The Declaration of Independence: 250 Years Ago Today

 

The United States of America is 250-years-old today.

This is an amazing milestone for our nation.  But in many ways, it emphasizes how short a time our country has been around.

Recently Mel Brooks celebrated his 100th birthday.  I saw something on the internet that said that he has been around for 40% of our nation's existence.  I also saw something that said his birth was closer to the death of Thomas Jefferson than to today.

That is incredible to me how few generations we are from the 1776.  

Wiser and more poetic people than me have waxed eloquently about the virtues of America.  But please allow me a few humble words to express my love for my country.

My father is an immigrant.  He came here because America is the land of opportunity.  I asked him once why he didn't stay in his native nation.  He told me that if he stayed there was a very low ceiling to how far he could go.  But in America, there was no limit.

He also told me that the thing that surprised him the most was how big our country is.  Before coming here, he imagined you could drive from New York to Chicago in a few hours.  But the vastness of our land blew his mind.

When he got here, he started off staying with his brother who had also immigrated.  He then met and married my mom.  And together they had very little.  They saved and scraped just to get by, all the while my father worked himself constantly to provide.  Many years later when my parents got divorced my father told me that he would always take care of my mom because "she stayed with me when we had nothing." 

But they did not always have nothing.  He worked to provide a better life for his family.  He took in his mom and dad, who also became US citizens.  He loves this country and has always been grateful for all that it provided.

My love for America is rooted mostly in my father's story.  And it isn't about any simply about material success.  It's about what America meant to my father:

It is the land of opportunity, because it is the land of freedom.

A few years ago I was out after dark on a summer's night getting a late dinner for my wife and I.  And as I was walking through the parking lot, I took a moment to think about how through so much of human history and even in parts of the world today, people did not experience these kind of simple freedoms.  Not only was I able to earn a living to pay for that meal, but I have the freedom to choose where to go, where to live, where to work.  While there are always dangers around, I live in relative peace and security.  That is a blessing that I often take for granted because I have lived under it for so long.

In America, I have the freedom to become who I choose to be.  I think of my favorite patriotic song, "God Bless the USA" by Lee Greenwood.  His opening line says, "If tomorrow all the things were gone, I'd worked for all my life and I had to start again with just my children and my wife, I'd thank my lucky stars that I'm living here today, 'cause the flag still stands for freedom and they can't take that away."  My life has had ups and downs, same as everyone else.  But even at the lowest of times, I was grateful to be in America.  Because here, we have the freedom.

Today, I focus my gratitude to God for our country.  No nation is perfect.  There are still many areas where the fight for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness still rages on.  But it rages on because we are committed to the ideas given to us in our founding document: the Declaration of Independence.

When I taught World History, one of my mentors pointed out to me how unique the American Revolution was.  Most revolutions in history turn into horrific bloody reprisals of vengeance.  But America was built on ideas, philosophy.  Great thinkers like Locke and Montesquieu helped lay the rational foundation for our country.  Our revolution was not just one of arms but one of thought.

In America, we see the world in a different way.  We take very seriously the Christian principle that every single human life has value.  Because of this, it is the individual and not the state that is the bedrock of our nation.  It is one of the reasons we are not a pure democracy: our rights do not come from the majority.  Our rights do not come from a king.  We do not get our rights from the Constitution. Our rights do not come from the government at all.

They come from God.

I read somewhere that the Bill of Rights should not be read as a list of rights that the government gives the people.  Instead it should be read as a list of rights that all citizens have from nature that no government has the right to take away.  When I see how things like freedom of speech and freedom of religion are absent in so many countries of the world, it fills me with gratitude that I live in a country that enshrines those rights in our very nature.

Our founding fathers pledged everything, risked everything so that we could live in the freedom we have today.  They fought and sacrificed so we could have this beautifully simple thing called "normal life."  The family dinners, Sunday drives, drinks with friends, quiet walks, football tailgates, school plays, backyard gardening, reading books on the porch... all of these things are possible because we live in the greatest country in the world.

Today I will continue to pray for my country, that she may overcome all of the injustice that still plagues her and for her protection from all of our enemies.  I will also pray in thanksgiving for my country, for all that she provides for us.  I will pray for all those who have fought for us, those that have died for us, and those who have given to us so that we could live this life.

Below is the entire text of the Declaration of Independence.  

As I have written in years past, I encourage you to read the entire text below on this birthday of our nation.  Particularly, I am struck by the last line:

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence,  we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Those who wrote their names on that document held up as collateral for the investment in our freedom:

1.  Their Lives.  I am humbled when I remember that so many gave much more than I will
ever give so that people like me could live free.  The only way we can hold onto our freedom is if men and women are willing to pay the ultimate price.  Too often tyrants, both fearsome and soft-spoken, try to snatch away our freedom.  They depend on us to lay down our resistance and give in.  We must never do so.  The Founding Fathers gave us that pledge.

