Stranded in an Illinois Cornfield

Yesterday I was going to visit my girlfriend in Illinois.  On the way back, I took some wrong turns and ended up in Charleston where my tread blew off my tire.  So I had to spend about 3 hours in a cornfield next to a church with only one lamppost providing light.

In short, it was a thoroughly unpleasant experience that kept getting worse.  I have never had to change a tire so I had no idea what to do and I was far from civilization so I was rather terrified of what else could be out there.  My insurance was able to set up roadside assistance, only for the assistance to cancel and my insurance to fail to find a replacement.  I called a tow company that ended up unable to send someone out to pick me up so that was another dead end.

I really was not taking it well last night all things considered.  I have been through a lot in the last couple years with bad relationships, struggling to find a decent job that fit my interests, and all of the unpleasantness with quarantine so all of the weight of that was bearing down on me hard with my already present sense of panic since I was out in the middle of nowhere.  It didn’t help that three of my four closest friends were asleep by now which made me feel even more alone.  It made me feel like everything just kept going wrong and everything that did go right, like a good day with my girlfriend, got taken away.

Fortunately, my dad helped me get in touch with the police who came out to help, and, when there was worry that there was more wrong with the car, they sent out a tow truck to address the issue.  The tow man was able to help deal with the problem so I was able to drive home that night on the spare.  It was 100 miles home at 45 mph, but it was worth it to finally get out of all that.

After getting some sleep and finally calming down the following day, I finally got a chance to think about the positives that came out of that.  One important thing was my parents who were able to talk me through everything and get me home.  My dad was able to get me in contact with the local police, without whom I would not have gotten out of that situation.  My mom also stayed up all night to help me make sure I was awake and safe during the long drive home as we talked on the phone.  That would not have been a possibility 20 years ago so I consider myself lucky in that regard.

Even though my insurance and two tow companies blew it last night, the people who did show up were extremely helpful.  The officer came out to check to make sure I was alright and he was very respectful while helping me get set up with the tow company.  The tow truck driver was also very nice and was able to convince me my wheel would be fine to drive back to Bloomington.  There was also a couple who had stopped by to see if I was okay and needed assistance (before I knew what was something wrong with the tire) so I appreciated their kindness.  There were still very good people involved in dealing with my problem and I appreciated their effort.

Beyond that, I got to enjoy the earlier parts of the day.  My girlfriend took me to see Allerton Park which was beautiful with both the flowers and the statues (especially the Sun Singer).  In addition, I got to have dinner with her parents and we got along pretty well.  I also got to talk to my sister on the way home which I really enjoyed.  So there was still a lot of good that day, even if I wish my tire had not gotten busted.

As I thought about that, I realized there is still a lot going well and that my problems will pass.  I had one friend who was able to stay in contact with me that night since he worked the late shift and my other friends checked in on me once they were up.  I have started a new job so that provides new opportunity and optimism for where my career is going.  Also, I know COVID will pass and things will go back to normal eventually.  So I know things are better than I felt at the time and it is important not to lose hope.

Life is a constant and unending series of tests that throw us off our game regularly.  How we react to it and the ability to get through it is important to maintain getting through it.  Eventually, the rain stops and the sun will come out.  It is important though to never lose faith and deal with problems as they come.

Shrek Revisited

*Spoilers*

Last night, I went to see Shrek at the Starlite Drive-In.  It had been a while since I had last seen the film and I wanted to see if it held up.  Surprisingly, there were parts I quite appreciated, but it was not as enjoyable for me as it was when I was younger.

Back when it was first coming out, the film was advertised as though it was going to be the next big fairytale.  There was this feeling that the film was going to be the next major animation staple, especially since past fairytale characters were included in commercials, which made me feel like I needed to see it.  Unsurprisingly, I thought it was great when I first saw it and continued to watch it for years afterwards.

This was the first time seeing it again and I did not maintain the same level of enjoyment.  A huge part of that was probably the comedy as it was not as funny as I remembered.  Part of that is because I remembered the jokes extremely well, but they still did not feel like they would have worked if I did not remember them.  However, comedy is subjective so part of that may be that my tastes may have evolved so it could still work for others.

Also, the last third part was rather dull.  It follows a lot of tropes including the third act misunderstanding, the slow build up of their relationship right before that, and the last moment attempt to stop the wedding and get the girl.  The message of “things are not always what they appear” has been done a lot as well so it can feel heavy handed.  As a result, it does not stick the landing.

