First World

Learn me right–1.

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Today I started thinking about the years I spent sitting in Youth Group feeling frustrated.

I’ve started going to a new youth group by the way, which appears to be much better.

But I always wanted to know why youth don’t seem to take their faith or the bible seriously.

The conversations I’ve had with other teens about passages in the bible that aren’t often talked about, well their ignorance or indifference is surprising.

But over the years I’ve sat in Church services that talked to grown men and women pretty much how the youth leaders talk to their youth, only the adult services focus more on sin.

as any Christian teen over here can tell you, Youth Groups tend to cover purity, identity, and not behind addicted to technology by being a good example to your friends.

And all those are great messages, which I have needed and still need. The problem was, those messages should be seasonal, or every so often, but they made up the bulk of my youth group teaching.

As a homeschooler, I always felt like it was to easy for me. No one talked about books much, no one watched the same movies as I did, often enough; and no one expected me to retain much of what I heard, or to do the ridiculously easy assignments.

People could come to our youth leaders with their problems, but they couldn’t seem to actually follow their example. Why?

I don’t have a magic answer, but let me tell you about a contrasting experience I had.

When I went on my missions trip, the other teens were the most well-behaved, respectful bunch of peers I’ve probably ever been around. Except other homeschoolers. (Sorry, but it’s true.) We all wanted similar things, we all took pains to be nice to each other and to serve the people of Cambodia well. A lot of them also ate bugs, but hey, that’s normal in Asia. (And most other places except America.)

Phones were still a bit of an issue, but they at least kept it to a minimal. what made this group so different?

Well, the sad thing is, it didn’t stay that way entirely. Once we all go back, all of us hit some heavy obstacles in our everyday lives. Some of us floundered, others kept right on swimming. I admire one member of the group in particular for continuing to be of service to the people around them. I myself had to deal with a lot even the very day I came home.

I’ve never been common, and I don’t think anyone else would exactly fit the societal mode either, so what caused some of us to lose our grip?

My theory is it’s the same thing that plagues most other young people, here and in every place where kids have the opportunity to d more than survive.

You see, there’s a principle of life. Your situation is not what matters, it’s your outlook.

The fact is, no matter how hard our life is, we choose whether we live just for survival or not.

I have known plenty of people who are just trying to get through every day, whether its’ doing their school, their work, or possibly actually trying to keep food on their plate.

And like or not, when you live like the day-to-day challenges are the worst thing in your life, you have adopted an attitude of survival.

It’s not a good way to live, because it’s selfish, and it makes your vision very narrow.

They wonder why teens don’t care about church, it’s probably because they have learned to survive without it.

Personally, if I hadn’t found a good church to go to, I’d be at the end of my rope right now. I need the encouragement of being around other people who believe, people who I can sing to God with and they wont’ think I’m crazy. Non-believers take that kind of freedom for granted, I think. But it’s harder to find than it seems.

They say that the church is not relevent. That may true of some churches. But the ones I have gone to are usually quite relevant to some people. They feed the homeless, provide free childcare in a safe environment for busy parents. provide na alternative to secular culture; and give Christians a place to feel they are understood.

The church is much more than a safe haven of course, but the one problem is, very few teenagers appreciate having a safe haven unless they are in big trouble.

The teens I’ve known who came to church consistently were the ones with the most unstable lives, often enough. Sometimes they were more committed. Sometimes they were pastor’s kids and took more of an interest because of that. But I never heard any one of them say they came to church because it was a challenge, or because they felt it was dangerous.

That is, in my opinion, a huge percent of the problem.

we’ve taught kids that they can be anything, and prepared them for an adventure when they are young, but when they are teens, we start saying “Only a few more years of school.” There’s a light at the end of the tunnel, in other words. I don’t blame anyone for hating public school as I can’t imagine going to it myself, but church is treated the same way.

