What does it mean when some of the best religion stories these days appear in New York magazine? It means the Apocalypse is near. Last week New York had a concise but interesting Q&A with Jay Bakker, son of Jim and Tammy Faye, who has moved to Brooklyn to found a hipster church. This week, columnist and Zeitgeist tour guide Kurt Andersen announces his heebie-jeebies at the ubiquity of apocalyptic thoughts in the culture just now, from Daniel Pinchbeck, author of the foreboding "The Return of Quetzalcoatl," to Mel Gibson and his new "Apocalypto." (Both focus on the Mayan civilization's demise.)
What bothers Andersen, in part, is that the apocalypse is no longer counted as a necessarily bad thing. "The nuttiest Islamists and Christians agree that the present hell in the Middle East is a hopeful sign of the end-times," he writes. He also notes that the apocalypse as a cause celebre belongs to neither the right nor the left. "Apocalypticism is one of those realms where the ideological spectrum bends into a circle and the extremes meet."
Mel better hope so. After offending Jews last month with his anti-Semitic tirade, his mouth has now gotten him into more trouble, this time with conservative fans, according to The New York Times, this time for comparing the American troop deployment in Iraq to the kind of human sacrifice depicted in his film.
The rest of the Times article debates whether Mel's conservative success in "The Passion," combined with the "Are you a Jew?" rant, will sink his movie's fortunes come Oscar time. Early reviews, like this one from a film-fest viewing with Mel in attendance, suggest the flick's so good the Academy won't be able to ignore it.
At any rate, Mel, as usual, is right on the trend. Says "One member of the audience asked Mel if he was saying that the decay of the Mayan empire was solely from within. Mel responded that he has always felt that the seeds for different civilizations demise always start from within." And guess what? " He does see the film as a metaphor for where we are today."
Perhaps, like me, when you saw the teasers for ABC's new show "Ugly Betty," you thought you'd be getting "Less Than Perfect" at a magazine rather than a television station: a cute sitcom wherein the ugly duckling teaches those around her the value of loving oneself while spewing zippy one-liners.
But "Betty" is much more than that, and that's both good and bad. Starring America Ferrara, Hollywood's go-to gal for the empowered Latina, anti-waif--see her tremendous breakthrough performance in 2002's "Real Women Have Curves"--the show is an almost mind-boggling blend of genres: Think "Sex and the City" meets "The Devil Wears Prada" meets "Cinderella" meets "American Family," all wrapped up in a possible murder mystery/conspiracy.
Betty Suarez, a smart but homely gal from Queens, is first rejected for a job at a magazine publishing company based on her looks, but then is hired by the Rupert Murdoch-esque owner of the company to act as his son's assistant. (It could be argued that Betty is "ugly' only by Hollywood's standards--i.e., glasses and braces make a girl absolutely abhorent.)
The son, Daniel, was recently elevated to editor-in-chief after the death (possibly, murder) of an Anna Wintouresque EIC. He has a penchant for sleeping with any good-looking female that comes within 10 feet. Long story short, Betty is finally humilated by Daniel enough that she quits, but he asks her back, since she's got an idea could win him the cosmetics ad campaign the magazine so desperately needs. At the end, Daniel has gained new found respect for Betty and the magazine gets the ad.
Although the show seems to be an amalgam of other shows and themes--rich vs. poor, beauty vs. beast--it is decidely different than anything else on TV. On the surface, the production feels more like a movie than a television show, the sets and location shots are fantastic, and some of the material is racy enough to be on the big screen (oral sex at the office anyone?). And while the pilot episode introduces far too many distracting storylines for an hour-long show--Betty's family dynamics, her ex-boyfreind dumping her, her friendship with the sassy British gal, her relationship with Daniel, the evil botoxed Vanessa Williams who may be in cahoots with the not-so-dead ex-EIC and the fact that our magazine mogul may have paid to have had her offed in the first place--I still was pulling for Betty and her determination to land her dream job and be the person she knew herself to be. Thanks to Ferrara's humanizing, never degrading portrayal, Betty never comes across as a victim.
Still, I'm not quite set on adding "Betty" to my regular viewing schedule just yet; but I will be giving it another try. One way that ABC could ensure that I stay tuned is to avoid having Betty whip off the glasses, lose the braces, and pluck her eyebrows; don't let the ugly duckling turn into a swan. For network TV, that would be as original and as brave as Betty herself.
Ministers aren't exactly known for their fashion sense and couture style--until now, that is. Beginning this month, the Rev. Joanna Jepson is trading life at a local British parish for big-city London, and most interestingly of all, a post as chaplain for the London College of Fashion--the first chaplain ever at the school, or at any fashion institution in England, for that matter.
In the article "The catwalk finds God," Jonathan Wynne-Jones reports Rev. Jepson's surprise ateveryone else's surprise regarding her new appointment:
As someone who has long taken an interest in fashion, Miss Jepson, 30, feels that the Church should have a presence in the business. "The fashion industry has a huge impact and influence on vast numbers in our society," she said. "It has a particularly powerful role in shaping the self-image and views of young people, and it's important for the Church to be involved with this type of community. It's amazing that it hasn't had this link before." The curate, who has previously criticised society's preoccupation with image, said that she was switching from full-time parish ministry to the fashion world because she could make more of an impact there.
Perhaps the Fashion Insititue of Technology (FIT) in New York City will follow suit.
One of the movies I am most excited about seeing this upcoming movie season is New Line's version of Jesus' birth, "The Nativity Story." And if you are as interested as I am in how Hollywood is going to treat the Christmas story this time around, well, the official movie trailer is available online.
While it is true I scoffed ever-so-slightly when I heard New Line was going to develop the project, all of my concerns about this story--that it wouldn't be given the respect and artistic merit worthy of the big screen--were assuaged whem I heard that teen actress Keisha Castle-Hughes ("Whale Rider") had been cast as Mary and that Mike Rich, the screenwriter, is a Christian.
If all of my LA/Hollywood insider friends are correct with their information, the movie will be less of a sappy Hallmark greeting card and more of a glimpse at the very human emotions Mary and Joseph felt as they embarked on their journey to Bethlehem. The movie will trace the life of Mary and Joseph prior to the birth of Christ and follow the family through Mary and Joseph fleeing to Egypt after King Herod's mandate to kill baby boys under the age of two.
So while Hollywood has been somewhat erratic in its attempts to tap into the market that made "Passion of the Christ" a blockbuster, everything I am hearing and reading confirms that this time Hollywood has a hit--one most Christians won't want to miss. (Click here to see the trailer.)
Are Jewish men attractive? TV doesn't seem to think so. Sure, Ross Geller certainly had his moment in the sun, as did Paul Buchman before him. (And any Jewess would be out of her mind to refuse to "hug it out" with Jeremy Piven.) But today's television shows seem to be making some rather harsh statements about my Hebrew homeboys.
For an example, try on this article in the NY Times reporting a slam on Jewish men in Ted Danson's new show, "Help Me Help You," which premiered this week. The article reports that one of the characters, played by Suzy Nakamura, "goes to the Jewish matchmaking Web site JDate to meet men, then promptly repels them. Asked if she is even at all Jewish by one man on their first date, she admits she is not and explains, 'I guess I find Jewish guys a lot less threatening because I'm not attracted to them.'"
A recent episode of "Next" (the latest addition in the MTV dating show legacy established by "Dismissed" and "Room Raiders") featured one guy proclaiming his tribal membership by wearing an "Everyone Loves a Jewish Boy" t-shirt. He gave his date cookies, told her it was his grandmother's recipe, and then was promptly dissed and dismissed rather harshly: "I'm not into David Schwimmer meets Napoleon Dynamite..." Adding insult to injury, the show's voiceover said, "For [guy's name] it wasn't hava nagila, but hasta la vista..."
As the author of "Boy Vey! The Shiksa's Guide to Dating Jewish Men," Kristina Grish has spent a good deal of time singing the praises of Jewish men, and she tells me that she thinks it may be a lack of classical machismo that ails the male members of the tribe. "I've always found Jewish men to be warm, articulate, generous, and doting," she says, musing that "perhaps these are the qualities [Nakamura's character in 'Help Me Help You'] considers to be 'nonthreatening' because they can be considered 'soft.' But I also think they're smart, entrepeneurial, passionate, and funny as hell... none of which screams 'wuss.'"
Take Ross Geller from "Friends" as an example, Grish says: "He tiptoed around his feelings for Rachel season after season, and that lack of chutzpah made him unattractive. Give his personality some oomph, and suddenly those doe-eyes would seem dreamy instead of drippy." She cites other examples--Piven, Jon Stewart, Jake Gyllenhaal, Ben Younger--"all Jews, all hot." I'll add Zach Braff, because I have to, and Oded Fehr, because how could you not?
Grish further noted that the women who responded to her book--whether or not they were Jewish--"couldn't STOP praising Jewish men - and there was no mention of nerdy or unattractive implications. So many Jewish men boast Mediterranean good looks--complete with big eyes, curly hair, dark features and endearing freckles. What's not to love?"
Despite what TV seems to tell us, and even if the stereotype seems to be indicating nerdlike or neurotic tendencies, Jewish boys are still coming out ahead--with an overall assumption that they are smart, funny, and nice. And Grish, whose new book is "Addickted: 12 Steps to Kicking Your Bad Boy Habit," oughta know a nice boy from a naughty one.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 4:24 PM | Permalink |
Though the documentary "Jesus Camp"--which goes inside Pastor Becky Fisher's "Kids on Fire" camp in North Dakota--has only been playing in movie theaters in limited release for two weeks, it has generated a firestorm of controversy. I saw the movie several weeks ago at a film festival and found it one of the more difficult film-watching experiences I've had. Still, I have purposely taken these few weeks since first watching it to think carefully about what I want to say about "Jesus Camp" itself and about its distributors' claim that the film "doesn't come with a prepackaged point of view."
The documentary starts in Missouri, where we meet Becky Fisher, a woman who runs a kids ministry out of a large, conservative evangelical church. It is here at Fisher's church that we also meet the three children whom the documentary follows most closely--Rachael, Levi, and Tory. These children are designated by Fisher as future spiritual leaders in "God's army." They and many other kids are taught to boldly share their beliefs with friends as well as strangers--and to develop their own "prophetic gifts," such as speaking in tongues and healing, for use by God.
Fisher wastes no time before sharing with the camera the goal for her ministry, including the camp: She wants to raise a generation of children who are as passionate about influencing the United States for Jesus Christ as children raised in Muslim-extremist circles in the Middle East are passionate about serving the Taliban and other terrorist groups.
As the campers and Fisher rally together at Devil's Lake, North Dakota, we are treated to such horrific images as campers holding plastic embryos while praying with huge tears in their eyes for the government to end legalized abortion, and children kneeling around a cardboard cut-out of George Bush while praying for him. In every scene, we see children whipped into an emotional frenzy by the adults, all in the name of worshipping God.
But wait, there's more: A documentary about Christians wouldn't be complete without working well-known pastor and political activist Ted Haggard into the movie. Toward the end of the film the directors show footage of Haggard speaking at his church in Colorado, where he reminds those watching that he and his followers--including their children--have the power to turn any election.
Whether you agree or disagree with the people in this film, it is difficult at best to argue that "Jesus Camp" doesn't have an agenda--namely, to scare us into thinking that our freedoms are in grave danger because of those scary evangelicals. In the name of balance, the filmmakers sprinkle throughout the documentary radio talk-show segments featuring Air America host Mike Papaontonio--a self-proclaimed Methodist who frequently criticizes the religious right. The segments probably add up to less than 15 minutes of screen time and don't really offer any insight--just a lot of ranting. That's not balance.
And simply because there is no voiceover to manipulate the narrative of the film--a technique often used by filmmakers like Michael Moore--that doesn't mean "Jesus Camp" isn't carefully edited for maximum sensationalistic impact. It is. And I feel comfortable saying this because my own Christian background includes a hodge-podge of various experiences in different denominations.
