is, but the fact is, Christians are’t the only ones who can be weird about the day.

That said, most of us don’t know the people on the other end of the spectrum, but we do know Christians. So I’m talking about that.

Christians may just feel Halloween has too many bad connotations, and can’t in good conscience condone it. They may also know people who, while they aren’t in the occult, do take the death and spooks side of Halloween way way too far, and that’s pretty weird in of itself. Christians don’t want their kids to think that’s acceptable.

This is totally reasonable.

So that’s one side of the issue.

The other side is that Halloween, whether we like it or not, exists. And we can either put about it and freak out that the devil gets a whole day to be celebrated (ahhh!!) or we can suck it up and make the most of what opportunities we have to connect with people in healthy ways through the day.

I mean, handing out treats isn’t inherently evil. Netither is wearing costumes. Neither is having a party, and having wired lightning and crazy decorations.

I’ve done some Church hosted trunk or treats (like trick or treating, but with cars instead of houses) and I had fun and got a lot of candy. (Not always candy I liked, but I’m a picky candy eater.)

My Christian Halloween experience was mostly different just in that most people didn’t dress up as witches, ghouls, or whatever. One guy did wear a viking-like dress. But I’m pretty sure it was a joke. (Some guys do have that sense of humor right?) We dressed up as angels, princesses, historical characters (me,) presents, and even a banana.

Also I believe the decor was more harvest oriented than spooky.

I honestly don’t think that’s wrong. Taking out the negative elements of Halloween and leaving the positive is perfectly within Biblical precedents. And it’s not a discountable ministry tool. Plenty of parents don’t like the idea of their kids going to strangers homes. a family friendly event at a church makes  a lot of parents feel safer about their kids doing the costume and candy gig.

However, I personally don’t celebrate the holiday in any form.

I don’t think it’s a sin to take the more proactive route, but personally I feel no need.

The fact is, even if you redeem the day, you still have to face the fact that it originated as something bad and pretty messed up even; if you study the history of it.

It’s god to redeem a bad thing into a good thing, but the Bible makes no secret of the fact that it is far better never to have had the evil in the first place.

Broken bones can heal stronger than they were before, that doesn’t mean you should try to break them.

So, basically the good in Halloween is all a patch up job. Not wrong, but not as good as the day being totally pure to begin with would be. And that’s why I treat Halloween like any other day, because in the wider scope of things, every day is from God. And eh’s not hindered by what men do on it from blessing the day to His purposes. (Why be God if you can’t ignore what the enemy is doing in one place in order to do something better in a different place?)

I’m well aware that if more than five people read this, I’m definitely going to get both sides of the debate here.

And hey, you could think I’m still being too lenient, or that I’m being too harsh; but, much as I like being in the right, I have to admit that the Bible itself would tell me that this day is open to being redefined.

So, in whatever way you wish to do that, here’s to all of us trying to do good today.

Until next time–Natasha.

Propaganda.

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Do you know what freaks me out? How I can’t watch anything now without being concerned about propaganda being slipped in.

Seriously, it bugs me.

Well, one person’s propaganda is another person’s truth; or at least it’s what they believe is true.

Propaganda: information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.

Originally from a Latin phrase meaning “spreading the faith.”

Obviously propaganda isn’t always bad. Anyone who believes in something will spread it around.

The only problem is when propaganda is spread around under the name of fact.

I could say it is a fact that God exists. But I can’t prove it; and no one can prove He does not exist. It’s a matter of belief (and evidence.)

Evidence is never fact until  it’s been confirmed that your interpretation of the evidence is correct. Like in Legal Cases. Or in a detective novel, a good detective never says who did it until they are certain the evidence is irrefutable. Then the guilty party inevitably does something to prove them right.

All this being said, I guess I have no right to complain about propaganda in media and entertainment. To make a piece of art devoid of propaganda is nearly impossible.

What does bother me is when it’s propaganda I don’t agree with.

I guess the only thing to do would be never to watch anything ever again. But I doubt I could go through life doing that successfully.

