Moralmovies

2007-12-15T05:01:00.000-08:00

Hardy Thanks,
It looks like the prayer and vigilance of readers of this blog have scored a victory for righteousness and the Kingdom. Due to you good readers the forces of darkness (i.e. the makers and promoters of "The Golden Compass") suffered a great defeat last weekend when their athiest propoganda raked in only $26 million and this weekend looks to take in 60% less than that. Perhaps this nation will be spared from utter destruction for a few more months.

2007-12-04T14:56:00.000-08:00

The Great Moral Battle at the Box Office

Well, the weekend of dystany is almost here, the release of The Golden Compass. This is one of those pivotal moments in history, like Luther at the trial of Worms or Jim Baker at that tawdry motel with his secretary. Will America spend its box office dollars for this New Line (read New Age) production or put it in the Sunday offering?
Part of me would almost like to see the film succeed (meganota)and then just sit back and wait for the fire and brimstone hail down on those who brought Pullman's heresies to the big screen. But I would hate for any of you, dear readers, to get caught in the crossfire. So stay away from the movie theater this, and every, weekend.

2007-11-27T12:23:00.000-08:00

Helga with this week's movie to avoid:

"Awake" opens this week and I urge you, if you care about the Earth,to avoid this film. The film stars Hayden Christensen (you may remember him as the boy who would not stop whining in Star Wars II & III, part of that sci-fi salute to facism) as a very rich capitalist who goes into surgury (heart surgury, not for lava related injuries). But during surgury he suffers from "anethetic awareness" meaning he finds himself awake but paralyzed. Rather like when I drink too much coffee before sitting through one of Vinton's sermons.
This film will encourage the use of more anesthetics which will further enhance the evil phamichutical industries which will continue to make things more difficult for the independent herb and "herb" growers.
The film also stars Jessica Alba. Need I say anything about the proven link between Alba and the onslaught of eating disorders in this country?
And Christopher McDonald plays a doctor. This may be the one good thing about the film because the portrayal of a doctor by "Shooter" from "Happy Gilmore" may finally lead to realization that this country needs socialized medicine. For all her faults, Hillary would never let such a thing happen.
So I say, be could to our Mother Nature and skip this film.

2007-11-20T19:21:00.000-08:00

Vinton warns:

My upcoming film to avoid, The Mist. Written by well known Satanist, Stephen King, the film is about a fog that forces people into a super market in Maine wherein they argue about whether or not to go to their cars. Now from the ads I've seen, the perfectablely reasonable character who argues that this is the wrath of God is mocked and derided by the film makers. I don't think anyone would argue with her if it was a killer fog coming in on San Francisco.
This film is directed by Frank Darabont who also directed King's Shawshank Redemption in which there was no Biblical redemption that I could see, not a single person read the Four Spiritual Laws.
It "stars" Thomas Jane, as if anyone knows who that is. (A young person in the church told me he played "The Punisher" which he said was like one of the Judges from Judges, but aside from that I know nothing positive him.) I didn't recognize any of the rest of the class, though I believe an African fellow in the film used to be in a television show about policemen.
So another anti-Christian, pro-Satan film, and again I say a good sermon is all the fun you need.

2007-11-13T15:25:00.000-08:00

Films to Avoid Next Weekend

Helga says:

It would be very bad for your Karma to attend "Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium". I'm sure you are, like me, already excited for the upcoming Holidays, by which I mean the Winter soltice. But I get so sad when children are making their soltice Christmas lists. Instead of asking for donations to progressive charities and clothing made from non-species oppressing materials, so many children ask for toys. And this film could only increase that kind of materialism. Also, this film simply frightens me. Dustin Hoffman in the trailers and promotional still does not compare favorably to Jigsaw in the Saw trailers and promotional stills. Natalie Portman should not be allowed in films again until there is justice for full sized women. And Jason Bateman is in the film and his television program Arrested Developement was not at all politcally correct. And the magic of the film is not of the wholistic Wicca variety.

2007-11-05T14:22:00.000-08:00

New Feature - Movies to Avoid Next Weekend

I must first of all apologize for the tardy nature of our posts; Helga and I have been busy with many activities and have failed to regularly post warnings about the abominations at your local sinaplex. We are going to attempt this new feature of warning you of films to especially avoid in the upcoming weekend.

Things to avoid the weekend of Nov. 8 - 10

Helga says - avoid Lions for Lambs

Now I'm sure Robert Redford had the best of intentions when he made this film. It is a film made to condemn the Bush adminstration (obviously the worse adminstration in world history, let alone of the United States) and their immoral "War on Terror". But he went about it in absolutely the wrong way. Tom Cruise plays a senator who mouths the right wing lies defending the heinous US wars in the Middle East, arguing with Meryl Streep playing a reporter who speaks THE TRUTH TO POWER. Now I'm sure the arguments put forward by Cruise have no merit whatsoever, but should we take the risk some unimformed budding neo-cons in the audience might believe what he says? I believe debate is greatly over rated. I believe the film should been structured with Redford, Streep and Cruise speaking straight to the camera telling the audience that the US policy is evil and the people of Iraq and Afganistan would be much better off with the Taliban and Sadam in power, rather than racist, sexist, violent Americans. It would just make everything more clear.

Vintor says avoid Southland Tales
Fortunately, this film should be easy to avoid since the interweb says it is going into limited release. Still, this sure abomination from writer/directer Richard Kelly (of Danny Darko infamy) should be shunned if one should have an opportunity to see it. It seems to be a confusing end of the world type of tale. Why should anyone have any confusion about the end of the world when everything is made so perfectly clear as in the book of Revelation and the second half of Daniel? Plus it stars The Rock and do we really want anymore stars from the WWF? It also stars Sarah Michelle Geller as a porn star who wants to start a reality TV show. (As if there was a difference between porn and reality TV.) I could not make heads or tales of the plot discreption, so needless to say in the world of Hollywood, drugs must have been involved. So once again I say, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

2007-09-03T22:46:00.000-07:00

Helga's Final Fall Film to Avoid in 2007

"No Country for Old Men"

If you know me, you know how I hate violence. I've been particularly been over wrought about this whole Michael Vick dog fighting incident. My fellow members of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) have been petitioning for the neutering, beating and electrocution of that man.
To review this film's trailer and saw what is called the 'red band' version. This film apparently is full of violence based on a drug deal gone bad. So those who are trying to enhance the lives of others through pharmaceutical means are again demeaned.
And who is the chief villain of this piece? Apparently a Hispanic played by Javier Bardem. Looks like another slam at the only decent class of people in this country, undocumented workers. And who is the hero, the voice of wisdom? Tommy Lee Jones, another old, white man. This continues to be a country only for old white men, contrary to the films title.
I should not be surprised this piece of film is brought to us by the Coen brothers, who certainly do not seem intent to promote feminism, environmentalism or animal rights in their films. What have they done for the Earth?
So I urge you not see this film as the fewer tickets that come out of that little metal box means more trees will live and there is a chance we may not die of global warming. (Though such an extremely slim chance.)
So warm vibrations and karma to you all this lovely Fall (probably the last to enjoy at this temperature), Helga

2007-09-03T22:23:00.000-07:00

My Final 2007 Fall Film to Avoid

The Brave One

Now as I'm sure you know, I usually prefer to condemn a film on its own merit, whether I've seen it or not, and not based on the personal lives of its makers. Well, I forgot to bring my Bible to read on a recent trip to my opthomologist and I was forced to read an interview in Entertainment Weekly with Jodie Foster. It promised on the cover a "Candid" interview, but she refused to answer one of the first questions. Apparently Miss Foster (note the 'Miss' and yet she has children), was on the cover of 'Out' magazine along with that newsreader, Anderson Cooper. They asked her to respond to the cover story on that magazine and she would not. Now I personally don't care whether she is going out with Anderson Cooper or not, I was bothered by something else in the interview.
Two other things in the article bothered me. First she said the point of her new film was that "No thinking, feeling, breathing human being should use a gun." Now was she saying policemen and soldiers should not have guns or that only irrational, insensitive people should serve our country and cities? Or was she insulting all of us NRA members. (I admit I registered under an assumed name so that when the government confiscates those registers they can't pull the gun from my live or dead figures.)
She also admitted to being an athiest. It used to be in this country, even if one didn't believe in God, they would have the common courtesy to lie about it to the media. I refuse to support with my entertainment dollars someone who so completely ignores common hypocrisy.
Now the film itself is something about a woman who guns down common criminals, so it is not so objectionable in itself, but do consider who's starring in and probably producing this thing.
So remember, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

2007-09-02T15:31:00.000-07:00

Vinton here on 2007 Fall Films to Avoid

"There Will Be Blood"

Now I know I am writing this on the Sabath, but just as Jesus healed on the Sabath I think it is worthwhile to use this day to save people from the cauldron of sin. You can tell Hollywood is up to their usual no goodness when they change titles. Who can forget when they came out a film titled "About Last Night..." to hide its real origin, "Sexual Perversity in Chicago". Paul Thomas Anderson used this new title to hide the fact that it is based on the novel "Oil!" by Upton Sinclair. Yes, that Upton Sinclair, notorious liberal. He ran for public office as a Socialist (and later as a Democrat, big difference), founded the California ACLU and experimented with the occult (his book, "Mental Radio" was about telepathy and the seances.) You know, my grandfather said that meat never tasted as good after he wrote the novel "The Jungle" (grandda said that cleaning up the slaughterhouses took much of the exotic flavoring from the meat.)
Anyway, considering Sinclair's commie background I would expect this film won't have much good to say about the oil industry and without the oil industry (as I'm sure Helga would wish) we would be using horse and buggies, but groups like PETA and PASA will keep up from using the horses so we will be pulling our own buggies, thank you very much.
I did hear in the trailer the use of the song "There is Power in the Blood", a favorite of mine and probably the only decent number Marty Robbins ever did.
I also heard that this is a violent film, as perceptive may discern from the title. If you want violence just read the book of Judges.
As always, if you want entertainment, just listen to a good sermon.

2007-09-01T17:00:00.000-07:00

Helga Here With Another Film to Avoid in the Fall

"Into the Wild" should be a wonderful story about a young man that leaves the confines of evil Western conventions to become one with the wilderness. Now I had some hope for this film because it was directed by Sean Penn who totally has vision in the world politcs. Penn understands that Bush is evil (I've tried to convince Vinton but they share Bornagainist so he blames everything Bush does that he disagrees with on the neocons)and Hugo Chavez is a genius and a beautiful humanitarian who limits his people's rights for their own good.
But the story of this film about a recent college graduate, Chris Candleless who does all the right things. He abandons his car (I assume because it contributes to global warming) and burns his money (I wish I had the courage to rid myself of those dead white men and only keep the sisters, Susan B. Anthony and Sacagawea, who, of course, won't burn.)
Now someone who does such good things would have exceptional Karma and nature would reward such a person greatly. From what I understand, she would reward him greatly for that but instead weather and natural forces work against him. Who cares whether this is based on a true story; they should have shown Mother Earth being nice to those who are nice to her. Shame on you Sean.
So skip this film, spend time with nature. Tree climbing is fine, but it has become a bit of a cliche, so go hug a bush.

2007-08-31T02:39:00.000-07:00

Top Ten Fall Films of 2007 to Avoid

Helga here:

My next film to avoid is "Alvin and the Chipmunks". I know what some of you are saying, "Surely Helga, this film is harmless! No animals were harmed in its making, they're computer generated!"
Sure, just as the previous incarnation used animation. But do you think the images of clothes wearing chipmunks come purely from the imagination? I'm afraid not. I have it on an impeccable authourity that in order to make the cartoon, real chipmunks were dressed in clothing to serve as models. And certain surgical procedures were needed so that their voices would have that high pitch.
Now I don't know if such models were used for this new film, but even if they didn't, what is to keep little kids who see the film from thinking "I want have my own pet chipmunk and put it in clothes and have it sing annoying Christmas carols." It will be worse than the annual Easter bunny adopted and abandoned plague.
This film stars Jason Lee as David Seville, the companion (owner? father? parmour?) of the poor little creatures (Alvin, Simon and Theodore). Wasn't it bad enough that Lee ruined many happy childhood memories voicing Underdog this summer?

I see no good karma coming from viewing this film.

2007-08-31T02:19:00.000-07:00

Top Ten Films to Avoid in the Fall of 2007 Continued:

Vinton says - Don't see "Fred Claus"

Now no one appreciates a good laugh in a suitable time at an acceptable time more than I do. My sermons often begin with a humorous little story that mocks the theological ignorance of children. And I will even admit there are times I have chuckled at comical moments on the silver screen. For instance, I remember being convulsed with laughter watching Tim Conway in 1977's "Billion Dollar Hobo". Now I wouldn't recommend your trying to locate this film because that was a long time ago and it may have had objectionable material I can't currently recall. I was also amused by many films with that comic genius Dean Jones (in the films made by Disney before they began to allow patrons with obsence and pink t-shirts into their parks.)