And I know you may not go to church and so may not care, but trust me, this is affecting you too. What do you get when a whole generation starts living just to survive. I almost prefer the past generations who lived for fun or to make a wealthy lifestyle, kids have grown up hearing that is not the most important thing, but they have no heard what is.

Or maybe they just don’t believe it anymore.

I am not letting teens off the hook. No one can make you stop caring except you.

But I’ll have to continue this in part two. Until then–Natasha.

Taboo–2

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Depending on how part 1 was received, this may or may not be getting myself in deep.

But I’ve started now, so let’s continue.

I already talked about Taboo Topic #1, but there’s a bit more to say before I go to #2.

As I mentioned before, some people feel they were born homosexual. I say feel, because the fact of the matter is, no one is born any kind of sexual.

We all have a sex, yes; but some people never marry; some, like nuns and priests, remain celibate; most people marry the normal, traditional way; and some people choose a homosexual lifestyle. It is a choice.

But no one is born with a sexual preference. We all grow up and decide how we feel about it as we go, and our opinions change.

It is true that young teens often have no wish to experience feelings, which they do experience, that tend toward what the world calls homosexual.

I think this term has been blown grossly out of proportion.

Not every desire for affection and for touch is a sexual desire; and people make this mistake  as often about heterosexual relationships as homosexual ones.

As I’ve said in “Are we starving?” Human beings need touch to show affection and feel loved, that’s from anyone, of any age group.

That said, it is true that some people develop those kinds of feelings.

However, some people enjoy hurting other people. Some people are addicted to substances. Some people develop a taste for porn.

I know, I am bringing up every controversial issue I possibly can, aren’t I? Sorry. (But uh, check the title of the post, people, what did you expect?)

My point is, human beings develop desires for many unhealthy things. Lust itself is unhealthy when it is out of marriage, and then it is not lust, but healthy desire.

Desire itself if no proof that anything is a good idea. When our emotions are screwed up, or just fluctuating, as any woman can tell you, we want to do crazy things. (Like binge on chocolate.) Not that these desires are on the same level, but it is clear then that not all desires are rational or good.

There’s a book written by a man who struggled with this issue, and he’ll probably go into better than I can, “A Strong Delusion.”

I’ll suffice it to say the Bible does deem some desires evil. And it tells you which ones.

Just to really entrench myself in this matter, I’ll address one more argument. The one that goes “people should be free to express themselves however they want.”

Let me go back to Romans for this, in chapter 1 verses 22-23 it says  “Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man…”

Self has been made into a god in our culture, and we wonder why people are so selfish. It is good to express yourself, but it is never good to disobey God.

I might further point out, God has given us a whole planet full of things we can express ourselves in and with, and it’s harmless; it’s kind of silly to go to the very things he warns us are dangerous and say “I want to use my freedom of expression for this.”

But I’m aware none of this will fix the problem, because it goes deeper than that.

Not everyone cares what God thinks of them, and so preaching about it will not get one anywhere; but that will not change that fact that those who do claim to care, often ignore God as much as the others.

That’s really why I’m doing these posts, I don’t want to be intimidated by the culture into acting like this stuff is not real and deadly. And it is deadly.

It’s not the homosexual act itself that really is deadly, though it does affect people’s health, but it is the attitude we promote with it.

An attitude that is destructive because it is determined to ignore everything expect what it wants.

People are encouraged to think about what they want and think they need, not what is really best for them, their family, their friends, their children, or even their partner.

It used to be those relationships had some weight, and we were encouraged to be unselfish in them, but now we think it’s unhealthy to give way to other people and their needs.

I get that people have been hurt. Abortion, issue #2, is often justified because of rape, or incest; which are ugly, evil things. It is terrible when they happen. And they happen a lot.

I don’t live in a different world than you do, I know about this stuff. And to be honest, I have feared it too. What girl has not?

It’s easy to be afraid of other people and think they will hurt you. Some people do choose homosexuality after being hurt by the opposite sex. Some hate the opposite sex.

I can’t say we don’t give each other reasons to hate.

