Come Back Nolan, We Need You

It pains me to write this review because I generally only write positive takes on great movies or TV shows, but this film had the potential to be one of the greatest and it fell short; taking a direction it should not have been on. The journey of the Odyssey through the eyes of the incredibly overrated director Christopher Nolan. First let me say, this review in my heart is admittedly naively only for Mr. Nolan because he for whatever reason does not follow the style and thematic structure he masterfully used in Dunkirk and to a lesser extent in his Batman films or “Interstellar”. Dunkirk is not only Nolan’s greatest film but it’s the type of film sadly he seems to not want to make anymore. Perhaps the culprit was how in Dunkirk Nolan was forced into a narrower process of telling a true story. A short story of a battle and within that idea he encompassed all into what Edgar Allen Poes monumental essay calls, “the Single Effect Theory”. All the dialogue, characters, mood, music and even framing was structured to serve the theme of Dunkirk; how man’s souls rises to the occasion through spiritual honor and bravery based on human empathy. This idea of all working towards the substance of the theme and its moral intent was also missing in “Oppenheimer”, a Nolan film that ignored the suffering and impact of the atomic bombings on Japan in favor of nuance artful stylization. Thematic structure that engages could have easily made Odyssey one of the greatest films of all time but instead Nolan chose to horde it, perhaps hoping the audience made its own conclusions before it was spoon fed as Odysseus’s final stages of redemption. During the battle of Troy, Nolan expresses the anguish of a cultural shift away from respecting spiritual context and humane societal norms in the form of flashbacks and convenient dialogue, instead of showing us the torment Odysseus felt as it was happening. He gave us glimpses of Athenas desecration while he fooled us with her presence as if she and Nolan was deceiving not only Odysseus but the actors as well. The theme was not married to the acting or the storytelling as if Nolan and the characters did not believe in ancient Greek spirituality or the value of the tale. It felt as though some lines were added later as an afterthought because they had forgotten to incorporate the theme. It’s hard to say if Nolan could have helped the players better embrace the theme but I’m confident Matt Damon (Odysseus), Robert Pattinson (Antinous), Zendaya (Athena), Charlize Theron (Calypso) and Jon Bernthal (Menelaus) could of rose to the occasion because they are indeed great actors but they seemed to of downplayed their emotions to let Nolan tell the story or perhaps not to outplay Damon. Tom Holland (Telemachus), Anne Hathaway (Penelope), John Leguizamo (Eumaeus), Elliot Page (Sinon) and Lupita Nyong'o (Helen) didn’t get that memo, they instead played their roles with method, seeking out their character’s shortcomings and passions within the theme; albeit abandoned and neglected by Nolan. Perhaps the biggest disappointment was Damon, who in roles for Saving Private Ryan or Good Will Hunting exposed his inner soul for us elegantly and with due diligence helping us feel the impact of those stories. In Odyssey, he phoned it in, to portray the warrior as an emotionless hero; something that could have worked until the final scenes when he forgot it was the ultimate redemption story, one surpassing that of an individual’s in scope and importance. Despite Nolan missing the boat on the intense emotion of the present in lieu of telling a story somewhat abstractly, the Odyssey is a good movie just not a great one as it could have been. The Odyssey is a very entertaining popcorn film with lots of fun effects and grand visuals, but it could have been a societal changing timeless epic.

Hamnet in the Pitt Waiting for Godot

One of my most eager reads growing up as an aspiring playwright was Samual Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot”. The philosophy and minimalist structure searching for meaning and salvation kept me turning each page waiting for that sweet rush of inner beauty and divine energy, Beckett calls upon in so many ways, eloquently humorously and with a thrilling deeply pensive anticipation but it never comes. The existentialist dread of nothingness like Albert Camus finding peace during a weeklong wake they sulk the meaning of all that’s good in favor of self-gratifying emotion, as if that in itself is worthy of salvation or justification. After reading the play my 20-something-year-old self tore it up and promptly dumped it in the garbage. There is no sweeping speech and bold sounding phrases that heal outside of positive delusions even if the drama is bold in scope and tantamount to emotions that fill us with great expectations, as in Hemingway’s “Old Man in the Sea”, there is no meat on the bone in the end. This instinctual resolution based on heroics and hopeful clamor even when masterfully presented like Alec Baldwin’s winners only speech in “Glengarry Glen Ross” is dangerous fantasy that seeks only to entertain our misgivings and ill found faiths. This was the sentiment that shook my head after watching the Hamnet, a fictional portrayal of William Shakespear’s life and loss equating the later to Hamlet’s relationship with his father’s ghost and soliloquy at Yorick, the former court jester’s, grave. The film Hamnet is incredibly well written, acted and directed. Jessie Buckley playing Shakespear’s wife brings out an amazing range of natural emotions that fill us with a deep understanding of all the subtle feelings of this fanciful character. Being a product of the 16th century her bold ravenous choices made in the script can be excused but it’s unfortunately socially unjust and dangerous. Paul Mescal likewise turns a brilliant performance digging us profoundly into a pitt of his substance as a writer who conveys and resolves his most intimate grief through Hamlet’s dialogue but these sentiments were not what the Dane prince’s play was about. Although I haven’t read the Book the film is based on it seems it was all conceived from one scene from Hamlet, as his dead father the king bids adieu to his son as a ghost. The film’s story is heart wrenching and entertaining, unrooted in reality for a unique surrealism but the interaction between the couple is erroneous. Agnes is presented as an enlightened soul with the natural divine energy of a druid but then turns around and shuts out Shakespeare and their communication breaks down after a tragic family loss. This isn’t Donald Sutherland ending his marriage with Mary Tyler Moore in “Ordinary People” while discussing their understanding of substance during their son’s wake. In Hamnet the clear view of decent hearts are abandoned. The tragedy swoons and cradles us with surprise and thrilling drama at the expense of our identities as human beings and superstitions struggling to make things right. There's an enchanting abandonment of reality here that isn’t explored but we don't care because the story is told so wonderfully sublime. Towards the end of the film when she finally discovers his art she initiates a very powerful scene epitomizing the most ideal virtue of theater, continuing the extraordinary tone, she reaches out and touches Hamlet on stage as he dies. He takes this cue and uses it to embody the final line as others also touch him, then he holds out his hands to the rest of the crowd as if to give them all a hug. It was such a powerful display of how the grandeur of art speaks from soul to soul as if contentment can be achieved together but the main characters did not. This is what makes the film so ironically special and unique but are we all to go about our lives embracing unhinged reactionary emotion? You can't embrace such divine beauty and then cut it off without explanation or even some closure. Was it a treatise on the exposition of how cult-like belief blinds us from the source of love? If that's the idea, that Agnes was so swept up in her blind beliefs that they became her harmful id that shielded her from a healthy openness, then bravo, but to have such symbolism hidden is detrimental to those that come away unself actualized to their identity. I dare say most would come away thinking her defiance caused by ill-conceived rules of faith were not discord but disjointed harmony they not only can relate to but now desire to act out. People release their anger, cut off their own love and peace for a stringent falsehood thinking their situation is somehow unique or separate from grace, the only thing that holds hearts together, as that final scene with Hamlet yet Chole left the Shakespeares' closure to a mere smile. Don’t we need more as a society? Don’t we need are most in-depth meaning to be a part of our peace and harmony or do we want it unhinged from time to time so that we can better appreciate when it’s at a loss. Sounds like an excuse, an ironic scapegoat to being real; afraid of being even remotely vulnerable when in fact it’s that open cohesion that protects us. During the backstage speeches at the Oscars director Paul Thomas Anderson, whose Oscar worthy film “One Battle After Another” won best picture, was asked about racial politics. While he didn’t directly answer the question he talked about Teyana Taylor’s Oscar nominated performance of Perfidia revealing how the character was flawed and made decisions that were detrimental to the revolution. How she started as a hero but became the anti-hero in fact fleeing the nation because she had killed someone. They owned up to the flaws with an eye on a future, one in which her daughter could be a better person. This integrity is missing from Hamnet during which we are robbed of a beacon of moral clarity. A few lines owing up to this or explaining the issue would have been enough and taken the film to a unifying effect. Instead, Jessie Buckley during her extremely worthy best actress winning speech said. “Chloé [Zhao] and Maggie [O’Farrell, the film’s screenwriters], to get to know this incandescent woman and journey to understand the capacity of a mother’s love is the greatest collision of my life. It’s Mother’s Day in the U.K. today, so I would like to dedicate this to the beautiful chaos of a mother’s heart. We all come from a lineage of women who continue to create against all odds.” The chaos though, indeed extremely heart felt and beautiful, was not explored or explained leaving the viewer with a misconception. How can we move forward as a married couple when one of the greatest writers of all time and one of the most soulful spiritual characters ever on screen, as so conveyed by Jessie, do not communicate with reason and accountability. This at a time in our history where ignorant disgruntled voters are still angry about how the president they voted for is treated by the media, the context of his actions unknown to them. Their souls mute to the damage wrought. Oscar winning actor Cillian Murphy recently expressed his strong aversion to entertainment media that dictates emotional responses to the audience during an interview with the Sunday Times saying, "The last thing I want to be involved in is preachy or dogmatic work because films should never tell you how to feel. They should just ask questions". I’d argue the opposite and in Hamnet, Chloe and O’Farrell give us questions no one should be asking. We don’t need to discover ghosts or gaping holes in the earth harping on superficial superstitions waiting for Godot; we need Godot to show up and help us up by pointing out what’s wrong in the proper context and showing us what needs to be done. The film’s director, Chloé Zhao relied on her genius eye for sound and frame as well as award winning earnest acting to lead the way as she masterfully searched for answers without any reality-based structure. Zhao expressed a divine tone and timing rarely seen in cinema, her efforts to bring out beauty and serene simplicity is quite magical, but the script gives bad advice. On the flip side the hospital drama series “the Pitt”, streaming on HBO MAX, bags a relentless emotion based on truth, justice and profound meaning. While Hamnet oozes fanciful yet profound emotion the Pitt bangs us on the head with humanity constantly bringing us to the brink of soulful existence so that we can love ourselves and our fellow man. It challenges our ill-gotten corrupted preconceived norms and practices as individuals and as a society in an earnest simplicity even a child can understand and grow from. We as a society are better when we come to terms with our own substance not dance around it like a court jester killed for speaking out. “To be or not to be” indeed. While we continue to hang million dollar de Koonings and Picassos let us not forget Basquiat’s warnings or Dali’s melting clocks as we embrace truth and justice; concepts that our slipping from us into a soulless abyss.