2.  Their Fortunes.  I will likely never see combat.  But how do I spend my money to
ensure freedom?  Do I take care of our wounded warriors?  Do I support laws and
representatives I believe in with my capital?  And do I take payments from those who
would make me dependent?  This pervasive bribery must lead inexorably to subtle slavery.

3.  Their Sacred Honor.  Do we even believe in honor anymore today?  Does our name mean anything?  In A Man for All Seasons, when asked why he would not take an oath of

loyalty to Henry VIII, Thomas More said, "When a man takes an oath, 
he’s holding his own self in his hands. Like water.  And if he 
opens his fingers then — he needn’t hope to find himself again." 
 We are free and we must stand by our commitments. 
 Otherwise who we are, our name, means nothing.  

These great men signed their names to this document. 

For each of them it may have been a death sentence.

But they signed it nevertheless.  They their day they took a stand against tyranny and stood for freedom.

In their day they stood as men.

Today they stand as giants.

And the challenge of today is this: could we stand with them?

Do we have what it takes to be the patriots at Valley Forge or the resistance at Boston Harbor?  Does that same noble spirit of freedom stir in us?

Or do we stand with those who try to tear down their memory to only have us remember their faults and failings and not the fact that they gave us the greatest nation that the world has ever known?

Perhaps reading this document again will renew and refresh the spirit of liberty.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

---

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1

Georgia:

   Button Gwinnett

   Lyman Hall

   George Walton

Column 2

North Carolina:

   William Hooper

   Joseph Hewes

   John Penn

South Carolina:

   Edward Rutledge

   Thomas Heyward, Jr.

   Thomas Lynch, Jr.

   Arthur Middleton

Column 3

Massachusetts:

John Hancock

Maryland:

Samuel Chase

William Paca

Thomas Stone

Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:

George Wythe

Richard Henry Lee

Thomas Jefferson

Benjamin Harrison

Thomas Nelson, Jr.

Francis Lightfoot Lee

Carter Braxton

Column 4

Pennsylvania:

   Robert Morris

   Benjamin Rush

   Benjamin Franklin

   John Morton

   George Clymer

   James Smith

   George Taylor

   James Wilson

   George Ross

Delaware:

   Caesar Rodney

   George Read

   Thomas McKean

Column 5

New York:

   William Floyd

   Philip Livingston

   Francis Lewis

   Lewis Morris

New Jersey:

   Richard Stockton

   John Witherspoon

   Francis Hopkinson

   John Hart

   Abraham Clark

Column 6

New Hampshire:

   Josiah Bartlett

   William Whipple

Massachusetts:

   Samuel Adams

   John Adams

   Robert Treat Paine

   Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:

   Stephen Hopkins

   William Ellery

Connecticut:

   Roger Sherman

   Samuel Huntington

   William Williams

   Oliver Wolcott

New Hampshire:

   Matthew Thornton

Film Review: Toy Story 5

 

Sexuality/Nudity No Objection

Violence No Objection

Vulgarity No Objection

Anti-Catholic Philosophy No Objection

Most people agree that Toy Story 3 was the perfect ending to the series and they are not wrong.  This latest entry in the series cannot top that fantastic conclusion. 

But it is better than Toy Story 4.

Toy Story 5 is once again centered on the toys living with Bonnie (Scarlett Spears).  Her main toy is Jessie (Joan Cusack) in the same way that Woody (Tom Hanks) was with Andy.  However, with more and more children becoming engrossed in technology, she has few playmates and friends.  So Bonnie's parents (Jay Hernandez and Lori Alan) buy here Lilypad (Greta Lee), a tablet so that she can connect with others her age.  But as she begins to fall down that rabbit hole, Lily conflicts with Jessie and the other toys.  Through a series of plot contrivances, Jessie gets separated from Bonnie and it is up to Woody and Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) to mount a rescue.

Oh, and there is an army of Buzz Lightyears that crash on a desert island trying to make their way to star command.

The first thing that you should know about this movie is that it is Jessie's movie.  Woody and Buzz are supporting characters to her character arc.  In the context of this point in the series, it makes sense.  Bonnie being a girl would naturally gravitate to Jessie as her main toy.  It is interesting that the writers/directors Andrew Stanton and McKenna Harris acknowledge that there are some natural differences between boys and girls reflected in the way they play.  Like Andy, Bonnie has heroes and villains and danger.  But unlike Andy, Bonnie's scenarios take place and weddings, balls, and honeymoons.  Also, Jessie would understand the feminine perspective of Bonnie's lonliness in a way that Woody and Buzz would not.  And in this way, the movie explores the lonilness of girls that I don't think it could with the original trilogy.