But now that I’ve admitted all this, how can I still call it wrong? Shouldn’t I have more compassion?

Well, I do have compassion. I don’t want to encourage people to do things I think are wrong, because to me, that is encouraging them to destroy their own lives.

That’s not a popular mindset, but all through history it has proven to be the correct one, people stand against the tide because they care about those who are caught up in it.

“There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.” (Proverbs 4:12.)

The good news is that despite all the negativity of these two posts, I still have a hopeful attitude, because I still have faith. Knowing all this doesn’t change that. Christianity is actually the faith for those who live in a messed up, broken world. It really is in the definition.

I know blogs do not have a dislike button, so if anything I said offended you, you can’t mark your disapproval, but feel free to comment about whatever your thoughts were on the subject.

Until next time–Natasha.

Taboo–1

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

I think the word taboo is hilarious. We have made ourselves afraid to mention certain subjects to each other, it’s ridiculous.

It’s also funny how the things that are taboo change over the centuries. Sex used to be taboo, now it’s barely even taboo in PG movies. It used to be taboo to mention many parts of the body, that’s gone too. I’ll grant you some taboos are just silly, but I notice that among many people it is now taboo to talk about important issues.

I’ve been in a few different churches in my short time, and there are certain subjects that you can be sure will not be brought up very often, and when they are people react, and that scares the youth directors so much that they shun the topics after that.

It may not surprise you to know that I’ve never particularly cared about whether anyone wanted me to speak up about some issues, if they get brought up and I don’t hear anyone else saying what’s right, I go for it.

It’s not because I like making people angry at me, or enjoy making them uncomfortable, but I feel that it is lying to them to pretend that there’s not more to an issue than what they are saying or believing.

There are two or three main taboo subjects, and they are, possibly in this order, 1. Homosexuality; 2. abortion; 3. Politics.

Okay, at this point some people would be going “Oh she did not just bring up all three of those! This is going to mean war!”

And others would be going “Finally, something really relevant to talk about.”

At least this is what usually happens when this stuff gets brought up.

My opinions on all three subjects will surprise no one, but I think I should prelude by saying I’ve heard many different opinions on all subjects, and I think I know the opposition’s standpoint fairly well.

And honestly I have considered in the past that they may be right, but as I grow more, I get more convinced of the truth.

Let’s start with the first one, why is this such a taboo subject? Really, think about it. On one side of the spectrum we have the people who encourage it, who are trying to get children in school to identify with it, (that is so freaking wrong, by the way, even if it was for hetero-sexualism, sex should not be brought up in elementary school, period.) At the other end we have people who think it is an abomination against nature, and in some religions it will get you killed.

So, I mean, why can’t we all just get along? This is no big deal? There’s right on both sides… right?

Obviously I’m being sarcastic, because I think it’s clear that with two such extremes, they cannot both be right.

I don’t favor killing anybody over this issue, I think that is wrong and taking it way too far, and I think that about any matter of belief. But my concern is that many people feel like their hands are tied when it comes to this taboo. If they are in favor of homosexuality, then they can have the honor of being like the majority of people in the public eye, but at least no one will accuse them of being a hater. If you speak against it, people get angry at you. I should know.

Interestingly, when people argue for it, they don’t usually tell me it’s right. They say something like “Well if two people love each other, then they should be together.” Or “I was born that way, God must have made me that way.” (This is in the church.) On the non-religious front, I hear things like “They should be able to express themselves however they want.” Or “There is no right answer.”

Okay, I can’t discuss all of these reasons in the same post, but I’ll address the first one because to me it seems one of the saddest.

Not that love has to be sad. But I find the reasoning faulty. We all know that sometimes people think they love someone and marry them, and then realize it was a mistake. Girls get pregnant out-of-wedlock because boys claim to love them. Women stay with abusive jerks because they love them. Men make mistakes because they think they are in love, they just aren’t talked about as often.

All these examples are sad, and they also prove that many human beings don’t really know what love is.

