High Movie Review #13: Spider-Man

This was the first DVD I ever owned. I remember it. I received a gift card for Christmas, and I went out to the store, and I bought the original Spider-Man movie on DVD. I watched it over and over again, and I loved it. And I still have that DVD! And I’m watching it on my PS2 right now. I’ll admit that I love late 90’s and early 00’s technology. I’m nostalgic for it. I enjoy it, you know? People are free to enjoy whatever era of technology or fashion or art or music or whatever that they want. Just don’t be an asshole about it, okay? I try not to be. I enjoy a lotta early 00’s stuff, and I let everyone enjoy early 2020’s stuff as they want. It’s all good.

Anyway, this movie, and the whole trilogy, in some ways, it kicked off what we have now which is superhero movies as the main movies in the world. And I know there were some Batman movies in the 90s, but they were a mixed bag; some were all right and others were complete shit. And there was Superman which was kinda good, but it’s such a different era and didn’t lead into the superhero genre as a whole as much. But the Spider-Man trilogy opened the door for the superhero era. It was amazing, and it passed the baton right to The Dark Knight and the MCU. Some decry the so-called “superhero era” of movies, asserting that superhero movies tend to lack depth [which is true for most, but not all], and that the genre’s dominance squeezes out other potentially great works. And others love superhero movies. And I’m a bit of both. I do see how this era can stifle other projects that don’t fit the formula, but I do enjoy Spider-Man movies. And just because a film is not extremely popular doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it and that it isn’t great. 

ALSO, this movie and its trilogy came out right smack dab in the era dominated by franchises of various kinds. Spider-Man, the Star Wars prequels, Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings, the Matrix, and Shrek all came out at around the same time. Incredible.

Who cares about all that, what do I think about the movie? I love it. I’m getting older, as people do, but I [like millions of people] related to Peter Parker, even though I was younger than him when I watched this movie initially. I actually looked fairly similar to him, though I didn’t wear glasses, I liked science [I’m not a genius, but I like it], I wasn’t rich, and I used to be not so smooth with girls. He’s just a very relatable character. Tobey Maguire plays the nerd well. 

Willem Dafoe plays a truly terrifying Green Goblin/Norman Osborn. I was legitimately scared as a kid. “You know how much I SACRIFICED?!??!!” Fuckin’ scary. When he attacks Aunt May, also fuckin’ scary. And who could forget Norman’s hallucinations. Incredible performance by Dafoe.

One of the best casting decisions in the history of superhero movies was J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson. That character is so funny. He used to piss me off when I was a kid cause he was always giving Peter a hard time, but as I got older I realized how funny he was. 

The rest of the cast is good too. Kirsten Dunst plays a good girl-next-door type. I don’t love her character, but she’s perfectly fine. A good Mary Jane Watson. 

So Peter gets bitten by a spider and he develops super spider-like powers. Everyone knows that. And the scenes of him steadily finding out about his powers are fun. It kind of starts off slow and then builds from there. His powers are so cool too. Swinging around New York sounds so fun. Oh yeah, it’s hilarious when he’s trying to shoot the web on purpose for the first time. “Go web, go! Fly..” I used to imitate that scene so much as a kid. That was kind of the earlier form of humor that is so incredibly prevalent in blockbuster/superhero movies. Where you build up a scene with dramatic music and framing, and there’s an expectation that something cool is about to happen, only for something lame to happen. Hilarious. But it was actually funny in this movie.

It’s a coming-of-age movie in many ways. It’s that tough time, the end of high school. People have hopes and dreams and aspirations, and maybe no specific dreams, but there’s all this potential. And it’s hard to make choices, you know? I remember making a few choices around that time, thinking “Ehh, whatever, gotta do something,” but those choices had GIANT effects on my life. It’s insane, really. Uncle Ben even explains it. “These are the years when a man changes into the man he’s gonna become for the rest of his life. Be careful who you change into.” I think you can still change as you go on, but it’s true to some extent for some people. I don’t think you just become a certain way forever, but those years are still incredibly impactful.

