heidibrideofchrist Reviews

The Guardians (2017)

Genesis 3:22 "They have become like us, knowing the difference between good and evil."

[10/10 · 22 April 2022]

I gave you a rating of ten because I don't want you to think I hate you. I want you to keep making more of these films, so I gave you a ten. This film is aweful. Despite this film's many flaws, it is very valuable to me. Thirty five years ago, I read somewhere that Adolph Hitler invaded Russia because the Germans already knew the Russians were performing these medical experiments and controlling human beings with violence. Even Hitler's enemies supported his invasion of Russia because the international community wanted the Russian experiments stopped. I did not have the resources to do any further investigation at that time, so I am doing it now. I now watch anything I can find on covert services and supernatural episodes.

This film is way too violent. It's hard to watch. Is the violence a red-herring, designed to lead us off the track? What is the director trying to hide? This film has no sex scenes. Usually, American films contain at least one sex scene to give their viewers some relief from the violence. This begs the question, "Do we use love, sex and affection for any purpose other than procreation?" It also makes me wonder at Almighty God's purpose in giving us a reproductive system. Why not just give human beings the ability to create new life in a laboratory? And, why put the playground right next to the sewage system? This film uses very rapid, violent language. It's hard to follow the plot because of that, but that has value as an exercise in planning for violent confrontations. How do we use language to diffuse violent episodes? Throughout the entire film, all the characters use language to try to capture control of their bodies, of their environment, of each other and of the confrontation with Kuratov. Kuratov claims that if he wanted The Guardians dead, they would be dead by now. Is he bluffing? He sounds like he is. This begs the question, "How much power do our words have?" This film has value as an exercise in planning ahead for the results of the build-up of strong human beings. Kuratov is very strong, but very ugly. This begs the question, "Do we have to sacrifice beauty to achieve great strength?" Ksenia is very beautiful, but she never ages. This begs the question, "Is beauty a source of power?" It also opens up the subject of eternal life. This is Christ's promise, after all. What would it be like to never get old? Would we place less value on our age and appearance if we never fear loosing it? The Guardians were created in a laboratory. In the scene where Kuratov views his human specimens, we can hardly see the bodies in their storage pods. This scene makes the film difficult to follow. This makes me wonder what the directors purpose is. Yet, the film still has value as an exercise in dealing with a very savage and powerful creator. With great power, comes great responsibility. Do we have a responsibility to be kind, loving and gentle? Does that behavior have a monetary value? Does anyone want to live in a world that is just as violent and harsh as this film? The Guardians possess super-powers. These super-powers can be used for good, or for evil. This begs the question, "Who are the enemies? If we have no one to fight with, do we need weapons or super-powers?" The Guardians can be controlled against their will. If we have the power to tamper with the qualities our children possess, and even their body movements, who will police the genetic codes and the control agents? What defines a human, verses an angel or a god? These questions can only be answered through the scientific method, and are worthy of our attention. Our lives and our eternal futures depend on it.

King Arthur (2004)

"You've been free since the day of your birth . . ."

[10/10 · 19 April 2022]

. . . Said King Arthur to his future wife Guinifir, in this film, when I watched it in 2004. Why do you now charge your victims money to watch this film? You want slaves, Jay Inslee. It's the only logical explanation.

Professor Marston & the Wonder Women (2017)

When I was a child, I spoke as a child . . .

[10/10 · 11 August 2021]

1 Corinthians 13:11: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things." Watching the Marston's and Olive go through this process is like watching your first child take their first step. The first lie they told us was that nobody was watching us in the privacy of our home. The next big lie was that nobody cares what we do in private in our bedrooms. The third big lie was that we could do whatever we wanted regarding sex. By the way, who is "they"? Why, the Federal Bureau of Investigation of course, and every other federal department tasked with monitoring morals. "They" do care what kind of sex we have, "they" are watching and "they" will find a way to punish us outside of the court system, and especially if the courts' attorneys refuse to enforce the ten commandments as "they" interpret it. While at the lake on their pic-nik, Elizabeth Marston tells Olive Burn that she and Bill attended law school. We can tell they did not complete their law course by their behavior. They think nobody is watching when they have sex on campus. They believe nobody cares what kind of sex they are having. Bill believes the world will not try to stop them. He says so at video minute 37:10.

The study of logic brings us to at least one conclusion: various and sundry people lie all the time. There will be repercussions for immoral behavior. The community will find out, one way or another. They will cast you out of their conservative neighborhoods. Once you understand this, it is up to you as an individual to decide what level of suffering you can live with, and what your purpose is. I'm not convinced that Olive had a valid option. She had no conventional family. Therefore, any decision she made regarding her relationship with the Marston's must be compared to her previous home life. The three-way love affair with the Marston's may have been the only love she had ever known. Certainly this is implied by Olive's life in the convent. If we must judge by the conduct of the women at that convent, it was no more moral an environment than the three-way with the Marston's.