But most screen comedies these days try to get laughs at the expense of body parts and functions God obviously wanted hidden or He wouldn't have provided Adam and Eve with furs (sorry, Helga, it's right there in Genesis.)

Now I understand they're going to market this film for "families". But if that is so why isn't it G? No, it is PG which means it has the usual Hollywood debauchery that "parents" are supposed to "guide" there children through.

Plus this film is part of the Santa Claus cult trying to steal the Christ out of Christmas and replace it with an X. And we all know what an X means in Hollywood. (Actually, I would expect these days the folks on the left coast to call the day NC17mas.)

Worse yet, Santa is played by Paul Giamatti, yes the same man who starred in Sideways, the salute to drunkeness. Is Santa going to be filling he stockings with Boone's Farm products?

And the title character is played by Vince Vaughn who I understand played a "Swinger".

Two more words of warning, no make it four, "Frank Stallone: as himself".

I don't think I need to say anymore except to remind you that the opening anecdote taken from Reader's Digest at the beginning of a sermon is all the funny you really need.

2007-08-29T21:46:00.000-07:00

Helga:

My next film this fall that is obviously moral indefensible is "Sweeney Todd". This a musical about a barber that kills customers and his lover that makes people into pies. Now you might not see the offensive nature of this may not be apparent. But as treasurer of my local chapter of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals), I am opposed to eating all meat, even human. If a Johnny Depp fan (I certainly understand the appeal) may think after seeing this film that cannablism is OK. If someone has no problem with this, how far is that from eating a pig or a cow or a cute little puppy dog pie. The maker of this film, Tim Burton, previously advocated the eating of processed sugar in that Charlie film, so it is not surprising to see he now advocates something very different from a vegaterian diet.

Vinton:

"The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"

Now people will probably trying to justify this film in the same way they defend those Satanic Harry Potter films. "Oh, the film gets kids to read, they have to read that whole title." But what are they reading about? Okay, not Potter satanism, but violence.
We all know how all the kids go around playing their cowboys and Indian games. But they should all be wanting to play the good cowboy: John Wayne or preferably Roy Rogers or Tom Mix. But instead the moral degenerates of Hollywood want our young boys to identify with the outlaw, Jesse James. It's Bonnie and Clyde all over again.
Look for a rash of bank and stage robberies in the next ten to fifteen years.

2007-08-28T21:59:00.000-07:00

Fall Films to Avoid

Vinnie says:

People have been asking me, "Vinnie, what films in the fall of 2007 should I avoid?"

I always say, "Every single one of them because Mel is not making a film based on Scripture and Cecil B. DeMille is dead." But they still ask. So over the next few days my lovely, but utterly heathen wife, Helga will be telling you which ten films you should most avoid from the moral perspective.

My first film to avoid:

"The Golden Compass"

If you thought those pagan Narnia films were horrible with their magic and creatures that could only come to fruition through the unnatural union of humans and animals (Horse-men, goat-men, disgraceful) than you will truly hate this film that promotes more magic than a Harry Potter film. Even the anti-God press, Entertainment Weekly points out the film's blasphemy, noting "Clergymen who kidnap children. Witches who aren't wicked. Even a pair of sexually ambiguous angels." If you thought Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig had brought enought pain and suffering in the world this summer with "The Invasion", that was nothing compared to this film. They pretended that aliens would take over people's life in that film, but this film will lead to demons to take over actual children. This film will be high on my list of film not only to boycott but also protest.

Helga says to skip:

"I Am Legend"

"The last man on earth, is not alone!" This time the last man on Earth is Will Smith. Before the last man on Earth was Charlton Heston. Before the last man on Earth was Vincent Price. Notice a pattern here? Why is it never the last Womyn on Earth? Typical science fiction male chavinism. Dramatically, I guess it makes sense, a womyn alone on the planet could get along just fine, thank you very much. But these films always make it seem like getting rid of all the men on the planet would be a BAD thing. I'm not sure Mother Earth agrees.

2007-06-20T11:20:00.000-07:00

Vinnie here:

About "Evan Almighty"

An unprecedented number of readers (literally several) have been asking Helga and myself for our opinion of the upcoming release, "Evan Almighty". This film has been advertising on a number of Christian sites and so people have been, of course, asking me if it was a Christian film and worthy of your box office dollars. My instinct says this is a piece of trash, but I'd hate to be overly judgmental. So I decided to check out the film for myself. I've heard that studios on occasion will do what they call "junkets". "Junkets" are a publicity tool of the studios to promote films. They fly reviewers out to an exotic location, put them up with high end food and lodging and then the reviewers are able to review the film in an utterly unbiased way. So I called some flak at the releasing studio and told them I was a respected film blogger and I'd like to attend a junket for "Evan Almighty". And they had the gall to refuse me. Obviously, they have something to hide, so until you hear more, avoid this film.

Helga,
Some fellow members of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) are suggesting that this film has a positive ecological message. But I already have problems with this film because it is based on the story of Noah's ark, a very speciesist story. Did you know that Noah was able to take his three sons and their wives on the boat when most animals were limited to two? Clearly the message is that people are more important than animals which I find highly offensive. Until I hear that this basic offense is remedied, avoid this film.

2007-05-03T14:01:00.000-07:00

Vinnie here:
Some have objected to the fact that in our warnings about sequels this summer that are the third in a series, we skipped Rush Hour 3. Helga and I wish to assure you all that if we had any real concern that anyone would go to see Rush Hour 3, we would have mentioned it.

2007-05-01T14:40:00.000-07:00

AVOID THE THIRDS

Vinnie here:
People in my congregation have already begun to ask me, "Which of the Big Summer Blockbusters should we avoid?"
There is a simple answer to that, of course, which is everything that Hollywood puts out. But people expect more detailed information from this blog and that is what Helga and I intend to provide. And there is an easy place to begin this summer - avoid all the sequels that are the third in a series and you'll be off on a good start (or Hollywood non-start). Helga will give us the first to skip:

Helga says - Stay out of Spiderman's 3rd Web

I have a long standing policy of avoiding films with 'man' in the title. We live in such a sexist and specisist society that I try to avoid subjecting myself to films that further glorify males. But I made the mistake of not following this policy with the first two Spiderman films. It was the 'Spider' in the title that lured me in. As an active member of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) I was hoping for something that would support our arachnid friends. But real arachnids play a minor role in the first film and are almost no where to be seen in the second, and I don't expect better from the third. And as if we didn't already have enough of 'man' with Spiderman himself, I hear this film also has a 'Sandman'. If you ask me there has not been a comic book film of any quality since "Catwoman", though I can't even recommend the DVD of that, inspite of Halle Berry's fine feline performance, until it is retitled "Catwomyn".

Vinnie says - Stay away from "Shrek 3"

It's bad enough that this films delve so deeply into the occult with the magic spells and such. And the bodily function humor of the first two films was deplorable. But I understand that this film introduces the baby of Shrek and Fiona which means they... I refuse to think about it, and you should as well. I mean, those large, green body parts intertwining...Helga, do the next film.

Helga says - Don't see "Pirates of the Carribean 3: The Long, Slow Boat Past China to the Last Reel"

I understand that this film features Keith Richards as Jack Sparrow's father. I oppose any appearance by Keith Richard's because looking at him further perpetuates the stereotype that illegal drugs are harmful. I blame the alcohol and the fear of Mick Jagger's tongue in his ear for his ghastly looks and speech.

Vinnie says keep out of "The Bourne Ultimatum"

Sure, the United States government is full of evil, corrupt people with dark motives in such places as the IRS and the DMV. But I refuse to believe that the CIA and the other 'intelligence' agencies pose a threat to anyone.

Helga says 'I don't care how dreamy George Clooney is, don't see "Ocean's 13"

Is there anyplace that oppresses womyn more than Las Vegas and all those other gambling halls with the waitress' with skirts that are slightly higher than their bustlines? I think not. Don't gamble on this film (though I think they added a few more stars this time - Al Pacino and Tony the Tiger and Charro just for starters).

Vinnie here again saying this is just a start on the films to avoid this summer, remember, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

2007-03-31T21:58:00.000-07:00

Vinnie here, I'm posting this e-address because it is supposed to help me contact other readers. I suspect it will lead to the government to spy on me.

Technorati Profile

The black helicopters will come soon.

2007-03-30T22:05:00.000-07:00

Vinnie:

Helga and I have been working to find areas of agreement and so we have agreed on the film we can most readily urge you to avoid in the month of April, sight unseen. And that film is "Grindhouse". Apparently, this film is some kind of salute to the B-films of the 60's and 70's that used the explotation of sex and violence to lure people to the cinema (I remember the times sadly, when films like "The Graduate" and "The Godfather", films without any artistic merit would lure youths to the theater with the promise of flesh and brutality.)
Now my understanding is that this film is a double feature, one featuring killer zombies and lesbians and the other featuring a killer car and lesbians. There are many reasons to skip this film, but Helga want you to know that she thinks you should skip it because of the zombies and killer cars and I think you shoud skip it because of the lesbian. So remember, a good sermon it all the fun you need.

2007-03-25T20:20:00.000-07:00

Helga:

The Lives of Others

This film takes place in East Germany during 1984. As we know, at that time, East Germany was a worker's paradise. The state cared for all the people and they were happy, but years later this wonderful place was destroyed by interference from the materialistic west. Well, this film makes it looks like Soviet satellites were horrible places to live.
The film tells the story of a East German secret service agent who spies on a playwright, looking for subversive activity. We later learn that the reason for the assignment is a central committee member is jealous of the playwright's girlfriend. So all this spying is not done for the good of the state. We all know that that kind of scurrilous eavesdropping at that time only took place in Reagan's America (though it happens so much more today in Bush's America, oh how I wish it was the Native American's America again with you could send an e-mail without fear that Big Brother was looking over your shoulder.)
The film does show the glory of State Sponsored Art. The playwrights work is produced by the state and the actors are paid by the state. Then, of course, it is implied that the state blacklists directors, actors and playwrights who speak out against in that Woody Allen and Zero Mostel film, The Front. But we know that blacklisting is just an evil to be found in the 1950's America when Ike acted as a front for Richard Nixon who ran the United States from behind the scenes from 1952 through Watergate, but he was able to come out in the open from 1968, but peace, love and flower power and Redford and Hoffman were able to bring him down. We had those Camelot years of Carter, but things have not been very good for the nation otherwise. At least, not as nearly wonderful as East Germany, but you wouldn't guess it from this film.
So don't see this film, but instead enjoy the beauty of the natural world until global warming wipes it out in the next year or two.

Vinton says:

I thought there might be something to be said about a film that supposedly shows the evils of the communist system. But no one ever comes right and says, "Communism is evil." It is all more subtle than that, and I don't trust the American people to figure these things out for themselves ever since they elected the American communist party (under the D name) in the congressional elections of 2006.
Now the film shows how evil the commies were to surveil the lives of their citizens, but it did make me think it wouldn't be so bad if a real American administration was keeping track of our lives. At the end of the film, the playwright, after the fall of the wall, is able to access the records of his years under surveillance. Now, I've never been good about keeping a journal, so an argument could be made for the the government keeping that journal for you. But since we maybe looking at a President Mrs. Bill Clinton, I don't want the government knowing any of my private life (which is all on the up and up and not anything I'm ashamed of.)
Another problem with the film, is the sexual content. We see partially nude German people. Now on the plus side, this is nothing that would lead the average person to lust, but it can be quite upsetting to the digestive system. (Unless you're the kind of person who does lust after the East German swim team and then your problems aren't just spiritual.)
So once again, I say, skip this film, a good sermon is all the fun you need. Vinton

2007-01-31T15:45:00.000-08:00

Apologies

Vinton: I do realize I warned against Babel in November, but I forgot my good advice. Don't make this same mistake.

Helga: I believe I wrote "blue state" when I should have written "red state". I get confused about that. When I think of "blue" I think of "Blue blood Republicans" and other such evil. When I think of "red", I think of Communism,so those obviously has positive conotations. I am sorry.

2007-01-31T14:37:00.000-08:00

Babel

Pastor Vinton,
It has been a while since I posted, but fortunately, I have been resisting the siren song of the cinema and have been studying the works of the great dispensational theologians.
But sadly, my movie fast was broken by an unfortunate piece of tripe titled, "Babel". You see, I thought I was going to see a version of the tale from Genesis, instead it was another sad piece of Hollywood multiculturalism
This film teaches the profound lesson that if you make bad choices, there are bad consequences.
Let's look at the choices characters make in the film.

If you, as a parents, were going to make a trip to Morroco to patch up your marriage, would you leave your young children in the care of:

A) A family member (brother, sister, grandparent)
B) Neighbors or friends of the child
C) Friend from your congregation that your pastor has recommended
D) An illegal alien nanny who might well be arrested if she needed to take your children to the hospital, apparently without a letter stating your approval for their care

The correct answer is, of course, 'C'. The characters in the film choose 'D'.