I have been to camps similar to this one, so it is easy enough for me to
pick out the scenes where events at the camp were being taken out of context and when they weren't. The perfect example is when the children are praying for George Bush. It's portrayed in the movie as idol worship of some kind, when really it is not so unusual for Protestant churches to look to Scriptures that instruct believers to pray for leaders in power. The same goes for the warfare references. There are references to spiritual warfare in the New Testament, but quoting those verses doesn't necessarily make you a member of a militia group, as the movie implies.
But perhaps more disturbing than the images up on the screen is the fact that the directors have been aggressively promoting the movie to the Christian market in the name of cultural dialogue. There is no real dialogue going on here.
I originally felt that this movie could be significant for Christians to watch--not because I agree with what Fisher does or because I agree with the directors who filmed her, but because this movie could serve as a warning to the many moderate evangelicals in this country that the likes of Ted Haggard have completely drowned out the more tolerant, moderate evangelical middle, which the media seem completely disinterested in.
But "Jesus Camp" is not about a true discussion of politics and religion in our culture; it is simply creating a dialogue of fear. Between the closed-mindedness of the filmmakers and the closed-mindedness of the film's subjects, the true message of "Jesus Camp" is: Freedom-loving Americans should be afraid of Christians. Christians should be afraid of liberals. And we should all be afraid of anyone who has a different worldview that we do. I consider both the subjects of this film and its creators equally guilty for this, and I think the best response is to refuse to join in their one-sided conversation.
The other day, a good friend of mine was creating herself a MySpace account as we were talking on the phone. She was joining the MySpace bandwagon, she said, in order to talk to only one person--a guy friend who tends not to return her calls. "I'm through with the phone thing," she said. "It's just so hard!"
Despite my protests, by the end of our conversation she had joined the millions who spend countless hours tinkering on this increasingly-popular social networking site. Coincidentally, my friend's interest came the same day that an article appeared in USA Today examining both sides of an important issue faced by MySpace (and other comparable sites): Is all of this no-pressure, no-commitment, so-called "socializing" inhibiting vital communication skills in young adults (not to mention not-so-young adults)?
I am opposed to MySpace and other such online forums as ways of communicating in any significant way or meeting new people. My rant stems from a real-life experience that makes me skeptical of most forms of non-verbal communication (though, I'll admit, I'm a text message-aholic, though I don't reserve that mode of communication for important matters).
A person I had known for several years and had considered to be a friend was on my MySpace friends list. (For those of you unfamiliar with MySpace, individuals can create profiles of themselves along with pictures, and users are able to search for people and add them to their group of friends). Another friend of mine was messing around with my account one day and deleted several people, probably out of spite or boredom. One of the individuals she deleted was the first friend I mentioned. He took offense that he had been deleted from my friends list and did not speak to me for four months. Eventually we began talking again, though it was against my better judgment--really, who needs a friend who is offended so easily by something so inane and immature?
My friend is intelligent (graduate student at a film school) and successful (getting his first graphic novel published this fall), among other commendable attributes. Had he simply called me and asked why he had been deleted from my MySpace friends list, our four-month hiatus could have been avoided. But the real point of my tale is this: My 25-year-old, highly-educated friend put a lot of meaning into MySpace, and unfortunately, millions of more impressionable, younger individuals are doing the same.
And why? As the USA Today article pointed out, the quantity of online friends that a person has is akin to a social status among certain age groups, regardless if you personally know each individual on your list. So the sheer number of pictures posted on the screen boosts a person’s self-esteem, and at the same time, the same person’s feelings of self worth plummet when someone doesn’t message them back, doesn’t comment on their profile, or, God forbid, deletes them as a "friend." It’s an avoidable, ridiculous source of anxiety for too many who ignorantly give it any meaning or importance.
This world of communication by typing is getting out of hand. People place too much emphasis on the meaning behind text messages, e-mails, and the number of times their profile and picture are viewed. As a recovering MySpace addict (you know, you’re never really cured), my advice would be to take your hand off the mouse and either pick up the phone or go to a bar, museum or park, and meet people face to face. Sure, it can be hard, as my friend says, but it’s the natural, healthy thing to do.
Anyone familiar with VeggieTales, the popular Christian children's videos, knows the stunning operatic oeuvre of Larry the Cucumber. LarryBoy's "Silly Songs" are masterpieces of drama and kitsch, boasting such lyrics as, "Oh where is my hairbrush?... Not fair, no hair, not fair, nowhere, no hair!" Now that VeggieTales is on NBC, however, both the songs and the Bible verse at the show's end have been dropped--the song for length, the Bible verse because the network required it. What does it say about me that I miss the Silly Songs more than the Bible verse?
Not so for some Christian viewers, who argue that removing the scripture verse is stripping the heart and soul from the series. In a recent column, conservative critic L. Brent Bozell accuses NBC of gutting the Veggies:
...NBC has grown increasingly fierce about editing something out of "VeggieTales"-- those apparently unacceptable, insensitive references to God and the Bible. So NBC has taken the very essence of "VeggieTales"--and ripped it out. It's like "Gunsmoke" without the guns, or "Monday Night Football" without the football…
…They have told parents concerned about their smutty programs like "Will and Grace" that if they're offended, they have a remote control as an option. The networks have spent millions insisting that we have a V-chip in our TV sets. Change the channel. Block it out.
But when it comes to religious programming--programming that doesn't even mention Jesus Christ--just watch the hypocrisy. Instead of telling viewers to just change the channel if they don't like it, or put in a V-chip for Bible verses, they demand to producers that all that outdated old-time religion has to be shredded before broadcast.
In August, VeggieTales' co-creator, Phil Vischer, blogged:
"So, Phil, will they actually let you talk about God on NBC?" Oh, good question. I figured you'd get to that at some point. The answer is... yes and no. At first we were told everything was 'okay' except the Bible verse at the end. Frankly, that news really surprised me, because, heck, we're talking about NBC here. God on Saturday morning? It didn't seem likely. Since we've started actually producing the episodes, though, NBC has gotten a little more restrictive. (I think they actually sat down and started watching a few VeggieTales videos. "Hey wait--these are religious.") So it's gotten trickier, and we're having to do a little more editing. More than I'm comfortable with? Frankly, yes. But I had already committed to helping Big Idea with this, and I really didn't want to leave them in a tight spot. …it could be better, but overall it's not a total loss.
After the media storm, Vischer followed this up on September 21 with a blog post describing NBC's flip-flopping on the issue:
NBC has now issued a new statement about VeggieTales, refining their earlier statement that cuts were only made for timing, not content. They now acknowledge the cuts they requested and explain that they don't want to air programming that offends or excludes any individual religious group.
Today, VeggieTales sent out an email reassuring viewers that the show can continue to fulfill its mission despite the NBC changes:
…we knew that certain religious references would not be allowed on a children's block under current TV network guidelines. And we recognized that we were not going to ch
ange the rules of network television overnight.
…would we still prefer to air the un-edited versions of VeggieTales on TV? Absolutely! It's there where we're able to share a Bible verse and encourage kids by telling them God made them special and He loves them very much. For now, we're hoping a new cross section of kids will fall in love with Bob & Larry… Please know our commitment to introducing kids to God continues.
Having watched VeggieTales on NBC the day it premiered, I don't understand all the fuss. "Minnesota Cuke and the Search for Samson's Hairbrush" was chock-full of wholesome values and Bibley goodness, inextricably embedded in the plot. Midway through the episode, Bob and Larry page through scripture to explain who Samson was. If this is "sliced and diced," I say: it's still yummy.
As if its premise isn't shocking enough--suburban mom selling marijuana to maintain her privileged lifestyle--Showtime's "Weeds" (airing 10 p.m. Mondays) seems set on pushing the envelope on just how raunchy a show can be on cable television. With such a high precedent set in its first season--masturbation references, rampant on-screen sex, and a mother secretly replacing her daugher's candybars with laxatives to help her lose weight--the show seems to have put religion in its sights as the last line left to cross in this, its second season.
Instead of making Christians the target of its un-PC humor, the show is spending its second season taking shots at Muslims and Jews. Among the new side characters added to the show is a Muslim who despises "the white race" so much he refuses to so much as acknowledge the existence of any Caucasian character. The suburb's biggest marijuana supplier becomes smitten with him and his way of thinking, and contemplates abandoning her drug pushing ways for religion.
Meanwhile, Nancy, the drug-dealing soccer mom played by Mary-Louise Parker, finds her hands full with her brother-in-law Andy, whose main objectives in life appear to be getting stoned and getting laid. In an ongoing storyline this season, Andy discovers that he erroneously enlisted in the military and must now find a way to get out of serving. To do this, Andy enrolls in rabbinical school, and must spend endless days slaving away on an essay explaining when he first realized his religious calling. In last night's episode, Andy tries to pull out of rabbinical school--citing an injury sustained from his pot growing hobby--but no matter where this storyline goes, it has certainly provided an interesting glimpse at this character's spiritual life.
Despite his cynical reason for enrolling in seminary, at some points Andy's inspiration seems genuine enough that we wonder whether he might truly feel some connection with his Jewish faith, but the cynicism quickly cuts in before we ever can be sure.
Of course, Andy, being his usual slime-ball self, takes a shining to a female instructor named Yael, and suddenly being enrolled in school becomes not a scam to stay out of the military but rather a way to try and bed the sultry teacher. As the show goes on, Andy milks his rabbinical student status as a means to get his nephew out of trouble in school by convincing the principal of his inherent morality.
While Andy's use of rabbinical school as an endless scam to some extent lampoons the Jewish traditions depicted on-screen, the show also takes steps to explain Judaism and its traditions. Prior to his enrollment in school, the characters displayed a generic "We're Jews" attitude, and the show never really explored how that made them any different from their blond, WASPy neighbors in their suburban gated community.
When it comes to depicting Judaism, television rarely offers any depth or any glimpse at what lies past the Jewish label. Even viewers offended by "Weed"'s antics--which include, most recently, an especially bizarre sexual encounter between Andy and Yael--have to admit that any depiction of modern Judaism is lacking on-screen. While "Weeds" might not provide the most sophisticated depiction of Jewish life today, it still provides something--and that's more than any other ongoing TV series can say.
posted by Adrienne Urbanski @ 3:45 PM | Permalink |
The best TV family dramas, in my opinion, are the ones that leave us feeling like we knew a family from the beginning to the end of a particularly intense period in their lives. The best of these were "Wonder Years" and "Six Feet Under," where the series finales literally showed us that these people went on to live the rest of their lives without us.
"7th Heaven," the longest-running family drama in television history, allegedly had its series finale at the end of last season, but returned for an 11th on the CW network last night. There are lots of reasons why this move made no sense. But maybe the show returned because the finale had left the Camden family unsatisfactorially on the same trajectory we had always seen them on.
Those who were supposed to be married were married, everyone was pregnant (with twins!), and everyone had found their vocation--some, their calling. Not that "7th Heaven" was ever really about life the way it actually is, but come on--this was way too neat and clean.
So last night's season opener started with the funny thing about trajectories: they can change without warning. Lucy miscarried her twins, sending her into a spiral of anger and spite that was extreme even for her character. But there was something else to her and Kevin that's often been missing from the show--palpable sadness. It was in their eyes, their body language, and it finally gave the show a chance to begin to tackle the fascinating premise of when bad things happen to people who aren't just good, but, like a minister's family, are expected to be really good.
As Lucy struggled with recovering herself, Annie confronted her empty(ing) nest, and Martin and Sandy wrestled with whether two people who are not in love should marry for the sake of the child they have together. The fixed roles that have sustained this family for so long are being challenged.
If only the acting would warm up a bit, this could wind up being a compelling season. And maybe at the end of it, the Camdens can finally leave us with the sense that although their lives wil go on, we've seen them through some tough times.
If there could ever be an "accidentally great" movie, the new remake of "All the King's Men" might be it. On the one hand, it's a big political action drama that lacks action, lacks drama, and lacks a real sense of purpose. On the other hand, it accomplishes either a wonderful stumble or a sublime piece of greatness in mirroring our current political system and most of its participants: There's a lot of activity and talk, but not much action or message.