Bill Marston truly believed his comic art would help to empower women. His methods and conduct prove that he has been very badly abused. No honest person would use violence to demand the kind of humiliating submissiveness Bill depicts in his art. Or perhaps, it's the directors interpretation of Bill's art that demands the submissiveness. It's hard to tell. Bill maintains throughout the film that he is trying to empower women. Child Study Commissioner Josette Frank mentions that Wonder Woman's golden lasso is used to force criminals to tell the truth. Marston states at video minute 1:41:35 that Wonder Woman reforms criminals. The contradiction between Bill Marston's repeated statements that the purpose of his art is to empower women, versus the depictions of violence against women in his comics, together with his acts of sado-masochism with Olive, imply that some truth has been lost along the way. What is less obvious are the covert attempts to derail Bill Marston. The fact that Bill Marston even verbalized the idea that women should fight back, that women should fight against physical restraints, that they should struggle, have sex outside of socially acceptable norms, scream, yell, argue, accuse, jump, run, throw things, think for themselves, and demand honesty, all this would attract the attention of those people who hate powerful women. Bill then becomes a target for the devil and his soldiers. The devil's only recourse is to lure Bill off the path with a red herring: violence as a necessary evil.

Elizabeth Marston appears to be the only truly sensible feminist in the film. She objects to Harvard refusing her a degree. She is the only person who objects to Bill using rope to tie up Olive at Guyettes shop. She was the only voice of reason that attempted to stop their love affair. She claimed they were living a fantasy, but the world lived in reality. She ordered Olive to leave.

Bill, Elizabeth and Olive go through a maturing process in a very public way, as adults, and with the added burden, or bonus, of children. As it turns out, the community did care about their three-way love affair, and they did fire the Marston's from employment at Harvard, and they did punish the children, and they did demand that the children be removed from public school. The world did try to stop them from maintaining their three way love affair. Women have historically been considered the weaker sex in no small part because of their inclination to submit to this kind of violence and perverted sexual conduct. That is not intended as an insult. We must be trained in the art of logic and argument to be capable of fighting with this demon. In times past, most women were not sent to school, especially the lower income households. They could not afford to send women to school. Thinking logically does not come naturally. More Men were trained in logic than were women. Men are tasked with protecting women. Mr. Brandt knew that. He tried to protect Olive from what he believed were immoral people. It is hard to tell whom is more open minded about the situation: Bill, who attempts to investigate and catalog the events, or Brandt, who condemns their love affair without investigating it. It can not possibly be a coincidence that Olive's aunt is the feminist Margaret Sanger. Again, we can see the evidence of child abuse in Olive's response to the Marston's behavior. She submits so easily to the abuse. It's like a bad habit. She accepts the pain without a word of objection. There is another point here that is not well developed in the script. Sometimes we have to fight. There are evil people on this planet. We may have to fight physically with them to defend ourselves. This idea is less obvious at first glance. The battle takes courage, stamina and a belief that our fighting back will make a difference. The fight was hard. It hurt. It was ugly and sometimes it was sexual, but it did prove fruitful. Bill showed that in his art. The director does not give this idea much screen time. Instead, Marston's comic strip art appears unattractive and excessively violent. The Marston's appear immoral and weak minded. The Director gives no screen time to the victory Wonder Woman achieved over the criminals. The director did not point out the importance of the process of expressing unattractive emotions and getting over them. The Marston's and Olive maintained their three way affair until they died. They did not conform to a socially acceptable heterosexual relationship. The situation was not resolved in a Universally acceptable manner. What the director did show us was the passion. The passion was Olive crying and argueing with the Marston's to keep her in their life. The film shows them rejecting her, then her rejecting them. It shows them begging for her to come back. It shows her going back to them. The three of them appear to truly love each other. It's the process, not the product that is important. If everyone was waiting for Olive to explode in rage and kill one of the Marston's, they were disappointed. Love won the fight, but it was not socially acceptable heterosexual love.

Haute Cuisine (2012)

It all depends on how you feel about gourmet food.

[7/10 · 23 July 2021]

Harumph. I am positive. The second time I watched, some dialog and scenes were added. The first big issue presented in the film: respect for authority figures sometimes causes paralizing fear in employees. These authority figures have the power to cause very real damage to our lives and reputations if we perform badly in their employ. Hortense says very clearly at her interview that she does not think she is good enough for the President's private kitchen. They want her anyway. She did a marvelous job. Aside from the overabundance of meat, and an obsession with foie gras, the cooking scenes made the food look delicious. The meals were very attractively presented. The director made cooking look like fun. It was enjoyable to watch.

The film sheds light on another very important issue: certain people meddling in our labor when they are not trained in the field. The presidents advisors try telling Ms. Laborie what is or is not a sauce. They were wrong. She was right. She made broth, not sauce. A sauce usually has flour, a fat, sometimes an alcohol and a dairy product. These sauces are usually high in fat, but not always. She made broth. They told her it was a sauce and was not allowed in his diet because of health concerns.