Another sad thing is that most of the original supporting characters are reduced to glorified cameos.  I know a number of the original voice actors have died, but it is still disappointing to not have them be a bigger part of the adventure.  We are introduced to some obsolete tech toys like Smarty Pants (Conan O'Brien), a toy that helps potty train kids.  And while they add some interesting dynamics, the others are missed.

The movie does two things very well.  The first is that it really gets the emotional beats right.  There is something very honest about Bonnie's pain and isolation.  I have seen this happen, where children who just want friends are too shy and isolated to feel like they fit in.  And often they either retreat further into themselves or they abandon who they are in order to fit in.  When Bonnie goes to a sleepover and proudly shows off Jessie, one of the girls asks in a tone dripping with disgust and judgment, "You still play with toys?"  And the look on Bonnie's face speaks volumes in a way that is crushing.  The emotional journey for Jessie is also powerful.  This movie helps resolve the trauma that we saw her endure when she was abandoned by her first owner, Emily.  Jessie has a kind of existential crisis regarding if her life has any meaning since she is doomed to be discarded at the end of her owner's childhood.

The second thing that the movie does really well is capture the change that technology, particularly screens, have brought to childhood.  The animation captures it like a spell is being cast on the children without being too over-the-top.  There is one moment towards the end where the toys run through a stranger's house but no on notices because everyone, including parents and children) are on some type of screen.  The constant dopamine hit creates a tangible addiction that you can see in Bonnie.  There is a fantastic scene shows Smarty Pants and the other tech toys the difference between being games and actually playing.  And that's what kids do: they vicariously give life to their toys.

The two big negatives that come through this tech are the killing of imagination and the problem of bullying.  Bonnie and another girl named Blaze (Mykal-Michelle Harris) have stronger imaginations because they are not constantly glued to the screen.  They are not passive receivers of entertainment.  They have to produce the entertainment to be lived out in their toys.  This may seem like a small thing, but playing with toys forces you to produce rather than receive; to make rather than consume.  Screens cause this imaginitave muscle to atrophy.  In regards to bullying, social media has made it unavoidable.  Before Bonnie gets Lilypad, she is isolated from others because she is missing out.  But once she is on social media, she is subject to mockery in a way that she is not expecting.  In one scene she is happily heading to a destination in the car when she sees girls in her social media group start dogpiling on her.  Her mom is completely baffled as to why Bonnie has had such a horrible mood swing, but it was because she was attacked out of nowhere by people who now have constant access to her via Lilypad.

But I have to give the movie credit in that it does not take a luddite view of technology.  While it heavily focuses on all of the dangers, Lily is not a villain the same way that Stinky Pete or Lotso were in previous films.  Lily genuinely wants what is best for Bonnie, and the movie is smart enough to realize that there is a place for technological advancements.  It just needs to be tempered with wisdom.  This wisdom is lacking in Bonnie's parents who simply unleash this world of tech onto Bonnie without any real guidance or supervision.  The message is clear: parents need to walk with their children regarding tech, not throw them into the deep end and let them drown.

The movie also also has some surprising things to say about natural law without meaning to.  In the Toy Story universe, toys are meant to be played with and to make a child happy.  For the most part, toys who reject this point of view are unhappy (again see Stinky Pete and Lotso).  The sadness in the toy comes from no longer playing with their child when they grow up.  But this joy cannot help but be present when real play occurs, as with Smarty Pants.  There is a wonderful scene where the army of Buzz Lightyears are marching through the woods and one of them is picked up by a family.  These Buzzes don't yet realize that they are toys and mount a rescue mission to rescue their fellow Buzz.  But later when they see their fellow Buzz being held and loved by a child, their eyes fill with awe and longing.  The "captured" Buzz sees them and smiles contendedly because he has found his happiness.

This captures so well the principles of natural law.  We are all made with an end or a purpose and our happiness consists in living in accord with that end.  This is true even if we are unaware of what our purpose is.  Smarty Pants and the Buzzes do not know what real play and childhood affection are.  But once they receive them, they are filled with happiness.  It is the same way with us human beings.  Even if we don't know God, we are made to be filled with the love of God and others.  When we find this, we find our happiness.

I was also pleasantly surprised that this movie showed traditional male/female romance as an important theme.  Buzz is in love with Jessie and wants to marry her.  Leaving aside the implications of how toys can make vows of fidelity, it presents this desire for lifelong married commitment as natural and beautiful.  This could be a reflection of how Bonnie plays with them, but it is refreshingly different from more recent Disney offerings.