Non-seriously though, Spider-Man’s first costume in the movie was hilarious. “The Human Spider? Ahh, that sucks!” They never showed how he eventually made the good costume, but whatever. Also it’s weird that Osborn’s assistant was murdered in Osborn’s lab and they just.. didn’t investigate him? Or interrogate him? His fingerprints are all over the place, including his neck! Oh well, I missed the part where that’s my problem.

Uncle Ben gives the main line of the movie: “With great power comes great responsibility.” I wish it were taken more seriously, but that’s a topic for another day. But throughout the trilogy it’s important to Peter’s growth as a person. I love how Peter goes from beating up a high schooler to fighting a professional fighter. The guts! Then he gets fucked over for the money by the business.. guy, who immediately gets robbed. Peter lets the robber steal the money, and in a cruel irony, the robber kills Uncle Ben. In his first real Spider-Man moment, he tracks down the robber and kills him. Or rather, he trips and dies, after Spider-Man disarms him. 

After Peter’s and Harry’s and Mary Jane’s graduation, there is a fun montage of the friendly neighborhood Spider-Man helping people, stopping robbers and whatnot. And they show a bunch of New Yorkers talking about him, and it’s exactly as I’d imagine it. That one guy: “He stinks! And I don’t like him!” And of course those women who want to fuck him, of course that would happen.

Anyway, there’s some double jealousy happening in the already convoluted love triangle. Harry is jealous of Peter because Harry’s dad loves Peter for his science brain. Of course Peter is jealous of Harry because Harry is going out with Mary Jane. Now that’s some serious tension. 

Osborn gets kicked out of his own company by “the board.” Now that I think about it, he really is a fuckin’ villain. He’s a dangerous capitalist and war-profiteering, making his fortune from the imperialist U.S. military, though the film doesn’t paint that aspect of his character as villainous. They have the MACY’s Thanksgiving Day parade with MACY Gray singing. And that song, Nutmeg Phantasy is a BANGER. Such a good song. Go and listen to it right now.

Hahahaha, oh my gosh. It’s so funny, I forgot. Harry and MJ are hanging out on some fancy balcony for rich people, and Harry tries to kiss her but she rejects it. Then Harry looks down and sees Peter down on the ground just STARING up at them. There’s this huge crowd of people mingling and whatnot, and Peter is just staring up at them, and he doesn’t even try to hide it or move away or anything. It’s such a non-subtle, hilarious image. I love it.

And then.. the Goblin shows up. It reminds me of another green villain, the wicked witch of the west. They both fly across the sky ominously, spewing dark smoke behind them. She spells out “Surrender Dorothy,” and now I’m imagining Goblin spelling out, “I’m gonna fucking kill those board members for selling my company.” Too bad he doesn’t say that, he just throws pumpkin bombs, which are cool, and one of them turns his enemies into skeletons, thereby killing them. Then Spider-Man shows up and this girl points and says, “It’s Spider-Man!” in the goofiest tone imaginable. And I thought it was cheesy even when I was a little kid. The line “It’s Spider-Man!” could be decent, but it was so cheesy. That was seriously the best take? I’d hate to see what the outtakes were like.

Anyway, Spidey meets the Goblin and they have a pretty cool fight scene, and then Spider-Man saves Mary Jane. And hey, Goblin chokes Jameson and asks him who Spider-Man’s photographer is, and Jameson says he doesn’t know. That’s pretty cool. He’s kinda an asshole, but he sticks up for Peter. That’s kinda heroic in its own way. 

Whaddayaknow it, Spider-Man saves Mary Jane again, this time in the rain, and they share a cool upside-down kiss. It’s very iconic, and it was spoofed in Shrek 2, another incredible film. Probably the coolest action scene is the fight between Spider-Man and the Green Goblin in the burning building. First of all, horrifying, when the Goblin turns around and screams. I love that line “It’s you who’s out, Gobby.” Spider-Man jumping around, dodging Goblin’s flying knife.. things, that’s the shit we all like about Spider-Man. We love the acrobatics and the powers. It’s just fun. I don’t mind if they make fifty more Spider-Man movies, I’ll be in there having a good time.