No love interest for Hortense Laborie made the film a little unusual. Most films with adults as the main characters have at least one obligatory sex scene. The usual sexual tension in a film was replaced by the passion they all had for food. The French are world famous for their high quality cuisine, so I do think the film had interesting tension exactly because Hortense felt pressured to perform well in a tense environment. The head cook in the main kitchen made it clear he felt threatened by her. Neither the president nor his advisors told her very much about the dignitaries he would be dining with on a daily basis. Should she dress the plate to impress? Or not? How is she supposed to know? They never presented her with a budget. There was more than one episode of surprise lunch guests. Then without warning they want her to cook everything cheaper. After the oyster disaster, I would have quit, too. The ending was depressing. It was not a satisfying end to a film, but it did leave the door open to the future. The ending made the film a romantic. She is alone and facing a personal crisis.

Nostradamus (1994)

It could happen to you.

[10/10 · 22 July 2021]

Every time you say fairies do not exist, a fairy dies. The Department of Justice knows that children who have been very badly abused become cynical. They mistrust other people, especially authority figures. They loose faith in God and in themselves. After having experienced miracles, your outlook on life changes. It happened to me. Before I had experienced the miracle, I would not have bothered to spend my time studying the lives of other people who claim to have experienced miracles. I did not believe, so I did not take action.

It was well worth my time to watch this film. It was a beautifully crafted film. The actors all did a very good job. The costumes were gorgeous. The Castles and houses were magnificent. It was a pleasant film to watch. The secrets revealed throughout the film kept me hooked. The secrets made me interested in doing further research.

I realize it would be easy to jump to the conclusion that Nostradamus was a liar and a cheat. Humans are fairly predictable. Anyone might predict some future events and end up correct at least part of the time. We have prediction mathematics that do exactly that. However, one can not argue with the facts. Why did Noatrdamus survive the plague? How did he know to stop the bloodletting? Why did his treatments for the plague work where others failed? By what miracle did his wife die, but he remained alive? How did he survive the poisoning? By what miracle did the Queen believe Nostradamus, but the King did not? With a plague raging across Europe, why did she not contract it from contact with Nostradamus? He must have carried the germs. He treated plague victims all the time. Why did King Henry die, but The Queen did not? By what miracle did Nostradamus escape being burnt at the stake, but Sophie was killed? The authorities were looking for him the entire film.

For the feminists that watch this film, we have lots of material to critique and talk about. How devastating for Nostradamus' wife, to feel so left out of the boys club. How intelligent she was to know that the men were keeping secrets from her. How devastating that she died right after gaining access to the wisdom they withheld, and before she could use it. She had such a good inquisitive mind. Why are men so intimidated by smart women? We want to help.

Find Me Guilty (2006)

Messiah DiNorcio

[10/10 · 20 July 2021]

I laid in bed trying to sleep after watching this film, ruminating on it. At first, I declined to write a review because my family is tied to DiNorcio's family. I assume the investigation into this crime family is still ongoing. I hesitated to say anything about the film at first blush. Firstly, I declined lest I incriminate myself, and secondly, out of fear of more retaliation. I have already been repeatedly and violently punished for talking about this crime family. The events of today changed my mind.

DiNorcio refuses to testify against his family. The family refuses the plea bargain. Then the Jury finds them not guilty. I couldn't help but assume the jury found them not guilty only because to find them guilty would mean a death sentence for the jury. Guilty or not, there are fates worse than prison time. The family still has to return to the polis and live out their lives. Guilty or not, inside of prison or out, there are ways of punishing the actors outside of the justice system.

I enjoyed watching Jackie try to defend himself. It was exquisitely painful to watch, but it was funny as well. The failure of the community at large to educate this man is obvious with every argument he makes. He is not stupid. He is uneducated, and it all becomes so obvious in the courtroom as he tries to defend himself without help. What a waste of a life. When the cops beat Jackie in his prison cell, it becomes obvious he is not capable of reason, because he refuses to testify against them in court. He continues to believe these people love him, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Anyone with two brain cells would conclude that the DiNorcio Mafia family has corrupted the legal system. He is not safe in his prison cell. You can't argue he is in there for his own safety. So why not testify against the family? He has nothing to loose at this point.

The original intent of the Mafia was to provide the community with men that could be trusted. They were called men of honor. You could ask them for help when no one else (including the court) could be trusted. Campagna's reaction to Jackie when he's cross-examined by Jackie in court proves this. Jackie clearly still had the respect of some of his friends. Campagna's eyes are fixated on Jackie. He shows every respect for Jackie. It's as if the whole world has dropped away. He is not responding to the court or the judge. It were as if they were not there. DiNorcio has more power over Campagna than the court does at this point. I think this scene prompts the viewer to question assumptions about the court and the Mafia.

By what heinous acts have the men of honor become the very thing they fought against? Jefferson said it best. Mankind are more disposed to suffer evil, than they are to throw off the yoke of tyrany. The fact that Jackie refuses to testify against them indicates he is accustomed to suffering for his family, which reflects badly on them. They can't or won't take responsibility for their own behavior. Instead, they blame the kids. That is not the behavior of honorable men. Jackie, why sacrifice yourself? Christ already did that for you. If the family are Italian and Catholic, why not go to confession? I gave the film a ten to reward everyone for taking the time to tell the story.