And I should also say that the movie is a great deal of fun.  Message movies are usually not very good, so Stanton and McKenna understand that their first job is to make the movie fun.  While the story of the rogue Buzzes don't connect up to the main story for a while, they are some of the most enjoyable and entertaining sequences.  Watching Buzz and Woody bicker like old buddies has a familiar comfort to it, like (to paraphrase CS Lewis) putting on an old, comfortable pair of slippers.  The movie is also beautifully rendered with wonderful use of color and lighting.

This movie is a big improvement on Toy Story 4, which was a bit unfocused and didn't have a strong theme.  While the films in the original trilogy are still better, Toy Story 5 is a worth successor and worth your time.

Now if you will excuse me, I have to see my three favorite toys from my childhood who are sitting on a shelf in my family room and I am going to take a moment to recall all of the adventures we used to have when I was young.

Film Review: Supergirl (2026)

 

Sexuality/Nudity Acceptable

Violence Acceptable

Vulgarity Acceptable

Anti-Catholic Philosophy Mature

I think of the first three X-Men movies, the third one is the best.

I believe that Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice is an underrated masterpiece.

I am letting you know this upfront because based on the response from critics and the box office, Supergirl is a bomb.

But I disagree.

I think Supergirl is a very good movie, one that I enjoyed despite its flaws.  So I acknowledge that I am in the vast minority when it comes to this film.  My first two statements were for you, dear reader, so that you have a barometer for my taste in super hero films.

I don't mean to be a contrarian.  I was prepared to dislike this movie, but I found it way more charming than most people.

Supergirl is a sequel spin off to last year's Superman.  Supergirl/Kara (Milly Alcock) is different than her cousin Superman (David Corenswet).  Unlike Superman who has no memory of life before Earth, Kara lived for several years after the destruction of Krypton in a floating city of Argo.  For reasons that are explained throughout the film, she is forced to flee with only her dog Krypto.  Because of this, she does not feel at home on Earth and engages in self-destructive behavior.  For her 23rd birthday, she travels to a planet with a red sun so that she can lose her powers and get drunk and party.  It is there that she meets Ruthye (Eve Ridley), whose parents were killed by the leader of a group called the Brigands named Krem (Matthias Schoenaerts).  Ruthye is seeking revenge against Krem.  Kara does not want to get involved, but unfortunately crosses paths with Krem who poisons Krypto.  So Kara only has three days to find Krem and get the antidote.  Along the way they encounter dangers like Lobo (Jason Momoa), who is basically "Space Wolverine,"and other perils along the way.

Many people have criticized Ana Nogueira's script, but it has no more contrivances than most super-hero fare.  The story does go out of its way to seem rebellious in a very immature way.  The opening shot has Krypto urinating on a picture of Superman.  Speaking of urine, the movie also shows Kara sitting on a toilet and peeing.  Things like this seem like super-cheap ways of trying to give Kara some edge.  The set up to how Ruthye's family gets killed is also fairly stupid, but not a deal-breaker.  

The biggest deficit of this movie is that the villain is incredibly boring and bland.  He is basically a generic Russian mobster from a John Wick film but an alien.  He has no real personality to speak of or character.  He is really just there to facilitate Kara's character arc.  This isn't necessarily a knock on Schoenaerts' performance, since he is given very little to work with here.  If the screenwriter thinks that the villain isn't that interesting, why should we.  Contrast that with Lobo, who is really not on screen very much, but steals every scene.  DC has an incredibly stable of cosmic villains to choose from and they chose probably the most boring choice of them all.

Having said that, the movie is good in spite of these flaws.  The success or failure really comes down to whether or not you connect to Kara.  This is a challenge in the beginning, because the movie does not explain to you why she behaves like an irresponsible jerk. The movie has to let that story unfold.  When she first meets Ruthye, she continually talks herself out of helping.  But when Ruthye gets accosted and robbed by the patrons of the bar, Kara cannot help herself by assist.  This, rather than her conflict with Krem, is her main struggle: against herself.  She wants to lose herself in the oblivion of pleasure and self-pity, but her more noble nature nags at her conscience.  This is a movie about going from recklessness to responsibility.

My brother-in-law upon seeing the trailers called this movie Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 4.  And there is some good insight here.  Director Craig Gillespie's approach to alien cultures is very similar to how James Gunn approached them in GOTG: every culture was an analog to human culture.  This is not an uncommon approach, but Gunn did it in a way where the exotic was looked at as mundane in context and Gillespie does the same.  This isn't bad, but it feels very familiar.