In that way, "All the King's Men" is an expensive and dressed-up version of a TV docu-drama: We were exposed to the characters but not much got solved.
It's been a while since I had been so excited to go to the movies. As a culture blogger and political novice with an interest in spiritual reflection, I wanted to enjoy a big movie with big thoughts about big issues, such as power, money, empowerment, the rich, the poor, and the politics and history of leadership. And this was supposed to have it all: Big stars. Big trailer. Big run-up. Big anticipation. Big themes. Big message. And, in the end, Big Thud.
I'd nominate this for an Academy Award for Art Direction and, for maybe one-third of its score. It had all of the impact of, say, a televised Presidential debate: The characters feel extremely impressed with their own importance, but it's just not making it through the screen. I was sad when it ended, partly because I was waiting for the impact moment and partly because I knew it wasn't coming.
Willie Stark (Sean Penn) is inspired by Louisiana governor Huey Long, surrounded by an all-star cast of trite, typical characters even for today's political landscape. Jude Law's Jack Burden, Patricia Clarkson's Sadie Burke, Kate Winslet's Anne Stanton, Anthony Hopkins' Judge Irwin, James Gandolfini's Tiny Duffy, and Mark Ruffalo's Adam run the range of principled to corrupt to leveraged to irrelevant. Stark navigates his way from idealist to electable to crusader to anti-hero. He gets elected as a voice for the everyday Joe but gets lost somewhere between lost idealism and found ambition. Sort of. It's hard to tell how much of Stark's hysterics are self-realized and how much are just, well, Sean Penn.
In the end, I'm not sure there's enough of a message here, but on the other hand, I'm sure whatever your own message is, you could impose it on this film. And in that way, I guess it is spot on accurate in today's political climate. Except, of course, there weren't any spin doctors to explain it after it was over.
One of these days, the best of our actors and the finest of our scriptwriters will get the funding to bring us an intelligent political movie about the haves, the have-nots, and each of our roles in between. This, sadly, just isn't it.
Censorship and the religious right will once again take center stage during primetime tonight on Aaron Sorkin's "Saturday Night Live"-inspired backstage drama, "Studio 60." At the end of last week's debut, new network president Jordan McDeere gave writer/producers Matt Albie and Danny Tripp her promise that their "Crazy Christians" sketch--the same sketch that lost their predecessor his job--would be allowed to air the following week.
Picking up the story three days after McDeere's promise, "Studio 60" writer/producers Matt Albie and Danny Tripp are at a press conference where they must once again tackle questions about the infamous comedy sketch, because the sketch has now been leaked to the media. In fact, a conservative Christian publication called "Rapture Magazine" has found out about the sketch and asks McDeere at the news conference if "Studio 60" really does plan to air it. When the magazine is told "yes," the woman who runs the magazine does what all good conservative Christians are born to do--at least in TV land, anyway--she starts a boycott.
Immediately after the press conference, we are once again treated to some sharp dialogue that no doubt has been patterned after real-life conversations and plays up the cultural divide between Hollywood and the heartland. When McDeere snippily asks the press conference coordinator, "How many whack jobs subscribe to Rapture magazine anyway?" she is calmly told by the media coordinator that Rapture magazine has a "circulation four times the size of Vanity Fair." McDeere and everyone else in the room is taken aback. They had no idea there were so many people out there who aren't like them.
But while I enjoyed that little bit of sparring, the rest of the storyline illustrates one of several storytelling pitfalls Sorkin is going to face while trying to create an intelligent show-within-a-show about Hollywood. Boycotts by conservative Christian groups are really old news. Those types of stories have already been done to death, and, quite frankly, it would have been more interesting, less cliché, if a different group would have been the ones doing the boycotting--groups like the NAACP and their recent attempt at a boycott, for example.
The other pitfall Sorkin stumbles into tonight is that if you are going to write a series about a sketch-comedy show, at some point your cast will have to perform a funny sketch. However, the sketch Albie finally comes up with isn't as funny as even a mediocre "Saturday Night Live" skit. What's worse is that we never see the infamous "Crazy Christians" sketch at all. If you are going to spend two episodes discussing something supposedly so controversial that most of middle America would be offended, there needs to be a much better pay-off to the conflict
Don't get me wrong, I still hold out some hope for this show to possibly resurrect intelligent, non-crime related storylines on TV this season, but tonight's episode is not a move in the right direction. (Oh, and I'll save my thoughts on the problem with trying to make the Harriet/Matt relationship work on the show for another time!)
Single Jewish women (and their mothers) are supposed to experience a Pavlovian drool reaction to the presence of doctors, but I never went thusly gaga, not even for television doctors. And while I do admit that Clooney was cute, this whole "Grey's Anatomy" McDreamy nonsense over the admittedly adorable Patrick Dempsey wasn't a reason for me to watch. I already had "ER," so my triage rooms were all occupied. And what kind of hospital in a major city doesn't seem to have any Jewish doctors, anyway?
But friends I trusted loved "Grey's Anatomy"--so I gave it a whirl. The format--young doctors dodging barbs from demanding residents and struggling to make it in a hospital--was familiar from other television shows, but the characters are innovative enough to keem me coming back, with each episode peeling back a layer of complexity for the residents of Seattle Grace.
In last night's episode, the first of Season 3, Izzy--devastated by the death of her heart-transplant patient turned love-of-her-life Denny--lay prostrate on the floor of her bathroom as her friends stood outside and debated who should attempt the impossible task of consoling her. Meredith was making sandwiches, because it's what you do when people die. "You mean like shiva," asks Christina Yang (Sandra Oh).
What? Yang reveals that her family is Jewish, so they sit shiva.
"Tell me about shiva," says Izzy from her prone position on the bathroom floor, engaging in conversation for the first time since her fiancee/patient passed away. "It's supposed to help with your grieving," said Yang, explaining that they sat shiva for her grandmother for seven days, offering a detailed--and accurate--description of the traditions of this seven-day Jewish mourning period.
This marks my first awareness that Yang is Jewish, and I wonder what kind of impact that added layer will have on her character's story arcs over the course of the upcoming season.
An hour and a channel flip later, I'm watching "ER," where Estelle Harris (who will forever be known to many as "George Costanza's mother") shows up as the mother of the burly reception manager Jerry Markovic (Abraham Benrubi, who's been with the show on and off since 1994) and starts talking at him with "oy veys" and calling him "sheyneh punim" (beautiful face). So suddenly, another Jewish character is outed on a medical drama--this time by his loud, abrasive cliche of a Yiddishism-spitting Jewish mother.
I found myself again wishing for TiVo, so I could rewatch those scenes for intimations of future plotlines, how Jewish tradition might impact story and character development. But most often, a Jewish television character is just Jewish culturally, making the perfunctory remark about how he or she observes Hanukkah, not Christmas, right before joining in the caroling chorus. And unless there's a Jewish patient, or until Hanukkah rolls round again, we forget that the distinction was even made.
On "ER," it's unlikely that Jerry's religion will become a storyline, but on "Grey's," it has a chance--the show never misses an opportunity to raise the stakes for each character, adding layers of complexity and nuance in characters as distinct from one another as they are interdependent and complementary.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 5:08 PM | Permalink |
Jet Li's "Fearless," opening today and based on a true story, is a film about finding yourself. Jet Li's character, Han Yaunjia, has one goal in life: to be the best fighter. And throughout the first half of the movie you will wonder if there is anything more to his character. You might even wonder if the first half of the movie will work its way to a solid payoff. Hang in there--it will.
The movie starts with Han Yaunjia easily handling three fighters, then flashes back to his childhood, where his need to fight and go undefeated started. The story jumps roughly 25 years into the future, and we see Han Yaunjia, already a master, fighting any and all challengers who are eager to defeat him.
Although some of the effects at times seem weak, the fast-paced martial arts will leave you oohing and ahhing. The fight choreography was done with precision, and two fights stand out in particular.
The first sets up the general arch of the movie, where we see Li's character fall from his own personal pedestal. In a battle to the death with Master Chin, we watch two men fight, not for personal amusement--as with many of the fights in this film--but for survival. Even though Han Yaunjia survives, his family pays the price in the vendetta. It is the brutal murder of his family that breaks him and changes the person he is.
In truth, though, his family was already a distant thought in his mind. He does not see his daughter or take care of his mother or home. He threw his family to the side for his own personal pride and glory.
What we watch in the second half of the movie is his rebirth. Moved by the compassion of those who find him drifting, he starts a new life. We watch as he changes from who he was to who he becomes.
With his newfound set of values, Han Yaunjia loses the will to fight for the pleasure of winning. He learns from all his past mistakes and works to amend for all his sins. And he works to become a teacher to his disciples.
The movie does not disappoint those who come for a good martial-arts fight. Han Yaunjia may have changed his personality, but he remains a fighter until the end, even if his attitude toward fighting has changed. At this point, he fights not for himself but for all of China and the East.
The final battle is the second memorable fight. Done with grace and class, it shows the beauty of martial arts, with its flowing kicks and some very nice camera work. With a single punch, we watch the culminations of the transformation Li's character has undergone and see the honor that a fight can convey.
The success of any heroic journey in fiction is based on the premise that the hero is an ordinary person who is endowed with special powers and is sent on a special quest to fulfill his or her destiny. NBC's new drama "Heroes," which debuts Monday night, takes that classic premise and gives it a slight twist by introducing viewers to the lives of several ordinary people from various parts of the world who are just beginning to come to terms with the reality that they have supernatural capabilities. Unlike "X-Men" or the "Fantastic Four," these heroes do not work together or even know each other--yet--nor do they wear super cool comic-book-hero-style costumes, but their quest to do something more is no less interesting.
In Monday night's episode, we meet a man who can fly, a woman who sees strange images in mirrors, and an artist who paints the future. The only real clue we are given to the possible link between these characters and their superhuman abilities is a genetics professor who is trying to solve the mystery of his father's death. The big question: Did his father make a huge discovery regarding human evolution, and does anyone else know about it?
While it is tough at times to keep track of all of the stories this episode is trying to establish, I think the best storyline by far is the journey of Claire Bennett, a cheerleader who can automatically heal from any wound inflicted upon her. "Heroes" is at its most life-affirming when we watch a teenage girl who has always been judged on the most superficial criteria--even by her own family--discover there is so much more meaning to her life than what she previously thought. (I'll bet I just grabbed the attention of all of you "Buffy" fans out there!)
With multiple characters, multiple storylines, and almost endless possibilities, "Heroes" is probably one of the few potential hits of the new TV season. It has enough action and mythic pathos to keep the graphic novel enthusiasts entertained while providing enough heart and soul to hold the interest of the rest of us.
"My Name is Earl" kicked off its anticipated second season by pairing two of the show's most distinctive characters--the eponymous amends-seeking hero, played by Jason Lee and his moustache, and his insufferably white-trash bitch of a wife, played by Jaime Pressly and her six-pack abs. The task: #183 on Earl's list, "I never took Joy's side." Earl decides to support the next decision Joy makes--which, unfortunately, is inspired by an episode of Britney and Kevin's reality show.
Joy sees that Britney and Kevin have a giant, disappearing TV, and she wants--no, she deserves--one too. So she manages to save up the $3000 and buys one, but it's too big for her trailer home. She tries to return it, but because the item number on the receipt was ruined, the clerk won't accept the return. She swears she's going to get her money back, no matter what she has to do. On her way out of the store, she encounters a delivery truck with the keys in the ignition and steals it with the intent to sell it for her $3000. It falls to Earl to help her sell the truck, which unbeknownst to our flawed protagonists, has a man in the back, effectively making the pair kidnappers as well. Throughout, Joy is unyielding in her beliefs: She is owed her money back, and if she can't t get it back from the store, the universe/life owes it to her.
In a show already steeped with lessons about the circular nature of karma, this episode additionally highlights the subjective morality of circumstance. If life owes us, to what lengths may we go to attain what should be ours? Is a crime of principle--"like when Rosa Parks stole that bus," Joy points out--justified if it achieves what is "right?"