Also Willem Dafoe’s voice is so good! When he’s sorta talking to the Goblin, so to speak. It’s very creepy. “The cunning warrior attacks neither body nor mind. The heart, Osborn! First, we attack his heart!” Such a great line. You know, it’s funny, with all these superhero movies, there are so many actors who play comic book characters and then act with each other in other movies. Like, in American Psycho, the Green Goblin interviews Batman about the disappearance of the Joker. And in Zodiac, Iron Man, the Hulk and Mysterio are hunting a serial killer.

Anyway, Goblin figures out who Spider-Man is, so he kidnaps Mary Jane Watson and presents Spider-Man with a trolley problem. Save the girl you love, or the many innocent children. And philosophy students will continue to debate the question for.. ever, probably. Of course, in the original trolley problem, Spider-Man is never considered as a possible solution. A bit clumsy of those philosophy people, innit?

The fight at the end is pretty good too, and Spider-Man kinda gets his ass kicked for much of it. But once Goblin threatens to kill MJ, that’s when Spider-Man starts kicking ass. In the end, Osborn is killed by his own blade on his own glider. His last wishes were that Peter not tell Harry about what a monster he had become. Guilt, his final emotion. 

Okay, so a great movie with exciting action and a pretty good narrative, lots of tension between the main characters. Good main characters and good side characters. The PERFECT side character in J. Jonah Jameson. There was a Weird Al song about this movie that I used to listen to when I was a kid. It was a spoof of the song “Piano Man,” by Billy Joel. It was hilarious. Describing Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin, he sings, “He’s wearing that dumb Power Rangers mask, but he’s scarier without it on.”

Hating Myself

I think I’ve hated myself in two different ways. The first was the worst and the hardest, the longest-lasting. And the second was still hard but it was easier to deal with on some level. But also, the second form, coming after the first, probably still had some of the first form wrapped up in it. 

I’ll try to explain.

So if you think about the phrase “I hate myself,” a big part of that is the word “myself,” obviously. Now I can think about myself as who I am, basically my identity. And that’s a bunch of things that combine into myself. My height, my weight, my hair, my eyes, my skin, my appearance, my voice, my talent, my skills, my personality, etc. It’s all myself, and that’s who I hate. I hate who I am. And that’s very difficult because you have to just, kind of accept who you are. There are a lot of characteristics that you just.. are.

And a lot of that is unchangeable. And a lot of that is almost unchangeable. My height’s not gonna change, my background isn’t gonna change. My voice and appearance can’t really change all that much. My social status might change, but it is what it is right now. It’s hard to accept. I definitely super-hated myself several years ago and it was horrible. It was so hard to deal with. And it nearly led to me ending my life. I’m grateful now that I didn’t, and that is thanks in part to some incredible people I knew at the time. 

But just because I “made it out” of that time, that horrible time, doesn’t mean that that feeling of hating myself totally went away. It’s a long thing, and it’s maybe a lifetime of accepting yourself. “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,” and so on.

Another way to think of myself is what I do. And I know some people think that who you are is what you do, and I concede that there is a lot of overlap between the two, but I do think that they can be different. What you do may or may not be indicative of who you are. And I know some people use that as an excuse or as part of their apology for seriously reprehensible acts. Like using horrible racial slurs or sexually harrassing someone or something, and then the person is like “That’s not who I am.” That’s not really what I’m talking about. I’m talking about more like, you know, a guy is usually super healthy, but for two weeks he’s eating like shit and not exercising and stuff. He’s just in a slump. That’s partly what I’m talking about.

Also, as I’ve explained, there are aspects of who you are that cannot be what you do. For example, my nationality is part of who I am, but I’m not doing anything. 

You may agree with some of that or not, I’m not here to philosophically defend this notion of identity. I’m just trying to explain how I’ve been feeling and what I’ve been going through. 