One of the strengths of the script is that it knows how to power-scale Kara.  A struggle that many writers have with Superman is that he is so powerful that they cannot find an adequate challenge.  The script for Supergirl is able to avoid this problem by placing Kara into situations (e.g. the planet with the red sun) that puts her and Ruthye in real peril.  While some have criticized these as easy contrivances, I thought that they made sense in context.

I have seen a little bit of Alcock in the series House of the Dragon, but I didn't see a lot that impressed me.  However, I really liked her performance as Kara.  While many viewers found her cockiness off-putting, I saw it as her armor.  She has created a wall of stone around her heart because she has been hurt too much in the past.  I thought that Alcock was able to play the part well of the reluctant anti-hero who slowly comes to true heroism.  You can see why she avoids the responsibility because if she makes the wrong call or isn't good enough, people die.  Alcock lets this weight slowly sink onto her shoulders and the pressure forms her into something more heroic.

Ridley is an excellent balance for Alcock.  She is overly serious and precocious to counteract the world-weary protagonist.  She plays the part of the scared, naive, but determined true-believer.  Her relationship with Kara was what I was hoping would be found between Kamala Kahn and Carol Danvers in The Marvels.  Ridley has to go through various stages of admiration and disappointment with Kara as the layers are slowly peeled back.  Momoa seems to be having a grand ole time chewing the scenery and throwing out snarky comments in every scene.  Corenswet has a small, but important role here acting as a foil to everything that Kara is and standing there for every Kara could be.  He brings that same earnest virtue he did in his own movie.

I thought that Gillespie did a good job of making the action sequences interesting and exciting.  As I mentioned earlier, they script makes sure to put Kara in real peril and because of this the stakes are higher.  I found the scenes where she and/or Lobo let loose on the bad guys to be incredibly enjoyable sequences.  

There is some controversy about the ending, which I will not spoil here.  Kara makes a choice that many could say contradicts the entire heroic theme of the movie.  And I think there is room for debate.  In fact, I think that was the point.  Kara is placed in a situation the choice is not so much whether the action is right or wrong or whether you can take on someone else's sin for them.  It obvious answer to this question from a Catholic perspective is "no."  But the movie does a good job of placing you in Kara's shoes and making you at least see the dilemma that she is in.  I think the movie is fairly ambivalent regarding the morality of that choice and leaves it open to interpretation for the audience.

Last year's Superman was about an ideal hero trying to survive in a fallen world.  

Supergirl is about a fallen hero trying to strive back to the ideal.

I think both films have a lot to offer.

Sunday Best: 4th of July Movie

    (repost)

On this weekend before Independence Day, I thought we'd take a moment to look at movies that instill in us a sense of patriotism.

Right now, there is a great deal of strife that divides us.  But we are Americans and united we stand, divided we fall.  No nation is without sin.  But Independence Day should be a time to focus on what brings us all together and the ideals to which we strive.

These films are not necessarily about valor on the battlefield.  They are movies that remind us of American exceptionalism and how we live in the greatest country in the history of the world.


Captain America: The First Avenger

Some say that this movie is cheesy.  I say it captures a less cynical time in our culture.  Steve Rogers is the perfect embodiment of America.  He doesn't see himself as above anyone (I'm just a kid from Brooklyn), he always seeks to do more, and he lays down his life for the freedom of others.  I still get excited when I hear that Captain America theme as he and the soldiers he rescues come over the hill.


1776

Yes, there are a lot of fictionalized characterizations in this musical.  But you will be struck by the vision and genius of our founding fathers and how they put into words the necessity of a new nation.

Hamilton

While this story goes beyond our fight for Independence, the first act shows us how integral the ideals of freedom were to our founding fathers.  These men shaped not only their times, but ours as well.  Seen through the life of Alexander Hamilton, we can see so many facets of this flawed but brilliant man's life and how each our stories help shape history.

Glory

There are some movies that seem more patriotic than they are (Rocky IV) and there are others that are more patriotic than they seem.  Glory is the latter.  It seems like its about how horribly treated the first black regiment in the Union army was treated.  There is even a long dialogue about one of the main characters is so disgusted with America that he doesn't want to carry the flag.  But all of that is overwhelmed by watching the flag raised and rally the soldiers to battle.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

There is a lot of genius in this film.  Some look at it as too simplistic.  But watch it again and you will see the corruption and cynicism surrounding Jefferson Smith, even by his "friends."  And yet this movie is about standing up for what is right and making a difference and show what real statesmanship looks like.

American Sniper

Not only is this a harrowing account of war and valor, but it is a movie that will remind you that in the modern age, America is still a country worth fighting for.  Though we have our problems and our soldiers are not saints, there is an unsleeping evil in the world from which we are only protected by our soldiers.  It is a reminder that we have a debt to those who fight to keep us safe.