If you were an illegal alien nanny caring for children when their parents are out of the country and they ask you to stay longer and skip your son's wedding in Mexico, you would:

A) Thought in advance that their trip might keep you from your son's wedding and refuse, or make plans for the children to be cared for in advance
B) Go to the wedding and have the children stay with neighbors, friends or surely someone that must know the children and could care for them
C) Turn yourself over to INS.
D) Take the children accross the border for a drunken orgy of a wedding, and hope for the best when you have to cross the border again with your drunken nephew driving the car.

The correct answer is, of course, 'C', but the idiot woman in the film chooses 'D'.

(An aside here. In the film, when crossing the border, the young white boy says to his Mexican nanny, "My daddy says Mexico is dangerous." The man is going to Morrocco, the same road that brought such danger to Hope and Crosby, and he says Mexico is dangerour!?!)

The final question in our quiz:

If you are a young, Morrocan, Islamic boy/goat herder and you are curious if your rifle has range, you should:
A) Continue to use rocks and bushes as target practice
B) Wait for the jackels you are supposed to use the rifle for, and shoot at them
C) Convert to Christianity
D) Shoot at cars and buses on the nearby road

Again, correct answer is 'C' and 'D' is the one choosen.

Why should we care for such idiots? I guess because they're not Americans. (No one could care for Brad Pitt anymore after this Brangela nonsense and Cate Blancett isn't really an American and the little Fanning girl gets no more sympathy since her idiot parents allowed her sister to appear in a child rape film.)

So you see, there are plenty of reasons for you to avoid this film and I haven't even mentioned the abundant amounts of young, deaf Asian teenage girl nudity. Nothing moves a film quicker up my list of films to avoid than young, deaf, Asian teenage girl nudity, except mayber young, deaf Asian teenage boy nudity, but it's still a big no go.

This film is sure fire proof that you should skip the movies because a good sermon is all the fun you need. (I assure you this film is no fun at all.)

Helga here:

I misheard what Vinton was reviewing. So instead of 'Babel', I went to the video store to rent 'Bubble'. It is a dark and dreary film that shows two young, dope-smoking high school drop-out working in a doll manufacturing factory whose possible love affair is interrupted by a middle aged woman who doesn't buy into our society's perverse pursuit of thinness. The film shows the hopeless nature of capitalism, blue state America and the doll industry which seeks to indoctrinate little wymen into bourgouis middle-class norms. This film gets one of the very rare Helga thumbs up, as long as enviormentally sensitive means are used to view the film.

2006-12-17T16:04:00.000-08:00

"The Queen"

Vinton here:

This film covers the life of the English royal family in the week following the death of Princess Diana. I remember this time very well. You see, I had been following the events in the life of Diana, and the very weekend she died, I had been planning to use her as a sermon illustration.

I was preaching on Queen Jezebel, and I was gong to talk the way she had abandoned her husband and children and choosen a life of debauchery hanging out with confessed perverts and supporting their causes and traveling about with a worshiper of Mohammad in a sad case of apostasy.

Now I had all this in a sermon for Sunday morning, and I heard about her death on Saturday night, and I knew I would have to change my sermon. Because to say the things I had planned on saying to soon after her death would be wholely inappopriate.

Obviously, I had to rewrite everything I was planning on saying about her in the present tense and change it to the past tense. It actually didn't take a lot of work. But considering the situation, I thought it would only be right to pile on Prince Charlie more as well.

But as to this film. After watching for two hours about these Brits moaning and bellyaching over whether to lower a flag to half mast here or there and how many horse should go before the hearse and such, it all just made me so glad our forefathers fought to not be under the thumbs of these sissy pants. God bless America.
Now I should say that there is much less foul language in this film than in your average piece of Hollywood filth. And thankfully, we do not see Helen Mirren as the Queen Elizabeth II or anyone else in a state of undress. But it is not worth the time for you to go to a movie theater when you could be studying your Bible at home or picketing a revival of 'Jesus Christ Superstar' at your local community theater. So, as usual, let me say, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Helga here:

Let me just say that any thinking person knows that if one was to list the greatest people of the last millenium, one would have to list Ghandi, Saint Francis of Assissy (for his work with animals even if he did have such a reactionary view of religion), De Vinci (more for his work as a theologian than his work as a painter which was so limited to realism) but along with these men, you must put the great woman (along with other great womyn like Gloria Steinman and Erica Jong and Charlotte Bunch and Mary Daly and Evelyn Fox Keller and I should also mention a man, the great Peter Singer for his great work - "Animal Liberation" which was equally important to the work these great womyn have done for womyn), but along with these great people you have to include Princess Diana as one of the great people of the last thousand years. The work she did for AIDS and landmines was amazing. (I should make it clear here, she did work against AIDS and landmines, not for them, because, you know, they're both very bad results of the white male domination of our society).
But sadly, you see only pictures of Lady Di in this film, because most of it takes place after she died, so it is about a real bummer of a week. And though I would like to be supportive of a womyn in power, like Elizabeth II, but sadly the womyn in power England have tending to be people who start wars (see Thatcher) and do very little for animal rights.
At least Queen Elizabeth seems to have affection for animals. She has canine companions she seems to care for, though she sadly uses leashes (which PASA [People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals] is trying to outlaw). And she has a tender sence with a buck, but sadly we do see the results of deerocide in this film, which the Queen does not prosecute, so that was really sad and that sadness is so overpowering that anyone who loves animals will probably want to skip this film. So please skip this film (especially don't pay to see this film) because you would just be supporting the Bristish government which is almost as guilty as our government in committing horrors in the Middle East.
So till later, peace, love and avoid the use of all plastics and unrecycled paper products and much bioharmony to you - Helga

2006-11-28T21:27:00.000-08:00

TOP TEN MOVIES FOR THE END OF THE YEAR 2006

Vinton here:

Besides summer, Hollywood's biggest filth spewing time is, of course, the time of our Savior's birth. So though, it is always best to avoid the theater all together, here are the worst of the worst.

THE HOLIDAY The biggest problem in this film is not the cast. Sure it has Kate Winslet, noted trollep and nude model from Titanic. And Cameron Diaz, one of three women who tried to ruin the word, 'Angel'. And Jack Black, who I suspect has used drugs at some time in his life. And Jude Law who is very English. No, the biggest problem with this film is the title. Just like those lilly livered clerks at the department stores that say "Happy Holidays" rather than "Merry Christmas". At least, for their many, many faults, the film industry used to be willing to comercialize Chirstmas by name. And then they come up with a chicken hearted title like this one.

Helga here, with my first film to avoid: CHILDREN OF MEN

The premise of this film is that people are suddenly unable to conceive, and that is presented as a bad thing. Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing? As treasurer of my local chapter of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) I believe it would be a great thing if people would fade away, and the planet would be dominated by noble beasts like the vole and flea.

Vinton: Dreamgirls
Another "Musical" celebrating rock and roll. Sure they may call it soul or R'n'B, but it's still rock 'n' roll to me. This film is a fictional story about the beginnings of the Supremes or Ronettes or some such group. Sure, there might have been something to say for the McDonald/Edie musicals. But I ask, if Hollywood has to make musicals, why not musicals featuring the great hymns of the faith.
"A Mighty Fortress: The Musical" or "Old Rugged Cross: The Musical" (Gibson could know that one out of the ballpark). And it has Eddie Murphy. Don't support potty mouths.

Helga: THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS
Will Smith goes from being a homeless man with a son to becoming a stock trader. And this is presented as a good thing. Being homeless, one is free of material constraints, free to become one with oneself and the earth. Oh, to spend every night in the elements rather than in a man made abode (but Vinton is so conventional about these things). The film presents joining the souldss corperate world as a good thing. Sadly, this is based on a true story. And Smith is introducing his own son, who portrays his son, to borgouis ideals.

Vinton:BABEL
Sadly, this is not a recreation of the Biblical tale. Brad Pitt took time away from his tatooed trollop (who, he says, he will not marry till gay marriage is legalized, and I believe he will not wash his hair till all shampoo companies stop experimented with animals)to star in this film with that plain Blanchett woman. I think the point of the film is we don't communicate enough in this world, and that is the problem with this world. I don't think that's the world's problem. The Muslims are communicating pretty clearly they want to kill us. And if there is a problem with communication, then the whole world should learn English. If it was good enough for God to use for the KJV, it should be good enough for everyone else.

Helga: NOTES FROM A SCANDEL
I believe I have seen this whole film, having seen the preview. Cate Blanchett stars in this film (and she is not plain, as Vinton implies, but beautiful, as all women are with the possible exception of Pamela Anderson and Anna Nicole Smith for reasons I won't go into here) as a teacher who has an affair with a student leading to blackmail from a jealous Judi Dench. Why must we continue to spread the myth that there are consequences to sexual behavior? Everyone should be free to love anyone or anything there heart leads them to. With the exception of Vinton, of course.

Vinton: LETTERS FROM JIMA
This story claims to tell the story of that great WWII battle from the Japanese side. Why should we have to listen to losing side? That's why we win wars, so we can say we were right and they were wrong and so shut up about it. I would think we would have learned our lesson in Vietnam. We lost, so we had to put up with a bunch of bellyaching film makers (yes, you Misters Stone and Coppola). We won, which means the John Wayne version of this war is all we will ever need.

Helga: THE LIVES OF OTHERS
This film takes place in East Germany in 1984, and presents communism in a very bad light. During the reign of communism in Eastern Europe, Hollywood quite rightly did not try very often to show any thing bad about life in those countries. After the worst scandel in world history, the Hollywood Blacklist, we should always and forever more cut communism slack. As I believe Joseph Stalin said, communism is the worst polical system, except for democracy and all the rest.

Vinton: VENUS
This film is about the enormously old Peter O'Toole taking some young girl under his wing. The title refers to another god, than the one God. 'Nuff said.

Helga: THE NATIVITY STORY

This is the Christmas story. Why force Muslims, Jews, Druids, Hindus, Wiccans and all the other religions followers that all true to be exposed to Christianity, the one religion in all the world that is judmentaland therefore bad. If it was just the story of Mary, it might be alright, but from what I've heard, it's about Jesus and Joseph as well. And let me make it clear, Vinton and I have seen none of the films we are hereby condemning. And so you should not see them either.

2006-11-21T22:23:00.000-08:00

Vinnie here:

I'm sorry it has been so long since I posted. But you see, I accidentally saw, brace yourselves, two R rated films, and I wanted to wait till they were our of theaters, so no one would say, "Well, Pastor Vinnie saw this film, so it's all right for me to see it." I know how you teenagers are. And you deacons.

I assure you, I had no idea these were R rated. The poster for "Little Miss Sunshine" had the rating covered at my local multiplex by a small sign for free popcorn on Tuesdays. I went in to the show thinking it was a return to the wholesome fun of the Shirley Temple era. Those were the days, the little moppet tap-dancing with a kindly elderly man or servant. (Not that I normally approve of dancing, but I think tap may have been the kind of dancing refered to in Scripture as it does not put men and women in compromising positions of body parts touching nor does it involve the Devil's music, rock and roll.)
But this was no Shirley Temple movie. This movie had a filthy mouthed, drug addict grand father, swearing of all kinds, and a child dancing to rock and roll music. But there was worse. There was a homosexual character. The most insidious thing about this character is the writers occasionally had this chararter say things I agreed with. He bad mouthed the positive thinking movement, which I have been bad mouthing for years. And he was funny, but not in a stereotypical frilly way. I liked this character, and that obviously can't be a good thing.
But even worse, there was a young man in the film who read Neechee and had a T-Shirt that read, "Jesus Was Wrong". If that shouldn't have earned the film an NC-17 rating, I don't know what should.
The other R rated film I saw was "The Departed". You must understand, I thought the film was a part of Tim LeHaye's "Life Behind" series. It had sex, violence, swearing, Catholicism, every known vice I tell you. The less said about it the better.
I will not be away so long this time. The gracious (though sadly Hell bound) Helga will join me soon with a list of films to avoid during the Christmas season.