Pluribus our only hope

Pluribus the si fi series which recently finished airing its first season on Apple tv, is simply put the greatest and most thought-provoking dramatic writing to ever grace a screen. At its core it is about what it is to be human, but its tragedies the failures to communicate properly. The "collective” consciousness evolves, but all the greatest minds of the world couldn’t stop Carol, efficiently played by Rhea Seehorn from failing to warn Manousos, stoically played by Carlos-Manuel Vesga of the dangers involved in disruption. It’s a shockingly realistic view, painting a grim picture for humanity. If the entire world’s conscious as one cannot communicate safeguards properly then do the leaders of the world have it worse off? Carol asked Manousos, “do you know how many people you just killed?” at first the ambiguity of Manousos with his back to the camera, seemed like a mistake, the only flaw I could find in the writing but that is life, that is the essential challenge, to communicate warnings preventing the loss of life or freedom. The series is working to find a balance exhausting all cross connections between want and need, free will and harmony, science and spirituality. How connected is the soul to the frequency of the universe as opposed to the mind's connection will other humans? (are they the same?) Perhaps the collective will see a different method or way to bond with each other, one that communicates with individual perspectives, to act like a child as opposed to reacting like one. There are many prospectives yet to explore and I hope it all leads to a more triumphant humanity that communicates differently, perhaps at a level that can actually be achieved in real life just as the collective needs to evolve in order to survive. Pluribus strips us of heroes and villains squeezing the essence of life and the importance of being into a divinity that empowers with free will. All are vulnerable and the entertainment value of this epic timeless series rests in how 12 characters, the last of which is the entire population of earth, figure out how to create utopia or extinction. How many world leaders do we have in real life that can save us this way? Writer and creator Vince Gilligan is one.

The Lowdown Shines Over a City on the Hill

It is with absolute giddy admiration and excitement to present a review of one of the most satisfying dramatic comedy series ever created in the Lowdown, currently on Hulu. One of Ethan Hawks’ most important works touching upon his western sentiments as a Texan himself in Tulsa. The story checks all the most intriguing boxes like corruption, racism, predatory capitalism, classism, redemption, friendship, loneliness, parenting, literature, gender equality, cultural appropriation, empathy, charity, and political vigor but most of all it tackles personal substance and how it’s effected by society. Hawke brings his usual gritty muckraking intellectual Greenwich Village hippy to a small town making a mountain out of careless corruption as so beautifully shot in the final scene; his failing bookstore in the shadows of a growing city in the backdrop. Tulsa, as the series touched on, was once a booming black city, a triumph of post-civil war reconstruction until mass murderous race riots filled the streets with blood and despair. Hawke’s character as if an afterthought is there to pick up the pieces in a modern era bent on forgetting its roots and respect for Native Americans. Hawke’s, Lee Raybon, is a comical Don Quixote of journalists touting a new brand of “truthstorian"-ism he holds on to and cherishes as his own identity, one the new world of alternate realities should instill. His acting as always entrenched in nervous thrill and bravery is surpassed in one scene by the teenager, Ryan Kiera Armstrong, who plays his daughter, Francis. “Don't patronize me by saying I’m not old enough to know you are good" a hero for the people as Lee wrestles with his indulgent dangerous passions wanting desperately to be a good example for his daughter but perhaps from a far not so close that she would see his warts and constant pot smoking I’d add. Perhaps the only flaw in the writing was neglecting to point out how he deals with stress as a reporter that lays it all on the line for the Lowdown nature of ultimate justice and equity. The acting overall aims for the heavy heart. A bevy of great performances like a final tearful swansong by a regretful, Jeanne Tripplehorn, the poetically stringent acts by Keith David, and Peter Dinklage, all relating to a masterful reconciliatory grace from the echoes of Tim Blake Nelson. Where are the Lee Raybons’ today? How soon we forget the massive corruption and insider trading that’s setting up a massive economic crash, turning cities on hills into tear gassed trenches for powershifting whims. The cruelty of public policy lost in headline news pushing talking points that entertain. The tattered notions of justice crumbling and decaying without repetition. The action-packed thrilling Lowdown climaxes with the importance of sensitivity as the strongest proponent of democracy. Bravo, Sterlin Harjo, whose timeless heart graced us with this series and others like Reservation Dogs, always striving to help us understand our reality, which can never change despite the greed and corruption that enslaves us all.