Apollo 13

I can understand people being cynical about the moon race in retrospect.  And just when that cynicism was sinking in, NASA had to deal with their greatest space crisis.  It is a movie about American ingenuity, determination, and ambition.  It will make you feel pride in what we are able to do.

Stripes
(TV version edited for content)

I dare anyone to listen to that theme and not feel more American.  Yes, in the post-Vietnam era there is a lot of humor directed at the military, but ultimately the movie is a love letter to our soldiers.  And I love Bill Murray's amazing performance as he delivers his "America" speech.

13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi

This movie makes you appreciate the safety and freedom we enjoy in America and appreciate them those who put themselves into harm's way for

Hacksaw Ridge



One of the great things about this movie is the unquestioning patriotism of its characters.  Desmond Doss does not deny the righteousness of his country's cause.  And he wants to serve as best as his conscience will allow him.  Mel Gibson does a fantastic job of showing the horror of war without any romance or glamour while at the same time showing the soldiers with all of their righteousness and valor.  It also has a great intersection of faith an patriotism that doesn't equate the two but shows how each can benefit from the other.

Lincoln

I dare anyone to watch this movie and not be in awe of this great man.  Here we see the battle over slavery fought not only on the battlefield and in the political arena, but in the hearts and minds of men and women.  This is one of Spielberg's best movie in years with a performance by Daniel Day-Lewis that is for the ages.  There is something so quintessentially American about how Lincoln is portrayed.  There is no attempt to deconstruct him, but the is show with all of his flaws.  And through this, he pushes against seemingly impossible odds to remind us that in this land of freedom and opportunity, we are called to guarantee the same to all of its people.  That is the promise of America.

Thoughts?

Film Flash: Supergirl (2026)

 

15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)

Critics are wrong!  An enjoyable antihero-to-hero story that I liked more than expected.

Film Review: Disclosure Day

 

Sexuality/Nudity Mature

Violence Acceptable

Vulgarity Acceptable

Anti-Catholic Philosophy Mature

I have said it before and I will say it again: Steven Spielberg is the greatest director of all time.  

But that doesn't mean that every movie he makes is good.

And that is the case with Disclosure Day.

The movie centers around two main characters.  The movie begins with Daniel Kellner (Josh O'Connor), a computer specialist who has stolen something valuable from a shady organization led by Noah Scanlon (Colin Firth), who has kidnapped Daniel's girlfriend Jane (Eve Hewson).  This leads to a chase through the country where Daniel constantly calls his leader Hugo (Colman Domingo) for instructions to stay one step ahead.  Meanwhile, TV weatherwoman Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt) is having breakfast with her boyfriend Jackson (Wyatt Russell) when a cardinal flies into their apartment.  After that, she begins to display clairvoiant powers and is also pursued by Scanlon's people.  Eventually the two stories converge as it leads to a world-changing event.

On paper, this sounds like the makings of a fascinating film.  But the movie just falls short.  It wants to explore big ideas, but it does it in such a shallow way that it doesn't work.

The action of the script makes almost no sense.  Characters say and do things that follow no real logical reasoning, but are done simply to move the story forward.  It feels almost like Spielberg wanted to talk about the big themes and the plot was a kind of afterthought, a nuisance that had to be dealt with in order to talk about his "big ideas."  But that is the core problem of the film.

Even as a devout Christian, I usually detest Christian movies.  It is not because I disagree with the themes or content.  The problem is that they aren't really movies; they are sermons dressed up like they are narratives.  It is absolutely true that your movie's theme is ultimately what your story is about.  But if you preach your theme rather than embed it into the plot, then you've compromised your art.  And that is exactly what Spielberg does here with Disclosure Day.  It is a Christian movie, except that you should replace Christ with aliens.

It is difficult to discuss the movie's shortcomings without getting into spoiler territory, but I will do my best to be as vague as possible.  But be warned:

SPOILERS AHEAD.

The movie is ultimately about the disclosure to the world that aliens exist.  Spielberg wants this movie to be a mediation on what this kind of revelation would do to the world.  But he builds the entire story to this revelation and he makes the reaction so incredibly uninteresting.

He wants to explore what would happen to people with religious faith if they found out that aliens were real.  We find out early on that Jane used to be a novice religious sister.  Now before I move on, I have to voice something which is a horrible pet peeve of mine.  It explicitly states in the movie that Daniel and Jane are engaging in a sexual relationship outside of marriage, and yet Jane is set up to be the main voice of the religious perspective.  It reminds me of the movie Contact, where the main Christian antagonist has sex with the protagonist and is lying in bed with her afterwards talking about his faith in God.  I find this so distasteful and a slap in the face to real-life Christians.  To be sure, we are all sinners and we all fall short.  My objection is not that movies like this depict believers committing sin.  My problem is that it depicts believers embracing sin as a fully integrated into their lives and then presenting that as the example of Christian living.  But I digress.