Joy also appeals to her ex's devotion to his list of atonement items, claiming that since he never supported her in the past, he needs to do so now. As the escapade escalates, Earl finally has to admit that he's supported her as far as he could, and that he is going to opt out of continuing to be an accessory to Joy's single-minded pursuit of what she considers justice. In her mind, Joy thinks she's no different from that "Robin Hood, Batman, Jesus stuff." Earl says he doesn't know about Jesus and Batman, but that stealing from the rich to help the poor did sound like it was up Robin Hood's alley.
"Why do bad things always happen to good people?" Joy wonders after the inadvertent hostage runs into a tree, which adds assault to the mounting list of charges against her. But Joy is not a creature of depth and nuance. She is a simpleton, but doesn't seem to understand that society has rules that she must adhere to.
But when we consider that Joy got into this whole mess because she thought Britney and Kevin were like royalty and the Federlinean lifestyle was worth emulating, we also have to ask ourselves who our role models are and why. The image of having a TV larger than your means and circumstances allow is a salient metaphor for the undue emphasis that we put on place on celebrities and television in general, and provokes us to think about what entertainment makes us think about, while we're enjoying that very same entertainment. It's very meta.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 3:59 PM | Permalink |
The ever-rising star television series creator and producer J. J. Abrams has done it again: "Six Degrees" (which premieres tonight at 10 on ABC) is riveting, complex, and promises something simple but essential for TV drama: good stories.
Reminiscent of the film "Love Actually" in more ways than one, the pilot opens with scenes from New York City--the subway, people passing on the streets, the skyline--layered with voice-over narration by one of the characters, Carlos. Carlos, a public defender who is single but seeking, reflects about love, relationships, how people meet and why, and most importantly of all, the roles that fate and chance play in the pivotal moments of our lives: when we meet that person who will one day become our spouse, our best friend, or perhaps even our worst enemy.
The storyline plays out from there, cutting back and forth between the daily lives of its six main characters--Carlos, Whitney, Mae, Damian, Steven, and Laura--encouraging viewers to piece together, bit by bit, each of their stories, and enticing us to guess how each character's story will become connected in some way, as they title implies will surely happen. If you loved or even liked "Love Actually," "Six Degrees" employs the same format of unraveling and intertwining the lives of a large group of people through relationships--friendships, romances, betrayels, breakups. If relationships in general fascinate you in any way, "Six Degrees" is a must-see.
But why am I calling a show about relationships classic J. J. Abrams? Well, for fans of all things J. J. Abrams, viewers will be pleased to see signatures from his three other hit shows--"Felicity," "Alias," and "Lost"--peppered throughout the storyline and casting of "Six Degrees." I am a longtime Abrams devotee, and in a rather classic J. J. Abrams fashion, simply by chance (or is it fate?), not by intention, caught "Felicity" from the get-go back in my early 20s and watched it faithfully until its final season, before moving on to "Alias," and more recently, "Lost."
In some ways, you could say that with "Six Degrees" Abrams has returned to his roots. "Felicity" was driven by the relationships between its characters, but also had a rather magical air of romance and fate as well. The show pivoted on what some would call daring and others foolish--the fact that Felicity, its central character, enrolled in NYU because a boy she didn't even really know at all in high school, Ben, was her soul-mate, and NYU was the college of his choice. Felicity believed they were "fated" to be together. That provided our introduction to Abram's fascination with chance, the mystical, the romantic, the religious, the spiritual; there are many things one could call it--the belief that something mysterious draws people together, makes them do things they otherwise wouldn't, shakes them with fear, drives them to the brink of despair, calls them to believe in some higher power than themselves, or makes them sigh with joy and gratitude. This notion of the "something beyond"--however differently it can be interpreted--is present in everything Abrams does.
The connections between "Six Degrees" and "Felicity" are rather obvious, and with "Alias" and "Lost" a bit less so, but they are still there for fans to find. Viewers will be pleased to find that the name of one character--Mae Anderson--is an alias. She has a secret, and we are not sure if she is on the side of good or evil, though we can't help but root for
good. And most importantly of all, she starts the show a platinum blond and by the end has dyed her hair almost a reddish-brown. Sound familiar?
Then, echoing "Lost," is the ensemble cast (which includes the fantastic actor Campbell Scott as Steven) whose lives we know not only will be thrown together in multiple ways (though not on a deserted island)--but who also may have a past that connects them as well (as do all the characters on "Lost"). Though Abrams so far does not employ the signature flashbacks of character back-stories, as he does each episode on "Lost," it's clear that each character brings baggage to the table that will become important as their relationships evolve and tighten.
All this to say, whether you are new to J. J. Abrams or a longtime fan, "Six Degrees" is yet another fantastic contribution to television drama by the man who can do no wrong (it seems) when it comes to imagining an engaging story. Definitely tune in. I'd say that your horoscope today says its in the cards for you to take a chance on tales of love and friendship.
The long-anticipated FoxFaith Movies, a division of 20th Century Fox, officially came into being this week, a great triumph for whoever is putting out the new division's stationery, with little relevance for the rest of us. Fox has been in the Christian movie business for some years, mostly in distributing DVDs of films as big as "The Passion" and as insignificant as "Love Comes Softly," the Hallmark-channel-flavored film of the Christian bestseller by Jeanette Oke.
The FoxFaith moniker will allow Fox to bolster its already-thriving marketing efforts for biblical films like "One Night With the King," (left) through churches; according to The New York Times, some 90,000 churches get regular information about Fox films. Perhaps more importantly, it will extend Fox's power to flack faith-free but family-friendly movies such as the animated baseball fantasy "Everybody's Hero" and an upcoming remake of "Flicka." A Fox official told the Times, "It’s a Good Housekeeping seal, a marketing umbrella for these pictures, so that people can have confidence the movies won’t violate their core beliefs."
The key here is that FoxFaith films are as much about what they don't show as what they do. "Love Comes Softly," the first Oke novel released as a Fox movie two years ago, is a simple romance and is faith-based only in the sense that faithful Christians don't have to worry that a torrid bedroom scene is just around the corner.
Innovative jazz musician John Zorn is having a good month--he's won two prizes, though most people only know about one of them. Even hardcore Zorn fans may not know that the jazz musician and founder/CEO of Tzadik Records took the prize for Best Blend of Jazz and Heritage at the Oyhoo Jewish Music and Culture Festival at the Jewish Music Awards ceremony, held earlier this month in Manhattan. And then, this week Zorn was named a winner of the MacArthur Foundation Genius Grant. Coincidence? (Well, since none of the other JMA winners were also MacArthur Fellows, yes, definitely a coincidence.)
The 25 MacArthur Fellows will each receive $500,000 in "no-strings-attached" funds, to be paid over five years by The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, a private, independent grantmaking institution dedicated to helping groups and individuals foster lasting improvement in the human condition. While I've never had $100,000 a year in no-strings income, I bet that would improve my human condition.
Tzadik Records, which Zorn helms, is a force for the unusual and avant garde in many genres, not just the "adventurous recordings bringing Jewish identity and culture into the 21st century," which the Hebrew label name--which translates to "Righteous"--evokes. The New Japan division provides "breathtaking, genre-busting music from the new Japanese underground," while Oracles celebrates "the diversity and creativity of women in experimental music making." And according to the website, "Tzadik's Lunatic Fringe series excavates the inner most views from some of the outermost reaches of human creativity, bringing to lightsome of the most intense creative acts of our time."
In addition to the new music that Tzadik produces, it also offers special editions of albums. For example, if you were seeking a special limited edition of Hemophiliac's self-titled album--and let's face it, who isn't?--you'd want to visit Tzadik Records. In their "special editions" section, you'd learn that such an item was available, featuring tracks like "Edema" and "Stretch Marks." Sadly, such items don't last. Even though the disc was sold only through two websites--Tzadik and Ipecac Recordings (whose slogan is--I'm not kidding--"Making People Sick Since 1999"), if you don't already have one, you missed it, since the set is now sold out.
Zorn's prize did not go unnoticed by Stephen Colbert, who, still smarting from his Emmy loss to Barry Manilow, decried the MacArthur Foundation's decision on Wednesday's show. Playing a clip of Zorn's unique--and, some might say, atonal--music, Colbert pulled out a top hat and cane and pretended to sitting-down-tapdance to it. Clearly Colbert felt shafted, and after his segment, in which he systematically insulted the awardees, stretched his hand out to the camera and said,"Genius Grant, please..." If only it were up to the Colbert Nation, Stephen, if only.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 1:53 PM | Permalink |
Perhaps the best way to describe last night's debut of the CBS series "Jericho" is that it is something like "Lost" meets "Left Behind." The show borrows storytelling devices from both, but with only moderate success.
Last night's pilot introduced us to the tiny, old-fashioned fictional town of Jericho, Kansas. But before we can become too attached to Jake Green, a prodigal son returning home for a brief visit after a mysterious absence, disaster strikes. A mushroom cloud is seen in the West--supposedly over Denver--and word of some kind of explosion in Atlanta is also heard of over the airwaves. Jericho then loses all contact with the outside world.
Chaos ensues, as word of the explosion spreads. Soon, townsfolk turn on each other, while Jake is reluctantly turned into a hero for saving children on a stranded school bus. By the end of the episode, the folks of Jericho feel an eerie sense of helplessness over their future survival.
The problem with "Jericho" so far is that the science fiction element is not as strong as it is in a show like "Lost" or "The X Files," but it also doesn't have enough of a spiritual angle to snag an audience thirsty for an apocalyptic adventure. My guess is "Jericho" may vanish from primetime before anyone--including viewers--realizes the citizens of Jericho, Kansas, are still alive.
The Russian Space Agency recently turned down Madonna's bid to get a spot on an upcoming mission. This must come as a disappointment to those Christians who would love to see the pop diva shot into space, once and for all.
Barely recovered from her latest U.S. concert tour--which includes the spectacle of the star posing on an enormous glittering cross and is now making waves internationally--some American clergy have been upset anew by NBC's plan to show the disco-crucifix footage on "Access Hollywood."
“By sponsoring Madonna’s mockery of Christ, NBC will insult the majority of Americans and millions more around the globe," says Reverend Rob Schenck, who is president of an ecumenical group called the National Clergy Council.
Rev. Schenck, of course, begs the question as to whether Madonna is mocking Christ. Artists--and as glitzy and overwrought as Madonna can be, she still appears on the Arts page--have long availed themselves of the cross to express their religious views. Mel Gibson did as much, and perhaps offended as manywith his ecstatically gushing "Passion of the Christ." The fact that Rev. Schenck may like one and not the other doesn't mean Madonna is dissing Jesus.
Instead, in her ham handed way, Madonna appears to be calling those who espouse Christian principles to account. Here is the account of a Russian journalist who attended Madonna's concert there last week (over the objections of the Orthodox Church):
What I--and, I assume, most casual observers--did not know was what the song would be and what the point would be. The song was "Live to Tell," her 1986 hit, and the point was not subtle. Flashing behind her on a giant video screen were the faces of children and some statistics: the number of children orphaned by AIDS in Africa and the fact that without help they will all die before the age of 2. And then there was a long quote from "The Sheep and the Goats" story from the New Testament."
At the end of the song, she makes a pitch for donations for these orphans.
Not coincidentally--and, okay, perhaps cynically--Madonna announced this week that she would work to raise $3 million to improve the water supply in the African nation of Malawi, where she's already sponsoring a home for orphans. If she's mocking Christ, she's found a nice way to assuage her guilt.
The long-haired, leather-wearing, born-again Dog (God spelled backwards, of course)--along with his wife/business partner Beth, son Leland, and "blood brother" Tim Chapman (no relation)--track fugitives who have jumped bail after being bonded by Dog and Beth's agency "Da Kine Bail Bonds." They're also hired by outside bond agencies to track their bail jumpers.
Now, Dog, who is known for showing compassion to those he captures, is facing legal troubles of his own. On September 14, he was arrested by federal marshals at his home in Honolulu for jumping bail in Mexico after a 2003 arrest there, related to his capture of Andrew Luster, heir to the Max Factor fortune and a convicted rapist.