The Young Karl Marx (2017)

The answers will come if we work for them.

[10/10 · 20 July 2021]

I knew nothing about Karl Marx before watching this film. I only know a very little about communism. Two years ago, I read their mission statement online for the first time. I was surprised to see it is the same statement as the Catholic Church. So, I must wonder, did Karl Marx come from poor parents? Were they religious? The film never gives us a history of his childhood, so I have no way of knowing why he associated with a dissenters newspaper. I was delighted with this film, and surprised. Fred Engels pressured Karl Marx to write the communist manifesto. They fight about this at the end of the film. Mr. Engels is not struggling to earn money. Mr. Marx is, and feels pressured to earn money from writting. He has a family to care for. Mr. Marx challenges Mr. Proudhon's communist ideas about private property at the Republican speakers meeting. At this meeting, Mr. Proudhon claims private property is the enemy of the public, and that it is anti-social. Marx then wonders aloud to Mr. Proudhon what he is stealing if he takes another man's property. This shocked me because the communist propaganda was from Proudon, not Marx. Marx is countering the argument. Throughout the film, Marx calls himself a materialist. He wants stuff. He needs money. That's more like capitalism than communism. So, by the end of the film, it looks like Marx was dragged into the communist party against his will. In the last 30 minutes of the film, Fred Engels demands an opportunity to speak at a meeting for The League of The Just. He had been ordered not to speak by party leaders. Fred Engels and his followers then take down The League of The Justs' flag and replaces it with a Communist flag as Karl Marx watches, passively, from the audience. Fred Engels is far more active politically than Mr. Marx is throughout the film. Engels is especially bold with older establishment figures, i.e., the scene in the men's club when he threatens the staff. That Engels' family is the owner of textile mills instead of Marx makes this viewer wonder how Marx came to form his political views. Would his views on labor have been the same without Engels' influence? Throughout the film there are homosexual innuendos. I get the impression Marx and Engels were lovers, as Mrs. Ruge comments that they met in her kitchen. She turns away from the camera and stops talking, which shuts down any further investigation. They then say they met in Berlin. At video minute 1:20:13, at the Workers party meeting with Weitling, Krieger, Grun, Engels, Mary Burns, Karl, and Jenny, Marx makes a point of offending Weitling. Mr. Weitling leaves the meeting enraged. Mary and Jenny are shocked. They ask what just happened. Engels and Marx start laughing. I wondered what happened as well. This argument between Marx and Weitling looks more like a homo-erotic power play for world domination than a communal attempt to alleviate workers suffering. Why alienate Weitling? Comparing this scene to the coup at The League of The Just meeting, Engels looks more like an anarchist or a trade spy instead of a labor leader. Someone yells "Long live George Sand" after Engels' speach. (I know George Sand was a crossdressing female.) Together with the other sexual innuendos, it confirms my suspicions that these attendees were not members of the existing craft guilds. They were the outcasts. This matters because the craft guilds are never mentioned in the film, but workers rights and communism is. For honest people, it's no conflict for laborers to make a profit. So what's the big deal? Both Mr. Proudhon and Mr. Marx mention starvation of the laborers. No honest boss would starve his employees. A new picture of the labor activists in this film emerges from the fog. They are not negotiating with the textile mill owners. This would have been very easy to do, as Mr. Engels' father owned the mills. So why not talk to him? Marx and Engels look more like provocateurs instead of labor leaders. I loved the sex scene with Karl and Jenny. There was nothing wrong with it. As a viewer, passing through this process of the sex, watching Marx with his baby, then the labor and delivery of their second child, then comparing these domestic scenes with the conversation between Mary Burns and Jenny Marx at the beach, (where Jenny is shocked when Mary says her sister will have children with Fred Engels), by this time, we should know this is why the establishment condescends to the lower classes, because they plan on disobeying. Marx calls himself a materialist. This is enlightening, together with the fact that we never see either Engels' or Marx working in a trade other than writing. Not that writing is any less labor, but it's not factory work. The point being, they wrote about factory workers from outside the industry. It's nice they were so empathetic to the laborers cause, but they did not live that life. They were outsiders. Engels' was factory owner. There are some assumptions that need attention. The first assumption is that the Bourgeoisie do not work. The director makes Mr. Engels' Sr. Appear to be a bully. We never see him in anguish over the fights with his employees. The next assumption is the Bourgeoisie do not suffer. We never see Mr. Engels Senior in anguish, suffering over the events with his son. We never see him in private, asking for advice, in a conversation with a wife or friend about the fight with his son. This omission is very important. Mr. Engels Senior has been cast as cold hearted, because they gave no screen time to him in private or in anguish.

The King's Choice (2016)

They lied to me.

