I saw Rogue One, and it is a good action movie. It felt a bit more like a Star Wars film, but without any character development. Droids still steal the movie. It is not directed by J.J. Abrams so no need to worry about crazy light flares. But it does fit with the new direction of the franchise set by Abrams. So here are a few thoughts now that we have two movies from the new direction.
First, it is clear that the concept of the Force has changed. The Force is now acting on its own, and has a will. People seem to pray to it in Rogue One, and it can look as if Rey might be doing the same thing in Force Awakens to change the momentum of her light saber fight. This makes the ground split between Rey and Kylo Ren have new meanings as well. The Force did not want Rey to kill Kylo. Everything now is part of the will of the Force. It is taking the Force from a more Eastern mysticism to something closer to Christian conception of a personal god.
This is different from Lucas’s view of the Force. Even in the Phantom Menace where it is mentioned the Force has a will, but then it also obeys your commands. Lucas used the Force as more of something that gave people abilities, and can be used rightly or wrongly. Now with this new view of the Force having a will, it brings with it a host of complications. What does it mean to return the Force to balance, as they discussed in the Prequel Trilogy? Why did the Force allow the Emperor and the evil he wrought? Vader killed younglings after all. Why does the Force have a light side and a dark side?
Second, these movies are no longer really fantasy kids movies. Force Awakens was the first film to earn a PG-13 rating, and this movie, Rogue One, is a war movie where, well, when you see the end you will understand. At least Rogue One is a self contained movie unlike Abrams’s Force Awakens where the mystery is never revealed.
Third, the original trilogy was great in creating characters. After all, we love those characters enough to have all these other movies. It still stands as one of the best trilogies ever. The Prequel was not as good. Some of the characters failed miserably. But, it did a good job of showing the government go from a Republic to an Empire. That was well done. The belief that councils and republics don’t work well continues in Rogue One. Force Awakens showed us some great new characters, but gave us very little and left with so many questions that it was annoying. Rogue One does not give great character development, but does a good job of showing the evil of the Empire and the nature of the war that does not come through in the original trilogy.
Fourth, Rogue One should have had a slightly different ending. Princess Leia being in that massive fight makes no sense. Worse yet, the beginning of Star Wars now feels like stupid pathetic lies. It seems as if Leia and the guy who said it was a diplomatic mission are a little like PR guy for Saddam Hussen.
Fifth and finally, the technology of allowing dead people to appear in movies is amazing. It will be bad in the long run as now the dead can be used to advertise beer or Snickers, but it is impressive technology. The moral questions of who owns the likeness of dead people is what will be interesting. Still, it cannot be denied that seeing some of the original people was fun.
Go see the movie, and hopefully Abrams will give us a better movie in 2017.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
[+/-] |
Rogue One and Thoughts on the New Direction of Star Wars |
Friday, December 02, 2016
[+/-] |
Mockery in the Church |
I recently wrote about the decline in discussion thanks to
the rise in mockery. It was in the
context of why we have Trump vs. Clinton.
It turns out that Trump won and in large part because the middle of
America felt put upon and scorned by the mocking left. I was not surprised.
But now I must say that I have long been bothered by the
same trend in church. Mocking is often
now the way the church communicates too.
Douglas Wilson is excellent at it with a sharp wit and a sarcastic
tongue. He helped popularize the heresy
of Federal Vision with his mockery. But
it has gone from the controversial to the church mainstream in the Babylon Bee. I see this posted everywhere I go
on social media.
Some of the Bee’s stuff is quite harmless using well-worn
jokes as fodder like the need to end a sermon on time. Others are more satire directed at new
evolving ways of communicating on social media.
But more and more are mocking of people directly. And not always individuals but large
groups. Some were so popular they were
fact checked by Snoopes.
Now mockery in and of itself is not sinful. We do see it used in the Bible. Surely Paul is mocking to some degree in
Galatians 5:12 where he wishes those who would require circumcision would
emasculate themselves. God participates
in a bit of mocking or sarcasm at least in his conversation with Job in Job
38. God knows where Job was when he set
the limits to the waters, and he knows Job cannot hook the Leviathan. But it was used to make a point. Job need his sense of importance and power
torn down by God, which God did to Job’s spiritual benefit. But we also see the Bible warn quite a bit
about mocking such as Proverbs 3:34 or the incident in 2 Kings 2:23 where the
she-bear tears apart some mocking children.
So there is a limit, a time and place, for the use of such
communication.
The problem today is the overuse of mockery. Jesus and Paul could mock, but that was far
from their only weapon. It had a place
and a purpose. The majority of the
conversation was to build up. They
mocked to bring a listener to change by laying bare his folly. But they never ever left someone there. Tearing down without building up is not good
at all. It clears out the strong man
without filling the house with the Spirit.
Jesus mocked and so did Paul and Elijah and others, but can we find a
Scriptural example where the mockery was not done in order to bring about
change, but rather to bring about a laugh.
Did the disciples sit around and tell jokes to each other about the
Pharisee who was eaten by a wolf on Saturday because he could not exceed the
proscribed number of steps for the Sabbath?
Probably not.
And here in lies the rub, for me at least. Do we believe this mockery is effecting
change? Is this tearing down leading to
a building up? Does anyone really think
Joel Osteen is reading this, much less motivated to start using the Bible
correctly? Do we think this helped any
followers of Osteen? Do we think it
helped protesters in the streets? Are
modern worship services starting to tone it down after seeing how they are likenight clubs thanks to the Babylonian Bee? Is the mocking of the anti-gluten diet craze really changing minds? Of course not. But is the
conservative Reformed crowd being affected by this mockery? We don’t make these mistakes, but what is the
attitude portrayed toward those that have contemporary worship or were so upset
by the election they took to the streets?
Is it compassion and love? Even
Jesus loved the Rich Young Ruler when he pointed out his sin and shortcoming. Does this form of communication, which seems
to be just for our entertainment, moving us to help the protesters in the
street who need to know from where the only comfort in life and death comes, or
does it make us look down our noses at them because they need a participation
trophy?
And let us also hold up the “do onto others” mirror that the
Bible desires us to hold up. Would Adam
Ford want to be at the end of his mocking satire? He has often pointed to his anxiety disorder
as part of his journey that was very formative for him. He takes anxiety medicine and has openlysatirized those who think you should not be taking medication for suchdisorders in some of his comics. Would
Adam think it good and funny satire if someone wrote an article with a title
along the lines of “Blood tests confirm levels of sin (just like Diabetes),
Jesus pill the answer”. Would he even
allow such as post on his Babylonian Bee? According to a search on the Bee's sight, the answer is apparently no. I am not saying that people with anxiety should not take medicine. What I am saying is that this is a more
complicated question than comparing it Diabetes. Again the more the mockery the less the
discussion. And the other thing I am
saying is that if he would not allow such an article, then he is being
hypocritical about his support of satire/mocking. His goal was to mock from a place of love,
but if you are doing something to others that you would not be okay with being
done back to you, you have failed the biblical test of love.
The problem I have with what goes on today in places like
the Babylonian Bee is that mockery is presented for mockery's sake. The main audience is not even those who it is
mocking. Rather, it is those who already
agree. It is not tearing down for the
purpose of building up, it is tearing down so we can all have a good laugh at
those fools over there.
This is a
worrisome trend especially in the church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)