And remember, a good sermon is all the fun you need, Pastor Vinton

2006-09-02T10:47:00.000-07:00

The Heart of the Game

Vinnie here:

I went to see this documentary with moderately mediocre hopes, but they were sadly crushed. This film is the true story of a girls' high school basketball program in Seattle Washington and what happens when a college professor specializing in taxes takes over as coach.
Now first of all, let it be said that there is no bigger fan of sports than me. I think our church's softball, basketball and volleyball team in the local church league are a great tool for evangelism. So I was expecting a movie about sports to provide at least a tad of wholesome diversion.
But sadly, the high school girls basketball team in this film features young "ladies" that on occassion use unwholesome language and at least two of the players in the course of the film are shown to be sexually active.
Now there is no bigger beliver in original sin and utter moral depravity than myself, but still, I ask you, how hard would it have been to find a high school basketball team on which all the players have let any unwholesome language come out of their mouths and are committed to abstinance till marriage (and perhaps a little longer than that)? Would that have been so difficult for the film makers to find?
I don't think so, but they want that PG-13 rating, so they can be in with the Hollywood crowd.
Also the team featuring in the film is the Roosevelt Roughriders. Yes, the high school is named after Theodore Roosevelt, the second worst Roosevelt ever to serve in the highest office in the land, the man who most responsible for income taxes and the IRS.
And, of course, this is set in a public school, a modern day socialist indoctrination center. If people don't have the moral fiber to home school, they should at least turn to a local Christian school (which is probably also morally questionable, but the lesser of evils.)
There is also a point in the film, when a player is banned by play from the league for making poor moral choice. The viewer is asked to choose between following the black and white rules that have been established or whether to give a second chance to a youngster who has very little going for her. Sadly, the film seems to come out against a moral mindless committment to established rules and authority.
So I cannot recommend this film or any others currently in the theater and remind you that a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Helga here:

I too had hopes for this film. After all, it features young womyn in sports and what could be more empowering than that?
Sadly, these poor young womyn on this basketball team are subjected to a MALE coach by the name of Restler. This man encourages the girls to practice the kind of aggression in sports that is typical of his gender. Instead of emphasizing virtures such of sharing, kindness and love, he focuses on competitiveness.
But the worse thing is this coach urges his players to think of themselves as a pack of wolves that will rip apart the other players or a school of sharks that will devours the opposition. As a member of PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) I must object to these sterotypes of animals as violent creatures. We all know that if people didn't oppress animals, wolves would be happy to leave on plants and sharks on seaweed. (We are working on a program in PASA to put our dog companions on an all Tofu diets. They will thank us for it in their canine way.)
There is such a focus in the film on "winning the big game", when I think as womyn, we should focus on having fun in the big game. Instead of trying to "steal" the ball, why not share the ball? Instead of "fouling", how about hugs? This could have been a film to make us proud of young womyn, instead it tries to make them into little men (with apologises to Ms. Alcott).
So instead of supporting this film that supports men's oppessive athletics, why not go out and play a game that is not about winning or losing or the excitement of "scoring"? Why not go out and play soccer?

Harmonic blessing to all, Helga

2006-08-14T03:12:00.000-07:00

WORDPLAY

Vinton:

I went in to this film with some hope it would not be complete filth and tripe. I heard it was a documentary about crossword puzzles and a national crossword puzzle tournament.
Now I like word games. I often do the word search in the Sunday School supplaments and have a couple of them myself. What could be the harm in word puzzles?
You'll have an idea once I tell you the film centered on puzzle master Will Shortz. You may not know the name, but I'll tell you this, he works for the New York Times and NPR. In the film he calls these institutions the finest news organizations going. What's wrong, Will, did they shut down Pravda?
Obviously, we know from the organizations mentioned, with have a blue state, liberal slant in this film. But it gets worse. They interview celebrities who do cross word puzzles. Such as Jon Stewart (the smarty pants 'phoney newsman' from Comedy Central, as if there were any other kind of news man), Ken Burns (PBS, need we say more), and BILL CLINTON! But we are not yet at the bottom of the barrel, they also interview a NEW YORK YANKEE!
Now I've always had a bad feeling about the NYTs, ever since I learned they didn't run comics. You have to wonder about the patriotism of an organization that refusing to be associated with NANCY or THE FAMILY CIRCUS. Now with a little research, I discovered this newspaper had been a big fan of Mr. Joseph Stalin. So I was on to their game, before they started providing helpful hints to terrorists.
But what could be the harm of little puzzles? I wondered at first, till the film tipped their hand.
You see, in 1996, the day of the presidential election, they did this with the puzzle. They had a clue (16 across) that could be either CLINTONELECTED or BOBDOLEELECTED. They worked the clues with various clues so either answer could be correct.
Do you get it now? The puzzles are obviously a way for passing information to communists and terrorists. I wouldn't be surprised if Fidel Castro had read the puzzle every day till his recent death (if you consider two years ago recent, which is my estimation.) The 'answers' they give are not the real answers, which can only be decoded by the stealth KGB or Al Quada.
If that wasn't enough to keep you from the film, let me tell you here and now (please shield the eyes of young people that may be reading) though the film is rated PG, it shows two homosexual men kiss. (Alright, you can let the kids read again.)
So don't see this film, because a good sermon is all the fun you need. But if you insist on something else, I've composed a word search to go with today's riview:

X N E W Y O R K T I M E S P
E D I T O R S Z A R E A L L
H E L L B O U N D A S A R E
V I R T U A L L Y A L L C B
H O L L Y W O O D X X X X X
A C T O R S A N D B B U U U
I I I D I R E C T O R S Q Q
V V V E S P E C I A L L Y X
W O D D Y A L L E N E A N D
M A D D O N A U N L E S S I
T H E Y R E P E N T A N D W
G I V E R E F U N D S F O R
T H E F I L T H T H E Y X X
Y U I I I H A V E M A D E Q

Helga here:
Did you know that the bottom half of the New York Times crossword puzzle is the mirror image of the top half, so if you take a blank puzzle and turn it upside down the space are in the exact same order?
I learned this in WORD PLAY, and this is one of the reasons I can't recommend this film. Such an obsesive-combusive world, the world of the crossword puzzle. In the national competition finals, three people work the same crossword puzzle. And if you put one letter the wrong box, you lose. How judgmental is that? You have to put the pre-ordained words in the right boxes in the right order. It us downright facsist I tell you.
So I can not recommend this film, but I will give you a puzzle that is all about freedom.
With love and hamonic convergence, Helga

(Fill in the blanks, unless you want to do something else altogether with them!)

1) I love _________________!

2) I feel mellow when I ______________ !

3) Men are pigs because ___________ !

4) Instead of polluting the Mother/Sister Earth, I ___________!

5) The universe will be better when I _____________ !

Have fun! (And remember, if your answers feel right, they are right!)

2006-08-09T03:54:00.000-07:00

"Triumph of the Will" (1934)

From Vinnie:

This is a reather interesting film for us to review, because it is a bit of a history lesson. This film was directed by Leni Riefenstahl (a person of German descent, I believe) as a propaganda film for none other than Adolf Hitler. It records the German Fuerer going to rallies, and has him and lots of people speaking about Germany, the Rhine and such, and has plenty of shots of men in formation and Nazi flags and eagle statues.
Now I take a back seat to no one in my abhorance of this fiend who went to battle against God' country, America (at least it was for the first half of the 20th century, till they took prayer out of the schools) and killer of God's chosen people, the Jews.
But they did manage to make a film without any foul langauge (though I am depending on the people that translated the German to the English, so maybe there was cursing and devil worshiping languag that was cleaned up) and not a hint of sexual immorality. In this, Hollywood film makers of today could learn a from this Riefenstahl fellow.
I even learned a thing or two. I had always wondered I was young and unfortunately watched television, what they meant on "Hogan's Heros" when the Germans said "Sieg Heil" (well, it means "Hail Victory").
Still, the film seems to be pretty favorable to Nazism, which although not as bad as Communism, still is very unBiblical. And my keen moral eye noted some idolatry in the film, so I cannot recommend it to any one (except maybe history students with a note from their instructor.) So remember, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

From Helga:

I watched this bit of history with Vinnie at the museum, and was struck by errie parrallels to the present day.

1) Hitler spoke to crowds - George W. Bush speaks to crowds.

2) There were Nazi flags all about during the Nazi rallies - there were American flags everywhere at the Republican conventions.

3) Hitler mentioned God in a speech - Bush mentions God in speeches.

I tell you, it was just uncanny, the list could go on and on.

On hte other hand, Hitler did say the German people should be peace lovers and in one scence, he looks very fondly at a cat. (And I've been told Hitler was a vegatarian.) It does make one wonder whether perhaps Americans were dragged into World War II on lies, just as we were in the current conflict. If FDR had been a Reblican, we could be sure.

I was dissappointed that a film directed by a woman, had so few woman. You can be sure a woman Fureur would never take anyone to war.

I must now get to a PASA meeting, but till later, bioharmony to all! Helga

2006-08-02T04:51:00.000-07:00

Scoop

Vinton writes:

If recent days have taught us anything, it is that you can not judge a film by its maker. One of the only films to come out of Hollywood that I could even come close to recommending was "The Passion of the Christ". (I couldn't recommend others see it, because it was rated 'R', and if anyone else saw one going into an 'R' rated movie, it might cause them to stumble. After, how would those outside the theater know you were seeing a film rated 'R' for violence, rather than for foul language or nakedness.) And yet, as we have heard in the news, the maker of that nearly fine film, does, in fact, drink alcohol. Somehow we must seperate the film maker from the film.
So I went in the film, "Scoop" knowing the film maker, Woody Allen is a well known athiest, degenerate and New Yorker, but I put those things aside to judge the film as a film.
And the film, standing alone, apart from its perverted creator, I cannot recommend. Sure it does have some interesting things about a couple of suspect professions.
Mr. Allen plays a magician who goes by the name, The Great Spledini. In the name of magic, show buisness magic, he accidently conjurers up the spirit of a dead reporter who happens to divulge to a member of the audience a clue to a murder.
At least someone in the show buisness industry is finally honest about the link between "magic shows" and the occult. I've been suspecious of this for years.
Sure, I do myself the occasional illusion in a children's sermon. But before I do the trick, I clearly label it as such and not magic. And after I perform the illusion with a suitable Biblical or spiritual analogy, I explaing the illusion ("See the hidden pocket in my sleeve", "See how the Bible coloring book has uneven edges to the pages" "See how the elephant is really your Sunday School teacher, Mrs. Milia")
The film not only shows the clear link between magic shows and the occult, but also the link between Tarot Cards and Murder (the serial killer always leaves a Tarot Card at the murder scene.) I have always been suspecious of such a cause and effect. (I also suspect palm reading leads to cannabalism and the horoscope will make you blind and weegee boards lead to thoughts of suicide and bad posture.)
The other dark profession examined in the film is journalism. Now this is not the wholesome kind of reporting I did at seminary when I scribed for "The End Times Times". There we interviewed and investigated our stories. (I'm still proud of my expose on Darwinism in the kindergarten class.)
But that isn't what the student reporter played by Scarlett (fitting name) Johannson does in the film. No, she seems to think the way to investigate a person is to lie about one's idenity and then have sexual intercourse with them (in this case that Wolverine fellow from those comic book films.) Now, I'm sure this is standard reporting procedure at The New York Times, but I think even some reporters at CNN would find this behavior questionable.
And, of course, the film has much in the way of double Ontarios (French for dirty jokes), but fortunately, I did not get them. If I did have any inclination to foul humor, I would simply remove the 'S' from the title of this film, but I am above such things.
So let me urge you to skip this, and all films, because a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Helga:

Sadly, I must once again agree with Vinnie that you should not see this film.
The young womyn character in the film, played by Scarlett Johannson, goes to England to visit with friends in the upperclass and falls for the Hugh Jackman character who plays a Lord or some such thing, but the film never directly critizes the class system as such.
I believe in the equality of all human beings (and that equality goes out also to all species, whether human or chimpanzee, moose or bananna slug). I do not believe there should be 'classes' on planes - first class, buisness class, tourist class and such - all people are equal. (I also don't think anyone should be destroying our planet by flying a plane either, but that is another subject.)
I believe any judgements and distictions made by class are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! (Unless these distictions are made in the Hindu caste system, because we can not judge other cultures, especially when the culture, such as anything related to Eastern Spirituality is clearly superior to our own.)
And it goes without saying the film is sexist, as are all Hollywood films. Many times in the film, the subject of Ms. Johannson's glasses are raised, as to whether they make her more or less attractive. I thought perhaps this might be a telling plot point in the mystery, but no, the 'focus' is just lookism. Does anyone in the film raise the point whether Mr. Allen would look better or worse without glasses? I think not.
At least there was no talk about a romantic or sexual relationship between Mr. Allen and Ms. Johannson. As my regular readers know, I do not believe there should be any obstacles love, whether those obstables be age or race or gender, but when it comes to Mr. Allen and younger womyn, let me just say... how should I put it? Alright - "EWWWWWW!YUCK!PETU-EEE!"
So, do not burn fossil fuels to venture to see this film. Instead of this comedy, enjoy the comedy found in your own soul. Instead of this mystery, enjoy the mystery your own heart. Instead of theater popcorn, enjoy the popcorn of your own karma.
Best of our Mother Earth to you all, Helga