Still, isn’t it kind of sick that I can’t watch even children’s shows without worrying about some sexual orientation propaganda being in it.

OF course, I’m realizing that that is widely accepted as fact now. That I’m gong to be seen as a bigot for having a problem with that.

cause that’ always the hide road, isn’t it? Call anyone who disagrees with you a bigot and put a label on them so you can shut them up.k

I won’t say that you can believe whatever you want. The people who say that don’t really mean it.

When was the last time you heard someone say “believe whatever you want” about Racism.

“Yeah, believe on race is better than the other, that’s fine. It’s your personal truth.”

Or what about slavery? Yes, slavery is okay as long as you believe it is.

(Yikes, if someone only read those last two lines I could be really misunderstood.)

Okay then, so not everything is open to personal belief. Clearly Racism is wrong. Slavery is wrong. It’s wrong because we as a society have moved beyond that.

Or was it always wrong? Even when society was practically built around segregation? Or slavery.

Clearly enough, unless humanity is suddenly more enlightened than it ever was, society in general can’t decide right and wrong.

Now, most people would not say society shapes their views. But many of them, if they looked back, would see that the people they grew up around, and the things they watched and read and were taught, are still what they believe now.

People may think it’s even noble to believe what they do. Like believing in homosexuality. It means their open minded, and not biased. Those people would also do well to examine themselves more closely.

Because,whatever the belief is, believing it because it makes you a better person in the eyes of the world is the wrong reason to believe. And I would say that about my own faith too.

I was lucky enough to grow up in a house where if you had doubts about the faith, you could express them and not be shamed for it. My mom would tell me we all go through times of doubt. I wouldn’t have to feel like I was the only one who had questions.

By and large, that saved me from believing just to get points. I don’t think anyone is ever completely spared from that temptation, but it’s not what motivates me now.

A good question to ask yourself is “If I was the last person on Earth who believed what I do, would I still believe it?”

Any real faith would say “Yes.” Because real faith is not based on other people, or on what you see around you, but on what you don’t see and still know.

The reason I believe in God is because I have experienced things with God that I never experienced with people. People never gave me deep peace, or true joy, but when I became a Christian, I had those things.

You could never convince that was in my head, I’ve been in my head too long to think there’s any peace or joy to be gotten from there. (Some of you know what I’m talking about.)

Only God could explain me finding things I never could find in the world. There has to be something outside the world that can provide those things.

And when you believe that, you have real faith.

Which is not to say everyone who believes that is on the right track, but they are at least being real, and that’s the point all truth starts from.

We all need to be real. We need to admit that some things that ate accepted as fact have never been proven. We need to admit that till we’ve really been tested on something, we don’t know if we really believe it.

Someday you will be called upon to choose a side. It may seem like there’s only one side to be on when it happens, but there are always two. There is always another option. And all of us should decide now which we’re gong to pick.

And stick to our guns. Propaganda or no.

(Propaganda helped me come to my faith, but it was not the thing that drove me to it. There’s a difference from having something beat into your head until you believe it, and actually facing your demons and recognizing them for the first time.)

Until next time–Natasha.

(The cover photo is not intended as a direct crack at Hinduism, it was just the most religious example I had.)

 

Expectations (for the new Justice League.)

/ toseealife / 1 Comment

I’ve finally seen a trailer for the Justice League movie, and I am still skeptical at best. It’d be hard to beat the show.

The key to superheroes as a tool in the creative world, is, as my sister and I have narrowed down, to put a person in a normal human situation, magnified by super abilities and super villains and over the top circumstances.

All this makes it clearer to the audience what the stakes are, what the choice is, and what the difference between the good and the evil character is.

So what I think the new film needs is not to progress further into the dark, gritty and melodramatic world that the genre has become, but to regress into more human terms.