However, there were still elements of the film that worked quite well.  Shrek was quite enjoyable as the main character.  He has defined and respectable goals, a sympathetic backstory, and a grumpy personality that can be relatable if you want people to leave you alone.  In a way, he was strangely endearing and I did still find myself rooting for him to win.

Donkey was an extremely good counterbalance as well.  The comedy may not have worked, but Eddie Murphy still gave him an optimistic personality that could keep Shrek moving forward even when they were at odds and bring him back to see the light when he wandered off trail.  As a result, he was still extremely likable.

The animation also held up extremely well.  The characters were constantly moving around, the visuals were inspiring, and the designs of the characters were pretty good.  Despite being almost 20 years old, the film still looks impressive.

There is a lot of Disney satire as well that was quite enjoyable for interested audiences.  Lord Farquaad looks like then Disney CEO Michael Eisner, his kingdom looks like Disney World, there are obvious shots at it like it being empty, he is constantly abusing fairytale creatures which is a metaphor for Disney using its brands to exhaustion, the list goes on and on there.  For those aware of the legendary Eisner v. Katzenberg feud, this was a nice touch.

Finally, the story for at least the first hour is pretty interesting.  This is less Shrek’s story and more he is interrupting someone else’s fairytale.  Basically, Lord Farquaad wants to get a princess, and then Shrek enters with his own problems which he can only accomplish through a deal with Farquaad.  From that perspective, it is quite interesting to see Shrek handle the events thrown at him, especially since he knows how it goes due to his own knowledge of fairytales, which lead to a lot of meta references.  For that reason, the perspective makes it much more interesting

Despite my misgivings, it is hard to understate the impact Shrek has had on animation.  It was the first animated film to win the Best Animated Feature Oscar, it made Dreamworks a household name, it convinced companies that 3-D animation was popular for non-Pixar films, and it inspired a variety of ripoffs like Hoodwinked and Happily N’ever After.  So it is hard to say Shrek does not have a place of prominence in animated history, even despite not aging as well.

Nevertheless, parts of the story are weak, the comedy does not age with the viewer, and its place in viewer hearts is largely overshadowed by its sequel.  The basic story, characters, and satire are still pretty strong, but it is far from perfect.  Inevitably, the film could be better, but is probably still worth a watch for the young or nostalgic viewer.

My First Time at the Drive-In

A friend of mine at work told me about the Starlite Drive-In south of Bloomington so I thought I would go there.  I like to have things to look forward to to keep me focused and optimistic and, before quarantine, going to movies was always something to do.  Finding that there was any theater still open where I could social distance was an excellent opportunity.

I learned that they usually do a double feature on Friday and the Weekend and show one of the two films on the weekdays.  On Monday, they did Shrek, which I had not seen in a while and thought I would give a watch.  So I drove down, gave it a watch, and thought I would share my experiences here.

Right off the bat, the location was a bit disappointing.  It was kind of hidden away on the side of the road behind trees and further south of Bloomington than I expected.  Also, it was very dark since the clouds blocked out the moon and stars so navigating was rather unpleasant.

However, when I got there, I had a good time.  I drove up into my spot, turned my car off, and watched the film.  If I wanted to, I could also turn on my radio to listen to the film, but the speakers were loud enough where I was that I just listened to those.  The concession stand was particularly nice as it had a variety of options and the prices were low as well.

Overall, I had a good time.  It was nice to be out and about again and it was fun seeing a film at a theater again, especially since I could social distance.  So if you’re looking for something to do, I recommend Starlite Drive-In.  It is an experience I am glad I had.

Go Watch Jesus of Nazareth

Recently, a friend of mine requested I watch the 1977 miniseries Jesus of Nazareth, directed by Italian Senator Franco Zeffirelli.  I was surprisingly endeared to this miniseries and felt that it was an extremely powerful watch, especially under Quarantine.  So I wanted to talk about it here and give a review.  Mostly though, I will be discussing why I enjoyed it.

The film is a very straightforward reproduction of the life of Christ throughout the New Testament.  The film goes through the major part of his life from his birth to meeting with sinners to his parables to arriving in Jerusalem to his crucifixion and resurrection.  In addition, it actively provides context to events by showing the Romans, Pharisees, and other people as well in the miniseries to understand the stakes for Christ and everyone’s reaction to him.