2006-07-25T03:52:00.000-07:00

MONSTER HOUSE

Vinnie here, I know it has been awhile (well, not so long for those who subscribe to the podcasts of my sermons, you fortunate ones know who you are), but Helga and I have been fortunate enough to avoid many of the recent Hollywood abominations (since they're started locking the back door again at the Elm Street Theater.)
But unfortunately, believe it or not, parents of children were considering seeing a film by the name of MONSTER HOUSE, so I told them I would preview it for them.
Now one would think that the name of the film itself would discourage parents from taking young ones, as it accurately indicate involvement in scary creatures, the occult and spirtualism. Of course, many parents didn't take the hint from the titles, THE CORPSE BRIDE or THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS.
If you are one of those parents with problems of discrimination, let me give you a clue: the words Massacre or Dead in a title (as in TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE or DAWN OF THE DEATH) indicate we are not dealing with Sunday School material, and Monster doesn't either.
Now I wish the indoctination into the supernatural (which will likely lead to the tarot cards then palm reading straight to Satanic worship and human sacrifice) was the only problem with this film, but it isn't.
There is also a flagrant disrepect of property rights. Why is it that an old man who tells kids to stay off his lawn always an object of ridicule in popular culture these days, in my book, he is a hero.
The founding fathers of America were quite concerned with property rights, and the minute men did not bleed and die so young squirts could ride their bikes and trikes all over private lawns, let alone teens leaving their beer bottles.
So I must say that little ones may be frightened by this film, but any right thinking American who was horrified by the Supreme Courts recent Kelo/New London decision with be even more scared.
So again I say, skip this film, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Helga here,
I would have to agree with Vinnie that film is too frightening for young ones. Why do they make horror films for wee ones? Surely, they could make films for pre-adults with more positive things, such as ponies and rainbows and lessons on proper composting.
But when I found out that the film was about a wooden house that seeks to avenge, I thought it might have some good things to say. Certainly we all can agree that trees are sentenent creatures that reason and feel pain just like you and me. And why wouldn't the wood from those trees seek to teach a painful lesson to the carpenters, contractors and especially lumberjacks that ended their peaceful life in the forest. Sadly, the film does not take that direction.
Also, the film again portrays Halloween as a holiday just about gathering candy (to rot teeth and line the pockets of industrial "food" mercendisers) rather than as a celebration of our Druid heritage.
So I must agree with Vinnie that you must skip this film, even if you just want to avoid the heat in the air conditioning. You must face the heat and let it remind you to fight global warming as you fight sexism, speciesism and rightwing talk radio. Till later, harmonically balanced and yours, Helga

2006-06-30T02:59:00.000-07:00

Vinnie with a quick note.
I saw, regretfully, SUPERMAN RETURNS, because it was free. It was on Helga's list of films to avoid this summer and she did. But some members of my congregation convinced me the film could be used as an evangelistic tool. They said, "The film talks about the world needing a Savior, and the only Son is sent to the world to save it, etc."
They almost convinced me they had a point, till I saw the film. I don't want to give anything away if you are so foolish and hellbent (literally) to see this film, but...
[SPOILER] (as the fan boys do), this film is nothing but a comic version of THE DEVINCI CODE. If you've seen it, you know what I mean, if you haven't then you may well be taking my sound advise, a sermon is the only fun you'll ever need. Vinnie

2006-06-28T04:20:00.000-07:00

THE LAKE HOUSE

Vinnie writes:

Leviticus 13:34: "On the seventh day the priest shall examine the scale; and indeed if the scale has not spread over the skin and does not appear deeper than the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him clean..."

You must excuse me, I do not plan to expand upon this fascinating portion of Scripture today, but I would prefer that Helga didn't read this review, and nothing makes her eyes glaze over like the Pentateuch.

For today I am writing about an actress that, to be frank, has led me on more than one occasion to have untoward thoughts. I must confess this splinter in my eye, if I hope to get those 2x4s out of your my friends. So yes, I admit I have had to repent for thoughts about this saucy vixion, this embodiment of all of the tempting flesh that the Babylon that is Hollywood had to offer. I have no doubt you have already guessed I am talking about Sandra Bullock.

I'm sure you remember when she first led America astray, on the television screen in the short lived series, "Working Girl". (I did not see the big screen version of "Working Girl", fortunately, because it was rated R and I was holding to better standards at the time, resisting Helga situational ethics, I later learned it was so rated for Melanie Griffith nakedness. There but for the grace...)

But I was not truely intoxicated by Ms. Bullock's intoxicating charms, in the films SPEED and DEMOLITION MAN. In the former she played a woman who lost her driver's license and yet drove the bus nonetheless. In the later she played a futuristic police officer who played by her own rules living on the edge (to the point of attempting vulgar expressions). Something about that combination of beauty with recklessness appeals to my sinful nature, I admit shamefully.

Now as to her current film, THE LAKEHOUSE. Do not be decieved by the MMPA lax rating of PG. In the film, Ms. Bullock both appears in a low cut blouse and at one time stands in front of a window in her night gown, and I tell you for about two seconds as the light pours through, little is left to the imagination. For this alone, I would urge ever member of the righteous male population to avoid this film in order to remain pure in heart and mind.

But there are also serious theological problems with the film's plot. It is a time-travel tale. Now in theory, it is possible to do a Calvinistically correct time-travel story. Sadly, that is not the case here.

Ms. Bulloch and Mr. Keanu Reeves share a lake house, but live two years apart in time, communicating through some sort of magical mail box. Now even though they live in different times, I was still troubled by their sharing the same abode in an unmarried state. (That is why, when single, I tried only to live in apartments that had been previously occupied by males, so I would not be tempted by any female enticing ordors or such that may have been inaventently left behind.)

As I said before, in theory, a film about time-travel may be theoloically sound if it affirms predestination, the impossibility of mortals making a difference in the history as it was ordained in every detail. (For there many moral faults, THE TEMINATOR, 12 MONKEYS and TIME RIDER got this right, and even Mr. Reeves' own BILL AND TED'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE came closer.) But this film advocates the possibility in a change in the ordained path of time. For everything has ordained to be as it is to be. Like this sentence. And this one. And this one two. Even with the "two" instead of the "too". But THE LAKEHOUSE has love changing destiny and such rot, and there is the drinking and enjoyment of alcohol in this film, so it is obviously a work of the devil, that I must condemn.

So again I must say, avoid this film, because a good sermon (such as one about Jezebel) is all the fun you need.

Helga writes:

So Vinnie still thinks that old Levitcus ploy will throw me off... hasn't worked for years. Fortunately, I know how to keep Vinnie from reading what I write. I need to do nothing. If something has been written in a century that begins with 2 and has four numerals, he won't read it.
So I am free to express my carnel passion for that dreamy man of men, Keanu Reeves.
Though I could not fully with moral conviction recommend any of his films, there is something about the way this great thespian says "Whoa" that has always warmed my soul.
When he said "Whoa" in BILL AND TED'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE, he was saying "Whoa" to our current capalitalistic, militeristic superstructure, let's have a culture based on peace, partying and rock and roll instead.
When he said "Whoa" THE MATRIX, he was saying "Whoa" to a materialistic culture that makes human beings into little more than batteries.
When he said "Whoa" in FEELING MINNESOTA, JOHNNY MNEMONIC, and CHAIN REACTION, he was "Whoa" to the very crappy films he was appearing in.
But sadly, Keanu does not once say "Whoa" in this film. He plays an architect and contractor who makes houses out of wood! Why couldn't he have said "Whoa" to the destruction of the homes of our woodland friends to make our homes. The character admires the tall monstrosities of sky scrapers of Chicago. Why can't we all live in hogans?
He also portrays an "owner" of a canine equal, Jack. We at PASA frown on such things. (Sandra "owns" the dog too, who seems to be a time traveler, and I was not only offended by this all, it also confused me greatly.)
And they use up so much paper writing back and forth to each other, how many trees lost their lives? Why couldn't she just write, I'm going to be at the Green Day concert June 7th, be there or be square.

So sadly, I can not recommend this film, but I can recommend recycling, yoga, and celebrating your inner woman, even if you are a man.

Sincerely, Helga

2006-06-11T20:17:00.000-07:00

Vinton here, but sadly the bulk of this post is not by me or my lovely wife Helga. But since Dean Anderson has agreed to post our work, so we don't have to personally go on the GRID, we have no choice but allow him to post this short story.

SPECIAL EDITION by Dean Anderson

Elisha stared at Bogart's lips. He was waiting for the words, "Play it again, Sam."
That was Elisha's cue; he shouted, "Rick didn't use to say that! He used to just say, 'Play it'! They changed it!"
People shushed him. One woman yelled, "Shut up!" quite shrilly. Someone threw popcorn.
That was okay. He was used to it. There was the time in San Francisco he was arrested for smoking in the theater. He still remembered every time Rick and Ilsa lit up, so he brought a pack of Nico-frees to a Saturday night screening. He smoked when they used to.
The cops pulled him out of his seat about the same time Louie closed down Rick's Cafe Americain.
In Chicago, his life had been threatened. Now he usually felt he was getting off easily anything less.
He first saw the film on videocassette. When he talked about "videos", kids scratched their heads and called him a crazy old man. Sixty wasn't old his book, but they called crazy no matter what he talked about. Maybe it was the trench coat and fedora he wore.
The audiences always shouted him down, hit him, kicked him, spat on him. Well, not always. There was that one time in New Orleans.
That time, when the patriots at Rick's countered the Nazis' singing with "God Bless America", Elisha countered with a boisterous, loud, not-quite-in-key version of "Marseilles". And it seemed every single person in that packed house on Bourbon Street sang along.
Perhaps it was that one glorious moment that kept him traveling from city to city as Casablanca celebrated its hundredth anniversary with a special edition released to theaters. (He remembered his parents outrage at "Director's Special Editions", but those weren't nearly outrageous as the "Government Special Editions".)
Something kept him going, in spite of the abuse from audiences. Nothing any audience member, usher, manager or cop would ever do could hurt him as much as the pain he felt when he saw Bogart and Bergman board that plane.

Fin

Vinton here again. This story seemed to be negative toward the technology that allows the censorship of films. I those machines coming out of Utah that edit out foul language and nudity out of films are wonderful things, even if it is Mormons that produce them. Films are bad enough, but when they have material that makes people watch them, they're even worse.
Helga here. Unlike my husband, I vehemently oppose censorship. Unless it is censoring racism, sexism, or homophobic material. Or Rebulicanism. Then there is a place for censoring because it protects people's feeling which is really important. Til the universer brings us together again, with regards, Helga

2006-06-04T21:48:00.000-07:00

An Inconvient Truth

Helga here. I was so excited that as a member of the executive committee of my local chapter of AKEA (Advocating Killing Every Automobile)I received tickets to see Al Gore's new film, An Inconvient Truth!
There are so many things about this film I loved, but sadly, not enough to recommend it. Let's start with the good.
As a huge enviormentalist, I loved how the Vice President used statistics and graphs and all kinds of other science to show how all the bad things happening in the world (animal extinctions, disease, natural disasters, etc.) are the fault of polluting people (particularly white, male Americans, usually Rebulicans). If anyone doubts the science is conclusive let me give just one example from the film: there was a graph of the history of global temperatures on a wall, and throughout history tempratures were about Al Gore's height. But scientists predict that temperatures will get so high, that the Vice President will need a cherry picker to follow the graph! You can't argue with evidence like that!
And I loved how they showed that the Vice President loves looking at pretty nature scences, because I do too!
It was also very cool how he showed all the clips of Rebulicans lying and defending pollution. (Has anyone else noticed the connection between George W. and Global Warming? Both G.W. Coincidence? I think not.) The Rebulicans, of course, single handedly prevented the United States from signing the Coyote Treaty which would have stopped pollution around the world. (The Austrailians also did not sign the treaty, because the white Europeans there run the environmental policies instead of the Aborigines who would have done right by Our Mother/Sister Earth.) Anyway, since the United States won't stop polluting, the rest of the world can't stop polluting. Clearly, all our fault.
And (don't tell Vinton), I just enjoyed watching the VP. I guess I just didn't notice when he was in the company of that hunk, Bill, how dreamy Al is!
But sadly, I cannot recommend this film.
Firstly, because so much of the film shows the Vice President traveling from city to city, state to state, country to country, to give his power point presentation. When I thought of all the CO2 those cars and jets and helicopters were emitting, killing our dear planet! Why can't he, instead of going from place to place, just put his presentation on the Internet? Isn't that why he invented it? And all those people who drive in cars to the theater, oh the horror! (I biked to the theater, sadly, Vinton drove his '65 Mecury Comet.)
Now I know the Vice President would argue that the travel's damage is outweighed by the good he does, and the trees he plants. But I'm just afraid some will argue that in the same way, the United States' pollution is outweighed by the good it does (feeding the planet, defending the weak, blah, blah, blah, lie, lie, lie). I just think it would be better is Al had stayed home with Tipper and did everything through a web cam.
Another problem. There is very little in the way of action steps presented in the film. When the Vice President talked about polar bears drowning due to lack of ice, I (as secretary and treasurer of my local chapter of PASA [People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals]) asked myself, "What can I do for my Polar sisters and brothers? The film gave no anwsers, but I came up with a couple of my own. At the next PASA meeting I am going to suggest a fundraiser to buy those poor bears some floaties or rubber rafts. Though they may pop such things with their claws. Maybe we should concentrate on getting the poor dears more ice. Perhaps we could buy some old ice machines from Motel 6s and Super 8s and ship them to the great white north.
While in China, a young woman asked the Vice President, "What can we do?" And what did he say? Did he say, "Sabotage industrial polluters?" or "Only eat what you grow in your own garden?" No. He said, "We must start by distinguishing truth from fiction." Now we all know those distictions. What Republicans and Western Corporate Executives say are lies, and what the leaders of China and Environmental leaders say is true. We have that, let's move along.
At the end of the film, we are given tips in the credits about what we can do. "Drive a car with lower gas milage." NO ONE SHOULD BE DRIVING ANY MORE! THIS IS LIFE OR DEATH! "Use a light bulb with lower wattage. Use public transportation." Etc. Many of us have been doing all of these things since the Carter administration. I was expecting it to tell us to put on a frigging sweater when it's cold! (Actually, there was one new suggestion I put into practice. It suggested children ask their parents about what kind of world they will leave them. When I got home, I called my mother, and so perhaps she'll lower the thermostat at Shady Pines Convalescent.)
We need to take real action if things are as serious as the Vice President was telling us for an hour and a half (and it is much, much more serious than he had let on.) And so I wondered, why does the film bring us to the bring of revolution, and then pull back? Of course, I thought. The film is put out by Paramount Studios. Think Paramount, think Gulf-Western, think Big Oil.
They're letting us think they're doing something, but they're in on the plot to destroy the planet as thick as the Bush Dynasty.
So I say, don't see this movie. Just disconnect some stranger's carburetor.