Last night, A&E aired a special episode of Dog's show entitled "The Family Speaks," explaining the case that started it all and why Dog was arrested.
In 1996, 1997, and 2000, Luster raped three women after giving them the "date-rape drug" GHB. He even videotaped the assaults. In 2003, while on trial, Luster jumped bail and fled to Mexico. He was convicted in absentia of 86 of the 87 charges against him and sentenced to 124 years in jail.
When a then-unknown Dog heard about the case, it hit home for him as the father of four daughters and six sons, and he dedicated his own time and money to finding Luster. After following a lead to Mexico, Dog, along with Leland and Tim, spotted Luster at a bar. In last night's special, Dog recounts the capture and says that when he found the felon, he said, "Freeze, Andrew Luster, in the name of the United States of America. Your days of raping are over."
Dog claims that when they tried to bring Luster back over the border, Mexican police arrested all parties. Initially, Dog thought he was being "Punk'd," set-up by the popular MTV hidden-camera show.
Because bounty hunting is illegal in Mexico, Dog, Leland, and Tim were charged with "unlawful depravation of individuals" and "illegal seizure," and faced six months to four years in jail. Luster was handed over to U.S. authorities to begin his jail sentence. After spending a week in jail, the bounty-hunting gang was set free on bail and returned to the U.S. Lawyers told them that their crimes are misdemeanors under American law, and so as long as they didn't return to Mexico, they would never need to go back to court or do jail time. They all returned home and hadn't heard anything further about the case--until now. Suddenly, Mexican authorities are fighting to extradite the three bounty hunters.
Many of Dog's fans--myself included--are upset and appalled at his arrest. Although he may have broken Mexican law by capturing Luster, he has saved countless women from this sick sexual predator. We shouldn't be concerned about the civil rights of a monster like Luster, and we should instead focus on the good that has come of his capture--namely, that women can sleep a little easier at night. We should reward Dog for his efforts, not punish him.
One of Luster's victims, Tonja "Doe," is trying to do just that. After Luster fled the country, his apartment was searched, and among videotapes and a supply of GHB, a "hit list" was found, documenting all of the pe
ople who were testifying against him. "Doe" was on this list and credits Dog with saving her life. Since Dog's arrest, she has set up a website to solicit donations to help with his legal expenses: www.dogdefensefund.com/. A Myspace page, has also been created, which includes a petitions to drop all charges against him, Leland, and Tim.
Dog's family is comforted by their faith, and last night's special showed Beth, her children, and other family members standing in a circle, praying for the release of the rest of the team. On September 16, the group was released on bail, but forced to wear electronic monitoring devices. Although the family is still concerned he will be extradited, they are trying to remain optimistic.
"[Dog] walked the walk, and showed mercy to so many people, that surely mercy will be shown on him," said Beth.
September marks the premiere issue of Good, a magazine founded and funded by Ben Goldhirsh (son of media-multi-millionaire Bernie Goldhirsh). Good is for the "growing number of people tied together not by age, career, background, or circumstance, but by a shared interest," writes Goldhirsh in a letter to potential readers on the magazine's website. "This revolves around a passion for potential mixed with fierce pragmatism and creative engagement. We sum all this up as the sensibility of giving a damn. But to shorten it, let's call it GOOD. We're here to push this movement and cover its realization. For while so much of today's media is taking up our space, dumbing us down, and impeding our productivity, GOOD exists to add value."
Described as falling between "New Age meets new money volunteerism meets the consumerist imperative," by NY Times reporter Sharon Waxman in her article "A Magazine for Earnest Young Things," the magazine has no explicit religious ties or motivations--though Waxman describes the magazine's headquarters by saying, "Yoga mats are neatly arranged in little cubbyholes next to the bar. The staff generally gathers for yoga classes out on the narrow balcony about three times a week."
Also absent from Good? Irony and sarcasm. "The founders say they were motivated by a desire to contribute to society and express something on behalf of their generation.... One thing that distinguishes Good from other young magazines is its wholly unironic tone.... Mr. Schorr believes that his generation is looking for a little earnestness."
To entice subscribers--of which I plan to count myself one as soon as I finish this post--Good boasts an offer that seems almost too good to be true: the entire $20 six-issue subscription fee will go to one of the 12 charity organizations listed on its subscriber page--and you choose which one. Charities include: City Year, Donors Choose (Katrina Aid), Teach for America, UNICEF, and the World Wildlife Fund.
How good is that? Now the only question remaining is to which organization should I assign my subscription?
Which book did you like better--Philip Roth's "The Plot Against America," or Dara Horn's "In the Image"? Jonathan Safran Foer's "Everything Is Illuminated" or Saul Bellow's "Ravelstein"? This showdown of sorts among contemporary--and in Bellow's case, deceased--Jewish writers is taking place as part of the 2006 Jbooks.com People's Choice Award, a prize for the book determined to be the best work of Jewish fiction from the last 10 years. Judges (including myself) have selected six finalists ("The Puttermesser Papers" by Cynthia Ozick and "The Wedding Jester" by Steve Stern are also on the list), and now it's up to the people to decide who should win the $5,000 prize. The winner will be announced at a November 15 ceremony for the Koret International Jewish Book Awards in San Francisco. Last I checked "Everything Is Illuminated" and "The Plot Against America" were neck and neck, so your participation can make a difference! Cast your vote now.
posted by Rebecca Phillips @ 9:30 AM | Permalink |
Sure, we're happy to see Matthew Perry return to television, especially alongside those enjoyable "West Wing" folks like Bradley Whitford and Timothy Busfield. But the biggest reason many of us will be tuning in tonight to the premiere of "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip"--NBC's new behind-the-scenes look at a fictional late-night sketch show--will be the man who puts the words in their mouths: writer/producer Aaron Sorkin. And I am happy to say that tonight's premiere of "Studio 60" provides Sorkin aficionados with great acting, lush sets, and the joyous return of "walk and talks"--witty banter matched with long tracking shots that are typical of the storytelling style Sorkin and his directing partner Tommy Schlamme have perfected.
Tonight's pilot episode (10.00 p.m., NBC) finds the "Saturday Night Live"-style comedy sketch show "Studio 60" in more than a bit of trouble this particular Friday night. The fictional NBS network's standards and practices rep is pulling the plug on the intended opening sketch, intriguingly titled "Crazy Christians." This leads to an on-air "Network"-inspired tirade by the show's producer, which, of course, gets him fired and leads to major national news coverage. In an effort at damage control, the new network president, Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet), tracks down the famous writing/producing duo of Matt Albie and Dannie Tripp (Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford) to offer them a chance to return to "Studio 60" after being fired from the show a few years before.
But just as Sorkin's "Sports Night" was not simply about a sports broadcasting team, and "The West Wing" was not only about people working in the White House, "Studio 60" is about much more than the cast of a floundering comedy show. Whether it's references to Pat Robertson as a bigot or psycho-religious cults who thrive on boycotts, Sorkin is clearly taking some thought-provoking shots at the cultural and spiritual divide in America. But he's doing it with the help of a Christian.
That's right: Imagine my surprise when I found out that "Studio 60" has, at the center of its cast, a character who is clever, funny--and just happens to be a devout Christian without being completely annoying, as so many TV Christians are. Harriet, a longtime cast member and ex-girlfriend of Matt Albie, is a thinly-veiled homage of some kind to Sorkin' s ex-girlfriend, Kristin Chenoweth, a Christian who became a Broadway star and was also a "West Wing" regular in its last season. But that doesn't dampen my excitement over the possibility of a primetime show portraying a Christian without resorting to stereotypes. A perfect example of this is when Harriet defends the "Crazy Christian" sketch, while the less-tolerant Albie confesses that he let Harriet's appearance on Robertson's "The 700 Club" become justification for ending their tumultuous relationship.
All indications point to Harriet's faith continuing to play a significant part in future episodes of the show. And while I am not convinced that Harriet will continue to serve as an accurate mouthpiece for us moderate evangelical types, I am looking forward to the spirited--and spiritual--discussions "Studio 60" is going to generate around watercoolers everywhere this season.
It may be #10 on the Top Ten list of things Jews and Christians shalt not do, but not coveting thy neighbor's house, other related property, and just generally not coveting things that are not yours still made the tablet. And yet a new MySpace-like online community has sprung up with the sole purpose (or so it seems) of baiting us to break commandment #10.
Zebo.com, launched last week, is devoted to building community based on personal profiles that list all your possessions and reveal your deepest desires for that which you do not have but desperately want. Zebo.com allows members to make friends, invite others to join (and a host of other Friendster- and MySpace-like functions), yet with the sole purpose of giving everyone a little peep show into what you have (or at least, claim to), as well as the ability to go poking around in the contents of your friends' closets, drawers, and other private places normally reserved for personal viewing only.
"If the Internet encourages people to share with the world the contents of their souls, Zebo encourages them to share the contents of their homes. It is 'MTV Cribs' for the masses. Minimalists need not log in," writes NYTimes reporter Stephanie Rosenbloom in her article, "A Sense of Belonging Among Belongings," about the site.
Rosenbloom interviews Roy de Souza, Zebo's founder and chief executive, who offers the following mantra about the generation sure to make his site a success: "For the youth, you are what you own," [de Souze] said. "They list these things because it defines them."
Apparently, according to Rosenbloom, the biggest draw to the site is not simply getting to show of your own worth in stuff, but getting to see what everybody else has and craves themselves. Though Rosenbloom's overall assessment of Zebo is that--at least at this point--the site seems almost "wholesome," her final words sum up Zebo quite succintly: "Its members' primary vice is coveting."
Zebo is clearly for Christians and Jews whose Commandments only go to 9.
Website-creator turned author Janice Taylor brings her food-obsessed, playful, confessional ourladyofweightloss.com to the printed page, with a new book titled the same: "Our Lady of Weight Loss: Miraculous and Motivational Musings From the Patron Saint of Permanent Fat Removal" (Viking Studio).
As someone who grew up in a house filled with saintly paraphernalia and an all-too-pervasive knowledge of the, count-em, 6000 or so saints that make the Catholic holier-than-thou grade, I'm all for coming up with new saints for such difficult wordly tasks as weight loss. And Taylor--a weight-loss coach by profession--more or less masquerades as the Lady herself. NY Times book reviewer Liesl Schillinger explains that Taylor's weekly e-letter includes "confessions" of dietary transgressions sent in by the weight-struggling--which Our Lady of Weight Loss promptly and kindly forgives: "For instance," writes Schillinger about one e-letter. "When a woman admits that she wolfed down an egg biscuit and hash browns at McDonald's--'I sullied myself for the sake of convenience'--Our Lady is merciful: 'All is forgiven. Move on.'"
Truth be told, Our Lady of Weight Loss seems a bit more New Age than Catholic as far as spiritual persuasions go, and certainly not without humor, as evident in Taylor's site describtion of this saint of fat removal: "Our Lady of Weight Loss is dedicated to those who are drawn to The Art of Weight Loss. Our Lady encourages all to lighten up in every way. Have fun, laugh at yourself, enjoy a healthful lifestyle, and redirect those 'feeding' energies into something creative and more fulfilling than any bowl of ice cream could ever be."
Taylor's inspiration that started it all?
Janice's [Taylor] epiphany came one day in 2001 when she dragged herself to a weight loss center "where people obsess about weight and food," she recalled. "I weighed in and nearly keeled over. The scales of injustice were heavy indeed. It was all so dreary and depressing. I thought, 'I'm never going to make it.'" Then she heard The Voice (who later revealed herself to be Our Lady of Weight Loss), "If you think you're never going to make it, you never will. You're an artist. Make weight loss an art project." And she did, becoming America's first weight loss artist.
Well, at least "The Voice" part sounds very Catholic!
Past Billy Graham television specials have focused on issues such as divorce or on cities in ruin, such as hurricane-ravaged New Orleans. But the latest evangelistic crusade, broadcast from Baltimore, asks the question, "Do you know where your children are?" Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, continues to take the helm of the behemoth evangelical ministry, while the ministry increasingly is focusing on reaching out to teens, in this case by addressing the staggering and bleak statistics surrounding teenage runaways.