Yet you use it as a justification for such a major issue of morality?

The point is not to shame everyone who ever made a mistake about love, it’s better to error because of love than to never love and still error.

According to the Word, true love wants the best for the beloved. It rejoices not in sin, but rejoices in truth. It bears all things, believes the best, hopes for the best, and endures all things. Love does not demand its own way. It never fails.

When love is like that, then it might weigh in the balance, but statistically, homosexual love is no better than any other kind of human love when it comes to being unselfish. The couples don’t usually stay together. They, I would say, don’t show as much respect to other people.

Even if they were saints when it comes to loving each other, it still ignores one very important matter.

If you are a Christian  then you are bound to do what the Bible says; it goes with the turf. If you are not a Christian, then your choices are on your own head, but if you are one, can we really keep ignoring what both the Old Testament and the New Testament teach about the issue?

Romans 1:24-28 talks about how unnatural and ungodly the act of homosexuality is. I am merely quoting it. I did not come up with this idea myself.

But I have to challenge myself and every Christian with this question:

If we really believe that Jesus saved us, if we believe He is our lord; and that God is our Father; if we have His Word that we can reference in any moral dilemma; if we believe His word is alive, and is truth; if we believe He himself is truth; then can we afford to ignore Him?

Can we claim to believe his word if we disregard what it says even when believing it makes us unpopular?

This is no and, or, but, in this matter. This is a yes or no question.

People will always be furious when they are presented with this type of dilemma; we all like compromise better than black and white.

Sometimes there is no grey area.

So, comment if you want to, I’m going to pause this until part two–Natasha.

Personal Interpretation?

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Have you ever watched a movie and thought that it was advertised all wrong? Or thought that what you heard people say about it was bogus? This also happens with books, to a lesser extent, because to be honest,  I rarely hear anyone talk about the last book they read. (The last one I finished was The Magician’s Nephew, those Narnia books never cease to be awesome.)

Movies, books, pictures, songs, as we all know, these things are what make up most of our cultures and every culture’s art. Except for movies, that’s not something every culture can afford to compete with the U.S. in.

There are a thousand different opinions about art, even about the same piece of art. So, it’s no surprise that what one person sees is not what another person sees. We’re not all looking for the same things.

But there is a point where I’d say personal interpretation goes too far.

I am getting heartily sick of reading or watching the most innocent of material, and then finding out somebody is pushing to get it acknowledged that there’s a homosexual character present in the said material.

People even did this with Frozen, to an extent that makes me sick, because what they were suggesting wasn’t okay even if one accepted homosexuality as normal. I really don’t want to repeat it, but you may have come across it yourself. If so, enough said.

And then there’s just the heterosexual remarks too. People do read way too much into some stuff.

However, even more common than both those unwholesome incidents is just misinterpreting what something really means.

What astonishes me is how often both authors and screenwriters do this with their own creations.

My siblings and I call it a lack of vision. What happens is someone creates a character that ends up catching the interest of a lot of people, and they develop the character enough to keep that interest, but then inexplicably, they just stop and leave it at that.

I know a couple of kids shows that young adults still watch because they’re actually good, and the shows make this same mistake. They build a character up and then they let you down.

I suppose to anyone not interest in the show or movie or book, it hardly matters; but interested or not, I do think such problems affect you more than you realize.

You see, history shows that it is art that inspires greatness, or imparts it, to other people. This is particularly true of the art of words. And it was the art that had something real and good to say to us, that caused us to become better people. that is still true.

Anytime an opportunity to make something like that is wasted, so is a chance to inspire kids and adults alike to be better people.

I have a case in point that should be harmless to give because the author is long gone.

There’s a book titled Miss Pettigrew lives for a day that was later made into a movie. I saw the movie first and liked it a lot. I was sure the book would be even better–it wasn’t. Mind you, I’ve only said this of maybe half a dozen books. Almost always the movie is inferior. (Just look at what they’ve done to The Chronicles of Narnia, even Disney sometimes disappoints me.)