[10/10 · 13 July 2021]

I can't believe how many people have lied to me. Nobody told me Germany had been called in to deffend Norway from British aggression. How can anyone find fault with Germany for answering the call for help? But, they did, and not only in Norway, but everywhere else the Germans went during WW2. All I have ever heard is hatred of the German Nazi party. Throughout the film I was reminded how important spies are for collecting information. There were many opportunities throughout this conflict when spies could have delivered information that would have prevented the war. Where were they? The king never even read the documents brought by the German envoy. What a tragic and unnecessary loss of lives. In any case, the film is well made. The King is so loving and tender with his family, it warmed my heart. He is adorable with his grandchildren. It really touched my heart to see this very frail old man forced to play the role of monarch, a grandfather and a father all at the same time. The pressure on him to make a decision about Germany was so obviously causing him distress. I could not help thinking to myself throughout the movie that the adults did not spend enough time talking about everything that was happening. They rushed around far too fast, jumping to conclusions about the Germans. The Germans stated clearly at the beginning of the film that Norway was not strong enough to deffend itself from British aggression. Why run away, then? Why not let Germany do the job they were assigned to do?

All the Queen's Horses (2017)

Humpty Dumpty was pushed.

[2/10 · 3 July 2021]

I believe about ten percent of the information in this film. After I heard the name Mahoney, it was a downhill slide from there.

The Odyssey (2016)

This film really touched my heart.

[10/10 · 25 June 2021]

I have had a song stuck in my head for a week. I turned this movie on for the first time today. This films' theme song was the same as the song stuck in my head for a week. We loved watching Jaque Cousteau on T. V. when we were children. We also lived on the waterfront, and played on the beach all the time, so it all worked together to create interest in our oceans. Mr. Cousteau's idea about people living under the sea with breathing devices is ahead of his time. Just like other explorers, like the Wright brothers and their flying machine, it's a very extreme idea. Extreme ideas tend to frighten people. I don't think most people are going to pay money to live underwater with a breathing device installed in their body. It's just way too extreme. It does not sound like something the bankers are going to back with lots of cash. Perhaps some day this idea will take hold. However, I really appreciate the director including this information in the film. Mr. Cousteau had so much faith in the unlimited potential of the human race. That is inspiring and heartwarming. It seems more practical to build Seattle Aquarium style housing that have air pumped in through an HVAC. I think people would pay money to live in that. Or, perhaps we could build giant house-boat style apartments to make use of the space on top of the water. I really appreciate Cousteau's enthusiasm for turning the oceans into people-friendly places. The oceans are a vast resource. We aren't making good use of most of it. The main problem is that we keep killing the animals, the fish and each other. We are faithless. We have lost hope in the future. This planet has the potential to last for eternity, but it is up to us to farm it, care for the animals instead of killing them, and to keep up our faith in eternal life. I think salt-water water parks would work to create income from the sea. Lots of people are afraid of the water. They don't understand the oceans. I think if Cousteau could convince governments to build easy-access water parks, and he gave lectures to inform the public, that would make money. The parks would have to be easy to get to, relatively in-expensive, and he should hold short duration lectures. Otherwise, people will loose interest. The lectures need to dispell myths about the ocean. If he held lectures to teach people how to be safe in and around the water, that would help create trust.

Francesco (1989)

The worst of the worst.

[1/10 · 24 June 2021]

This movie is total trash. It does nothing to inform or inspire the viewer. It is full of malicious lies and heresy. No one is identified by name until video minute 20:33, when they finnaly identify Francis. The soundtrack is nearly inaudible. The story line is nearly impossible to keep track of. Every artifice possible has been used to make Saint Francis's conversion as gory and insane as possible. It's not worth my time to watch one more second of it.

Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel (2011)

Awesome!

[10/10 · 23 June 2021]

I think I love this the most for Diana's ugly duckling syndrome. Not all people are beautiful. Very beautiful people can be intimidating, which does nothing to encourage friendship and commerce. The way this problem intersects with fashion is very important. You can correct, or disguise physical defects with clothing and makeup. Diana set a good example for women who are not classic beauties. She got to work and made herself useful. She had good taste. She got dressed up every day, put on makeup and jewelry, and forayed out into the world. The alternative was staying home, depressed and useless. She had the good sense to pay attention to what the public was wearing out in the street every day. How are other people interpreting fashion, solving clothing problems, and individualizing their clothing? What are the kids wearing? Viewers want to see that in a magazine. That is why we read, after all, to collect new ideas. Diana paid attention to the wider world. That's the sign of a healthy person. Good clothing makes us feel good about ourselves. It is an essential part of sobriety. Good personal hygiene is the first step to staying sober. The alternative is people sleeping in the street with no clothing on, drunk and stoned. We don't want that, right? So, for those reasons alone, I loved this movie. But wait, there's more! We want a magazine to encourage women to engage in good hygiene. She did that. So why fire her? If you were not making money, it's because you were not advertising. Good advertizing makes or breaks a company. In any event, you did fire her, but she survived it, and thrived. That sets a good example as well. She got back up and got out of the house and made herself useful again. The photography in her magazine was truly inspiring. It inspired the viewer to imagine another life, which is good. This is one of the reasons we make art, and share photographs: to inspire and inform the viewer. The alternative is stagnation and a kind of artistic death. Diana's style was sexy and feminine. We want to encourage women to feel sexy and attractive to the opposite sex. The alternative is a utilitarian and androgenous style, which does nothing to encourage procreation. So what's the problem with keeping Diana employed? By the way, I do not think Diana is ugly. She is totally unique. I think she needs to gain some weight.