Yellowstone and the American Identity

Of the three western series beginning with the story of pioneer James Dutton and his family’s legacy, “Yellowstone” is the weakest in terms of structure and acting, despite a few great performances. The prequel “1883” was more pure drama, depicting pioneering settlers with an astonishing reality, the heroine in the limited series, a daringly brave lady carving a way of life, and a way to live in nature for what’s best in man, Isabel Day playing Elsa Dutton preserved the tactile subtleness of substantive living, even through sacrifices and danger, where all is equitable and free - the show’s main characters adhering to a moral structure and tradition of modesty. In my past review of the limited series 2nd prequel “1923”, I write about the superb realism bent on a just order, the cowboy order of things, free spaces and wild nature in harmony with a dream, to rest among the stars and the land whole. Perhaps inspired by Native Americans, the new cowboy, like Ted Williams, John Wayne, Roy Rogers and Clint Eastwood was duty-bound by honor to put the word brave in home of the brave. It’s what we all aspire to if we live with nature and do what’s right, even if not technically legal. He is at once against authorities that gather for profit without catering to the ramifications. The “Yellowstone” series set in the 21th century began with acts of brutality which in the end comes close to heading in the right direction before death with only several characters adhering to what is right - a break from the cowboy ethic to the good ole boys’ rule of reckless brashness. The lead role in the 5 season Yellowstone series, John Dutton comes off as a cowboy mafia soap opera committing atrocities to keep the biggest ranch in Montana building a legacy to keep his promise to his father, to never let the ranch go. Yellowstone entertains from start to finish despite adding several unrealistic plot points, and denying common sense approaches and occurrences although it stays true to a realistic approach. The acting in this series, topped by Kelly Reilly playing Beth Dutton, was not enough overall, and towards the end suffered some sluggish directions, showcasing horse sales got in the way of a thrilling ending scenes instead used to show how important being a cowboy is, working the land to feed people. The biggest dilemma of the series, a pipeline headed under a reservation’s water was left with unresolved after criminal vigilante action; its consequences ignored. Reilly tore through the fabric of her own psychosis, a symptom of living with the utmost truth and hard hand of justice, the cowboy creed distorted. Beth Dutton’s character on paper sounds like a dysfunctional egotist, but she cried like an Apache during fight scenes and sought solace in quiet moments within herself, although seemingly over the top, her choices are sublime and suspenseful in a poetically abstract way, taking her promises like a cowboy cliche of fabricated honor. She adds a surreal drama like Julia Schlaepfer’s bad choices as Alexandria Dutton in 1923 yet only with Harvey Dent’s two face streak of cruelty, its examination worth the effort in order to expose gluttonously cathartic ironic grandeur to bare all of its ugliness and test the boundaries of self-respect - a tough love redefined from a “cowboy” not a “lady cowboy”, like her mother, the backbone of necessity though from Beth warped and overly harsh. She was obsessed with winning, the end result always justifying the ugly means yet clinging to whatever good beauty she could find. Beth adored good people and wanted to make a place for them away from the harsh reality of human setbacks and sin, with no patience for erroneous behavior, especially any that taints the aura of majesty that can only be productive if it is feared. She is described as an assassin for quickly seeing the faults in others and using it to punish them for their own good, to strip evil cowardness or ill repute of its false dignity, forcing rebirth in humility. Her victims are left of their own devices exploited to triumph over their worth. The worth of everything is questioned, and the most flawed character in terms of danger is the only one that can articulate the proximity to goodness which defines us but in the end she could not save her adopted brother, because she let her anger cloud her judgement. With all her appeal Reilly’s acting was so good we forget her major flaw - how her cruelty and relentless thirst for revenge made him into a monster. The ending of the series set forth a definition of good-natured living, the cowboy as a citizen, middle class empowered rancher. Beth choosing a home where she could visit the local pub on horseback away from tourists. Her legacy’s giant 140-year-old Dutton ranch was too much to hold against the might of development without affordable housing or inclusionary zones, raping the resources of the state’s modest cowboys. Gentrification without inclusion leaves us divided and angry, poor or worse, incapable of living. John Dutton’s son Kayce, played modestly by Luke Grimes, at one point when estranged he suffered on the reservation struggling to make ends meet on his small piece of land he rented with his distractingly beautiful wife, Monica, acted with delight and enchantment, by Kelsey Asbille. Kayce Dutton almost loses his identity crossing the line slightly, but through and through Kayce is the consummate role, carrying the banner for our true American identity as a fearless super soldier who would die for what is right. He could have been rich but instead chose the American Dream, a neglected American identity. One that is fair and yet sacrificing for the greater good of things. Yellowstone as a whole could have been much better. Kevin Kostner, who portrayed John Dutton, wasn’t up to showing us how cruel the mistakes were, the failure to reach out when needed and speak. The role seemed unreal, fabricated perhaps because Kostner played him too gently. Almost as if Kevin Kostner’s face, much like Gimes’, is too kind and welcoming to get at a complex redemption. John Dutton, a man who used ruthless tasks for the greater good was at time a tyrant masking himself with unwritten rules. In contrast the many faces of Dawn OlivieriI, marvelously playing Sarah Atwood, a corporate fixer seductress who takes John Dutton’s adopted son and turns him into Macbeth whose character, Jamie Dutton, lacked a realistic redemption which in the end was denied for empty power, out of character as if the climax of his cruelty was also his demise. One of the other failures of the Yellowstone series is not bringing this character back from evil’s final embrace but in a fairy tale sense it certainly entertains. Olivieril’s eyes in turn mastered the perplexity of the dilemma, true to herself, her American dream of excess and elitism. John Dutton’s American dream was that of conquest, his son Kayce’s, that of a regular cowboy that just wants to love his immediate family, something his father could not hold together because of his tormented acts. His daughter Beth turning the drama to stage level for a show of absurd truths, her tongue constantly looking to change people’s mind with ridiculing sarcasm. Beth’s American dream is the most refreshing climax of the series, abandoning millions not just for her on a modest ranch in the coldest parts of Montana away from the ill effects of corruption and greed, but in spite of it, yet we don’t know how much she has tucked away with that Bentley in the barn; the righteous American is not cruelly gluttonous over excess and luxury, especially the kind that exploits. I can’t wait for the next limited series, “1944” but there is so much more Yellowstone could delve into, this time hopefully with a proper perspective, never losing its grip on what’s right. The late great American writer James Baldwin wrote and spoke about our nation not being able to attain the American dream because it had no identity without embracing the diversity that shaped us. He talked about how we hate history because we cling to nostalgia instead. During his time there was great political upheaval and violence because of racism and our war in Vietnam but that nostalgia he talked about at the very least kept us mostly rooted in a general understanding of liberty and human rights despite blatant racism unlike today. While politicians always lied or subterfuged to get their agenda through, today and I’d argue since Sarah Palin something else is eroding at what little nostalgia we have that forms a basis for democracy as mendacity and false propaganda in the form of alternate realities have become commonplace place among non-racist Trump supporters. They cling on to MAGA talking points playing into this false dichotomy that is now leaving us vulnerable to authoritarianism at the whims of “project 25”; its agenda of cruelty to serve white elitists. Perhaps it’s time to discover some nostalgic news from our past that can help shape a neglected American identity, never fully formed in the minds of our forefathers. Most people don’t know that the “bill of rights” was not in the original constitution. For this reason, Patrick Henry railed against the first constitution’s ratification, and the people demanded it be included until it was a year and a half later in 1791. As I’ve written many times in this blog, the founding of modern democracy began with two schools of thought. Before Palin’s embrace of fact less rhetoric we were republicans vs democrats having evolved from aristocracy vs reasoned logic. John Adams wanted Washington to be a king and he even suspended the free press because he envisioned a nation where good men of character would make the right choices based on traditions and norms. Thomas Paine and Ben Franklyn on the other hand wanted reasonable laws that served all the people, catering to their wants and needs. I can respect John Adam’s and legacy republicans’ conservative views as much as I disagree with them because that was part of who we are; the cowboy protecting the open spaces against development while welcoming his good faith neighbors as long as they didn’t change their way of life, as long as they earn it with respect and kindness. But that way of life is threatened just as opportunities for all sought by progressive thought is being threatened with political and judicial violence. Neglecting to regulate greed and corruption is violence and apart from the physical pain and hardship it causes it is also eroding the very core of our existence, albeit as Baldwin said an incomplete dream. That pledge of allegiance we made every morning as kids is in jeopardy, “…indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." We're losing our identity, to love and respect all beliefs and cultures, enriching our society, strengthening democracy, and empowering every individual (something that terrifies the corrupt.) All because the con for don and project 25 is so deep they are using all they can, as many narratives as possible, to create an alternate reality based on imaginary erroneous objectives built on lies - be white like us cause we don't share - no poor people allowed - no loud culture making noise next door - dominion over freedom- land over liberty - tradition over reason - mansions over community- elitism over lunch trucks and taco stands - what kind of country do you want? What a handful of forefathers got aristocrats to approve by divine force of will or what the racist aristocrats had in mind - for white men to rule all? Theres no such thing as DEI hiring. There are only tax incentives for businesses that hire disabled people and veterans. Theres no funding for immigrants in extended Obama care subsidies. Massive cuts in Medicaid will force hospitals to raise health care costs for all because of emergency care. Migrants help the economy; they are consumers who pay taxes without federal assistance. Presidential executive orders are meant to be emergency measures mostly affecting only the administration’s cabinet procedures. The facts go on and on constantly ignored or misunderstood by the public because news outlets merely report news as it happens, it doesn’t refer to them every time they are challenged by lies and hidden agendas. To the non-racist Trump supports I say, democrats are all ears over your concerns and your way of life but the current group of republicans in power are mute to them as farmers and ranchers alike wait for subsidies, and soldiers are forced to wage war on migrants for cruelty’s sake to discourage people from coming to America. Targeted tariffs properly passed by congress could help ranchers and farmers instead of the blanket taxes that help wall street volatility gains. Orangestone, a big ranch of graft, is killing the cowboy way of life.