I have nothing against climatic events and galaxy sized stakes, but it should never be about that. Making the problem with the world the main focus of any movie risks making it too vague. What the film needs to be about is what problems humans deal with on a human level. With something like the Justice League, there’s a wide range of subjects that could be covered, that’s why it worked so well as a show. Narrowing down each member’s own personal struggles in the span of one film is a difficult and almost impossible task

But my concern is that none of them will be followed through in a satisfying way.

Many super movies (and other movies and also modern literature) end with what I call a question. Ending with a question means the narrative of the film (usually the unspoken one) does not completely side with any perspective presented in it. It may lean one way, but it refuses to admit it. Leaving you, the audience, to try to figure it out by debate.

Sometimes that is okay. But I have never liked it.

I know many people are totally fine with movies ending with a question. They think it’s more respectful and more thought provoking that it does so. They think they will discuss it more and understand better because of it.

There may be times that happens, but I have yet to see that actually be the fruit of Question Films.

What I typically see is that people will take whichever side of the argument they were already on walking into the film (or reading the book) and continue to use the piece in question to defend their point of view. They claim to be getting a better understanding of it, but all they really are doing is getting deeper into their own beliefs. The film did not challenge them by presenting any belief as wrong based on evidence or results, it just fed into the desire they had to remain perfectly secure in what they already thought.

Take Zootopia, I liked that film okay, not because I agree with its supposed portrayal of society, but because I thought the characters still exhibited real world flaws that could apply to a lot more than racism or class bigotry. Judy being guilty of the crime she hated is a thing that happens to all of us at some point, and she handled it the right way.

However, I do not think it is pushing us forward if you take it only as a class and racial  (or a have and have nots) commentary because all the people that already believe that just nodded along with the film, it presented no new information or ideas to them. The people who didn’t agree either disliked the film or got a different message from it, like me.

The fact is, Zootopia was too vague to really be an effective eye opener to anyone. There are no cold hard facts in it.

The shift in super hero movies since the Avengers and Captain America franchise started is that they go from being about personal struggles to being about world wide threats. Which is not bad exactly, but in a way it renders the drama both too real for people to want to dwell on, and not real enough. Because we know similar organizations exist or have existed, and that this is just a more dramatized version of it, making it less serious and not more.

People always complain about characters not being relatable. But I think the real reason is not the struggles of the character are less terrible, but that the characters themselves are less moral.

I could relate to any character who is struggling with the right and wrong thing to do, especially if the choice is not really obvious (and I don’t mean that it’s morally ambiguous, but that it is a difficult choice to make for them because of the circumstances,) the reason is that the moral struggle is one we all go through. We are all equal under that struggle and no one is exempt from it.

Films that confuse that struggle are not being honest with us. In real life, we almost always have at least a dim idea of what the right choice is. What would be best for us to do, what we should do, and often what we know we won’t do but wish we would. In real life, we can repent of our mistakes and actually turn away from making them before we destroy our lives.

Like the Black Panther did, frankly, that was probably my favorite moment of Age of Ultron.

In real life, villains are often afraid of heroes because heroes are stronger than them in that one dangerous way: in their heart.

It’s the Dark Side in Star Wars that must be threatened by the Light. Why does the Emperor decide to kill Luke after he refuses to be corrupted? He fears and hates him for being stronger than himself.

So, to wrap all this up, the more dark these films become the more impossible to please the fans will be. Once people start to hunger for drama and gore and unbelievable violence, it will only grow. It’s happened many times. By pandering to this wish, Hollywood is dooming itself.

And it is only by being a little less picky about our special effects, our complex characters, and our high stakes; and a little more concerned with what affect our entertainment is actually having on us, that we will learn to really enjoy it.

That’s my thought anyway. I’d forgive the new Justice League for a lot if Batman would just take a knee at some point and deeply regret his actions in the previous film(s.) (I’d forgive even more if Wonder Woman straight up tells him what he did was reprehensible and doesn’t want to join the league till she’s convinced he’s really changed.)

As unlikely as I find both those things, I hope that there’s someone on the writing team who still knows how to use the genre.

Anyway, there’s still Infinity Wars coming.

Until next time–Natasha.