Dirty Pictures (2010)

Thank you for making this film.

[10/10 · 22 June 2021]

Question your assumptions every day of your life. Public school health teachers told us frightening stories, complete with gory photographs of allegedly sick or deceased drug and tobacco abusers, probably to frighten us into submission. The problem with public school health class was that we had not studied logic or the scientific method before taking the class. Therefore, we did not know how to question the validity of what they told us. Were the evidence and photographs they used in class fabricated to frighten us? We guessed they were. I would then leave school and spend time with kids who took drugs. I took drugs. I smoked tobacco, drank alcohol and had sex. My friends and me did actually discuss these ideas sometimes. We talked about police officers, the work they did and the methods they used. We talked about medical research. We knew the establishments' accusations that drugs caused psychiatric symptoms were not entirely accurate because some of the kids we took drugs with did have experience in the sciences. They refuted these accusations. They were the children of doctors and medical laboratory researchers. Some of the children we partied with were police officers children. They believed the drugs were alleviating their psychiatric symptoms. That is why they took them. I appreciate this film for many reasons. Firstly, for demystifying drug use. We took mass quantities of drugs, but did not die the way our public health class teacher claimed we would. Secondly, I appreciate the film for informing the public about the history of the investigation of chemicals like L. S. D. Sasha was licensed by the D. E. A. Thirdly, I appreciate it for demystifying the ammature naturalist. Although, I'm not positive Sasha is an ammature. He has the desire, the time and the space to grow cactus plants, and to take notes on his drug use. State funded laboratories depend on the public for financial support. Sasha can accomplish at his home garden what a public lab can not. That is really important. It's part of our American heritage. The idea that he has the right to privacy on his own property, that this privacy allows him the freedom to run his own tests, and that the State has to stay out of his business is all a very essential part of being an American. Forth, I appreciate the film for drawing attention to the fact that the D. E. A. Has not accomplished it's goals in stopping drug use. (Video minute 1:18:00) We talked about this issue as well when we were teenagers. The trouble with the police agencies is they tend to bully the population instead of collecting information and doing a thorough investigation. We knew that. We talked about it. What we did not do was drive to Congress and testify, and I think that was a crime. I wish we had been braver.

Citizenfour (2014)

I'm on the terrorist watch list.

[5/10 · 19 June 2021]

I was placed on the list because I tried to testify against the man that sexually assaulted my sister when she was ten years old. They put me on the list again, or reinforced the surveillance for no reason I can think of, in 1990. Bill Cook falsely accused me of trying to blow up Greg and Nancy Roats. At that time, I could not do enough math to divide a fraction, let alone enough math to build a bomb. I never threatened Greg or Nancy. I had never bought a bomb, not even an M80 at the Indian fireworks stands. I had no handgun. I had no plan to hurt Greg and Nancy. I never even told anyone that I hated them, because I didn't. Out of the blue, Mr. Cook ordered all staff into the office conference room. He then accused me of threatening to blow up Greg and Nancy. Joan Hecker asked me afterwards what Bill was talking about. I said I had no idea, because I truly didn't. I forgot the whole episode because I had not done anything wrong, nor had I any plan to do anything wrong. But that does not matter to tyrants. It never has mattered and never will. It's not an accident that the surveillance system is in Utah. That is where the Mormon churches home base is. My apartment is broken in to every day. The agents go through my notebook and personal possessions every day. They have already stolen millions of dollars from me. They steal my possessions. They steal money out of my bank account every day. They remove the pertinent information from my receipts, and from my bank account statements. They reprint my receipts to hide all the money they stole from me. They remove my notes about evidence. They deny me service in the courts, the hospitals, the vendors and police stations. They ridicule, harass and assault me 24/7. They remove and replace my personal belongings all day, every day. They try to burn my house down all the time. I have scars all over my body from their attacks, occuring all day every day for 52 years. They are using some kind of radar gun to assault me all day, ever day. The police refuse to arrest the assailants. The police intimidate me, insult me, harrass me and refuse to take any evidence I have into custody. They infantilize me. The police threaten to arrest me for calling 911. The Mormon Church is playing a very large role in these crimes committed against myself and all other victims who are under surveillance. My family is Mormon. This is not new. The community at large, and my family, have tortured me all day, for 52 years, for the sole purpose of forcing me into their organized crime syndicate. But they never admit that. They refuse to speak to me or spend time with me until or unless I commit a crime. Every minute I spend with family is full of fear. They are constantly trying to trick me into doing something wrong. They record every phone call I make. They have camera men filming every minute of my life. Every movie I watch, radio station I listen to or book that I read is monitored, controlled and recorded. It is not so much a matter of keeping us under surveillance, as it is that every minute of our lives is scripted by them. They controll every scene. They know us well. They know what we like and don't like. They know where we are every second of the day. They have pain reading machines they use in secret to monitor and control our every movement. They inject drugs in our blood while we sleep. They inject drugs under our scalp. They place topical drugs and chemicals on our scalps and faces. They inject chemical plug control points in our facial muscles that they use to control our facial expressions. They wipe chemicals on our feet so it hurts to walk. They use radio guns to control what we say. What Ed did was just a beginning, just a scratch in the surface of this giant invasive surveillance state.