Before commenting on the film itself, it is worth noting the members of the cast.  The film includes Anne Bancroft, Ernest Borgnine, James Earl Jones, Stacy Keach, Ian McShane, Laurence Olivier, Donald Pleasence, Christopher Plummer, Peter Ustinov, and Michael York.  Those are the names I immediately recognize, but there are still many more that make up the cast.  So the film is full of extremely talented people turning excellent performances that a viewer probably wouldn’t see together elsewhere.

Now, the strength of the film is in its handling of Christ as he deals with the world around him and overcoming skepticism or fear of his message.  The events are played as they would have happened in the bible and the impact is felt as well.  This miniseries gives a real impression of the power and impact of the people involved.

Christ himself is portrayed as very human.  He actually feels emotions such as anger, joy, and everything else one would expect from an actual person.  It serves as a reminder that Christ was both man and God.

However, we are reminded of his God status by the fact that he rarely fits in with human customs.  From eating with sinners to saying he will not support open revolution against the Romans, his entire focus is promoting the kingdom that is to come instead of making peace with the existing world.  As a result, he does not fit in with man and people, even his own disciples, often avoid him.

This does really remind the viewer of God’s goals: save the sinners and protect the faith.  Christ does reachout throughout the film to sinners and only gets angry when the church is being used for personal gain or at odds with salvation.  It clarifies the goals of Christianity and reminds the viewer what Christ came to do on earth.

This therefore is a pretty strong reminder of why Christ is never popular, even when the church is at times in high regard.  Christ himself is aimed at the salvation of mankind, not man’s own satisfaction in this life as it is often fleeting and easy to lose.  This is why he is often rejected by the Pharisees, the Romans, and others as they cannot benefit from his message in this life.

Still, he provides hope to many as he reunites salvation with God and gives a reminder that there is hope for the blind, the outsider, and all others as God gives his salvation to all.  This is perhaps best symbolized by the fact that the Centurion is one of the most (if not the most) faithful person Christ meets.  The Lord’s message is no longer for the Israelites but instead everyone.

Christ says his Kingdom is not of this world and that is why he and his followers are persecuted.  If it cannot be used to support the goals of those in power, it is forgotten.  The film reminds us that often being at odds with the status quo is often why something will inevitably be hated.

The film is a strong example of how to communicate ideas or a message.  Instead of trying to bend out a propaganda piece, it merely shows the life of Christ as written and provides a better understanding of everything going on at the time.  For this reason, I highly recommend a watch as it will remind us of the message of the one true Lord and savior.

At this time, there is a movement to erase history and control morality that has an unsurprising distaste for Christ.  I highly recommend this film as it reminds us of a higher calling and men’s motives in response.  Fortunately, it is on YouTube so if you have 6 hours (seriously), give it a watch.

Princess Tiana Goes to Splash Mountain

Disney has officially announced that Splash Mountain will be rethemed to feature a “Princess and the Frog” theme as opposed to a “Song of the South” theme.  This has been met with some controversy, but personally I am all in favor of this decision.  Princess and the Frog is an excellent film and an appropriate choice for the design and theming of Splash Mountain.

In full disclosure, Princess and the Frog is one of my favorite Disney films so the film getting its own ride is something I find to be extremely exciting.  From the animation to the characters to the music, the film was extremely delightful and a great addition to the Disney animated pantheon.  Tiana herself is actually my second favorite Disney princess (behind only Elsa).  So this is good news on a personal level as I will be seeing a larger presence of the film in the park.

However, in addition to that, there is a lot of opportunity to adapt the film into the ride.  The track itself and the storytelling of the ride in its current state suggest how they could be adapted around the scenes in the film.  A brief overview may be a key to explaining how that could happen.

The current layout along the water track opens out with a fishing scene set in a river and introduces the world of Br’er Rabbit while the tune “How Do You Do?” plays.  It is followed by the “Laughing Place” which is located in a dark cave that leads into a mountain climbing up to Br’er Fox’s hideout, Chickapin Hill.  After rising, this leads into a 50 foot drop directly into the Briar Patch before an exit past a riverboat scene and Br’er Rabbit returning home.

Using this track, the opening fishing scene could be a great location for the bayou with a round with the opening song “Take You There” playing while the dark and moody atmosphere of the Laughing Place could be rethemed to include Dr. Facilier and a recreation of the scene with the song “Friends on the Otherside.”  The artwork suggests that Mama Odie’s treeboat will be on top of Br’er Fox’s hideout so it will likely be her on top with a round of “Dig a little Deeper” before the drop.  The finale would stay the same though as we pass Louis the Alligator playing jazz on a riverboat and saying goodbye to Tiana and Prince Naveen.

