The Da Vinci Warning

For any Catholic going to see The Da Vinci Code film directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks, make sure you understand three things:

1) A picture may say a thousand words, but one painting does not re-write history.
2) It is fiction, not fact.
3) It is potentially blasphemous and heretical and should not be take lightly.

I find it ludicrous, really, that just because a talented painter painted his own interpretation of the Last Supper that such an act somehow validates any re-rewriting of apostolic and church teachings. So John in his picture looks like a woman. His woman, in the Mona Lisa, looks like a man. Isn't it more likely that Da Vinci was just wrong or nuts or inaccurate or just confused instead of the greatest Clue Giver of the Ultimate Deception Ever? I mean, lets use a little common sense here.

Second, The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction that has numerous errors and assumptions in it that unsuspecting and/or uninformed Catholics may misunderstand as fact. Remember, just because it is on the screen starring Tom Hanks does not make it true. It only makes it entertainment.

I think our last few years from Hollywood should prepare you all for the fact that Hollywood never promotes Christianity. Take Cinderalla Man, for example, another Ron Howard film. In it, James Braddock, played by Russell Crowe, is a Roman Catholic from New Jersey living in hard times with his wife, played by Renee Zellweger, and their three children.

At one point in the film, they are saying grace before a meal (Bless us O Lord, for these our gifts which we are about to receive from thy bounty, through Christ, Our Lord, Amen). Except Crowe interrupts before "through Christ, Our Lord, Amen." Later, they go to church, but we never hear about Christ. People pray for Braddock at the church during his boxing matches, yet we never hear about Christ.

The only time we hear God or Christ is when His name is taken in vain, which is NUMEROUS times. So, they removed the times it was a positive and added many times where Christ was used in a negative.

So don't expect these filmmakers to portray Christ in a positive light in The Da Vinci Code.

Thirdly, stating the Christ was married, had kids and that the Apostles lied to cover it up, is against all Catholic teachings, heretical at least and blasphemous at most. Such things should NOT be taken lightly. It is through such "discussions" where Satan is able to creep in, lay a little doubt in our souls and undermine the foundation of our beliefs.

Don't fall for it. The price of your soul is not worth it.

And exactly why did the Apostles cover this up again? So that they could be ostracized, hunted down and killed? Remember, the Catholic church was not a grand institution, it was a group of guys who witnessed Jesus' ressurrection together . Also remember that Romans did not tolerate "superstitions", which is what Christianity would have been considered since it was neither Roman paganism or Judaism. The entire assumption that the Apostles had ANYthing to gain from such a deception is outright stupidity.

I will leave the decision as to whether or not to see The Da Vinci Code up to you, of course... I never tell people to stay away from a movie that I have not seen myself. However, the book is clearly in opposition to the Catholic church and all Catholics, informed or uninformed, should be more protective of Mother Church than of Hollywood's version of it.

The Frighteners (1996)

I remember seeing The Frighteners in the theater with my friend Mark Moffitt when it originally came out in 1996. I liked it a lot then and, upon a recent reviewing, still think its a very good film. It is one of those films that never clicked with the audience, for some strange reason. It should have made a lot more money than it did, but the forces of public opinion have kept this an underachieving film.

The film, helmed by Lord of the Rings and King Kong director, Peter Jackson, stars Michael J. Fox as Frank Bannister, an architect turned charlatan psychic, who lives in an unfinished house, reliving the memory of his tragically killed wife. Bannister’s psychic business techniques could be called into question, but the event leading to his wife’s death left him with the real ability to see those who have passed on.

He works with these ghosts to conjure up business by generating poltergeist ability on demand. The ghosts create havoc, the people call Bannister and he “cleans” the house for a nice little sum. He uses this process to relieve Dr. Lucy Lynskey, played by the under-appreciated actress Trini Alvarado, of a couple of hundred dollars.

Bannister lives in a town that has been suffering from an epidemic of suspicious heart attack deaths. Through the course of the story, Bannister begins to see those who will be future victims because of a glowing number carved in their foreheads that only he can see. When the victim finally dies from a heart attack, they are found with that number actually sliced into their foreheads, just as he had envisioned it. Bannister tries to get to the bottom of the epidemic of deaths only to find a figure of Death behind it all. He watches in horror as Death reaches into their chest and squeezing their heart until they pass on.

Bannister’s unique information leads police to believe he is the cause of these deaths and he, along with Lynskey, work together to try and prove his innocence.