Agora (2009)

Wow!

[9/10 · 19 June 2021]

I loved this movie. The whole film shocked me. I knew the library in Alexandria burnt down, but nobody ever told me the Christians did it. This does not surprise me, though. The Christians I know would not have wanted me to know that. They would not want me to think badly of them.

There are so many events in this film that challenge the viewer's assumptions. Why can't people of differing religious beliefs get along? Why does the Catholic church maintain such a dogmatic state of mind when it comes to belief in the Pagan Gods? Why was Cyril and his faction so intimidated by Hypatia and the Pagans? If Hypatia was truly open minded, which she claims she was, why would she refuse to try Baptism? If Hypatia had been thoroughly trained in the scientific method, she would have tested her own assumptions about baptism before refusing it. She would have kept careful records before and after Baptism. She would have donated the information to the library. Why didn't she follow her own advice and try Baptism?

I especially love the scene in which Orestes refuses to bow to Cyril. It's such a truly human moment. The entire purpose of creating human beings and planet earth was to give people a choice whether to worship Almighty God or not. We can't make an informed choice for God or against him without having something else to compare him to. Hypatia's investigations, and the pagan beliefs, supplies a comparison model. The existence of Pagan gods imply that Holy Father is not the dominant force in our galaxy.

That Cyril is using the word of Holy Father God to establish control over Prefect Orestes and pagan philosopher Hypatia speaks volumes about this six thousand year old struggle between the human race and a single, divine God. Holy Father God is not standing there demanding that Orestes get on his knees. A fallible human is making this demand. Cyril is interpreting Gods words and intent for his own purpose. I assume that as the prefect, Orestes was in a position of holding more political power than Cyril. Cyril attempts to use the power of God to try to take control away from Orestes. This does nothing to encourage critical thought about any potential differences between the pagan gods versus an almighty, divine and solitary God. Cyril hurt Orestes in a way that would do the most damage. He attacked Hypatia. This behavior looks all too familiar. We also see this struggle for control appear repeatedly throughout the bible. It was the priests that crucified Jesus Christ, after all.

It's really unfortunate that the Christian faction viewed Hypatia's work as ungodly when she was working. It's tragic that the Christians felt compeled to destroy the library. Hypatia was doing valuable investigation into our solar system. Hypatia's research has great potential for solving common problems, like farming and weather predictions. Understanding the world around us through the sciences has so much potential to end human suffering, it is well worth the effort. Certainly, if we believe a divine Holy Father God exists, and if we believe in Jesus Christ mission on earth, this research can not be against Gods wishes. God wants us to be happy. The only explaination I can see for the eliptical orbit is that another celestial body is pulling earth out of a perfect circle orbit. Hypatia does not say so aloud, but the idea is implied in her model in the sand. Even to speak a new idea aloud in a time of such distress, with war ragging, would be to risk ones life. This lack of freedom of speach is implied throughout the movie. Hypatia wants to believe the earth moves in a perfect circle orbit, but all evidence implies the contrary. She never says that out loud. This speaks volumes about the Catholic church's demands that we profess faith in their dogma. They also claim Holy Father and Jesus Christ are always perfect, though the evidence implies the opposite.

I have never read any book or watched any film that depicted Christians stoning anyone to death. It's always been the other way around. Certainly, the entire movie challenged my assumptions. So for me, this film was very enlightening. I genuinely appreciate being able to watch this history for free.

I Am Big Bird: The Caroll Spinney Story (2014)

I always loved Sesame Street.

[10/10 · 18 June 2021]

But I hated it, too. There was so much I wanted to tell your cast and crew, but I had no way to contact you. We experienced a lot of domestic violence at our home, just like Carrol. Mom built us a homemade puppet theater, complete with home-made puppets. I will never forget trying to invent a script. I wanted to use the puppets to express my rage at my family, but I knew I would get hit if I spoke my mind. So I gave up. Howard Stern interpreted life this way, too. We felt like puppets at home. Our parents were the puppet masters. We did what they said, or else. There was no such thing as freedom of speach in our house. I noticed a sarcastic tone that entered the Sesame Street crew in about 1980. After watching this video, I am convinced we were all victims of cold war era warcraft. I do believe Sesame Street is a great way to teach children. Not just letters and numbers, but big ideas like freedom of speach, and ethics as well. Oscar the Grouch makes it o.k. To be angry, and kids need to know that. They need models that show them how to have upsetting emotions, and then return to calm. Because that is real life. Adults get angry all the time. Children don't always know they have the same rights as adults, so Sesame Street and all children's programming in general is a great way to teach them. I wish I had a computer in 1975. I would have sent you emails responding to your programming all the time if I'd had one. I love you all, and hope Sesame Street stays on the air forever. By the way, growing up watching your cast had introduced multi-racial community members into our daily life. I never knew what racism was, because I watched you all getting along with each other every day on Sesame Street. I was shocked to hear about slavery and white supremacists when I got older. It was clear your cast all loved each other. Nobody ever even mentioned skin color was a problem around me or on your program when I was young.