For all I know, this theoretical pitch for how the ride could go could be completely wrong and they could switch scenes with other parts of the film, but it does show one key point.  There is potential for this story to fit in well with the design and theming of the ride, especially since both take place in the south and can use similar props.  As a result, Princess and the Frog is the perfect film to bring to Splash Mountain.

The songs as well will be a welcome addition to the ride.  Quite a few have already been listed, but each one will be needed to create the same inviting atmosphere as the current iteration of the ride.  The ride has particularly likable songs such as the Disney all time classic “Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah” so that will be no easy feat.  All the same, the songs from the film are well designed to create the same atmosphere if used properly.

So there is a lot of potential in this ride.  The songs, the potential visuals, the characters, and the ability to use parts of the existing layout will be what makes this a good update to Splash Mountain.  This all suggests that there is good reason to believe that the change will be a success.

Of course, I will still miss the old parts of the ride.  I still do have fond memories of the first time I saw the stork animatronics fishing on the ride and I will miss falling into the Briar Patch, the various renditions of Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah, and Br’er Fox, Br’er Rabbit, and especially Br’er Bear.  Leaving anything behind is hard even when the future might be brighter.

The ride itself has been a point of controversy for many due to a debate about the film the ride is based on.  However, it is important to remember that the petition on Change.org to keep the ride the same had twice as many signatures as the petition to change it.  So there is no denying that the current iteration is still beloved by many.

All the same, the direction that is being taken will still keep the spirit of the original ride the same.  After all, the 50 foot drop (the best part of the ride) will stay the same, the riverboat will probably still be used, and Disney likes to keep references to old rides so parts of the ride will still probably be hidden there somewhere.  No matter what, the same quality of the old ride will remain even after the changes.

There is no doubt change is scary, but it also provides promise for a great, big, beautiful tomorrow.  If the changes are done well, this could make the ride even better.  Only time will tell, but for now I believe this is a good thing and it will be nice to see Princess and the Frog have a larger role in the Disney Parks.

The Art of Crafting a Message Film

With every medium, art, or craft, there is a method to doing it well.  A layman may know the basics to a field such as filmmaking or writing, but to do it and do it well is another story entirely.  So today will be a discussion over a rather relevant topic: the method of putting ideas and concepts in entertainment.

There has been a large push in recent years to increase the number of political concepts and norms in pop entertainment.  From press narratives on the importance behind an upcoming film to defenses of entertainment based on the ideas of the piece, there is no denying that Hollywood is pushing to increase the discussions on relevant concepts in our media. And this is always met with backlash, derision, and loss of audience interest.  This is an abnormally common occurrence it seems.

Some may argue that this may be a sign that audiences are opposed to the messages in entertainment, but the truth is most Americans are apathetic to politics as opposed to particularly invested.  So why then is there so much backlash to the politicization of current media?  Well, to answer that, one would need to look at the nature of communication.

There are two important schools of thought on the importance of communication: looking THROUGH communication, and looking AT communication.  The concept of looking through communication is based on the belief that the primary importance of communication is to transmit an independent idea free from the medium that transmit it.  The use of language or other parts of a medium is secondary from the transmission of an idea as that must take priority.  This is why Plato hated rhetoric as he believed that it would obfuscate the actual goal of the speaker or manipulate the audience.

Looking at communication, however, was instead the idea that the medium was a part of, if not equal to, the message itself when communicating.  As brought up by Richard Lanham, the mere choosing of wording or style can change the conveyance or intent of a message.  Every bit that makes up a medium of communication, including the choice of medium itself, is important in how that message is communicated.  Therefore, there is no message without the medium of communication itself.

Just about anyone in communication will say that the medium and method is just as important to reaching people as is the message itself.  For example, many in campaigning have said that billboards and signs do little while phone calls, mailers and door knocking actually connect with people.  So when one seeks to communicate any message, following the rules of the medium are important when seeking to use it to craft a message.

When one makes a film then, the focus on filmmaking must come first before using it to tell a message.  One must follow the rules of the medium, such as “conflict is the heart of the story,” and “you admire a character more for trying than their successes.”  If the message comes at odds with the story, then bending the story to please the message does not better communicate it, it just weakens the film.  This is why message films often fail: because a bad or mediocre film leaves no impression.