Anyway, Jane is supposed to be the voice of the Christian, but her theology is so shallow that it is almost laughable.  She says that disclosing the aliens would be horrible because it would telling people who believe in God that there are other "Supreme Beings."  Again, I don't mean to theologically nitpick, but what the hell does this even mean?  Even in the realm of science fiction, this isn't really an issue. I never saw an episode where Kirk felt the need to worship Spock.  Just because a species is technologically more advanced than we are, it does not therefore make them "Supreme Beings."  God is the Supreme Being because He is That Which Nothing Greater Can Be Conceived.  Not a single one of the aliens presented in this movie comes anywhere close to that.  What Christian would think this way outside of this script?  To be fair, her former superior Sister Maura (Elizabeth Marvel) has a more mature take on Christianity and aliens, but it feels too little too late.

Because of this, Jane is able to be swayed by the influence of Scanlon's mind control device.  From this point on, she is nothing but a problem and adds nothing really to the story.  Again, this parallel to Christian movies is strong: because she lacks faith in the aliens, she is subject to demonic influence.  In fact, the entire movie is like that.  Daniel constantly contacts Hugo begging to be given shelter and protection, but is repeatedly told that it isn't the right time.  In other words, he has to have faith that the aliens know what they are doing.  

Whenever the story writes itself into a corner, a miracle occurs.  That is not an exaggeration.  Margaret's new powers give her prophetic visions and then channels the dead loved ones of the villains to save the day.  In another example of the Christian illteracy of the story, when Margaret ends up with the alien-friendly group, one of them genuflects in front of her and does the sign of the cross.  She then shouts, "I will not be anyone's religion!"  Again, what Christian would worship the creature rather than the Creator?  And if the point is that the worshipper is not a Christian because they are believing in the aliens, then why do the SIGN OF THE CROSS?

If I wanted to be really mean to the movie, I could make a long list of all the contrivances and inanities in the plot, all the way down to the fact that Jane ends up saving the day by literally just walking past the bad guys and handing something to Margaret.  It's like the movie forgot that she was being chased by the very people that are surrounding Margaret to prevent her from disclosing the aliens.

There are only a few things that prevent this movie from devolving into a total disaster.  The first is that when Spielberg actually decides to entertain rather than lecture, the movie does well.  There is an incredibly chase scene involving a train that feels like vintage Spielberg.  There is also a moment where Margaret turns the good guys invisible that is filmed with tension, humor, and fun in the way Spielberg could do in his Indiana Jones movies.

The other things is that the performances are generally good.  O'Connor plays the in-over-his-head everyman very well.  Blunt does a good job of showing the internal revolution in her mind as it plays out in the world around her.  Firth is decent as the bad guy, but there isn't a lot for him to work with. The same thing is true of Domingo, who is there to be a calm center of faith in the film.  He feels like a Spielberg self-insert, who is literally directing the events of movie.

Also, Spielberg had the chance to do the funniest things in the world, but chose not to.  At the end of the movie, we finally have one of the aliens revealed.  At first he is obscured by a covering, but then we see him fully.  If that alien turned out to be ET, I would have laughed so hard and that would have been worth the price of admission.  But no, the alien is as generic as can be.  And the resolution of the struggle against the antagonist is so odd, it is like nothing I have ever seen in a movie.  I literally turned to my wife in the theater and said, "That's it?"

Steven Spielberg decided to de-emphasize storytelling in order to emphasize his theme.  Because he does this, he fails at both.

Film Review: Masters of the Universe (2026)

 

Sexuality/Nudity Acceptable

Violence Acceptable

Vulgarity Acceptable

Anti-Catholic Philosophy Acceptable

Have you ever had a friend who tries to tell the group a joke that he thinks is really funny, but the joke bombs?  And then to make up for it, that same friend keeps telling jokes, hoping one of them will land, but things get more and more awkward?

That is the biggest problem with Masters of the Universe

The movie is based on the famous cartoon and toyline.  Prince Adam (Nicholas Galitzine) has been sent to live in safety on Earth after the kingdom of his father Randor (James Purefoy) is conquered by the evil Skeletor (Jared Leto).  Adam has been living on Earth for a decade searching for the Sword of Power, which he lost on the journey.  Everyone thinks he is crazy.  But then his childhood friend Teela (Camila Mendes), daughter of the head of the King's Guard Duncan/Man-at-Arms (Idris Elba), comes to Earth to bring Adam back to Eternia.  All the while they are pursued by Skeletor's forces until Adam can release the power of the sword and become the hero of Eternia: He-Man.