The special follows the usual Crusade format of testimonies of dramatic conversions--in this case from teens who used to live on the streets--mixed with coverage of Franklin Graham preaching and contemporary Christian musical guests singing their latest hits. While I have never been a huge supporter of this type of old-fashioned revival-style formula for evangelizing, a thought struck me as I was watching the special. With pseudo-celebs like Stephen Baldwin trying to make Jesus "rad" by developing gospel skateboarding comic books while Christian bookstores sell the latest "Gospel According To…" book, maybe it's time to go a little retro in the way the gospel is preached after all .
Jesus didn't try to follow pop culture trends to make his message fashionable, He told the truth in simple terms. So while Graham's method of ministry may seem old-fashioned, it is perhaps ever-so-slightly more effective than the latest Christian slogan or marketing trend.
Baylor University's Institute on Studies of Religion is pitching their new report, "American Piety in the 21st Century," as a testament to how diverse and complex religious feelings in our country really are. The report does show that many religiously unaffiliated people pray, and that "The Passion," produced by a conservative Catholic and championed by white evangelicals, was most popular among African-American Protestants. The subtext of the data, however, is to show how culturally divided we are.
It's right there in the charts relating church attendance to consumption of the controversial thriller "The Da Vinci Code." Quite simply, Baylor found, the less you attend church, the more likely you are to have read the book. Only 16 percent of evangelical Protestants read Dan Brown's novel; those who gave their affiliation as "None" were twice as likely to have read it, and "Other" were more than three times as likely.
On the other hand, "VeggieTales," Rick Warren, and the "Left Behind" series all appeal to 20-25 percent of the population—a number close enough to the percentage of evangelicals in the national body to suggest that as popular as those products have become, they are still confined mostly to their home communities.
Since St. Paul, Christians have asked the question, What influences you most: Christ or culture? Judging from Baylor's report, the answer might be that what influences us most is neither Christ nor culture, but which Christian culture we come from.
No character on television represents my own spiritual journey better than Gregory House, protagonist of FOX's "House." Flawed yet searching, abrasive in his search for answers, Dr. House has gone through a series of challenges, culminating with last season's near-death experience. And now that the cranky doctor is still alive and back for a third season, I continue to be amazed at the way this series flips spiritual themes upside down.
In last night's episode, House is no longer walking with his cane, thanks to the success of a risky surgery performed on his leg. He is now, with great difficulty, adjusting to a new life without physical pain. He is also a somewhat kinder, gentler version of himself. Because his co-workers like the new and improved House, some of them decide they don't just want to fix him physically, but they also want to fix him spiritually. They feel House gave a reckless diagnosis and treatment to a patient, and so his colleagues take the opportunity to teach House a lesson in humility by telling him the treatment failed--when it fact it had worked.
The failure doesn't sit well with House, who suddenly questions every personal and medical decision he makes. And then there is the pain in his leg that mysteriously begins to return. Is it real or a symptom of depression?
When House discovers that his co-workers betrayed him, he lashes out at them, and rightly so. While they often have accused him of playing God with his patients, it is, in fact, his fellow doctors who have played God, this time with House's life, by tricking him. More importantly, House challenges the notion that humility only reveals itself by outward signs of modesty. House is humbled by the leg pain that is returning as well as by the Vicodin addiction he can't quite beat.
As always, it remains to be seen how House will grow as a person as he continues to wrestle with fresh physical and emotional pain. However, just like my own tumultuous journey, I am sure House's journey will continue to be unexpected, but, in the end, very rewarding.
St. Francis Church in Macon, GA, is putting a stake through the heart of boring adult education classes, while providing pop culture aficionados with a learning opportunity they can really sink their teeth into. Starting this Thursday, the church will launch "The Gospel According to Buffy the Vampire Slayer," an adult-ed class designed to explore the Christian virtues portrayed in the show. The Macon Telegraph reports:
"It's the most artistic and literate program that's been on TV in 10 years, maybe ever," [series co-teacher and self-proclaimed "Buffy junkie" Buzz] Tanner said. "Spiritually, Buffy's virtues are Christian, though it would be hard to say Buffy is a Christian. The show deals with good and evil, right and wrong."
"It's about helping people not be so uptight about their religion," said John Mark Parker, pastoral assistant at St. Francis. "One of things we want people to do is look for themes that reflect what they experience in their faith.... It's really about creating dialogue."
The group will watch an episode each week, and then discuss the episode's spiritual lessons over soft drinks, popcorn, and beer. (As Buffy might have said, "Beer... foamy... good." Of course, that was right before she said, "Beer bad..." but one can assume that with church supervision, they'll stop at "foamy... good" before getting to "beer... bad.") Garlic necklaces and wooden stakes are apparently optional.
Members of the class are being encouraged to read "What Would Buffy Do?: Vampire Slayer as Spiritual Guide," and discussion will continue on a special blog. The last class in the eight-week series will take place on Halloween, when participants will be encouraged to dress as their favorite "Buffy" character.
Of course, the Macon church class isn't the first analysis of the spiritual side of slayage. Over at Hollywood Jesus, horror writer/environmental toxicologist (yes, really) Maurice Broaddus writes about Buffy, Alias, Stephen King and other bastions of pop culture from a spiritual angle. Idol Chatter's Donna Freitas has made no secret of her spiritual love for all things Buffy. At Slayage.tv lives the online International Journal of Buffy Studies, with articles like "The Evolution of Joss Whedon's Vampire Mythology and the Ontology of the Soul" and others. And the cult of Buffy continues to inspire, as the IFC Film Center in NYC takes a cue from Rocky Horror and serves up midnight shows of the soulful musical episode, in sing-along format.
Still, the best thing about having Buffy classes in church? Abundant crucifixes minimize chances of vampire invasion.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 6:47 PM | Permalink |
...Or so the comedian-turned-liberal political commentator claims during the initial moments of the documentary "Al Franken: God Spoke," opening in limited released tomorrow.
Hilariously dressed in a Santa Claus-like beard and holding a Ten Commandment-esque tablet--presumably Al Franken's mode of representing God--the film opens with Franken's voice booming amid the clouds: "God Spoke! God spoke to me and he told me to write this down...." Franken is of course, mocking pundits and politicians who have been known (and heard) to imply that God speaks through them and the ideas they espouse--most notably President Bush. (This scene is sure to offend some viewers--though then again, those viewers it might offend probably won't go see a documentary about Al Franken. They are busy at home reading Ann Coulter's latest diatribe, "Godless.")
But for viewers hoping for a Franken critique about God and politics, religion and the public square, Franken's mockery of right-wingers' claims to bend the ear of God is limited to those first moments. This documentary is not at all about religion or God (at least in any direct way), despite its title's implications. It is, instead, an overview of two years in the life of Al Franken--which includes a good deal of sparring with Ann Coulter and the rise and subsequent demise of Air America, the liberal radio network Al Franken spearheaded. (OK, maybe "demise" is not the right word--but the network is having its troubles.)
The film is certainly a tribute to the career of Al Franken, specifcally how he uses the claims and foibles of our country's O'Reillys and Coulters as a means to espouse his liberal point of view and make his targets look stupid in the process. The film also highlights Franken's recent struggles to make Air America work. (It is having trouble finding its audience and has been dropped altogether in some major markets.)
Though I was disappointed to find out that the film has virtually nothing in common with its title, the documentary is sure to interest Al Franken fans. It's as "fair and balanced" a film as one can hope from two unabashed fans of the documentary's subject.
Both Kris and Doug, in their own separate ways, downplay the controversy over ABC's "The Path to 9/11" miniseries. Maybe it's just that, unlike them, I am a stereotypical East Coast liberal, but I can't dismiss Democrats' complaints over the TV movies' exaggerations and fabrications so easily. Let's not forget another based-on-fact miniseries pulled--not just edited, as this one was--because of conservative complaints about truthfulness: "The Reagans," CBS's 2003 docudrama about the former president. Let's apply the same values here.
For better or worse, we Americans look to Hollywood--and the fiction it produces--for insight and, yes, information about news and historical events; Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert owe their success to this trend, and they step up to that task responsibly, with a deep thoughtfulness inside their comedic exteriors.
That's not to say every work of fiction need hew to truthfulness and social responsibility; it just means that if you're purporting to present fact, do it in a way that is honest and which helps further our understanding instead of muddying it. For ABC, the timing of this miniseries around the fifth anniversary was no coincidence, nor was its hiring of 9-11 Commission chair Tom Kean as a consultant. The clear message, despite the hastily added disclaimers to the contrary, was that this movies dramatized The Truth. If not quite a documentary, it was to be not quite a work of fiction either.
And why would anyone need to fictionalize 9-11? As Maureen Dowd wrote this past weekend, "Isn’t the dire actuality enough?" For a nation still mourning its losses, still trying to figure out how best to respond to the terrorist threat, still trying to understand how our leaders and intelligence services could have missed the clues leading up to Sept. 11, 2001, it's just plain irresponsible of ABC to air a miniseries that does anything short of depicting truth as it happened. A mix of fact and fiction is the worst of both worlds, allowing us neither to dismiss it as mere entertainment or to embrace it as edifying.
I applaud ABC for re-editing the movie after the complains surfaced, but for me, the movie's credibility is already lost, and I don't know what to accept and what to reject in its portrayal of this crucial part of our recent history. "Truthiness" just doesn't cut it here, and we deserved better.
Despite protests, petitions, and threats of boycott, the first part of ABC's mini-series "The Road to 9/11" aired last night. Many political pundits and liberal media watchdogs were crying foul--even though some of them hadn't seen an advance copy of the movie--because they felt it was spinning the facts to be sympathetic to Bush's handling of the terrorist attack while portraying Clinton's lack of response to Bin Laden as the cause of the 9/11 tragedy. ABC's official stance--repeated often during last night's broadcast--has been that this is simply a fictional recreation of some of the events leading up to 9/11 and is not meant to be a documentary.
The first part of the mini-series started with the collapse of the Twin Towers but then began working its way back in time to 1998, when journalist John Miller broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden. The film then goes back further still, to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Through all of this, we are reminded in scene after scene that not only were there many warnings of what was to come in 2001, but also that many government operatives were feverishly working to capture Bin Laden, only to be hampered by beareaucracy. In short, this movie tells us what we already know: Hindsight is always 20/20.
Quite honestly, I don't know how closely this mini-series adheres to the Commission Report on 9/11--which is what ABC has claimed the script is based on. What I do know is that the liberal political conspiracy theories and verbal attacks surrounding the mini-series are unfounded and make me automatically doubt any other argument about how the events surrounding 9/11 are being portrayed.
Specifically, director David Cunningham has been under attack on sites like Ariana Huffington's blog. He's been called a right-wing activist simply because his father is the founder of a missionary organization called Youth With A Mission (YWAM). YWAM is not an organization involved in political activism of any kind, but an organization that offers Bible training and coordinates relief efforts in other countries as well as the U.S. And while David Cunningham is a Christian, perhaps the reason he was hired to direct this movie was simply because ABC used him in the past to direct other historical dramas (he did ABC's version of "Little House") and they liked his work. In fact, Cunningham posted a sensible response to detractors over on ABC's website, but it attracted such inflammatory comments in response that ABC temporarily took it down.
My point is simply this: The mini-series, so far anyway, is actually not that poignant or insightful or revelatory--but the controversy around the mini-series is. While there are better examples in the media of coverage of the events surrounding 9/11, perhaps the controversy surrounding this mini-series underscores that the depth of the political and cultural divide in this country is a long way from being bridged.
Guy Ritchie, sometimes known these days as Mr. Madonna, recently fell asleep during a Kabbalah meditation service. It's okay, it happens to everyone--we may not be celebrities, but we understand. We're all busy, what with our jujitsu and jetlag and all that living in castles with bodyguards. Not to mention that our wives are constantly under scrutiny from the press and regularly the subject of excommunications and inquisitions declared against us for disrespectful use of religious iconography. At the end of a long week, can we really be expected to engage in meaningful spiritual pursuits?