Wishing peace and harmony, Helga Goodearth

Vinton here - I suppose many of my faithful readers expect me to condemn An Inconvient Truth as a steaming load of tree hugging, leftist bovine excretment. And I certainly will in due time. But I must in all honesty admit the film has some positive features. It is faily free of such Hollywierd mainstays as foul language, sex and violence.
And far be it from me to say there isn't a place for apocalytic doomsaying that may bring some to repentance. It did warm the cockles as Al Gore refered to imminent disasters as a wander through the pages of Revelation.
But as tempting as it may be to use this fear mongering as end times sermon illustrations, a perusal of my sermons through the last few decades shows the foolishness of such an endeavor. In the 60s and 70s I used Paul Erlich's predictions about the destructive effects of overpopulation, and he proved about as reliable as Hal Lindsey. Magazine covers in those days predicted a new coming ice age. (Which I'm sorry to say reminds me of time I wasted watching an episode of that foolish show, "The Twilight Zone" in which the Earth is heating up as it approaches the sun, till we find it was just a dream and we find out the earth is freezing since it is getting further from the sun.) I even used in a sermon Ted Dansen's prediction from the 90's that the oceans would be dead in ten years. As people in my congregation, "Fool me once..."
Speaking of sermon illustrations, Al Gore did tempt me to be covetous. I was an only child, and Helga and I have not been blessed with offspring. So I was sorely tempted to envy Gore's use of his child's traffic accident and his sister's death to make his points. But then I count my blessing that I do have my dear wife Helga, who provides illustration after illustration of foolishness, debauchery and all kinds of godlessness.
Now about the science in the film, it begins in a gutter here as it refers again and again to the hundreds of thousands, yeah, millions of years of the earth's climatic history, when any respectable Biblical scolar will tell you this planet is only 5000 plus years old.
There were scientific points that eluded me. Al Gore was talking about that athiest Carl Sagan (that is the late Carl Sagan, athiest no more) agreed with him that man can have an impact on planet earth because the atmosphere is so thin. He made it sound like this thinness is a bad thing. But then he goes on to say that pollution is making the atmosphere thicker, which you would think would be good, but he said it was bad, and my head was spinning.
Another scientific point that I found baffling was he seems to go on and on about the speed of climate change in our day is unprecedented. That the activity of man is the only explanation for today's rapid climate change. But then he talks about how something or rather happening to the Great Lakes in North America thousands of years ago led to an ice age coming over Europe in a ten year span. That seems quick to me.
Now there was one point of science that made real sense to me. He talked about how these birds usually hatched at the same time these caterpillars hatched, so the birds could eat the bugs and that was how nature keeps the birds healthy. Because of people pollution, they weren't hatching at the same time and these birds were going to die off. Because nature (i.e. God) would never let anything bad happen to an animal species. Now this makes sense to me. God would never let one of His marvelous species just die off, that always would have to be man's fault. Which just shows that dinosaurs must have been around the same time as people, and people must have got rid of 'em. Probably hunted those thunder lizards like we later hunted the passenger pigeon.
But in the end, I cannot abide the politics of the film. Al Gore keeps whining about the ballot difficulties in Florida. Say what you will about Richard Milhouse Nixon, but you didn't find him anywhere in public in 1966 complain about all the corpses that voted for Kennedy in Chicago.
At one point in the film Al Gore talks about how he had hoped democracy would address the problems of the enviornment, but politicians just deal with the problems of the moment and it was so frusterating, that I was sure he would come right out then and there for Bolshevism.
Though Al Gore doesn't address this too specifically in the film, I keep hearing him in interviews talk about how we are approaching some kind of climatic tipping point in the next ten years and if we don't change our ways, the world is coming to an end.
Well, I've got news for the former Vice President, we've already passed the moral tipping point and so the world is already coming to an end. (Scholars differ on whether the tipping point was Madonna's "Immaculate Collection" or the Janet Jackson Super Bowl, but it definely has been passed.)
And if thinks I'm giving up my vintage Comet just because it gets 12 miles a gallon so the former VP can think he's saving the planet, he's got another thing coming.
This is usually where I say, "Skip this movie, because a good sermon is all the fun you'll ever need." But this film was a sermon. But not a Biblically based one. Now that's the kind of fun you need.

The Rev. Vinton

2006-05-30T01:46:00.000-07:00

Tarzan: from the archives

Vinnie here. Please forgive our tardiness in posting. But fortunately, Helga and I have been able to abstain from Hollywood's lastest feeble blasphemous offerings. But if you have missed my wisdom and Helga's.. um.. perspective, here is another review from our archives circa 1999.

Vinton:

Many of the non-elect may think of Disney's new animated film, Tarzan, as harmless children's fun. They are not thinking through the complex moral delimas that confront one, as to even to view the film.

For instance, should I do my duty as a moral vanguard who views, then denouces Hollywood's lastest drudge and drivel when the Baptists have urged a boycott of Disney products? It goes without saying that Southern Baptists tend to have a lefty slant on things, and I fear buying a ticket may be viewed as support for the Homosexual Agenda and may lead some observers to think I am more liberal than a Southern Baptists! Meganota (for the non-Greek students, "May it never be!")

(I found a simple resolution to this situation, so as not to let down any of my dear, faithful readers. I purchased a ticket to another children's animated film, something titled, South Park, and then went to the theater showing Tarzan. I hope to present my thesis on the morality of theater switching at a later date.)

Unfortunately, my wife, Helga, was unable to attend the film with me, as she was attending a meeting a protest of fish sticks with PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) at a local grocery store. Even more unfortunately, many children were in attendance (what are those so-called parents thinking?) This film featuring a scantly clad man living with animals who eventually "shacks up" (to use the vulgar terms of the day) with a woman apparently without a proper church ceremony. I know what you're thinking, "That sounds more like the plot of an early 80's soft core porn flick featuring Bo Derek" and yet the ratings board had the gall to slap a so-called General Audience rating on this film.

The shocking communal, Bohemian lifestyle presented in the film is bad enough, but I have a sneaking suspecion the whole project is meant to indoctrinate young minds into Darwinism. And as for all the scences of a man and woman swinging on a vine, well you don't have to subscribe to all of Dr. Sigmund Fraud's theories to wonder about the whole enterprise.

So I urge you to skip this film (and all other films) because a good sermon is all the fun you need.

I was unable to attend this film with Vinton (the co-habitating yang to my yin) but I knew he condemned it. Some of the other members of PASA thought it would be a lark (such a lovely bird!) to see the Tarzan film. Naturally, I had my qualms about seeing a Disney film (Disney being a part of the cartel along with Ford and Microsoft that runs the US Military Industrial Complex), but little did I suspect the depths of racism, sexism and speciesism to which this film would sink.

First, the racism. Many Tarzan films of the past have presented Native Africans as inferior to European Whites. This film does not even show an Native African People, obviously because if they had, they were afraid they would be condemned for their presentation of them. So, we can safely assume, we can condemn the people of Disney for the way they would have presented Native Africans, if they had.

Next, the sexism. Jane meets Tarzan, as she is pursued my Orangutans, he, of course, rescues her. The obvious message is that men can handle like in the "jungle" (read "business world") and women can not.

Finally, the speciesism. After a long discussion over many carrot/soy milk lattes, the otherr members of PASA finally agreed with me about the prejudice inherent in making Tarzan, "Lord of the Apes". All would readily admit the world would be a better place if instead of giving another man the feudal or theological title of "Lord", we would instead make the peace loving Gorilla, Koko, President of the United States. (I doubt she even has signs for "Let's bomb Serbia".)

So I urge you not to see this picture. And until Hollywood starts to pay animal actors union scale, you can keep your stinking aisle seat.

Yours with LOve, Peace and Bioharmony, Helga

2006-05-17T20:26:00.000-07:00

From the archives: The Poseidon Adventure
Vinnie here. Apparently, in a rare show of good sense, most of the American public joined me in keeping Hollywood's dirty hands off our wallets as Poseidon premiered. (Helga here: they've fixed the lock on the back door at the Strand Theater downtown.) But I am sure many are looking for my counsel on this issue. Although I can't report on this release, I can report on the original, The Poseidon Adventure.

At the time of that film's release, Helga and I were not writing film critism. But it just so happens that I did write about this film, as I discovered while going through my sermon notes.

You see, I had a wild streak when I was young, and I often preached topically rather than expositionally. (We all have our dark secrets.) And the following is excerpted from a sermon of that time:

"Brothers and Sisters, I have a confession at this time. Last night, I attended a motion picture show. Now I am at a point of spiritual maturity in my life, that I can risk such moral contamination, a point that most of you have not achieved. I was there because of wayward bride, Helga. I just didn't feel right about her being alone at night, so when she insisted she wanted to see this new disaster picture, The Poseidon Adventure, I felt compelled to go along.

"Now most of the picture is as vile as any other piece of Hollywood tripe, but it was not wholly without artistic merit. Leslie Nielson, a stalwart actor, plays the captain of a large ocean liner. That man always brings a touch of gravitas to his roles, and when he is on the screen, you know serious films are involved. Roddy McDowell has a small role, but he brings his English charms. Let me just say, that if I was a woman, I would find that fellow irresistable. (I'm sure he has to beat the women off with a stick.) That is why you young ladies should not see this film. You young men should not see this film because of Carol Lynley in hot pants.

"But the worst thing about the film, what should keep anyone from seeing this film again, is the secular humanistic perspective of the fighting young priest played by Gene Hackman. He urges relying on one's self rather than God, a sure method for avoiding eternal air conditioning.

"But through all the dreck, I was able to find one pearl of spiritual wisdom, that I will share with you this morning. For the Poseidon is a ship that is turned upside down by a giant wave. And the only way of escape, is to go up, which to all appearance is down.

"Isn't the world a lot like this? Everything the world tells you is up, is really down, what is right is wrong, what is vanilla is really chocolate. But you don't need to see the film to learn this, because I'm telling you here myself. Because a good sermon is all the fun you need."

Helga here. I also found a way to share with you my feelings on this film. I looked in my old diary my opinion of this film at that time:

"Dear Diary,
Groovy to be with you, sis. So, like, Vinnie and I went to see the lastest piece of propaganda put out by the man to oppress the people, and it was, of course, a total bummer, except there for some cute outfits and a dreamy new song.

It was, like, about this big boat run by these big oil consuming engines (my dream is that all boats may someday be run by solar power. Or by wind power, is that possible?)

"But then, like, the boat is turned upside down by,like, a big wave (which I am sure Mother Nature had a good reason for sending), so, like, the people in the ship have to move, like, from the bottom of the boat to the top of the boat which was really from the top of the boat to the bottom of the boat, it was so trippy.

"So, like, I was rooting for Pamela Sue Martin because she had just an adorable outfit. And Gene Hackman and Arthur O'Connell were priests in the oppressive Catholic church, but they seemed nice, so I didn't really want them to die (but that didn't mean they were safe, though I don't want to spoil the film for you, Diary [Tee-Hee]).