a ritual for healing in the name of Jesus

Cousin Reinaldo explaining how you can pick up dirt and during a moonlit night kiss it as if it can hold warts, and toss it back without letting any fall on you to get rid of warts. Send those warts to hell in the name of Jesus he says. We must be able to perfom miracles through Jesus's salvation. It is a clear tenet of the Gospels. Whatever faith you can muster with an authentic attempt at a sinless life filled with positive energy. 1. Which Apostle Performed the Most Miracles? While Jesus performed the greatest number of miracles in the New Testament, among the apostles, the two most prominent miracle workers were: 🕊️ Peter Miracles: Healed a lame beggar (Acts 3) Raised Tabitha (Dorcas) from the dead (Acts 9) His shadow healed the sick (Acts 5:15) Struck Ananias and Sapphira dead for lying to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5) Role: Central leader in the early church, especially in Jerusalem. Seen as a foundational apostle. Focus: Preaching, healing, and delivering powerful signs among Jews. ✨ Paul Miracles: Healed the crippled man in Lystra (Acts 14) Cast out demons (Acts 16) Raised Eutychus from the dead (Acts 20) Survived a viper bite and healed many on Malta (Acts 28) Role: Apostle to the Gentiles, theological teacher, and prolific letter-writer. Focus: Evangelism, planting churches, teaching on spiritual gifts. 🔥 2. Who Focused the Most on the Gifts of the Holy Spirit? 📝 Paul Undoubtedly the apostle who wrote the most about the Holy Spirit’s gifts. He taught extensively on charismata (spiritual gifts) in: 1 Corinthians 12–14 – Teaching on prophecy, tongues, healing, miracles, wisdom, etc. Romans 12 – Gifts like leadership, encouragement, mercy. Ephesians 4 – Roles of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. Paul's theology of the Holy Spirit is the most detailed. He emphasized that: All believers receive gifts for the benefit of the body of Christ. Prophecy and love are more important than flashy signs like tongues without interpretation. He also insisted that gifts must be used with order and love.

chat gpt - tracking holy gifts

Can we track the amount of holy gifts being used in a timeline, to compare the most miracles and holy gifts being used from the apostolic church till now. perhaps using the formation of the Pentecostal church as well on the timeline? ChatGPT said: It’s an intriguing idea to track the usage or manifestation of holy gifts (charismata like healing, prophecy, speaking in tongues, etc.) over time from the apostolic age to the present, and it’s definitely possible to map it conceptually or historically, though not quantitatively in a strict sense. Here's how we could approach building a timeline of holy gifts use, tied to major movements like the Apostolic Church and Pentecostalism: 🕊️ Timeline of Holy Gifts and Miracles in Christian History 1. Apostolic Church (c. 30–100 AD) High activity of holy gifts. Documented in the New Testament: tongues (Acts 2), healings (Acts 3), prophecy (Acts 11), etc. Considered the normative experience of early Christians, as per Paul’s letters (1 Corinthians 12–14). 2. Post-Apostolic Era / Early Church Fathers (100–300 AD) Continued but declining charismata. Church Fathers like Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Justin Martyr testify to miracles, exorcisms, and healing. Some debate over whether gifts were still normative or fading. 3. Nicene/Post-Nicene Era (300–600 AD) Charismata largely formalized or institutionalized. Augustine initially skeptical of miracles, later revised his view (e.g., City of God). Shift toward sacramentalism rather than spontaneous Spirit-led acts. 4. Medieval Church (600–1500 AD) Miracles tied to saints and relics, not general believers. Gifts mediated through hierarchy (bishops, monks). Rise in pilgrimage miracles, visions (e.g., Hildegard of Bingen), but not “gifts” as in NT. 5. Reformation (1500–1700s) Most Reformers (Calvin, Luther) suspicious or cessationist about miracles. Some Anabaptist groups claimed visions, but were often persecuted. Holy gifts seen as non-normative or ceased. 6. Radical Movements / Mystics (1600s–1800s) Quietist and Pietist groups experienced private revelations, prophecy, and healings. Shakers, early Methodists, and Quakers emphasized direct experience of the Spirit (often non-charismatic but contemplative). Pre-Pentecostal Holiness Movement emerges in the 1800s, emphasizing sanctification and sometimes divine healing. 7. Pentecostal Revival (1901–1920s) Explosion of gifts: tongues (glossolalia), healing, prophecy. 1901: Agnes Ozman speaks in tongues in Topeka. 1906: Azusa Street Revival in LA sparks global movement. 8. Charismatic Renewal (1960s–1980s) Holy gifts enter mainline denominations (Catholic, Episcopal, Lutheran). Emphasis on baptism in the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts in personal and communal life. 9. Third Wave / Neo-Charismatics (1980s–present) Gifts seen as normal part of Christian life in many evangelical and independent churches. Prophecy, deliverance ministries, healing services widespread. Rise of “Power Evangelism” (e.g., John Wimber, Vineyard Movement). 10. Present Day (2000s–2020s) Global Pentecostalism is now over 600 million strong. Africa, Latin America, and Asia are hotspots of charismatic growth and claimed miracles. Continued emphasis on supernatural gifts, often tied to revival or spiritual warfare themes. 🔍 Interpretation Considerations Measuring “use” of holy gifts is subjective—based on written records, testimonies, theology, and church reports. Historical silence on gifts doesn't mean they didn’t occur—just that they weren’t emphasized or were downplayed. Theological stance (Cessationism vs. Continuationism) heavily shapes how periods were interpreted. No file chosenNo file chosen ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Good Night and Good Luck

Good Night and Good Luck is a remarkably epic stage play, and elaborate docudrama about the legendary news anchor Ed Murrow’s clash with the junior senator from Wisconsin and his fascist delusional fight against the intellectual threat of communism in the 1950’s. George Clooney delivered an authentic Murrow composing his mannerisms and subtle emotions with vigorous realism although some scenes required more over the top passion as could be felt in his closing speech after a collage of media malfeasance addressing a timeline of our current march to autocracy. Without directly mentioning President Trump the final backdrop of news highlights pop culture failures and tendencies can be dissected and discussed for hours on end, analyzing and parsing the projected impact. The carefully crafted script at one point went after the dangers of commentary asking what would happen when Murrow isn’t around to guard and check blatant mendacious rhetoric posing as news. As such it comes full circle, the final scene somewhat exasperatingly added for proper intent and purpose. It is a play that should be required viewing or reading for high school students adding to important social studies. I cannot recommend it more but it’s missing a glaring reality. Ed Murrow for all his epic sacrifice and defining work lacked the resources and time that is needed to properly cover issues. An eloquent presentation of facts added to curated sound bites goes a long way in a society where you had the “1949 fairness doctrine” and most of its politicians were honest. At one point in the play Murrow says that McCarthy lied about him being a communist sympathizer but that was the only backlash the senator got from them on air for presenting a report that was filled with lies. They played a clip of congress’s censure of McCarthy after mentioning his illegal communist witch hunt which lost him support. The use of historical film was a poignant gift and a production choice I wish more historical work would use. Waxing poetic to inspire the soul of the viewer like Shakespear did is admirable and highly entertaining as is the constant redundantly futile daily talking points news presents today but where is the investigation into the blatant corruption? Where is the bold confrontation with deception? Without cameras in politicians’ faces asking blunt questions, or without reporters getting kicked out of the oval office for asking obvious questions that would not get answered, we lack the proper perspective. The pivotal role McCarthy’s report ushered in as well as the work of Roy Cohen, his instigator was not hammered home or made evident in this play. Today’s media likewise misses essential developments, dismissed as merely a news of the day mention and not a long form examination or repetitive issue that should be brought up extensively like the hidden provisions of the “big beautiful bill” hampering court orders or election suppression. Where are the segments on how the bill wants to require bonds to ensure court enforcement or the provisions. Why aren’t reporters asking republican senators how they feel about that before they vote on this disastrous bill? Where are the questions about how migrant handlers bribed the president for more detainees? How about a reporter on the virtually closed border or on the companies that bribed the administration for more migrants to be detained? A simple nuts and bolts report with one or two curated sound bites isn’t enough. The outrages come across as passé commentary not a hammering that blue collar workers can hear or a dissection of the facts confronting culprits that cannot be ignored. The goal posts have changed as is their relationship with advertisers. News media is still as quaint as Murrow was and we are losing badly because the corruption, lies and hidden dangers are inadequately exposed. Waxing poetically about it isn’t journalism. Good Night and Good Luck indeed.