But instead of laughing good-naturedly at her husband's exhaustion or emergent narcolepsy, like the other worshippers did, Madonna didn't crack a smile, leading gossiphounds to speculate again that adherence to Kabbalah is driving a wedge between the Ritchies.
But according to this article in the Daily Mail, Madonna (who at one point took the "Kabbalah name" of "Esther") may not be long for Kabbalah herself, because she's "said to resent the enormous drain her association with the group has been on her finances" and because "her patience with the religion has become increasingly tested because it has ultimately failed to help her achieve her dream of a brother or sister for nine-year-old Lourdes, her daughter by fitness instructor Carlos Leon, and five-year-old son Rocco by Ritchie."The mail quotes an "associate" of Madonna's as saying, "Madonna looked to Kabbalah for results. She thought her faith would help her get pregnant again, but she is feeling let down."
So for me, as another Esther, approaching the Jewish High Holidays, this begs a re-examination of the role that religion plays in our lives. Most of us are born into a religious structure, and we stay members of that religion--practicing faithfully, sporadically, or not at all--but counted among the numbers for the sake of demographics, at least. Others are seekers--born into a family that worships one way, but find that faith in some way wanting; the seekers leave parental faith behind and try on other faiths until they find one that fits.
Madonna was born Catholic, but found the structure restrictive and her faith severely impacted by the loss of her mother. Disappointed in her traditional faith, she's never missed an opportunity to take a shot at Catholicism through unconventional and often-offensive use of religious symbols in her work. When she embraced Kabbalah, she did so with all her heart and her pocketbook. Now, it seems that because Kabbalah disappointed her by not providing another child, she may leave that behind.
So is the function of religion meant to be results-oriented? Or does having faith mean believing that there's a reason for the things that do and don't happen, even if it's inscrutable? And what of those moments when your partner's spiritual affiliations don't match with your own?
When confronted with all these issues, it's not surprising that the mind and body sometimes choose sleep over spirituality.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 3:17 PM | Permalink |
As Kris describes, several of former President Clinton's advisors and administration officials had put pressure on ABC to cancel--or at least change the story and dialogue--of its 9-11 miniseries, which began last night and ends tonight. I am struck by the hypocrisy of it.
The show that ran last night contained changed and deleted scenes. For Democrats to influence that is absolutely counter to everything they posit about artistic freedoms and civil liberties, not to mention their accusations of the insider influence of the Bush administration upon government service contracts, oil, and the media.
According to CNN and AP reports, the original version "indicated President Clinton's preoccupation with his potential impeachment may have hurt the effort to go after Osama bin Laden," including a scene with "an actor portraying White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke" telling FBI agent John O'Neill: "The Republicans are going all-out for impeachment. I just don't see in that climate the president's going to take chances" to "give the order to kill bin Laden."
In last night's version, Clarke said "The president has assured me this... won't affect his decision-making." In another deleted scene, Clarke says the "Lewinsky thing is a noose around his neck," but that scene was cut in full. And there were many others.
I have personally enjoyed the long relationship between Hollywood and Washington, D.C., going back to Jimmy Stewart's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." Movies, television, and docudramas have long brought the slow pace of government bureaucracy and behind-the-scenes plots and decisions into the entertainment arena. No one is ever confused, though, as to the "entertainment" part of the arena, and everyone knows that docu-dramas usually carry more "drama" than "docu."
The culture war between the two political parties is as clear as the difference between CNN and Fox News. Whether it's government service contracts or oil or television, there will be two sides to stories as long as there are two dominant political parties.
To that end, this controversy is a "repeat." I'm looking forward to the second half of the show tonight. It's a good reminder that plotters are plotting, terrorists are terrorizing, governments are governing, and operatives are operating and its enough to remind me to pray for all of the heroes who work on my behalf and give thanks to our Lord that we have the freedoms we do, starting with life itself, something robbed from thousands of people five years ago today.
"I would never steal anyone's boyfriend. It's bad karma, and I'm a big believer in karma--hence the fact that I've studied kabbalah. I'm very true to the 'Treat people the way you want to be treated' sort of thing." --Lindsay Lohan
Hollywood's favorite tabloid starlet appears on the cover of this month's Elle magazine, disarmingly frank and honest about her experiences with the paparazzi, dating various men, visiting Iraq, and--surprise--religion, among other things.
Going the way of Madonna and Britney, Lindsay seems to embrace Kabbalah, a form of Jewish mysticism, as the faith that prevents her from committing relationship adultery. Problem is, Lindsay mistakenly points out Kabbalah helped her understand karma, a reincarnation concept usually associated with Buddhism and Hinduism.
Even though Madonna and Britney also flirted with Hinduism, Lindsay seems unaware of her religious gaffe. Still Lindsay seems to be having a true New Age, multifaith experience.
Aside from getting in touch with her spiritual side, L.Lo has also set Iraq as a top destination spot for her next trip out of the states:
ELLE: Any big plans for the next year? LL: I've been trying to go to Iraq with Hillary Clinton for so long. Hillary was trying to work it out, but it seemed too dangerous. I wanted to do what Marilyn Monroe did, when she went and just set up a stage and did a concert for the troops all by herself. It's so amazing seeing that one woman just going somewhere, this beautiful sex kitten, who's basically a pinup, which is what I've always aspired to be. So I tried to go there. I'm not afraid of going.
At 20, L.Lo's desire to go overseas and entertain disheartened soldiers seems admirable, especially when she admonishes the paparazzi, "Stop writing about me and start writing about how people are dying overseas for our country!" Unfortunately, her confessed aspirations to be a pinup à la Marilyn Monroe is self-serving and unlike the enlightened mystic beliefs of Kabbalah... or karma.
Perhaps Lindsay should take a page out of Evangeline Lilly's book. Raised as a Baptist and Mennonite, the "Lost" actress and May 2006 Elle cover girl seems to be truly making headway in her faith. As a former Sunday School teacher who would prefer to be stranded on a desert island with her Bible, Evangeline has traveled to Rwanda for missionary work and wept at the thought of being a sexy pinup girl. She also expresses hopes of imitating another Hollywood icon, albeit one who was known for her humanitarian work just as much as her acting: Audrey Hepburn.
Fox's brainless sitcom, "Til Death," a comedy about "love, death, and marriage," starring Brad Garrett ("Everybody Loves Raymond"), has a lot of positive things to say about the institution of matrimony today. None of them, however, are contained in the pilot's drab depiction of neighboring suburban couples nagging and sniping at each other over the husband's right to install a pool table in the dining room. Nor are they in the wan closing scene, which concludes that love means having someone to drive you to the hospital.
No, the upbeat news from "Til Death" is that since "The Honeymooners," which clearly inspired this show, series like Paul Reiser's '90s hit "Mad About You" or the more recent "The King of Queens" have recognized there's more to satire in how couples try to work with, rather than around, each other. Televised marital relations, in other words, have come a long way.
That said, Garrett does a fair impression of Jackie Gleason's knowing oaf, dedicated to enlightening Norton-ish newlywed Eddie Kaye Thomas ("American Pie") about the facts of married life. But his insights, over Thomas's protests about the value of communication and mutual respect, are little more evolved than Ralph Cramden's of 50 years ago, and, despite that, lack even Ralph's "Bang! Zoom!"
Starting this Saturday, NBC’s new morning children’s programming will feature a goofy cucumber, a spunky tomato, and some very cute French peas. Yes, Big Idea Productions, the force behind the hugely successful VeggieTales series of videos, recently signed a deal to provide a two-hour block of programming on NBC as well as Spanish programming for sister network Telemundo and other VeggieTales programming for the “I” network--formerly known as the Pax Network--every Friday afternoon.
Not all of the VeggieTales episodes on NBC will be original stories--at least not at first--but carefully edited versions of previous Veggie adventures, including the "Larry Boy" and "3-2-1 Penguins" series, that will align with NBC standards. Gone will be the Bible verse at the end of each story but the messages about sharing, being thankful, and other wholesome themes will remain intact.
More importantly for those of us adults who are closet Veggie fans, the shows will feature a silly song or two, like "The Bunny Song" and "The Grapes of Wrath."
"Happy Hour" premieres tonight on Fox, and it's not worth rushing home for. Get some more work done, or tune into a game, or just enjoy whatever real-life Happy Hour you're coming from. This show's a dud, at least at first review.
"Happy Hour" tries to be "Cheers" and "Friends" at the same time, and it is neither. I don't remember seeing the first episodes of those sitcoms, but I sure remember the characters as being more endearing than Henry, Heather, Larry, Brad, Tina, and Amanda. Perhaps time will help and their chemistry will improve, but I'm not raising a glass to this show yet.
The premise is awesome, though: "Whatever happens on the way to Happy Hour, around 4 o'clock, there will always be an excuse to raise a glass." Fellowship and relationships among friends is at the heart of the spiritual journey and Jesus himself enjoyed reclining at the table with his friends, or turning plain water into the best wine anyone had had.
But "Happy Hour" will need that kind of miracle to succeed over the long-haul.
Recently, I blogged about the website JonStewartisGod.com, (JSiG for short), the homepage for a "religion" based on deifying the popular fake-news anchor. It turns out that, like any religion worth its salt, the Stewartist faith, if I may call it that, is already splintering. Yes, there's a schism among the faithful over whether to accept fellow anchor Stephen Colbert into the pantheon. The rival Web site www.jonism.com, while confusingly named, accepts both men as saviors, in distinction to the original JSiG. Stewart is known as "His Hostiness" and Colbert as "His Truthiness." Futher bolstering its sense of inclusion, Jonism declares that regular Daily Show correspondents like Ed Helms, Samantha Bee, and Lewis Black are prophets.
Of the two sites, Jonism is much broader in its scope. In addition to its acceptance of Colbert, Jonists have a "Fake News Heaven and Hell," to which they consign journalists, pundits, politicians, and lobbyists based on their political affiliation. (Example: Anderson Cooper is in heaven, Ann Coulter in hell). JSiG has a catchy single, but Jonism has a "Relics and Idolatry" page where the faithful can view screencaps and photos of their idols.
In terms of doctrine, though, JSiG definitely has the advantage. They have written their own text about beliefs and practices, whereas Jonism simply reprints one-liners or segments from Stewart's and Colbert's shows. One could make the argument that it's better to hear the Word straight from the deity without human interference, but it never hurts to sprinkle some "thee"s and "thou"s into the liturgy. JSiG also has a much more streamlined and easy-to-read website. Jonism tends to rely too much on bright colors and fancy graphics that make their message harder to read. JSiG uses cool colors that feel soothing and make me want to hand my soul over to a man I've never met. And isn't that what online church is supposed to be all about?
What to make of this schism in Jon-Stewart-based religions? Just as Christianity has its Catholic/Protestant divide, so believers in the spirituality of "The Daily Show" must choose their allegiance. For now, I'm staying neutral in what will surely become an all-out religious war. Forget fake religion. I'm sticking with the fake news.
The Catholic Church has not ever been silent about its non-love affair with Harry Potter & Company. Concerns about the series creating witch-loving children abound. But to say that J.K. Rowling's beloved series, which has the world's children reading like never before in recent memory, is satanic? According to Linda Morris, reporting for "The Age" about recent Vatican commentary regarding Mr. Potter, the Vatican's official exorcist did just that:
The Vatican has never been a fan of Harry Potter, but its chief exorcist has gone one step further and condemned J. K. Rowling's fictional boy wizard as downright evil.
"Behind Harry Potter hides the signature of the king of the darkness, the devil," Father Gabriele Amorth, the Pope's "caster-out of demons," said.
The "Potter" books contain many positive references to the satanic arts, falsely drawing a distinction between black and white magic, Father Amorth told the Daily Mail in London. He also said he was convinced that Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler were possessed by the devil.
Comparing Harry Potter to Stalin and Hitler? Give. Me. A. Break.