The Frighteners is an interesting mix of horror and comedy... maybe that's why it has remained undervalued... people didn't know how to respond to it. Jackson’s unique fingerprint is shown throughout the film and Fox and Alvarado are excellent in their roles. The film is scary and disturbing and humorous and a mystery all wrapped into one.

If you’re a fan of horror or of Peter Jackson, I strongly suggest checking out The Frighteners... especially around Halloween. It’ll scare you and make you laugh from beginning to end.

Autistic Basketball Hero

Great story about an autisitc high school senior who was allowed to play in a basketball game and then the amazing happened.

Check it out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fw1CcxCUgg&feature=Views&page=1&t=t&f=b.

Soviets Behind Pope JP2 Assassination Attempt

Interest stuff... you can read the entire article HERE.

The jist of it is that an Italian panel concluded that the Soviets were behind the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II because of his support of the Solidarity movement in Poland.

The Virgin Mary was right... we should have consecrated Russia a long time ago when she first suggested it.

Bouncers in Heaven

I was at mass last night for Ash Wednesday. Funny that Ash Wednesday is one of the non-Sunday masses Catholics go to but it is not a Holy Day of Obligation. There are many other Holy Days throughout the year that Catholics don't go to, but Ash Wednesday, they're there. I'm just glad they attend, to be honest. I just wish they appreciated the value for the true Holy Days on the calendar.

One of my pet peeves is people leaving mass early. Usually people leave after Communion, but before the final blessing... one priest called that act the Judas Kiss, as Judas left the last supper about the same time.

Last night, during the ceremony, there were people who left after the ashes were distributed and before Communion. I found that very funny. Like, Heaven's a nightclub and Peter's a bouncer and if you got your ashes on your forehead you're in... no need to actually attend the entire mass or stay throughout, etc. Ashes, in. No ashes, out.

Please.

So, as I watched these people shuffle out of mass WAY early, I was both peeved and humored. I'm hoping Peter checks our souls, not our foreheads, before allowing us into Heaven.

Welcome to Lent

Today we kick off the Lenten season with Ash Wednesday and begin our fasting and sacrifice for the next 40 days. The purpose of this sacrifice is not to punish ourselves, but to remove those things that are dear to us here on this planet so that we can make God our primary focus. If you love watching television, then giving up television and using that time to reconnect with God is a healthy exercise. It is not a punishment, but an opportunity. Giving up television and not using that opportunity to focus on our Lord is a waste of the sacrifice. The sacrifice should be tied to an action that brings you closer to God.

So, to those of you fasting today, do it quietly and humbly and offer it up to God. Let your Lenten sacrifices bring you closer to God, culminating with the celebration of the resurrection of our Lord on Easter.

Midnight Cowboy (1969)

Midnight Cowboy is another one of those "I should have seen it by now" films that was recently shown on HDNet. The film, starring John Voight as Joe Buck and Dustin Hoffman as Enrico "Ratso" Rizzo is a depressing film about broken people in a broken world. Buck is a poorly educated young man who was once abused by his grandparents and raped by others, who travels to New York to hustle rich ladies for sex and money. His grand naiveté lands him in the path of Ratso, who cons Buck out of twenty bucks and leaves him on his own.

Buck struggles to understand the complexity of New York City and discovers the world is not as easy to conquer as he once thought. He runs into Ratso again and, despite Ratso's history, they become friends, living in a condemned building. Just as Buck seems to get an "in" into the hustling business, things go from bad to worse as their apartment building nears demolition and Ratso's health continues to decline. They struggle greatly and eventually Buck kills a man and steals his money to take Ratso to Florida on a bus before his health declines past the point of no return.

This film, directed by John Schlesinger, was interesting, but not nearly as gratifying as I had expected it. I don't know why this was considered so special... it must have said something important when it was made in the late 60's, but now it is just a story about broken people with no hope of succeeding in life succumbing to their own devices.

If you like watching sad people live sad hopeless lives, this movie is for you.

"Minor" Victories

I've been coaching my son for the past five years from t-ball to minors. Each leap up the baseball foodchain can be daunting for the kids. Moving from hitting a ball off the tee to hitting a ball thrown by a coach is really tough. Then, moving from coach pitch to the more erratic kids pitch can be tough too.

When you move into minors (9-10 year olds), just about everything is on the table. Every kid must play infield and outfield. Every kid can only play one position for up to two innings. There is a five run rule on every inning, except the last inning. Kids pitch and catch. On passed balls or bad throws back to the pitcher, baserunners can steal, etc.