Severance from Democracy

Who knew Ben Stiller was this good a director. A slow churning examination of identity. The sci-fi-ish thriller drama makes a case for the pace of awareness. I know where I am and I know the truth, the truth is what is needed now and even the next five steps to the door can reveal whatever peace or grace is needed to live. Dan Erickson’s scripts and vision of the close up featuring a doorknob opening, Severance encapsulates time within the present thought, from there it shares everything: the story, the rhythm, and the need. It’s so hard to figure out, yet so easy when you understand. It’s as if I was angry the story was such a mystery and that the plot was even left for us to figure out. The main character played a bit too reserved by Adan Scott and Britt Lower was even more intentionally vague because the script is a conundrum of competing beliefs. At one point involved in satisfying work, and easy existence that reflects and cherishes art or a simple philosophy that drives peace from sheer ignorance. Scott and Lowers eyes met the task but I didn’t feel the layers needed to examine safely like I did with Zach Cherry, Christopher Walken, Patricia Arquette and John Turturro who all felt more authentic in their portrayals believing in the moments whereas Scott and Lower saw many different outcomes as if an abstract painter we need to figure out. Perhaps that decision to play a cynical sadness consumed their skills in convening plot and story. It’s fine for the script, one of the most unique things about Severance is this vague line dividing decisions and identity. The whole give in to your feelings to know who you are crowd is too existentialist. You are not what you want. You are what you need. This is perhaps the best lesson from Severance, but the direction that Erikson takes defines an ill-fated freedom into living in a false reality, a new one that’s distorted from the current one, taking self-duality to a level of defeat; but it’s almost as if the Zen like compliance of raw emotion supplants need for want. How can someone pick what they want if they know it’s not what they need clearly. It feels somewhat unbelievable in Severance, yet not so much in life when someone that sounds intelligent and charmingly kind stoops to shill for corruption to get whatever perverse issue they believe based on want and desires. Some are so obsessed with ending violence that they let insane notions harbor unanchored to the facts that surround what is happening, in Severance we don’t have the facts, the foreground is missing and all we are left with is a background to gleam reality from. In the case of school demonstrations for Palestine they detain protestors and cut school funding but aren’t going after the outside instigators of the protests or the actual antisemitic suspects; perhaps that goes beyond there capability especially so far removed from when the protests occurred. The same goes for gang members sent to prison without criminal charges when one of the leaders of MS 13 had his charges dropped allegedly so he could be sent to El Salvador as part of a bribery scheme with El Salvadorian officials. A similar incident occurred in April after a so-called leader of MS 13’s charges were dropped for immediate deportation according to immigration prosecutors instead of getting more information on the gang from the leader to further persecute the gang. With regards to short windows of due process for sending legal residents to foreign prisons, as a blue dog democrat, I’m all for sending in special soldiers to go after gangs, but imprisoning suspected ones without any charges is unamerican and unconstitutional. The latter is opinioned and discussed in the media ad nauseam but the former conspiracy theories are left uninvestigated, underexpose or examined. The DOGE employees who quit, the Starlink over the White House as well as the Russian Ip’s found meddling at the National Labor Relations Board, the confidential information sent on gmails, and other groundbreaking stories fall out of the attention span, deemed no longer “news”, awaiting a documentarian or historian to account. What’s missing is the relentless investigative work that keeps the issue, its cause and effects in the headlines, not merely part of the tone or feeling as if a fleeting memory seen after crude brain surgery. It’s absurd to think how the Trumpian era has made a large portion of our population distracted from all the facts focused on their scheme to entertain a false narrative that serves the corrupt. What is Lumon’s corruption? Why are they creating new identities to serve their seemingly diabolical needs yet the extent of which, the details of which, we do not know. All we know is a cocreator wanted to separate their minds to create a separate existence. And it appears somewhere down the line, her vision was stolen, going from science to something unknown in Severance but in real life that reality is clear, even though the task to undo it is absent as if the minority cannot understand what is happening or is just incapable of overcoming it or stopping it. Senator Schumer knows the reality all too well. The president wanted to shut down the government so he could continue shutting down the government by dismantling it without any congressional fight to stop him. How the president has a grip on executive orders and is grifting the country with Elon and company is a complete shock and much worse than I had ever thought it could be. Senators Murphy and Booker laid the tale on tape for us to listen to on the floor bare.

The hero needs to file a discharge petition to bring up the CRA act forcing a vote on executive orders or enacting one or 2 other similar acts, the REINS act or the SOPR act; all three could get a vote on restricting executive orders before it’s too late. Its erroneous that democrats haven’t focused on flipping votes to make this happen or for impeachment. All they need is 8 or 9 votes in congress. The hero needs to convey to the majority why the use of Trump’s 143+ executive orders have been unconstitutional and in the case of some departments or programs too late to reverse even with a court order. The problem is folks like AOC who I adore didn’t even mention executive orders in one of her speeches I caught during the “fight oligarchy tour”. While there is a lot of middle ground progressives can meet to appease conservative votes what’s most imperative now is to convince the “innies” what reality is. The republican Lumons in turn have introduced the “no rogue rulings act” which would dissolve the judicial branch because their reality is based on grift, plain and simple market and institutional manipulation. A house committee’s republicans recently voted the Trump administration could deport American Citizens, and the Administration is working to eliminate investigations into voter suppression and manipulation. It’s clear they are moving to sever Americans from democracy, truth. and reality hoping we, like the main character in this thought-provoking series, choose what distracts us most from who we are.