"But then they had this pig played by Ernest Borgnine as one of the survivors. Like, how am I supposed to root for the fuzz? And his wife, played by Stella Stevens, plays a former prostitute. I mean, I'm fine with a woman doing whatever she wants with her own body, but YUCK! Any way, she ends up just wearing a man's shirt for a lot of the film, and there are a lot of camera shots of her from below, enough to make me think that perhaps the makers of the film were, in fact, treating her as a sex object!

"But I did come out with one hero in the film, Shelly Winters! Though not fitting society's ideal of beauty or size, she still proves to be the film's savior. She's one of the only people over 30 I would ever trust.

"Finally, the best thing about the film. Because, you know, 'There has got to be a morning after, If we can hold on thru the night, We have a chance to find the sunshine, Let's keep on looking for the light'. That is so GROOVY! So DEEP! So TRUE!
I don't make predictions very often, but I think this song will win an Academy Award. And a Grammy. And very probably, the Nobel. I look forward to hearing it on the radio again, and again and again."

I was perhaps a little too open at the time, too positive and submissive to corporate America's media beast. But kids will be kids. Till then, good vibrations to all. Helga

2006-05-06T17:52:00.000-07:00

Mission Impossible III: Two Views

Vinnie:

My wife, Helga, has been urging me to look at things more positively. Now I don't normally go in for that Norman Vincent Peale gibberish, but my doctor has said a more positive outlook may lower my blood pressure, so I will make an attempt to find something positive in the new Hollywood schlockbuster, Mission Impossible III.
Now first of all, let me alleviate any concerns of those in my congregation who think their offering plate donations went to line the coffers of Paramount Studios. It just so happens that Helga and I have a favorite picnic spot that is next to the local drive-in theater. With one thing and another, we weren't able to get to our picnic till evening when the show was about to begin. And we happened to bring along a radio. We couldn't get a clear signal on either my Gospel station or Helga's Air America. The only signal that came in was the movie soundtrack.
There are some that will avoid this film solely on the basis of gossip they have heard about the film's star Tom Cruise. People seem to be disturbed about Mr. Cruise's relationship with Katie Holmes which is reasonable. She was found with child before they were in a matramonial state, but I expect that from the morally absentee Hollywood crowd. But Cruise's character, Ethan Hunt, is just as morally bankrupt as the actor. Hunt lives with his fiancee before their marriage.
People also seem bothered by Tom Cruise's lifesytle choice, apparently he is some kind of scientist. I myself have nothing against scientists per se. Mr. Newton believed in God, and yet also invented gravity, which has proved very useful. But if Mr. Cruise is one of these scientists advocating evolution, then I can understand why people don't like him. There is an interesting parallel again, as Hunt also seems to be some kind of scientist-inventor with a new gadget for every occasion.
But onto reviewing the film proper. It is your usual Hollywood stew of sex and violence. Woman driving sleek cars and wearing skimpy little things and hanky-panky in hospital supply closets and machine guns firing left and right and fine machinery blowing up. These are things one has come to expect from Hollywood, and is reason enough to skip this film
The plot is something about the search for a weapons system known as the "rabbit's foot". Now they are never too specific about what this weapon does, but the name refers to a luck charm, so obviously it has something to do with the occult. Another reason to avoid this film.
But if you need one more reason to avoid the film, you should know that the villian of the piece is played by Seymore Phillip Hoffman, who just this year received an academy award for playing a well-known homosexual author. Do you want to support a film that has an actor that shared a platform (literally and metaphorically) with the makers of Brokeback Mountain?
But I said I would find one good thing to say about the film, and I did find something. The main character, Ethan Hunt, is a covert spy, but he says he works for the Department of Transportation. This is the one thing in the film that really makes sense.
Have you every wondered why there seems to be so many road workers, but so little road work gets done? That the Department of Transportation is really a front for a spy agency makes as much sense as anything coming out of Hollywood.
So skip this film, and remember, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Helga:

As Vinnie said, we are making an effort to make positive affirmations, so I will make a positive affirmation about viewing Mission Impossible III: the stars in the sky above the screen were lovely and there was a wonderful breeze and I enjoyed the soft grass beneath my skin.
The movie itself was severely challanged ethically. But I did find myself torn morally about certain things.
For instance, I abhor violence in all its forms. I especially abhor gun violence. But I also want to see woman portrayed as strong and able to take care of themselves. So, you can see, I am torn when I there are scenes in the film of women capably using weapons and blowing stuff up.
Which leads me to another moral tension. There are a number of sports cars, helicopters and trucks in the film that of course pollute our Mother Earth. And I would not be truthful if I didn't admit I enjoyed seeing these vehicles crashed, demolished and obliterated.
There is one moral evil in the film that I certainly my speak out against. There is a machine in the film that manufacters masks that can make any person look like any one they wish. Can there be any doubt that certain Beverly Hills plastic surgeons are working on such machines right now? Soon these machines will be used to make every woman look like Carma Electra and every man look like Tom Cruise. And when that happens, I'm going to miss Vinnie's ugly puss.
Alright, I will say one good thing about this film which is itself a source of karmatic dissonance. It does show the need for more difibullators. At crucial times in this film, life and death depends on the presense of a difibullator.
It is no mere coincidence that this film comes out just as PASA (People Affirming the Superiority of Animals) is conducting a fund raising drive to buy solar powered difibullators for animals. I hate to think of all the times during our rescue raids, in an attempt to save sister and brother lab rats and mice from research labs, the poor beings have suffering cardiac failure due to the excitement.
If only we could shave those little furry chests and apply the paddles, bringing forth their life forces. You can do your part. Give generously to the Rodent Heart Fund through your local chapter of PASA.
So till the Universe brings us together again - Smell the Flowers, not the Films.

2006-04-28T18:29:00.000-07:00

A Proposal for Posting the Ten Commandments in Movie Theaters

Vinton here, with an important public policy proposal.

We all have shared outrage at the movement of the courts banning the posting of the Ten Commandment on public lands, such as schools, parks and sewage treatment plants --everywhere except courthouses. It is therefore all the more important that the Ten Commandments be posted on private property, and what better place than those dens of iniquity, the local movie theater?

My hope is that such postings will eventually lead to a change in the content of the film. Let us consider how this proposal may improve the motion picture industry.

(And remember, these are Commandments interpreted by an ordained minister. Moses did not bring down the 10 Suggestions. That would be more like the morally relativistic tripe my lovely wife, Helga, will be offering following my post.)

1) "You shall have no other Gods Before Me"

There are a great many folks in the motion picture industry who have a mighty high opinion of themselves, seeing themselves as godlike. I'm not just talking about studio chiefs, agency execs and movie stars, but even local movie theater managers. (Such as the local tin horn dictator who still will not allow me into his theater, years after a little incident involving Shakespeare in Love. I was kicked out of the theater when I simply encouraged people to cover their eyes so as not to observe Gwyneth Paltrow's nakedness. I'm sure I was just expressing the outrage the Bard himself would have expressed if he knew sexuality was being injected into his work. I never saw the words "tart" or "tramp" when looking in my Bartlett's for Shakespeare quotes for use in a sermon.)

2) "You Shall Not Make for Yourself an Idol"

This is definitely a commandment for the film industry (let alone the TV industry with their Randys, Paulas, and Simons). They are always intoducing new "Stars" that we are to bow down to. This was not a problem in the beginning days of the film industry. Until the '20s, there were usually not even cast lists in the credits. Now we have allowed actors and actresses become idols. As deplorable as those films made from video games are, at least they are peopled with people you have not heard of and will probably never hear from again. If we must have "stars", they should be people no one would worship. Rob Schnieder comes quickly to mind.

3) "You Shall Not Take the Name of the Lord in Vain"

Hear that, scriptwriters with your potty-mouthed pens!

4) "Remember the Sabbath and Keep it Holy"

Now I know, sadly, that we are no longer a Christian nation, and there is little hope of reviving the blue laws (look for a petition I will soon be circulating to bring them back). But the trend of the day is to respect the traditions of Jews and Muslims. That is why movie theaters should be closed not just on Sundays, but on Fridays and Saturdays as well. (People who handle their money well would never consider going to theaters at any time other than the midweek bargain shows anyway.)

5) "Honor Your Father and Mother"

Oh, how film history would have improved if James Dean had just said, "You're right, Dad" and fallen in line.

6) "Thou Shalt Not Kill"

Now I'm not saying there shouldn't be killing in films. The Bible is chock full of killing, so there is a place for it in films. But John Wayne had a reason to kill, and some secret agents were even licensed to do so. It is certainly true that seeing extreme violence and graphic gore will not corrupt a young mind like seeing a woman's "no-no" parts, but violence has still gone too far.

7) "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery"

No one stands before old Vinton in his contempt for slasher films. But at least they rightly show the deadly consequences of unlawful relationships outside of marriage. We need to be teaching our children that hanky panky leads to hockey masks, chainsaws and ice picks.

8) "Thou Shalt Not Steal"

Ever since The Great Train Robbery, Hollywood has been inspiring criminal minds. When Ocean's 13 comes out, you can expect another spree of casino robberies. It's not like that is as heinous as taking money out of the offering plate, but it is still wrong.

If films must depict crime, why not jaywalking or keeping library books past their due dates?

9) "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness"

Doing away with John Grisham films would greatly lessen the occurance of false witness in films, and that would just be the beginning of the numerous benefits that absence would provide.

10) "Thou Shalt Not Covet Your Neighbor's House, His Wife, or Servant, or Ox, or Donkey, or Anything Else That Belongs to You Neighbor"

Now I'm not a big one on "contemporizing" Scripture. But substitute "automobile" for "ox" or "donkey," and you can see how movies tempt us to covet. I was glad to see that in the next James Bond movie, Casino Royale, Bond will be driving a bulldozer from Fiat. This will be a much less covetable vehicle than Bond's Aston-Martin or BMWs. Why haven't we seen Bond driving a Ford Citation, an old Mecury Comet or a Yugo?

Until these changes are made, I continue to recommend staying away from the movie theater. After all, a good sermon is all the fun you need.

Ten Positive Affirmations for Movie Theaters

Anyone who attends movies these days knows there is a lack of positive, harmonic karma in our society, particularly in pop culture. But the attempts of some politicians to post Ten Commandments in public schools, courts and (my husband's suggestion) to post the same antiquated laws in movie theaters, would be a futile gesture.

Commandments are such downers, I prefer affirmations. That is why I would like to see the following postitive affirmations (perhaps adorned with some colorful decoupage) posted in every American movie theater. The positive aura alone may shame the negative vibrations emanating from the screen.

1) "Begone Lookism and Ageism!"

For too long Hollywood has overvalued youth and beauty. Hollywood gives no hope for love to the elderly and attractiveness-challenged. Why can't we see love stories between Martin Lawrence and Kathy Bates? Sandra Bernhard and Kirk Douglas? Betty White and Catherine Zeta-Jones? It is just sad that it is too late for a Jamie Foxx-Shelly Winters love scene that would have stirred us all.

2) "Begone Guns and Weapons!"

Not even a children's movie like The Incredibles is free of weapons. Bruce, Colin, Wesley, and even you Angelina -- why can't we all get along? Talk it out! Remember, arms are for hugging! Even teenage boys will eventually look forward to action films ending with the big negotation scene followed by a big group hug.

3) "Begone Fossil Fuel Vehicles!"

I remember how I looked forward to seeing Run, Lola, Run, and my disapointment when I found out it wasn't car-free. Though I can't recommend Breaking Away, at least its bicycle-to-car radio was better than your average Hollywood potections. (Sure, Westerns didn't have cars, but the oppression of our horse brethren and sistren may have been worse.)

But I am grateful for the little blessings of the Universe, like the fact there is yet to be a Speed III.

4) "Begone Animal Abuse!"

Do you know anyone who found the abuse of the little doggies and fishes and cats in There's Something About Mary or A Fish Called Wanda or Meet the Parents funny? My friends in PASA (People Acknowledging the Superiority of Animals) didn't find those scenes funny. (Though a lot of my NOW friends think there could be a lot more of those Mary zipper scenes.)

5) "Begone Make-Up and Other Desecrations of the Human Face and Form!"

Be free Michelle Pfeiffer, Sharon Stone, and Susan Sarandon of the foundation and blush that hides your lovely wrinkles. I can't tell you how my stomach turned when I witnessed the devastion the razor has wrought on, say, Nicole Kidman's legs and underarms. If only we could see those lovely legs and underarms with free and flowing red locks.

6) "Begone Smoking!"

I do not mean, of course, that films should not portray the legitimate use of medicinal marijuana in films. But tobacco must go. Fortunately, computer technology has opened avenues to digitally erase those cancersticks from the mouths of Bogey and Bacall, and they can instead enjoy carrot sticks. (For purists, there still could be R-rated versions of The Big Sleep that include the cigarettes, as long as the film was followed by X-Rays of Bogart's lungs.)

7) "Begone Meat Eating!"

And I'm not just talking about the next Silence of the Lambs prequel. Protect Brother Cow and Sister Chicken not only from carnage on the screen, but also from fast food tie-in deals.