At this level, the team with the most solid basics win. As my brother Paul said to me when he was at this stage with his son, Jonathan, if they are able to catch the hit, throw it to the right base and that person catches it, you win. That's it. Because most kids can't do those basic things every at bat.

So, last night was my nine-year old son's first minor league game of the season.

He started off pitching for two innings, striking out four. We led after two innings 6-2. Going into the fourth inning we were up 11-5. During that last inning our pitcher threw a lot of walks and the other team started to catch up. My son, now catching, overthrew two balls back to the pitcher, allowing two runs to score. At the bottom of the last inning we were now losing 12-11... two of those runs due to my son's mistakes. As he was taking off his catcher's gear in the dugout, he was pretty bummed, knowing that he may have cost his team a win.

I asked him how he was going to respond.

So, in the bottom of the last inning, he came up to bat with a man on third, still down 12-11. He hit a single and scored the man in from third to tie the game, 12-12. On pitches to the next two batters that made it passed the catcher, he was able to steal second and third. When the next batter walked, the catcher overthrew the pitcher and my son stole home, sliding in under the tag and scoring the winning run.

So, I guess he responded pretty well. It made for a very exciting game.

I couldn't believe how intense I get during these little games. You want them to have fun, but you also want them to compete, understand their responsibilities and understand that their actions have consequences. And, lets be honest, you want them to win.

So, last night, we did. It was a nice way to start off the season.

Captain Blood (1935)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again... I love Tuner Classic Movies. Every March they show Oscar winning films, 24 hours a day, in preparation for the years Oscar award ceremony. TCM in March along with a Digital Video Recorder = Heaven for a film buff such as myself.

This weekend I caught Errol Flynn in Captain Blood I have three thoughts after watching this film:
1) Pirates of the Caribbean owes A LOT to this classic film.
2) Errol Flynn was incredibly charming with an infectious grin.
3) Olivia de Havilland is a beautiful woman with wonderful, expressive eyes.

Captain Blood is the story of Dr. Peter Blood, played with magnetism by Flynn, who is branded a traitor by King James for offering medical assistance to a rebel. He is forced into slavery in the Caribbean and bought by Arabella Bishop, played by de Havilland. He eventually earns a level of freedom on the island by helping to heal the Governor’s gout. This freedom allows Blood to seek passage off the island and forms a rag-tag crew from among his fellow slaves.

Their plans are interrupted by an attack by the Spaniards, but he and his crew steal a Spanish ship and save the town, yet are still considered rebels and slaves. They quickly realize they are men without a country and become pirates, living by a strict code of ethics penned by Blood himself.

Eventually, King James replaces the Governor with Arabella’s father, who is determined to bring Blood, now Captain Blood, to justice. Blood and his crew attack and steal, hiding out in the Tortugas, away from the new Governor’s wrath.

Blood makes a pact with French pirate Captain Lavasseur, portrayed by Basil Rathbone… a pact which comes back to haunt him when Blood is forced to pay for de Havilland’s freedom from Rathbone’s grip, buying her as she had bought him.

The story climaxes with massive naval battles, a path to freedom, the eventual justice for Blood and the acknowledgement of shared love between Flynn and de Havilland.

Flynn is perfect in the role of Blood, playing both an educated man and doctor and a fierce man forced into piracy as Captain Blood. Olivia de Havilland’s face radiates with her smile and her simmering love for Blood is hard for her to suppress.

It appears as if the recently popular Pirates of the Caribbean used Captain Blood as a template, pulling many of its plot elements out and into Pirates. There are the locations, the wronged man who is forced to become a pirate and who is in love with the Governor’s daughter, the charming Captain and the naval battles are, at times, shot for shot copies. I will say that if you are going to copy a pirate movie, Captain Blood is the one to copy for it has so many wonderful elements and performances.

I find it interesting that Flynn was not the first choice for the role. Robert Donat was cast in the title role, but didn't turn up at the start of shooting. Warner Brothers scrambled to find a replacement, asking Brian Aherne to take the role, but he refused. Warner Brothers decided to take a gamble on the previously unknown Australian, Errol Flynn, and the rest, as they say, is history.

I also found out that Basil Rathbone took a dislike to Flynn. During their dueling sequence, he reminded Flynn that he was being paid considerably more for his part in the picture, a part which is very small in the overall scope of the film, and then deliberately wounded him in the arm (leaving a permanent scar).

If you want some old-school swashbuckling fun and to see the genes which gave birth to Pirates of the Caribbean, check out Captain Blood. You won’t be disappointed.