Grace of Monaco (2014)

Why should we care about gambling?

[5/10 · 17 June 2021]

Monaco is famous for it's gambling centers. I've never been to Monaco, so I have nothing to compare the information in this movie to. It does not make sense that Grace would refuse a million dollar paycheck for playing the role of Hitchcock's "Marnie" when Graces' family and country are about to go bankrupt. It does not make sense that the wealthy aristocrats that use Monaco for vacations and gambling would refuse to support the country in a time of need. The movie comes to an abrupt end without showing the viewer what happened after Graces' speach. Did France go to war against Monaco? They never show the viewer. Did the Red Cross fundraiser make any money for Monaco? They never show the viewer. Did they banish Antoinette and Joshua from Monaco? They never show the viewer. The cinematography is beautiful. You can't argue with that. They spend too much time showing us how beautiful Grace and Monaco are. They did not spend enough time on the subject of women's roles in the workplace. Why even introduce the subject if you are not going to develop it? This is why we make movies, after all. Grace had a very important role to play in helping Rainier. They showed us this idea repeatedly through out the movie. So why did Grace not do Hitchcock's movie and use the money to help her husband pay off the debts? I would have liked to see some script that explained this. The characters get all self righteous about the acting profession. Rainiers' country-men imply Grace was a fallen woman, or somehow defective before she became a princess. He says so himself to hurt her feelings and degrade her in front of his family. But nobody mentions gambling addiction and the horrible results of that. The script makes clear from the beginning that Monaco creates no product it can sell on international markets. The orphanages existence proves the sexual immorality of the men that visit Monaco for gambling and sex. They then abandon pregnant prostitutes, caring nothing for the children left behind. If the movie had any purpose aside from being a vehicle for showing Nicole Kidman's attractiveness, why not fill in this part of the story?

Cromwell (1970)

I was two years old when they made this movie.

[5/10 · 15 June 2021]

Pounding away at my brain is the necessity of educating the lower classes in logic. Every scene proves our tendency to rely on our own assumptions. Cromwell and King Charles are bombastic, stubborn, monologing, barking dogs. They don't ask enough questions. They rush to conclusions. They don't listen to the opposing side. If the story line is accurate, I wish the script writer and director would have spent more time developing the King. It's just too easy to hate him. Cromwell is merciless. It's too easy to hate him as well. They both yell lots of accusations but never back them up with proof. There is no way to separate the issue of religion from the monarchy or war. Since the time of King David, we believe God gave the king's the power and right to rule. So the movie looks like an anarchists propaganda machine. We end up hating both of them. I don't know enough history to have a way to compare this to the truth. A good movie explains enough of the history that the viewer can understand what is happening despite our ignorance. So I wish they had included some script explaining what led to the crisis.

The Red Baron (2008)

I always wanted to know who the Red Barron was.

[5/10 · 7 June 2021]

I used to watch T. V. by myself all the time in 1982. They played Red Barron Pizza commercials. I always wondered who he was. I do wonder when human beings will stop inventing excuses to hurt each other? Have we all become so hard hearted we can't see or care about the pain and suffering of our alleged enemies? When will we have shed enough blood, sweat and tears to satisfy our desire for revenge? War is just like drinking alcohol or taking drugs. The first drink was too much, and the last drink was never enough. The cinematography was excellent. The script was only bad if you knew better.

Dora and the Lost City of Gold (2019)

I love you, Dora.

[10/10 · 17 August 2019]

Excellent job, everyone. I loved the parent roast at the end

Little (I) (2019)

The Problem

[1/10 · 9 July 2019]

The problem with this movie is that justice is never done. The main character is terrorized and tortured the whole movie long, with never a truly kind and loving response from the community to her need for friendship and love. The theme is violent and cruel, obsessed with money and power throughout. The actors did a great job. The filming was beautiful. It was funny, sexy, and touching at times. What upset me was that no one ever apologized or made reparations to the main character for hitting her and mistreating her.

The Wandering Earth (2019)

Excellent

[4/10 · 29 March 2019]

Good Job! I loved the computer graphics. I got a splitting headache in the middle of the movie and had to leave early. I will probably purchase it when it comes out on CD. The plot needs more development middle of the way through the movie you lost me . . . to much, too fast. Overall, I still loved it and plan to watch it again.