As an action/adventure movie, Masters of the Universe is actually pretty good.  The fight scenes are fun to watch with big, bright, bold heroes versus villains.  While Eternia feels a little too filled with CGI, the production design on it is very good and nice to look at.  The story isn't trying to re-invent the wheel.  It is a by-the-numbers hero's journey.  And perhaps this is part of being a Gen-Xer, but I couldn't help but get excited when I recognized a character from my childhood come onto the big screen like they just stepped out of my memory.  I particularly like how they didn't really compromise the over-the-top style of the characters, but tried to incorporate as much of their wild appearances as possible.

The performances also generally good.  Galitzine is perfectly likeble as Adam and he becomes our POV character for the entire movie.  In the cartoon, He-Man is the actual person and Adam is a persona, but in the movie it is vice-versa.  Mendes has good chemistry with him and the two work off well against each other without her trying to overshadow or girlboss him.  Elba always brings charisma and gravitas to everything he does.  Even Leto does a good job as Skeletor, so much so that I would not have known that it was him if he wasn't credited (granted his face is all CGI, but the voice performance is unrecognizable).  The only performance that is off is Alison Brie as Evil-Lyn.  I take no pleasure in this, because Brie is a very talented comedic and dramatic actress.  But she plays Evil-Lyn like she's doing an SNL parody.  But that performance is not the big problem with the movie.

The big problem is the script.

The movie wants to be funnier than it is.

Masters of the Universe is filmed like an action/comedy.  To be clear, this is not like a typical Marvel movie where it is an action movie with a lot of humor.  No, this movie is filmed like an action movie that is also built for laughs like Dragnet or 21 Jump Street.  Nearly every single scene is written and directed with comedic intent.  Nearly every scene ends with a punchline.  I came to this realization in a scene where He-Man is awkwardly fighting Trap Jaw (Sam C. Wilson) on a bridge.  Every time He-Man got injured, it would cut to a reaction shot of Teela or Duncan winces for comedic effect as if to say "That's gotta hurt!"   In fact, in the entire film there may be only one or two scenes that allow actual heartfelt emotion to breathe, but then it quickly backs off the more serious tone.  

And that isn't to say that I am criticizing this movie because it chose to be comedic, like Masters of the Universe is some sacred story that cannot be mocked.  I am perfectly fine with this approach.  My problem is that the jokes are nearly as funny as they should be.

Humor is horribly subjective.  If the jokes land it can elevate the material.  I mentioned in my Mortal Kombat II review that every scene with Kano made me laugh out loud.  The humor of the film helped overcome most of its flaws to make me remember it fondly.  Masters of the Universe was a movie filled with jokes that only made me laugh a handful of time.  If the movie had less jokes or if the more of the jokes landed, this movie would score higher with me.  In fact, I think if you removed a lot of jokes, it would not only help the joke-to-laugh ratio, but it would cut down its 140 minute run time.  And this could be done easily.  There is one scene where the heroes are doing a cool slow motion walk through smoke set to Queen's "Princes of the Universe."  You could easily cut from this to the subsequent fight scene.  But the movie instead decided to insert a sight gag that went on too long without a strong payoff.

This isn't to say the script lacks cleverness.  One of the smartest thing the script does is explain the silly names of the heroes and villains as the young child Adam not knowing their real names and so coming up with nicknames like "Fisto" and "Ram Man."  

The movie also has some nice things to say about heroism, manhood, and violence.  Adam as a child feels like he is not able to live up to his father's expectations because he is not a strong warrior.  This lingers throughout the entire movie, so much so that He-Man becomes the fulfillment of this primal, boyish desire for strength.  But the movie explores this a little deeper.  This isn't an eschewing of traditional masculinity, but an examination of it.  Duncan at one points says to Adam, "When war breaks out, it's not the poets that step up.  It's the man with the muscle.  He's not doing it for glory. He's doing it so his children can see another morning.  That is a man, as far as I can tell.  He stands up when he is needed."  I thought that this was a fantastic encapsulation of the masculine genius.  As summed up in the movie Camelot: "Not 'might is right," but "might for right!'"  The culminates in the final confrontation with Skeletor where He-Man tries to find a non-violent solution, but understands that sometimes someone must stand fight until the end.

Despite the flaws, I enjoyed Masters of the Universe.  I only wish it didn't try so hard to be funny.  There is so much potential for this franchise going forward as long as they stop focusing on jokes and instead concentrate of sci-fi action.  It's in the latter where this movie has the power.