A good example of this would be the problem christian films.  Often these movies are very poor in terms of film quality and not well received by critics or general audiences.  There are certainly exceptions, but often they fail specifically because they focus more on the message than actually telling a good story.

For instance, the movie “God’s Not Dead” is a perfect representation of failures of looking through communication.  The christian hero is specifically designed to act absolutely perfect while the atheist villain is as moral as Hannibal Lecter to drive the point that christians are noble, atheists are evil, and that the former will triumph over the alleged threat they impose.  He and the rest of the christians are going to win because they are noble while their enemies, though seemingly more powerful, are evil.

At face value, this can be extremely insulting because the message oversimplifies actual struggle in a cultural war.  In addition, no christian is actually perfect (Romans 3:23), so it is hard to relate to a character that lacks any level of imperfection.  The characters as a result are not real characters like an actual movie would have, but instead lifeless tools designed to represent whatever is needed.  As a result, the film is no longer a film but instead a sermon designed to sell an idea.  Even if one agrees with the message of the film, the sloppy attempts at storytelling will alienate potentially interested individuals or supporters which makes any intent pointless.

Compare that to a decent christian film like “I Still Believe.”  Though the pacing and the dialogue can be clunky, the story is built around a man dealing with the death of his wife and coming to grips with it through his belief in God.  The message flows naturally from the story which is why the message does not feel forced or like it bends the film around it.

So that is the key to producing good content.  It must follow the rules of filmmaking and storytelling while the message must flow naturally from the struggle.  If it fails to do this, it will fail to interest the particularly interested and possibly make the message look bad.  Therefore, one should always keep the rules of filmmaking and storytelling at heart when making a film and never bend it to justify an alleged message.

Crafting a story that can promote a message is a hard process that is rarely commercially successful.  If entertainment truly wants to be entertainment, it must focus on good storytelling and filmmaking first, and all else second.  If it does not, then it will continue to divide and fail to resonate.

Some Random Thoughts on Donald Duck: Goin' Quackers

So, after watching YouTuber Caddicarus, I purchased and played Donald Duck: Goin’ Quackers for the N64.  An unsurprisingly lesser known entry in Ubisoft’s history, I was fascinated by the game and thought I would add my thoughts on the game as well.  I will admit, however, that I will only be parroting a decent number of points he made so instead of doing a review, I’m just going to say whatever came to mind while playing.

For starters, the game really is a ripoff of Crash Bandicoot.  The control scheme, level layout, and goals are representative of what one would expect from a N64 port of Crash Bandicoot.  There are even time trials for those who want a 100% score, something synonymous with Crash 3.  Partner that with running from oncoming objects such as bears and trucks instead of boulders, the game clearly takes inspiration from Crash Bandicoot.

However, the game is clearly aimed at a younger demographic than Crash, so the levels are shorter and there are fewer if you do not want to 100% the game.  The only actual increase in challenge is that the tokens needed to get to the boss battle are at times harder to find than the crystals.  There are cosmetic differences, though few of those are an improvement.

Also, the story does not matter in this game.  Yes, Donald Duck has to go save Daisy who has been kidnapped, but that is as standard a game origin as one can get.  So realistically, the game lives and dies by its gameplay.

Nevertheless, I still found the game surprisingly fun to play.  It does follow the Crash formula pretty well, the gameplay is simple and fun, and there are enough elements like collecting toys or time trials that justify replay if you are a completionist.  So despite those criticisms, it does accomplish exactly what it sets out to do.

The more fascinating realization is that it is actually a better Crash game than some of the following ones.  Crash 4 failed to follow up the original by trying to increase the variety of gameplay  and widening the levels, while after that the series tried to try a new formula that worked for some and not for others but was a departure from the original formula.  So Donald Duck: Goin’ Quackers is a surprisingly better Crash 4 than Wrath of Cortex.

At the end of the day, the game is a pretty decent platformer.  It was fun to go throw and I can see myself playing it again, but will admit that if a Donald Duck rip-off of a beloved platformer does not immediately interest you like it did me (I am weird), then there is not a reason to go out and buy it.  Still, I thought it deserved some attention.

All the same, it is interesting to see what used to exist in far more successful companies used to make earlier on in their careers.  Nowadays Ubisoft makes Assassins Creed, Far Cry, and the Tom Clancy games among others, but they used to make licensed games as well that were pretty decent.  This does show where a company can go when given enough time and effort.