8) "Begone Saturated Fats and Processed Sugars!"

Hear that, Ms. and Mr. Concession Worker? People will come to appreciate snow peas and celery with a variety of tofu dips as a part of the film going experience.

9) "Begone Corporate Greed!"

Why should the rich enjoy movies more frequently than the poor? I see no reason to charge money for the filmgoing experience.

10) "Begone Dangerous Chemicals!"

Are the nitrates used for film safe for the environment? Till a decade's worth of scientific studies let us know for sure, we should return to the example of our ancestors and enjoy good old-fashioned storytelling around the fire. (As long as the fire is produced by environmentally senstive materials.)

Yours with Love, Peace, and Bioharmony,

Helga Lilith Goodearth

2006-04-27T04:02:00.000-07:00

From the Archives: May 1999

Two Views of a Prequel

View 1: Vinton

Well, I have finally seen the highly anticipated new "masterpiece" by that bearded directing "genius" the left-wing film work had been waiting for and it grieves me to announce that the film does indeed focus on nothing but sex, sex, and more sex. And I am not talking about the lastest by Mr. Stanley "Too Good to Live in America" Kubrick.
Before I continue the discussion of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, allow me to introduce myself. I'm the Right Reverend Vinton Thingball of the Pharisaic Reformed Brethren of Law Church, and I am writing along with my lovely, gracious and sadly hellbound wife, Helga, to inform readers on the sad and disgraceful cinema scene.
Helga and I do have contrasting opinions on may subjects (as one might expect of a man who during wayward Jesus Freak years accidentally sampled some hashish loaded brownies and the Marxist, Feminist Hippie bride he married under the influence of said brownies). But we do share a common, abundant acrimony toward the modern cinema and its preponderance of petulant pollution (albeit for different reasons). And we intend to go to every screening room we can get into for free for the weeks, months, if need be years to come to alert the world to Hollywood's evil ways.
But back to our review. This is the salacious tripe one would expect from Hollywood (I know, I know, Mr. Lucas says he is outside Hollywood, but if he is such an outsider, why isn't he telling his story the way moral people do, with flannelgraphs?) Hollywood, the industry of Betty Boop fills this lastest Star Wars atrocity with innueno, flashes of lasciviousness one will not be able to easily purge from one's mind. Who will forget the blue skinned beauties tending Sebulba the pod racer's every want and need? Or the bald bikini babe by the side of Jabba the Hut? If you have seen this film, I'm sure you have dwelt on these scenes, as I have, as Mr. Lucas jams these images front and center so they'll stick in our craniums.
But it is not just the blatant debauchery you must be warned about in the film, but also the rampant New Age Occultism, from the Jedi counsel taken straight from a Masonic Temple to the talk of "micro-clorines" (which is obviously just soft-sell demonic possession for the kiddies).
So, till I get back with my review of Eyes Wide Shut (and I assure you, my eyes will be throughout the screening), I urge you not to see this film, or any other, because a good sermon is all the fun you need.

A Second View: Helga

Let me say first of all, that my husband is right about The Phantom Menace being evil, but not surprisingly, he sights all the wrong reasons. So it seems my Karmic life duty to write Vinnie's wrongs.
I will leave it to others to point to the sexist, racist, and Fascist imperialistic messages this film extols (and keep at it sister critics).
But I must take my stand, even if I am the sole voice, to point to the fact that this film is a more than willing pawn of the cosmetic industry. I must cry out at Natilie Portman's extravagant use of eyeliner as the handmaiden, Padme, let alone her full white base assault as Queen Amadala. (And if you are worried about my giving away any kind of secret here, may I remind you the publicity for this film is filled with the names of men: Liam, Evan, Jake, and even Kenny and Anthony, but only one femyle name, Natalie. And it seems the previous film featured many male names as well, but only one femyle. And if that is not bad enough, Carrie is sometimes a man's name. Of course the Queen and the handmaiden double in the program, just as the bounty hunter and the princess double in the program in Return of the Jedi, because we can't risk more than one memorable femyle presence!)
But back to Revlon. The make-up industry is built on the premise that we must hate our own skin. What could better illustrate this than putting Queen Amadala in so much make-up that she is unrecognizable and interchangeable with any other woman wearing the same make-up.
And how do we know whether any Bantas were harmed in the making of this film? I saw no disclaimers.
So why support the patriarchal make-up industry or its doppleganger the film industry with your meager wages? So till they make film stock out of biodegradable material that can be used to fertilize gardens in third world nation, you can keep your stinking aisle seats.

Yours with love, peace and bio-harmony, Helga Earthgood

Top Ten Movies to Avoid: Summer 2006

2006-04-23T22:02:00.000-07:00

10 Films to Avoid This Summer

We can all agree that the dribble Hollywood puts out every year is morally degenerate, but we may disagree on the basis of the immorality.

The Most Rev. Vinton Thingball is appalled by the sexual promiscuity, vile language and leftist politics of the film world.

Helga (Thingball) artist's, the Rev.'s wife, is disgusted by the materialism, sexism, and right-wing propaganda of movies.

Together they will keep you informed on why you should avoid the theater and your DVD player.

Vinton here, and I do want to make it clear that Helga and I have not seen the films we are herein condemning. Forbid it that we should stoop to the hypocrisy of telling you to not see a film when we had seen it ourselves.

Fortunately, it is not necessary to see a film to castigate it on moral grounds. Now if we were judging films on aesthetic grounds, it may be necessary to see it, though apparently many members of the Academy of Arts and Motion Pictures don't believe that is the case. No, to judge a film as morally bankrupt all we need to see is the advertising, a press release, sometimes only the title. So without future ado: The Top Ten Films You Should Avoid This Summer!

Vinton: #1 The De Vinci Code
Now a number of theologians, some even from your liberal Baptist and Four Square denominations have condemned this film on the basis of theology. I have heard reports that the film is based on a book that endorses Scriptural errancy and bad Christology and feminism, and if that's not enough to say, "Kiss me, Satan, I'd like another" then I don't know what is. But I am not attacking the film on those grounds today.
No, it had come to my attention that the film has something to do with Leonardo De Vinci the artist. (Which makes the title seem rather strange to me, sort of like if the advertising said the film would tell you something about a fellow named "Of Nazareth".)
Anyway, the problem with exposing people to this Leonardo character, is people may become interested in the paintings he drew. And if that is the case, it will just lead them into art museums. And you know what that means, free access to nudity. I am ashamed to admit that in my wayward youth, I went into an art museum or two, thanks to our godless public school system. And there I saw more than you see on those decadent famed topless beaches of Europe. I saw full frontal and backtual nudity of both of your sexes of the human variety.
This film may lead people to full exposure, to not just your Leonardos, but also your Ruebens and your Picassos. You are hereby warned to stay away from this film, Tom Hank's scary hair and those nudey pictures.

Helga: #2 Superman Returns

Well, it's all there in the title, isn't it? Has there every been a man that was adequate, let alone super? Correct me if I'm wrong, but had there every been a Superwomyn film? I think not. Yes, there was Supergirl, how very patronizing. What kind of role model is Helen (Who?) Slater for the young womyn of the world. And in that film we were supposed to root against Faye Dunaway, someone who in such films as Bonnie and Clyde and Network could have very well been a role model if not for her fetish for shaving under her arms.
And don't get me started on "Truth, Justice and the American Way". Oh, if only that little spaceship had landed a little outside of Havana, and the young Jose Kent could have helped Che' build prisons to reorient those with tired capitalist middle class values, then we would have a hero to cheer, even if he was male. Til then, count me, and you, out of this comic.

Vinton: #3 Miami Vice

Do I need to remind you of pink T-Shirts? And not wearing socks is the very definition of light in the loafers! You don't have to admit it, but back in the '80's didn't you had a poster of Don Johnson and Phillip Michael Thomas on the wall in your closet and you used to wonder as you looked at those two sets of twinkling eyes, and unshaven chins whether, "Maybe there are alternate lifesytles?" You know who I am, I mean, you are!
And as for all the bikinis that will be on view, we know nothing good could come of that. Along with the possibility of making Phil Collins and/or Glen Frye cool again.... Well, it reminds us that Anita Bryant maybe the only good thing that ever came out of Florida.

Helga: #4 Cars

As Al Gore reminded us in "Earth in the Balance", the single greatest danger facing our world is the infernal combustion engine. Children should be taught that automobiles are evil incarnate, not some cute little personality, that will be our favorite toy.
I have a real problem with Hollywood anthopormorphizing inanimate objects because children have difficulties distinguishing fantasy from reality. I was talking about this the other day with my raccoon companion, Snuggums. I said, "Snuggums, do you think when children see talking cars, they'll think cars think like people? I think they do." And I think Snuggums thought so, too.
(Let me take this opportunity to also condemn the auto-centric Fast and Furious 3: Tokyo Drift and Talladega Nights)

Vinnie: #5 X-Men 3: The Last Stand

The biggest problem I have with these films is the subtext. A keen observer of these films will notice that there is a message about the evils of bigotry and prejudice. Now that is fine and dandy to a point. It probably is wrong to judge someone just because they can turn your lemonade into a slushy with a touch or they have can openers sprouting out of their knuckles and whatnot.
But what if someone takes that even farther and says that it is wrong to be prejudiced against someone because of their funny accent, or long hair or even worse, their religous beliefs? It is that kind of ability to judge on the outward that makes for a more efficeint country.
And I hear that Kelsey Grammer is even bluer in this film than he was off color on Fraiser.

Helga: #6 The Break-Up

I have seen the trailer for this film, and it is not pretty. I'm all for womyn tossing out good for nothing men (though I could never leave my Vinnie any more than I could do without my companion Iguana, Bella [or she could leave me]). The real problem I have with this film, is it seems to glorify bowling as much as any film has since The Big Lebowski.
Such an ugly, male-centric sport bowling is, all that focus on balls and the ball size and how many pins the ball can bring down. Nothing but a methophor for chauvenistic conquests. And to think that I had my hopes pinned on Jennifer, after that ugly Brad buisness, to denounce maleness altogether.

Vinton: #7 A Prairie Home Companion

This film, believe it or not, is based on a radio program from NPR. Now I could see a film based on radio, if it were the Rush Limbaugh show or Sean Hannity or even Laura Ingram (though I wouldn't want any single males seeing that on DVD late at night), but a show from the National People's Republic, that is something else altogether.
Plus, this is directed by Robert Altman, of M*A*S*H and Nashville, whose trademark is overlapping dialogue, and we all know what that is there for. (And if you don't know, I'll tell you. It is so two or three dirty remarks can be said at once, but only your sub-consious mind picks it up, which means you'll probably go right out and do whatever filty thing that was said without thinking about it.)
I'm making my pledge break right now: I pledge not to see this film.

Helga: #8 Lady in the Water

May we start with the condesending term in the title, Lady? Womyn in the Water would be much less offensive. This is an M. Night Shyamalan film, which means there will probably be a twist. Which will, of course, leads everyone to think of Chubby Checker's dance the Twist, which led to undue ogling of the femyle form. Why can't the twist ever be nice in M. Night's films? How about the twist being that the aliens just want to be friends? Or that instead of seeing dead people, we could see recycling people?
And something else, the film is about a sea nymph, a mermaid like creature. Was there ever a more sexist fantasy than that? A man can then truely "catch" his mate, and throw her back into the sea if he is not pleased. Toss this film into the sea, sight unseen.

Vinton: #9 Through a Scanner Darkly

This is an animated film. But it is not for the kids. It is based on a Phillip Dick novel about drugs and madness and dark government forces.
I have a real problem with making cartoons for adults. There used to be a clear lines as to for who would watch what: cartoons were for children and sports programming was for men and your cooking shows were for woman and you didn't cross those lines. There is a place for cartoons, but a limited place. Sometimes, you need to put children in the nursury during the Sunday evening service (though it is good discipline for them to seat through the Sunday morning service) and then the childcare workers might want to have a video for the kiddies. I myself have pondered making a cartoon for the kids using the book of Judges. Capturing moments like Ehud ramming the sword in the fat king's belly and the fat encovering the sword would just be easier to animate than do in live action. The kids would love it.

Helga: #10 Snakes on a Plane

As secretary of my local chapter of PASA (People Acknowleging the Superiority of Animals), I must urge the boycott of this film that will obviously make many look on our scaly friends in a negative light.
Snakes want to get along with us, if we try to get along with them. So the next time you see a rattlesnake, don't shriek, but smile and give it a friendly shake of the tail. Remember, a boa just wants to be a buddy, a python is your pal, and a Black Mamba just wants to get along.

Well, we hope this will be a helpful guide for avoiding the multiplex this summer.

Til next time, this is Vinton Thingball saying - "A Good Sermon is all the fun you'll ever need!"

and Helga Goodearth saying - "Don't support the sexist, oppressing capitalistic Hollywood corperations, instead smell an organicly grown flower for your entertainment!"