So recently I’ve been hating myself more for what I’m doing, and it’s been a bit hard, but not as hard as the other kind. And, for the most part, what I’m doing is not really that bad. But, as the saying goes, I’m my own worst critic. I’ve been messing around on the internet, wasting a ton of time on social media. I’ve been neglecting my schoolwork. I’ve been wasting money on shit I don’t need. I’ve been drinking a bit too frequently, but it hasn’t been horrible, but it hasn’t been great either. I’m just kind of unfocused and unproductive and not living how I want to be living. With this form of hating myself, it’s not about accepting myself, it’s about changing my behavior so I no longer hate what I’m doing. So I gotta change it up and get back on track and doing things that I want to do and things that will help me thrive.

Just a little rant here, but I’ve already been doing a lot better than I was last week or a couple weeks ago. It’s something to consider, and I think realizing all this has helped me at times. It’s still hard, though.

High Movie Review #12: The Godfather: Part II

The sequel! They’re adding to the “lore!” They’re expanding the Godfather extended universe! All you Godfather stans, I hope you’re ready for a wild ride! 

Haha, lot to unpack there. First of all, the word “stan,” I only mention it to criticize it. I’ve never called myself a “stan” or ever even used that term before. BUT people do use it all the fuckin time, and a lot of the time they’re really proud of calling themselves a “stan” of some singer or actor or whatever. And it’s like, have you heard the actual song Stan? It doesn’t exactly go well for Stan.

Anyway, movie sequels are.. varied. Some are shit and some are good. This one is good, luckily. 

Oh, one more thing I wanna say before I start talking about the actual movie. I own this on DVD, and it’s on two discs. That was kinda rare, I think, but it was fairly common with VHS tapes. Movies like Titanic or Braveheart would come in two tapes. 

So, the movie. It’s kind of a double story, in a sense. There’s probably a better term for it, but the movie follows Vito Corleone from childhood to adulthood, and Michael Corleone in his continuing descent into evil. It starts off in Sicily, the old country. Vito Andolini lives in Corleone, get it? His father is killed by the Mafia, and his brother swears revenge. During their father’s funeral, Vito’s brother is also murdered. Vito’s mom tries to make peace, but the Mafia boss, Don Ciccio, won’t have any of it. Once diplomacy fails, she tries force, but is killed in the process, but it allows Vito to run away, and he eventually boards a ship bound to the United States.

And it’s the classic ship with a bunch of European immigrants in brown clothes and hats, looking hopefully at the Statue of Liberty. I’m sure people did look like that, but it’s kind of a romanticized concept. But it does provide for a good transition to Vito’s grandson, about the same age, growing up in lavish wealth.

In the wake of Michael’s brutal killing rampage, the Corleone family settled out west in a beautiful home in Nevada. Just like the first movie, there’s a big party [for Michael’s son’s first communion], which I like. I like that parallel, and I think it’s a good way to present what’s going on. What’s going on is that the party is a charade for Michael to meet with the Senator and do shady shit. The Senator is just racist against Italians which is interesting because it’s like, whiteness as a concept is a strange thing. White Americans were very racist against Irish and Italians, but, you know, I’d say they’re white. 

Anyway, the Senator’s trying to “squeeze” Michael and make money off his business, and Michael tells him to fuck off. I actually love that line “My offer is this: nothing,” one of my favorite lines in the two movies. It’s delivered so perfectly, and Al Pacino’s performance is just so good. Cold and calculating when he needs to be, restrained anger when he needs to be, and unleashed anger when he needs to be. Amazing.

After the party, Michael’s and Kay’s room gets shot up, but they’re fine. So, you know, they’re trying to figure out who was behind that. And then we get another great transition with Michael talking to his son in bed, then Vito looking at his son Santino in his crib. 

And, you know, Robert De Niro is my favorite actor of all time, so I obviously like his performance as well. Some of these street scenes are really well done, with people selling fruit and horse-drawn carriages [you’re telling me a horse drew this carriage??] going by. A well-made film just like the first. Vito’s neighbor Clemenza gives him his first taste in crime, as they steal a rug, which really tied the room together. Vito gets fired because of a Mafia boss guy, Don Fanucci. 