The whole reason that the movie was better than the book was simply this: both portrayed two different outlooks, and two different lifestyles, but while the movie was honest about the pitfalls of both, the book very much leaned towards one (that I’d say was the worst of the two.) Plus, the book offered no real reflective moments in which the characters could see something new about life and themselves, whereas the movie had quite a few.

The difference was simply vision. The people who made the movie saw something in the story that they could speak to their audience about. the author of the book just wanted to impress upon them what kind of lifestyle was the more fun and free.

I am grateful to the people who really tried to say something good with their work. “Rise of the Guardians” is another example. The people behind it had something to show the kids and adults watching. It’s a great movie.

One of the reasons Moana originally was somewhat of a turn off to me was because I kept hearing that they were trying to make her the anti-Disney princess.  Presumably by giving her a different build, no lover interest, and her own adventure, they were accomplishing this.

First of all, Moana is not the first Disney girl to have no love interest and her own adventure, or a different build.

Second, if that’s what they think has captivated little girls, and even boys, for years about Disney Princesses, then they do not understand anything about making a quality character.

Children love Disney movies for a few simple reasons: One, there’s a clear hero and a clear villain. Two, they are animated nicely, (usually,) and so there is no problem with wanting to be a “part of that world.” Three, the music is often more unique and fun than you’ll find in other places, and what kids don’t like to sing and dance until they get old enough to be embarrassed about it?

But the last and most important reason that kids love Disney is because Disney tackles important subjects, and shows us things about real life, in a way kids can understand, and often adults still find profound.

The more we forget this and see Disney simply as a tool to teach kids to be as pluralistic as the rest of the culture, the less the movies will be good. Because the movies that promote that stuff are simply not good. How can they be? When to say that there is no right answer is to defeat the point of making a movie about it?

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

“I am Moana” part 2.

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

Okay, I’ve already outlined the story and the positive and negative elements of the film itself, now I want to get to my favorite part: The message.

It’s funny that directors often don’t know their own message very well. Everyone thinks Moana is about being true to yourself.

“You always, always say ‘be true to yourself,’ but you never say which part of yourself to be true to!”–Buddy, The Incredibles.

Well, as Buddy points out, being true to yourself is not as simple as just being told to be.

And what does it really mean anyway?

I won’t argue that a large part of Moana is devoted to that message, but I don’t think we should just apply it to Moana. What about the Ocean? The Ocean wrecks Moana’s canoe, twice; almost drowns her; almost drowns her father and does drown his best friend; it also doesn’t respond to Moana’s cries for help every time she want sit to. What is the deal with the Ocean?

Moana, as we all would, gets frustrated with her new “friend.” Maybe you have a friend like that, one who acts in ways you can’t understand. I do.

But I actually love that the ocean acts this way, because the Ocean reminds me of God.

I know Christians say this about virtually every movie, but don’t roll your eyes yet, I have an unusual reason.

If you’ve read the Chronicles of Narnia, you’ll recall that Aslan, the king, is not safe; but he’s good. Even in the movie they admit “He is not a tame lion.”

The wildness of Aslan frightens many people, in and out of the books, I might add. Aslan himself may not frighten those of us in the real world, but when we meet anything like him, we are frightened.

When it comes to things that aren’t alive, I’d say the Ocean takes the prize for being the most wild and unpredictable. You know why sailors are famous for cursing? You try being on a boat in the middle of rough water and see if you don’t at least think about it. I have been, it was one of the worst days of my life–and then there was the return trip.

No one can tame the Ocean. And that is something Moana needs to realize, no matter whether it chose her or not, the Ocean is still the Ocean, and it has to act according to its nature. Aslan admits to swallowing whole villages of people, to Jill, (in Book 6,) and not at all as if he is sorry or glad. He just is.