Shrinking a Brutalist Real Pain

How institutions, architecture, social groups and the government interact and cater to human emotion is at the core of most entertainment, media, and sadly politics. Some rare movies and TV shows are experts in bringing out the substance and clarity deemed from emotions while others fall short or make it worse with broad sweeping declarations that act like benchmarks that distort reality. I’ve recently seen three great examples that contrast these 3 pillars well. Going in to see the Oscar-nominated film “The Brutalist”, I was really hoping to have my mind changed about brutalist architecture, yet the opposite occurred which in an ironic way would make this a great film but sadly this was not the intent of the filmmakers. The extremely well directed film highlights the gut-wrenching power of one of America’s greatest actors, Adrian Brodie. Brodie conveys such subtle depth and insight, like Meryl Streep he makes every scene he is in a true introspective experience. We all relate and learn from his depiction of pain and anguish, yet the writer director Brady Corbet and co-writer Mona Fastvold not only failed to resolve or even properly explore his dilemma, they presented it in an erroneous presentation catering to beautiful cinematography and minimalist expression lazily mirroring and championing a dangerous societal precedence, brutalist architecture. Brutalist architecture is a post WWII minimalist design structure that exposes construction elements in favor of inexpensive assembly attempting to find beauty in simple stream like lines and bold abstract idealism. Brody’s fictional main character László Tóth, based on several real-life brutalist architects, finds beauty using light and grandiose size, like 50 foot ceilings in small rooms making impractical purely aesthetic spaces meant of reflection or spectacle. His greatest work, an enormous community center uses light to shine a massive cross in a giant empty chapel over concrete and a small marvelous marble altar. While the attempt at minimalist beauty is admirable its steeped in rejectionist symbolism of do-nothing defiance. During the last scene at an honorary event Toth’s niece gives a speech praising her uncle’s work depicting how the rooms and tunnels within his massive community center echoes triumphantly prison rooms and Nazi death camps. The idea being that the soul and spirit of Jewish survivors like Toth are defiant in the face of oppression and tyranny in the timeless work like a memorial to the victims. At the end of her speech and the film she says his work, which we mostly saw only in photos on walls during sweeping pan or over the shoulder shots, is defiantly “about the destination not the journey” as, she quips, authors tell us. This final statement, spoken just feet away from a mute old Toth sitting in a wheelchair is perhaps the greatest argument against brutalist architecture but again this was likely the opposite of Corbet’s intention, yet it’s hard to say given the uninformative last half hour of the film. There are so many unresolved issues regarding Toth including a climatic traumatic event that his wife, adequately played by Felicity Jones, defends him over despite the complete lack of any dialogue between him and the culprit on what occurred. This neglect, like brutalist architecture, ignores human need and comfort, failing to confront the issues at hand. Perhaps this was Cobert’s intention, leave it up to the viewer to decide and assign how things should sit and actualize reality but its this type of thinking that’s giving us the current downfall of American democracy we are watching in real time now with President Trump and his sadistic MAGA project 2025 movement. The United States of America is incidentally burning from cheap wooden homes I digress, ignoring climate change and our responsibility to human need. I don’t dislike the essence minimalist beauty of post brutalist structures like that of Frank Loyd Wrights’ which find harmony with nature or contrasts within the New York rat race like the spiraling Guggenheim art museum on the upper west side of Manhattan, but I would prefer a welcoming statuesque building with beautiful angels, foliage or sculptures of knights pointing to the modern art inside. Perhaps lounges throughout it hosting cafes or comfy classrooms all elevating the human experience as a cozy interactive welcoming art case with a purpose to solve problems like isolation or disassociation which can lead subsequently to the acceptance of disinformation. Why depersonalize art making embracing the aesthetic of shapes as opposed to careful details that long for achievement and the excellence of the human condition. An elegant plush comfortable couch is not in itself inaccessible, but a massive rectangle of concrete is to everyone always. In “The Brutalist”, Toth creates a Zen-like library with a unique beach chair in an empty rotunda. No couches, no tables, no place for people to convene, share, and admire books or even relax in splendorous velvet or lush and plush comfort that most would want for a timeless experience. Instead, you have a cold thought-provoking epitaph which stops time much like the disinformation that coats dangerous political rhetoric. Trust Elon Musk with our records because he’s looking for waste, blame immigrants for crime as we see them lining up at the border, or blame our lack of spirituality on trans youth and abortion. All just dog whistles without any intention of working together with people in a common space to work out all the nuances of our issues and differences, as if a gigantic concreate box is more inviting than an indoor stadium filled with recliners. While on the topic of stadiums; ever notice how almost no seats at ball parks allow the viewer to easily see the pitching at homeplate; they are all upside-down giant C shaped cones although the opposite would help everyone see what’s a strike or ball much clearer. Architecture like political movements need to cater to specific needs and demands in order to be fruitful; creating an inspirational stage to solve problems. We need to take the time to care about each other in our spaces and hearts. What are the origins of our pains? While “The Brutalist” fails to even attempt to resolve pain (although you can make the case that Brody’s expressions in the end do, which is partly why I would recommend the film for its acting and sheer artistry) the film “A Real Pain” desperately tries to solve them but comes up short.

The film currently in theaters and on Hulu written directed and starring Jesse Eisenberg alongside Kieran Culkin who play two cousins on a Jewish heritage tour through Poland is a compellingly earnest look at what defines the human character and how our interactions affect us. The scope and effort here, together with ultra realistic heartfelt performances, especially from Culkin who embodies his annoyingly emotionally needy character with a profound intensity that truly pierces into your psyche becoming an emotional terrorist pinning away at norms and introspection with grand aplomb. The seemingly unfinished script is worth the price of admission and makes this film a must see despite its adequate, albeit, pedestrian direction and weak cinematography, but we are left in the end, like “The Brutalist, unresolved. I truly feel for all the characters in the film. The tour group and the two main characters come together and exchange extremely important takes on how to interpret and examine meaningful interaction. It is an Oscar worthy portrayal of our reality as social creatures dependent on each other to understand social constructs and it does lay important groundwork for communal resolutions, but the main supporting actor is left quite literally staring at the randomness of life’s mundane stage albeit at a place of reflection and good intent. Much like gangster rap that’s missing one line to be helpfully cathartic so to does this film leave us on the edge. Of course this was Eisenberg’s intent, like the majority of his work as an actor, he loves to react humbly leaving actions to our superfluous emotions to work out much. There is a great charm in this. His vulnerability is admirable and his honesty likeable and we do see his characters resolve issues but more so for comedic affect and existentialist drama. I think therefore I am but that’s not how I can change. One can see and appreciate the extreme realism here but damn it man, give me one line telling me he will be ok. Tell me one thing I need to know to change and grow or reach a place where I can feel something divine, not just an extra long hug, symbolizing loss or a view of Poland that looks like Paterson New Jersey looking west.

Give me great minds that find solutions, even if they veer from the harsh reality of empty incompetence or dreaded inaction. Give me a show like the Apple TV series, “Shrinking” about therapists working out issues using our most sacred power; human potential. The writer creators Brett Goldstein and Neil Goldman together with “Ted Lasso” executive producer Bill Lawrence are all about resolution and comfort, whatever the space or depth of need. They take everything they can get and blend it into something tangible that moves us all into an acceptance and deep understanding of our humanity. This is how to be, how to think and how to feel and we are getting this from flawed characters we all love because we are all flawed characters that we should all love. Shrinking into the abyss of mental health, Jason Segal presents a mythical wizard like chosen child portraying his lines with refreshing clarity and Harrison Ford astounds, after dozens of years as a technical actor he is finally finding his method in a performance that redefines the iconic cowboy, or the triumphant warrior king into a relatable mountain of steer actualization. This is perhaps Ford’s greatest acting ever. Where was this unwavering approachable reflection on that bridge with Kylo Ren? We all need method acting to transform emotion into something we can tangibly relate but while he fails to do this in Star Wars he redefines it in Shrinking, a show that should be shown to kids in school to teach them how to be human and how to deal with our shortcomings. This comedy is one of the greatest written masterpieces of human thought and progression, a celebration of divinity in all its subsequent travails. Quite the opposite of a country enraptured into a new administration, squandering for whatever humility can be drawn, the news ignoring Trump’s pronouncements and blatant grift because it’s a show we are all unwittingly playing parts in. Pundits and reporters may hint at the smoke screen distractions, but the headlines aren’t flashing the disinformation. The facts are subdued by the disinformation so much that we are caught off guard and in awe of the spectacle. Trump fears Wall Street and trailer parks taking up pitch forks and tanking his ratings that would cut off his republican support but where is the common ground, where is the resolution of his failings? Why are they all ignoring the largest stumbling blocks and injuries, like the tens of thousands or God knows how many people that will die because almost all USAID has been cut or what occurred on July 1st 2024 when the Supreme Court through its immunity ruling made the office and their own court illegitimate. Why is congress and the people not demanding a vote to reverse these simple acts that harm? Everyone knows absolute power corrupts, well its time for news and entertainment to start “Jimmying”, like Jason Segel’s character in “Shrinking”, Jimmy Laird, going inordinately out of his way to help his clients while barely holding on but with a determination to solve the underlying problem of rhetoric versus reality and better still how our thoughts can manifest resolution. Congress like the therapists on “Shrinking” needs to go back to the origin of our problems like the immunity of the President’s actions or the eroding of our constitution and democratic process. Let us not just describe the pain or simply march like monuments of defiance that do not even resonate with small minded ignorance. Let us embrace and solve our needs not merely flaunt our wants and aspirations keeping them unattainably abstract.