The only reason to tune in tonight to Fox's "Standoff"--from a religion-interested point of view, at least--is to get an update on the state of Hollywood's relationship with Islamic fundamentalism. The show, about a pair of FBI hostage negotiators (Ron Livingston and Rosemarie DeWitt) who are also sweet on each other, reveals that we're in a post-Osama period in which terror is a plot point, not a theme in itself, and a man in a Middle Eastern beanie and a vest of homemade explosives isn't a vengeful hater of mankind, but maybe just a mixed-up kid with a Mommy problem.
But no one will watch "Standoff" for its cogency, which is already compromised by the notion that even a major city will have two traffic-halting, building-clearing hostage situations in a week. It's when the fast-talking psychologists turn their mad chatter to romance that the show, debuting tonight after "House," gets interesting.
Well, not literally. But when you're talking about a movie like "The Hebrew Hammer"--the blaxploitation-style Jewish comedy film of a few years ago, which bombed at the theaters but inspired wild fan devotion--it's not surprising that the sequel would involve taking down the Mad Prince of Malibu.
TMZ reports that the sequel, which has already been written by HH1 scribe Jonathan Kesselman, features the following sure-to-be-memorable--and-memorably protested--opening scene:
The sequel, called "The Hebrew Hammer 2: Hammer vs. Hitler," depicts a very drunk Mel Gibson spilling out of Moonshadows, two blondes on each arm, and a bottle of Irish whiskey in hand. Gibson then obnoxiously berates the valets, leaps into his Lexus and speeds off, screaming obscenities about the Jews. Apprehended by a policeman down the road from Moonshadows, Gibson's anti-Semitic tirade is cut short when the cop--"The Hebrew Hammer"--puts a bullet in Gibson's head, spraying a bloody Star of David onto the windshield of his Lexus.
"Don't mess with the Heebs," the Hammer grunts at the bloodied superstar. "Jesus was our homeboy first."
OK, so I made up that last line of dialogue. (Note to Jonathan Kesselman: If you'd like to use that line, give my agent a call.)But no studio is going to make this film. It's one thing to put Mel in rehab. But proposing to blow away the former Braveheart? Never gonna happen. The only people who shoot and bomb celebrities are Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and even they use puppet and animated surrogates (see also "South Park": "Canada bombs the Baldwins" and "the Film Actors Guild" in Team America, particularly Matt Damon). I think the only real-life people you can safely blow away on screen are Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. Anyone else is going to cause an uproar.
But Mel might be able to rest easy, since I'm not sure that that scene actually exists. The "proof" for this story is apparently this opening page of HH2's script. I know that TMZ boasts an exclusive interview with Kesselman, but it seems to me like the writer/director is joking about the Kill Mel opening scene. The page in question contains two different fonts, and seems awfully unprofessional, even for a draft.
Maybe I'm wrong. But the story seems a little off to me--perhaps the script page is part of an internet buzz campaign designed to evince online support for a movie sequel that's going to be a tough sell in today's Hollywood. At least the rest of the movie--The Hebrew Hammer is called out of retirement to take on a time-traveling Hitler--sounds like a premise worth watching.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 4:00 PM | Permalink |
While the general public is familiar with the MPAA ratings that accompany the movies they watch--G, PG, PG-13, R--and what the ratings mean, it is safe to say that most moviegoers don't really know, or care, what the Motion Picture Association of America is or how its members decide what film gets what rating. But documentary filmmaker Kirby Dick thinks that consumers should be aware of the intricate politics and enormous hypocrisy of the MPAA. With satirical humor--not to mention two female detectives who hunt MPAA board members down and make them confess everything--he unravels the mystery of the MPAA's secretive ways in "This Film Is Not Rated," which opens in limited release this weekend before airing on the Independent Film Channel this fall.
In theory, the MPAA is simply a voluntary ratings system in which movie executives from different studios serve for a predetermined length of time on the ratings board that hands out a rating based on a film's content. No filmmaker is required to submit his or her film to the MPAA ratings board for approval. However, the MPAA works closely with the National Association of Theater Owners, and they like the ratings system. So if a film is not rated, or has the dreaded NC-17 rating, the chance of a film having commercial success is slim.
However, the MPAA system becomes even more complicated in light of the fact that the members of the board are from conflicting studios, so there's just a teeny bit of sabotage going on in the ratings decision making process. For example, if you think a fellow studio has a potential blockbuster on its hands, maybe you want it to get an "R" rating instead of a "PG-13" rating, so its audience will be smaller. On the other hand, all studio execs want to reach that target demographic of young white males, so violence and women's breasts don't receive the same kind of rating as male nudity or other controversial elements.
Dick supports these claims by interviewing numerous directors, including Kevin Smith ("Clerks") and Matt Stone ( "South Park"), who have attempted to do battle with the MPAA and have often lost those battles. With both humor and anger the directors recount the notes they have been given by the MPAA instructing them on how to achieve a different rating by editing the film differently--even though the MPAA is not supposed to give such suggestions.
I don't agree with some of the conclusions "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" comes to when exploring how to solve the problem of the MPAA , but I still think this movie is important viewing for anyone who has bought a movie ticket based on a movie's MPAA rating. The MPAA does not exist to be a friendly moral gatekeeper to guide or protect you or your family but is a corrupted system that is arbitrarily legislating morality and censoring content. And it's the degree of corruption that makes "This Film" so shocking.
Oh, and just in case you are wondering, "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" received an NC-17 rating for its objectionable content.
Against a backdrop of slams at the U.S. government and lectures on how the architectural industrialization and tourist culture is ruining the local flavor of N.Y.C. neighborhoods, "Looking for Kitty" (opening today) is a story of friendship between two men, both of them chasing memories of the women who have left them.
Edward Burns' grieving widower is a private detective who is hired by a high-school baseball coach (Paul Krumholtz) to help him find his missing wife. Krumholtz plays a good, if insular guy from Peekskill (which Burns's character constantly calls "Poughkeepsie") whose entire life was centered on the local level--his job as a Little League coach and his wife, nothing else. Each character in his own way has excluded himself from experiences outside the parameters of his comfort zone; by being in each other's lives they teach each other to embrace the reality of their circumstances and engage with the world around them. The two protagonists are themselves "New York holdouts," old-school guys who refuse to relinquish their hold on their emotional geography and persist in standing strong against the winds of change.
Krumholtz's dogged adherence to the belief that his wife was seduced by a culture of excess and that she really wants to come back is pathetic--but it is also relatable. To varying degrees, we've all been there, adhering to ideals that we'll never reach or wanting people who are out of our reach. For his part, the detective explains that he's not using the internet because he likes to do things the old-fashioned way, "the way Bogie woulda done it." Yet, he has rejected one of the more old-fashioned elements with which he was raised, Catholicism (a common theme in Burns's work), because he notes that even without the religious guilt, "I felt sh---y enough about myself already." The two help each other change, and even though each one goes home alone, they ultimately "leave because it is time to go," which is a subtle lesson that not everyone learns.
Portraying a neighbor, Connie Britton provides Burns' character with a moment of distraction and a tortured smolder, while Rachel Dratch, playing a woman in a bar, serves as a temptation to the fiercely loyal Krumholtz. This film is also noteworthy for the return of Ari Meyers (of TV's "Kate and Allie"), and features some odd but evocative and moving moments from both Burns and Krumholtz.
All of the women are underused, which is probably intentional, since the press kit talks of the "mechanics and mysteries of male bonding." Though it's pretty clear that the connections between Burns' and Krumholtz's characters are superficially about beer and baseball, there is something deeper that binds them: the brotherhood of loss and a lingering obstinacy when it comes to accepting what life has dealt.
I left the theater feeling sadder, but not significantly. The experience felt a little like tofu--spongy, with an indeterminate texture; I knew there was protein to the dish as a whole. But when lasting satisfaction eluded me, it was hard to admit that it was over. Which is, perhaps, the point.
posted by Esther Kustanowitz @ 3:59 PM | Permalink |
Thumbing through the latest celebrity-strewn Gap ad, part of the company's new "t-shirt shop" campaign, I found the usual melange of supermodels, iconic rockers, film legends, and rising stars. All looking enigmatic, gazing into the camera, straight at you, saying--what?
Then I turned the page and found "Entourage" star Jeremy Piven, flaunting his Star of David pendant.
The advertising masterminds behind this campaign want us to equate shopping at the Gap with individuality, personal style, and self-expression--so says the p.r. Isn't that why you shop at the Gap? I hope so, because you can hardly see the t-shirts in the artsy photos.
If that's the case, consider what we learn about Piven, or ourselves, from his pose. He's contorted into a pretzel-like arrangement, with arms entwined, one hand over his face. Clenched between his lips, in one version of the ad, is a chain, and from it dangles a large metal Mogen David. (In another version, right, the chain is around his neck, the Mogen David resting on his chest.)
Maybe Piven--who plays the ruthless, trash-talking, wife-dissing Hollywood agent Ari Gold on "Entourage" and starred in the movie "Keeping Up with the Steins," about a driven Hollywood agent competing with other Hollywood Jews to throw the most expensive, extravagant Bar Mitzvah party in history--is all tied up in knots about the fact that it's 2006 and he's helping to perpetuate hoary media stereotypes of Jews.
Donna Freitas has a Ph.D. in spirituality and is the author of "Becoming A Goddess Of Inner Poise: Spirituality for The Bridget Jones in All of Us."
Douglas Howe is an ordained minister, executive coach, author, and retreat leader.
Paul O'Donnell is the former Culture editor at Beliefnet.
Kris Rasmussen, the author of "WonkaMania," has been a contributing editor to the Christian music magazine CCM and a feature writer for Relevant magazine.
Plus, a number of Beliefnet editors will also be posting to Idol Chatter as the mood strikes.
Add to Del.icio.us 
Digg This 
Fave on Technorati
Perhaps, like me, when you saw the teasers for ABC's new show "
One of the movies I am most excited about seeing this upcoming movie season is New Line's version of Jesus' birth, 
Though the documentary 
Anyone familiar with 
As if its premise isn't shocking enough--suburban mom selling marijuana to maintain her privileged lifestyle--Showtime's "
If there could ever be an "accidentally great" movie, the new remake of "All the King's Men" might be it. On the one hand, it's a big political action drama that lacks action, lacks drama, and lacks a real sense of purpose. On the other hand, it accomplishes either a wonderful stumble or a sublime piece of greatness in mirroring our current political system and most of its participants: There's a lot of activity and talk, but not much action or message.
Censorship and the religious right will once again take center stage during primetime tonight on Aaron Sorkin's "Saturday Night Live"-inspired backstage drama, 
Single Jewish women (and their mothers) are supposed to experience a Pavlovian drool reaction to the presence of doctors, but I never went thusly gaga, not even for television doctors. And while I do admit that Clooney was cute, this whole "
Jet Li's "
The success of any 
The ever-rising star television series creator and producer 
The long-anticipated FoxFaith Movies, 
Innovative jazz musician John Zorn is having a good month--he's won two prizes, though most people only know about one of them. Even hardcore Zorn fans may not know that the jazz musician and founder/CEO of Tzadik Records took the prize for Best Blend of Jazz and Heritage at the 
The Russian Space Agency recently turned down Madonna's bid to get a spot on an upcoming mission. This must come as a disappointment to those Christians who would love to see the pop diva shot into space, once and for all.
Idol Chatter readers may remember a 
No character on television represents my own spiritual journey better than 
St. Francis Church in Macon, GA, is putting a stake through the heart of boring adult education classes, while providing pop culture aficionados with a learning opportunity they can really sink their teeth into. Starting this Thursday, the church will launch "
...Or so the comedian-turned-liberal political commentator claims during the initial moments of the documentary "
Fox's brainless sitcom, "
"
Well, not literally. But when you're talking about a movie like "
Thumbing through the latest 
If that's the case, consider what we learn about Piven, or ourselves, from his pose. He's contorted into a pretzel-like arrangement, with arms entwined, one hand over his face. Clenched between his lips, in one version of the ad, is a chain, and from it dangles a large metal Mogen David. (In another version, right, the chain is around his neck, the Mogen David resting on his chest.)