It is largely forgotten among the Church that God is like this. He is not predictable, we can not carry Him in our pocket. God Himself does destroy things, he does mete out justice, He does cause death. Many people hate Him for those reasons.

Yet God is not responsible for murder, for evil, or for every sorrow. But eh never tells us how we may know the difference between what he ahs caused and what other things have caused, He just ells us to trust Him.

This is why many people think Christians who are not fake are simply nuts. Well, maybe we are, maybe we are crazy for the sake of others, as Paul says.

But is it not somewhat crazy for Moana to set off alone, with her dumb chicken, to find Maui, who doesn’t seem the hero type even to her, and fight a lava monster single handedly after Maui abandons her like a jerk. (Really, if he’d just left it would have been one thing, but the mean things he says made me want to punch him.) Moana’s Grandma is crazy, and Moana definitely takes after her, but I loved it and I was not in the minority for once.

The Ocean teaches us a very important lesson: Good things are dangerous.

Things cannot be truly good until they are dangerous. Otherwise they are not tested. Evil things are also dangerous, but not in the same way. The difference, if we go by Jesus words, is one can destroy your body, the other can destroy body and soul, but the first is men, the second is God. Which is more good?

Of all the monsters in the realm, none of them defeats Moana or comes as close to it, as her disappointment and discouragement with the Ocean does. Good is far more dangerous than evil.

But that’s not bad. Because it’s good. That’s the paradox the movie is trying to show us. The Ocean helps Moana, just not in the way she expects, nor in the way she understands. For example, because the Ocean wrecked Moana a few times, she is not fazed when the Lava monster is making waves and nearly drowning her. She’s figured out how to swim.

And because Mona has had to do things without the Ocean’s help, she is brave enough to tell it to part when she needs Te Ka to come to her.

Because Moana has to carry so much of the weight, she is able to go on with or without Maui.

Maybe the Ocean knows what its doing.

The Ocean chose Moana for a reason, and I believe God chooses people for a reason too. But it’s not really about what’s special about us, it’s about if we will learn to trust.

That’s what’s great about Moana. It spends more time focusing on the journey than on why she was chosen, that becomes more apparent as we go.

Moana means Ocean, so the movie is really named after both of them, and Moana and the Ocean are in a sense, both the hero, neither is independent of the other.

Christians believe that God does not need people, but I personally believe that He has chosen to set this world up so that he does, in a sense. Not like we need things, it’s a different kind of need.

Moana realizes that our desires are awakened by something outside ourselves. That she longs for the Ocean because it calls her.

“And the call isn’t out there at all, it’s inside me. It’s like the tide, always falling and rising. I will carry you here in my heart to remind me, that come what may, I know the way. I am Moana!”

I am the ocean. Not that I literally am it, or that I have the power of it, but that the ocean is a part of me.

As weird as that may sound, the movie completely backs me up on it. Who we are is, literally, who we are called to be. Think about that sentence.

That song is what made me like the movie, and in my opinion, it’s why everyone likes it.

Is it better than “Let it go”? Of course not; they are two different songs that describe two different feelings, which are connected but are certainly not the same.

But Moana is like Frozen continued. Not good in the same way, but still good, and that is my verdict.

Until next time–Natasha.

“I am Moana.”

/ toseealife / Leave a comment

I’m having fun doing reviews, though I don’t do them exactly like how people generally do, but that’s fine, because I figure if someone wants to know about the cast, the score, and the rating, there’s a bunch of other sites that tell them better than I can.

So, as my title says, I want to talk about Moana.

Everybody, including me, went into Moana with high expectations, except those who hate Disney Princess movies, and they went in with that expectation.

I will say from the beginning that the advertisers never should have marketed this movie as something made by the creators of Frozen. Frozen is hard to replicate for its own screen writers (have you seen that horrible short that came with the 2015 Cinderella?) let alone for other people.

I tried hard not to watch the movie with a Frozen bias, but I realized that I couldn’t help myself, the result was, upon first watch, I really disliked it.