Rez Dogs in the MAGA Megalopolis

Less than 30 days and the unprecedented threat to our democracy begins to die or is unleashed spiraling us all, yes; the whole world, into a new unfathomable reality subsequent to the alternate reality we are currently living in. In the days before Sarah Palin, such rhetorically sounding alarms would be just quaint jests of poetic license but sadly today they are not as dozens of court cases and lawsuits present themselves combating active efforts to suppress voting in dozens of states, see the great work at democracy docket for more. The latter is erroneously glossed over as just a few segments unworthy of our constant attention which in news speak would mean network reporters on the scene providing updates everyday and extensive investigation, instead you get a few passing segments and quotes describing the 2020 election as if the only threat were designs to reactivate the rioters to storm the capitol once more declaring not only 2020 but 2024 stolen just as the former president and some of his surrogates in suits are proposing. The mishandling for such dire misanthropic delusions and the direct corruption it springs from can be neatly experienced symbolically artistically and poetically with hyper stylish aplomb in Francis Ford Coppola’s stunning Megalopolis, but the true answers needed to heal you can feel wholeheartedly by the pond or in the back of the pick-up with the FX Hulu series, Reservation Dogs. Megalopolis is a magnificent epic spectacle that drums out a plethora of timeless old platitudes that should be absorbed. This feature film should be watched not once but several times because it harps on the symbolic grandiose gestures of both tyrannical power and altruistic dreamscapes quite literally but as the beatnik in one of Coppola’s own fluff films, Peggy Sue Got Married suggested about Hemingway’s The Old Man in the Sea; there was no meat on the bone. The old man opined about life, courage, honor, and purpose while fighting for his life bagging a Marlin in a small boat off the coast of Cuba but he returned with a skeleton, like the false communism on the island, unable to feed himself or anyone else. How was Cesar Catilina, played majestically, powerfully and intuitively by Adam Diver, going to incorporate the masses into his plans? What steps could the government of played to of helped New Rome? Are the answers for content peaceful comfortable living so hard to outline or implement sociologically in detailed actions and explanations? As young Bucky in Reservation Dogs said, “at least we know who we are”. The character played brightly by Mato Standing Soldier is suggesting no matter what the white man does or had done to native Americans, they still have purpose and meaning in life because of their identity, culture and ancestors. So why is just under 40 % or hopefully not more holding in their hearts lies as epitaphs to our demise? Bluntly put they don’t see the danger from the MAGA clan, they didn’t experience the daily chaos and anxiety that the former now illegitimate president wrought every single day. How bad can he be when about half of congress and dozens of suits on TV say he will “Make American Great Again”? The truth is the former President would be in prison if not for six members of the supreme court of the United States who have not only delayed and distorted his indictments but worse they redefined our nation on July 1, 2024 with their presidential immunity ruling effectively making us a monarchical republic, no longer a democratic republic. Congress and the justice department can no longer investigate certain communications or actions communicated or actuated by the president of the United States. We are no longer cowboys, ladies and gentlemen, we are now enslaved ranch hands.

The dramatic comedy series Reservation Dogs pines for our souls, and scours for our American Identity amongst heartfelt actuating effective dialogue and resonating performances. The series thrillingly sought to explain what each character needed and what they were going through with profound depth that heals. D'Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Paulina Alexis, Devery Jacobs, as well as short stints by Oscar nominated actors Lily Gladstone and Ethan Hawke all stand out truly holding their hearts on their faces, conveying the weight of their concerns and spiritual growth, unveiling it in front of our eyes. The dialogue, honestly the best and most meaningful in any series since Ted Lasso, holds us accountable to our inner purpose and identity as defined by our divinity unlike the grandiose glimpses in Megalopolis; a major flaw effecting our politics, fraternization or affiliation versus soul spirit and merit-based value.

Vice President Harris needs to stoke the heartland’s spirit of true liberty and justice among the dangers facing our democracy and indeed human rights by the MAGA movements not just here but throughout the world. Can you imagine Harris in Miami with Cuban dissidents calling out the threats from the Cuban regime while comparing them to the fake electors or to state voter board members once again pining to steal results in America? Or how about appearing with a teen who doesn’t know his mother because he was ripped from her arms at the border? Who are we if we can’t lay out the plans of Thomas Paine and Benjamin Franklin? What will we become if we can’t spell it out?

ramy r us

Ramy, the dramatic comedy series on Hulu featuring the life of a young Muslim American man in Jersey, is a good metaphor for languishing political situations currently unraveling around the world and in the US of A. Ramy astonishingly brought forth a vision manifesting the most important question for any individual and indeed for mankind itself. Do we live and maintain a spiritual divine state of peace and safety, or do we dwell in desire rift with guilt distortion and ambivalence that divides not merely into mammoth delusionary unequal dichotomies but into a spiral of divisive thought. Ramy loses his sense of self and reality searching for the ultimate love energy to guide us. His uncle comes out manifesting a so-called right wing conservative anger that’s openly discriminatory as Ramy manages to treat him with residual compassion, his soul still lingering from the time he dangerously lied to help a war PTSD suffering individual who begged for redemption. Ramy contrasts his uncle’s dysfunction with an ex American vet’s psychotic tendency. The series treats violence just as it does the sins of lust and distorted outcomes, outlining how kindness and sincerity rule the day even while other more rigid actions cause massive chaos and pain. A Palestinian boy is left to languish in prison from an act of extreme desire albeit distorted passion. He stole the bike and deserved to have his jacket taken from him forcefully, but one suffers much more than the other because society is built on extreme discernment which has replaced reasoned thinking. Politics now uses a pulpit of distorted realities based on false conspiracies spread by social media algorithms which exists to sell ads. Its fine to sell ads, ill give my data for better cheeseburgers gladly but don’t keep fooling my family and friends into clicking on outlandish trails of video clips all serving mendacities upon mendacities upon mendacities for coupons. We as a nation are obsessed with satisfaction, just now most will think of the rolling stones and that song: I can’t get no satisfaction. The thrill especially bounded in culture gives us an indolent contentment; an easy fix of hysteria that acts boldly enough to submit and replace structure action and reasoned thought. At the same time great bold action predicated upon brash courage must immerge. Cuba needs a January 6th to happen but go further, and America needs to root out injustice while rectifying and regulating with new laws.

My favorite scene in the masterful series was when Ramy got his brain compared to that of a heroin addict with the same pleasure reward zones. Ramy, his doctor friend tells him, is overstimulated and needs to calm his mind down in order to get erect. You guessed it. Its all about sex and erections. The economy the environment and our justice system needs to get hard right. We need to storm the capitol building with appointed leaders ready to go; leaders biting at the bit to establish democratic rule in Cuba. Like good sex you got to be in love with what you’re doing, its got to be real, and based on whats good for you. What does science say about our emotions and where those thoughts lead us and how can we implement the proper reaction?

How do you give all your love selflessly? Only in temperance and restraint within the confines of divinity can you see clearly the ways to give of yourself. How much of myself must I share to properly love people? How do I harness this eternal force of contentment, living on the whims of devotion as guided by heartfelt sincerity always? Respecting all the dogma of the world and efforts to seek a reality for the soul after death, each doctrine points to the same conclusion a child could understand. To see truth and justice we should examine the intent of every heart and what motivates emotion. We all recognize our vices knowing how our limitations push us away or distorts our view of reality from a passive peaceful contentment bound by a lack of nervous fear or regret. To be gentle and kind is never complicated except when it is not actualized. This focus of thought is the meaning of life and the clarity of enlightenment. What is the easiest way attain a state of comfortable divinity always? It is easy to contemplate on our God or a different version of him as the means to achieve such discipline. To rule over your expression words and feelings tying then directly to a state of prayer or yoke calling upon the most good that can be felt, thought or actualized.