Masters Of A Very Small, Insignificant Universe

One of the downsides of mastering our domain by technological advances is that we have lost the awe of God that nature provides. We have sheltered ourselves in our own little world where we get an unrealistic sense of self by being surrounded by man-made things of which we can easily control. I think this is a relatively new issue for humanity, for most of our existence relied on the uncontrolled temper of the weather… mass starvation was just one bad harvest away. Natural predators had to be accounted for. Too little rain or too much rain or too little snow or too much snow or strong winds could ruin everything.

In other words, we were one bad day away from having a very bad year. And our sense of control quickly evaporates when something as natural as rain could make or break your very existence.

If you just spend a night under a star-covered canopy, you can’t help but feel how small we are in the universe. When you are surrounded by nature there is a great sense of relaxation, because all of our man-made distractions no longer pull our focus away from the beauty of which God has surrounded us.

And that’s the way God intended it. Slowly, with indoor plumbing and effective farming and industrial technology and internet connectivity, etc., we have, inch by inch, removed ourselves from the unpredictable world in which we actually live, buffering ourselves in a bubble of false security in which we think we live.

That is why we are so dumbfounded when tsunamis or hurricanes or earthquakes hit… we ask ourselves, what could we have done to control this? How did nature catch us off guard?

The answer? It is supposed to. It is a simple and not-so-subtle reminder that we control so little of what is truly important and God controls so much of which we completely depend upon… that is if we can pull ourselves away from the television and radio and internet and films and DVDs and CDs and sporting events and malls and politics to notice.

Cleopatra (1934)

Cecil B. DeMille is the king of spectacle, directing over 80 films, silent and talkies, including The King of Kings, The Sign of the Cross, The Buccaneer, Samson and Delilah, The Ten Commandments and the 1934 Cleopatra. Cleopatra stars Claudette Colbert in the title role, with Warren William as Julias Caesar and Henry Wilcoxon as Mark Antony. This epic story follows Colbert as Cleopatra uses her feminine wiles to keep Rome at bay from taking over her beloved Egypt, at first by wooing Caesar and later, by falling in love with Antony. At the end, she is willing to sacrifice her country for her love of Antony, but he misinterprets her negotiations and kills himself.

The film has elaborate dance and entertainment sequences for Queen Cleopatra as she tries to impress the Roman leadership and there are grand battles where Antony leads the small Egyptian Army against the massive Roman forces. The film is very dated in style and theatrically large acting. But Colbert does have one of the most natural screen presences of the time and finds great nuances in the script to give the character greater dimension than one would anticipate in a film made at this time.

I can only assume that such elaborate escapism was very popular during the financially hard times of the 1930s. DeMille is certainly a master of filling the screen with every such excess to represent the grand lives of royalty of the past, allowing struggling movie-goers the chance to escape into a world where every want can readily be gratified.

Overall, I found the film slightly entertaining, but not greatly profound or rewarding. It was nice to see Colbert's easy of screen presence so effortlessly displayed, but the other actors in the film did not match her natural ability.

Assault on Precinct 13 (2005)

In the standard action flick, you get about 75% of action and 25% character. Good action films utilize that 25% to give the film substance, which keeps the action from being a mindless cavalcade of bodies being riddled with bullets. Assault on Precinct 13 was originally made by John Carpenter in 1976 about a few police officers stuck in an abandoned precinct as they are relentlessly attacked by gang members out for revenge.

For about five years now, Hollywood has been castrated and no longer has the cahones to make original material, so in this 2005 remake of Assault, Ethan Hawke plays a good cop struggling with past demons who must defend an evil criminal, Lawrence Fishburn, not from gang members, but from bad cops on the take. On New Years Eve, Fishburn, being transported along with other petty criminals during a severe snow storm in Detroit, is detoured due to the weather and forced to wait out the storm in an old precinct about to close down, Precinct 13.

On a side note, Ethan Hawke is one of the high quality A- actors that seem to always work under the radar. Over his career he has amassed an impressive resume, including Dead Poets Society, Reality Bites, Before Sunrise, Gattaca, Hamlet and Training Day. When all is said and done, I think my children will be watching his films on television and wondering why he wasn't more of a star.

Assault qualifies as a very good action flick. The 75% action is well choreographed and bloody, but not excessive. The 25% character is very strong, with a collection of cops and convicts all working together to make it through the night. If you're looking for a very good escapist action film, Assault on Precinct 13 fits the bill.