But now I’ve had plenty of time to reconsider, and I’ve had my sister give me a lot of reasons why the movie was not as bad as I thought, and I liked some of the songs; and the long and short of it is, I have changed my mind.

Now, the people who say (and there are many) that this movie is better than Frozen, are completely wrong. From the first moments of the film there is a different tone and style to it than Frozen, Moana herself is nothing like either Elsa or Anna, and she has no special power, there is not threat form the elements. Plus, Moana is based off of a myth, not a fairytale, and the writers and animators did a good job of making the whole thing feel like a legend.

So, since this is the case, Moana is not actually the same kind of story as Frozen, and comparing the two in that light, is not fair to either.

Just in case you haven’t seen it and don’t plan to (Spoiler alert!) I’ll outline the story. Moana is the daughter of the village chief of an island in Hawaii, not yet called that, of course. she had a love for the sea, that her father discourages for reasons of his own, but Moana can’t help herself. Then we find out the Ocean chose her to be the one to save her people. As we are told in the opening minutes of the film the heart of Tafiti, the Polynesian goddess of creation, was stolen by the demigod Maui, and that brought a curse of decay and death over the world, which now finds its way to Moana’s island. Realizing this, and with some pushing and revelation from her crazy Grandma, Moana finally sets out to restore the heart, despite various setbacks. She finds Maui, they team up, and after a lot of monsters and storms, and Te Ka, the lava monster, Moana figures out how to restore the heart, and succeeds. (You knew she would.)

Okay, so what is negative in all this?

Well, though the story works a lot of the time, it unfortunately breaks down whenever Maui is acting less than demigodly.  Also, some parts of it are a little rushed, not very well explained, and why did we need that dumb chicken? But that’s a personal preference, not an actual plot problem.

I have to admit, the movie has no real plot holes, but it has plot rubbish. Maui may be the most unnecessary additional character that I’ve ever seen as part of the whole. But what I really had a hard time forgiving the movie for was that Maui and some other parts, constantly took away the mythic feel of the whole thing. They made it seem cheesy and too aimed at a young audience, and a young audience with low standards at that. The humor was just stupid at many times, and often it was modern, which threw off the movie because the whole point is to feel like you’re way back in time, watching the whole legend unfold before your eyes.

Moana is not the first modern Disney Princess movie to use modern humor, Tangled did in some ways, I’ve seen other movies do it and it worked fine, like Shrek. But those other movies were set up with a much simpler plot that would not suffer from that kind of humor, while Moana, form its conception, is supposed to feel more timeless.

I may be overstating my case, but the importance of this factor really cannot be stressed too much, I winced every time the movie got too modern, because, if I wanted to hear modern jokes, I’d watch a Dreamworks movie or a TV show, for crying out loud, I watch Disney to get away from that.

It doesn’t bother everyone the way it bothers me, but whether it bothers you or not, it does change the tone of the movie and that’s going to affect the quality.

Enough with the negative. What changed my mind about this movie was two things: The first was of course, Moana herself.

I’ve got to hand it to Auli, she kept this character grounded. Moana never is ruined by the stupid jokes, or unnecessary humor around her, she stays down to earth and passionate the entire time, and manages to sell innocent and shrewd at the same time. I have no problem with her character at all, and I would have liked her even better without the plot problems that were not her fault.

The other thing will not surprise anyone who has seen it: The Ocean.

I think the climax of this movie is one of the best parts, but the only thing that made Maui and Hei Hei bearable for me was Moana and the Ocean working together. The Ocean actually behaved just as I would expect it to if it were a conscious creature, and that was what really sold me on the plot. If the Ocean had been too nice, or too magical, it would have felt fake and contrived, but the Ocean being unpredictable and very real at times made it work. I was most into Moana’s head when the Ocean proved more dangerous than she expected, and when she almost gave up, because it was a natural feeling.

I can’t get into the meaning of the movie in this part, so I’ll do it in part two, until then–Natasha.