REVIEW: STUCK TOGETHER a film for a new age of reason

The world has a problem with substance as news has become opinion and commentary, allowing for dangerous distractions and subversions in the social contract; on beautiful display in the patient well-worn staging of average personalities all coping with the same underling problem, “Stuck Together” in a pandemic. The French film’s title itself a not so obvious metaphor for our political constructs. Set during the months before viable vaccines at the height of the covid scare, the humor and drastic realities are masterfully depicted in this epic story weaving a cast of apartment building extroverts and egomaniacs gunning for the most understanding and clarity in the temporary surreal existence of a government-imposed lockdown. The best part of the film stuck to a common theme we are all still feeling; how does your safety or perception of safety relate to who you are as a person? Everyone builds toward whatever grace they can surmise in a struggle to survive, weighing the pros and cons of freedom. One character charged with representing germaphobia was too slapstick for me, but my wife laughed loud during his absurdist scenes incidentally symbolizing the horrifically foolish extremes attempting to trump science and reason at a critical time. The safest vaccines ever, have been ridiculed erroneously ad nauseam. The most epic storyline features lawyer Laurence Arné as Claire; her touching teary eyed acceptance of a political rival’s redemption, that of a brute businessman played engagingly well by François Damiens as Tony. Worth the price of admission, the crescendo like impossible love felt fleeting at the same time as ever enduring, a masterclass of acting and directing capturing the essence of spiritual empowerment. Not far behind in accolades, the treatment of a child’s first romantic love in all its infinite innocent bliss was captured by the serene timing of child actors, Rose De Kervenoaël as louna, and Milo Machado-Graner as Basile; their extremely complex acting, especially at their age, was set to gorgeous cinematography which should have been used more. The innocent romantic love between children captivated in a heart shaped scene. A heavenly painting of a perfect moment seared into your mind with the sign of the heart juxtaposed marvelously. Artful framing and rich photography have sadly been used all too sparingly throughout the history of film; even masters like Bergman, Gilliam, Spike Lee, Wes Anderson, Nolan, and Spielberg who do dabble in scene painting don’t use this technique enough. Several modern political and social dilemmas can be measured against the psychology displayed in this classic film. Perhaps the most intense and glaring question to pose is, how news was examined as commentary throughout or how unexamined ideologies creep into our personalities establishing unrooted convictions lazily carried out at timely extremes. Our current media likewise focuses on soundbites as defining what news is rather than examining the actions and consequences being taken; the boring reporting of progress or lack thereof ignored. At one point in this film, spoiler alert, a doctor is arrested for running dangerous experiments with himself and others unbeknown to them, taken away with a possible perfect vaccine, the science of which remains studied. Perhaps symbolizing the conscious of a modern nonbeliever carried away by opinion in a world desperate for new rules and edifying justice. The dream of Franklyn and Paine, relies on actionable reason going about the reforms and implementation of new ideas and social constructs that brings us together in a harmony of a true democratic republic which strives toward comfort safety and true inclusion. Instead, we a ‘stuck together’, listening to our incoherent gripes and uncontested battles.

Si Se Puede - July 11 in Cuba - documentary short

 https://youtu.be/XDfN2yZXK5o

The Social Dilemma: Seven Months Later

Commercial use algorithms must be designed to omit certain types of content. Even though you can opt out to get your feeds in chronological order without interference and you can also make a feed based on your favorites. These are in effect the safety measures social media companies have created in the wake of our political dystopia in America married like a Siamese twin with an alternate reality of a party which uses lies and deception.

Ever since we began congressional hearings on social media the companies have been working to improve the service by removing extreme content that violates “public standards”, but no plans were laid out to regulate for ‘civic standards’, politics or mental illness.

The scary ai, artificial intelligence, we all should worry most about are social media algorithms which create specialized content to serve advertisers. Seven months after the epic documentary film The Social Dilemma we still haven’t addressed the elephant in the room, and it bears repeating. At one point the film which should be required viewing for students, a fictional teen girl smashes a locked box to get her phone locked up on purpose by her mom for only one hour and her son tries for a week without his phone; both instances showcasing the extremes of online addiction. Through these dramatizations guided by interviews with many of the original social media algorithm creators the harsh reality of modern-day technology is clearly evident but the solutions and regulatory needs are not detailed.

We all have our own distinct social media feeds, separate and individual, and when manipulations increase polarization for profit, it becomes dangerous especially when its used just for your attention. Information and news can never be politically motivated in such an environment because it creates harmful interest groups. Content that is deliberately a deception should be considered political and should not be part of any algorithm reliant on holding your attention to sell ads. The psychological consequences will be studied for years to come but what is most urgent is how it effects politics. It is unethical for social media platforms to monetize any content that contains socio political information. While of course free speech and political content should never be banned; people should be able to search and find any type they want legally, but that content again should not be used in algorithms that are monetized to maintain your attention in order to play you ads; this by definition becomes a political ad even if there is no person or political party physically purchasing the feeds. The examples of governments paying social media to help them win elections by manipulating viewers is appalling and egregious. Democracy should never be caught up in a sale of any kind. That is the existential threat. Manipulating your attention for market uses I believe are fair game while obviously coming with other types of psychological problems that should be further studied and regulated. Likewise online platforms should never be able to block search content; the internet must be free from commercial obstruction.

They are calculating our emotions and actions online, analyzing what we consume for advertisers. Political ad buying should never be a part of this and must be illegal on social media, period. Hours of congressional Hearings didn't even mention this as a viable solution. At the very least political monetization altering motivations and the habits of users should be illegal on social media platforms.

Solutions at end of the documentary film give some other essential tips on how you fight the algorithms like not clicking on recommend videos, but the problem is not with savvy people that could reprogram their feeds, it comes with mammoth size groups clustered over specific interests or beliefs regardless of merit. If they are clustered because of commercial access to attention, then they become divided even from their own true beliefs whether they realize it or not. It’s clear that the information age has made smart people smarter and dumb people dumber, but we can not allow mob rule to be strengthened by commercial proxies focused on profit and self-interest.

 

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/algorithms-and-amplification-how-social-media-platforms-design-choices-shape-our-discourse-and-our-minds

The Chair Review and the Lost Debate

 

What a timely series, “The Chair” (currently on Netflix) provides a breath of fresh air, and a place where truth is led astray in the hallowed grounds of truth seeking; highlighting the paradox of democratic movements which like in the series mostly lack detailed focus on outcomes or specific demands. In the Chair liberal activists demand a teacher be fired for making a Nazi salute without any nuanced perspective.  The series looks at how the media frenzy over the student cell video that captures the act goes out of control without said proper context. As awkward and senseless as it seems to the viewer so to are a staggeringly large group of people in our American society baselessly brainwashed to for example view COVID vaccines or the wearing of masks as an afront to their freedom! The series doesn’t make the correlation with well-meaning liberal activists and ring wing fed so called conservative activists nor does it offer any solutions to disinformation campaigns but at least it’s a theme and a topic that can be examined moving forward. While the teacher accused could seemingly end the false narrative with a simple explanation, he does not, and the first season ends without this needed resolution. Convincing conspiratorial “conservatives” that their opinions on masks and vaccines are erroneous has likewise not been properly addressed.

Sandra Oh leads the English department with an Emmy winning grasp of emotion. She’s a delight but run through too fast during much of the first season; the ‘TV pace’ takes away from the theme’s grand realism and its substantive dialogue. I hope the show’s writer producer Amanda Peet, who ranged so well in Brockmire where she played a struggling alcoholic brilliantly, can make an appearance next season.   

The timing and structured plot tunes worked great although there were a few scenes and or scenarios that sounded unrealistic or seemed out of place. Jay Duplass, who plays the accused teacher, and Holland Taylor, who shines as an overdramatic professor who is treated poorly because she’s a woman, both understand the importance of realism, their performances sought true understanding, conveying as much as possible, if only they were on screen more. What’s the rush lol..

Our society much like the University in the Chair, is now undergoing an urgent emergency in climate change and the stated strange political dilemma mired in large misunderstandings. The anti-mask, disinformation campaigns have become a theme all too often to the point where the phrase, “it’s a medical emergency” means you don’t get to decide whether not to wear a mask or get vaccinated because that’s not at all political. Deniers are right to view the government as clueless and inept in the face of so much in action much like the students in the Chair but, they both got the facts wrong, and their alternate reality is blind to research and science as well as against public health. I’m so looking forward to the next season of the Chair, where a proper perspective can be found. As far as American society, I’m afraid what may be needed is more time, media that more forcefully and virally points out misinformation, and or more consequences for the enablers and right wing or so called “Trumpers” who should not only face litigation but should also face our justice department which as an institution sadly fails us in going after dangerous inciteful speech whose results are clearly sociopathic. Truth is being swept on so many levels under the Chair, perhaps, like in the series someone can sit on it and add clarity to the lost debate.