I won’t go through the entire plot of the movie, point by point. There’s a lot. It’s a twisting, turning, complicated movie. But I will talk about some big scenes. First, Cuba. So Michael goes to Cuba to meet with Hyman Roth and other businessmen. And one of the men says that it [the late 1950s] was a period of the greatest prosperity for Cuba. Prosperity for whom? I know it’s a gangster movie, but it’s always funny how rich people describe prosperity as them being rich. It doesn’t matter if everyone else is fucked. It was prosperous in Cuba for rich Americans like Michael and Roth. Kennedy said it was the worst country on Earth for “economic colonization, humiliation, and exploitation” under Batista. http://www.granma.cu/idiomas/ingles/international-i/30may-Kennedy.html

That’s what happened. 

While they’re driving around, Michael sees a revolutionary kill a military officer and himself. Michael then thinks, “Hey, these communists sure are dedicated to their cause. They might win, and then I won’t be able to exploit this country any more.” And he’s right. On New Year’s Day, Batista resigns and that’s also the day that Michael tells Fredo that he knows that Fredo was the one who gave away his location to Roth, who tried to kill him. Emotional scene. 

I will say that after the New Year’s scene, and the revelation that Kay had a miscarriage [so we think at the time], Michael’s story becomes a bit less interesting for a bit. It’s not terrible, but it was very interesting in the first half, then slows down a bit. The congressional hearing, the Frank Pentangeli stuff, it’s not as good as the first half. It’s better when Michael is dealing with Hyman Roth and trying to figure out who betrayed him. I find the Vito storyline to be more compelling. I also just think Vito’s a better character, but his descent into committing murder is uhhhhh… very.. gripping. I don’t know adjectives right now. Movie is good. I like movie. Movie good.

Anyway, the scene where Vito kills Don Fanucci is the best scene in the movie. That’s because it is the genesis of everything, it’s the start of the whole Corleone family. A poor immigrant taking on the powerful, violent, oppressive Mafia boss. The poor immigrant risking his own life to take that of his villain. This, and Vito’s later murder of Don Ciccio, are the only murders in these two movies that I’d categorize as “punching up,” so to speak. The latter is retributive, revenge for Ciccio killing his father, brother, and mother. The former is the most “punching up” of all the murders. Fanucci was impeding on Vito’s ability to make a living, under threat of violence. Killing one man, however justified, makes him more likely to kill the next one, maybe justified as well, but he keeps going. And you know, power corrupts and all that. Who said that anyway? I just looked it up. His name is John Dalberg-Alton. He’s a guy from the 19th century with a big beard. Classic.

One scene with Michael that I really like is him talking to his mom. He asks her about Vito, if he cared deeply about his family. She says yes. He asks, if he was to be strong for his family, could he, in the process, lose his family? She thinks he’s talking about his wife’s “miscarriage,” when in actuality he’s talking about his brother Fredo. She says you can’t lose your family, and Michael says times are changing. He’s kind of predicting his own end of his descent, killing his own brother.

Diane Keaton also gives an incredibly emotional performance, especially in the scene in which she tells Michael that she had an abortion instead of a miscarriage. Powerful performance, her desire to end this whole thing, her choice to not take another one of Michael’s sons into the world. 

One last scene I’ll talk about. Michael is still planning to kill Hyman Roth and they’re like, “That’s impossible, man!”  And Tom is like “it’d be like trying to kill the President, it’s impossible!” Little did Tom know about a Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald. Anyway Michael says, “If anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it is that you can kill anyone.” …except Fidel Castro, right? Haha. He literally could not be murdered. 

Anyway, The Godfather II is a near-perfect follow-up to the perfect first film. I enjoy the historical fiction aspect of the film, especially the scenes in Cuba. And Fredo’s character takes a much bigger part, and I like that. John Cazale gives a deep performance. It’s a well-made film in every way, one of the greatest in American history and just film history in general. Oh, and I also like the parallel at the end of Fredo getting killed while reciting religious prayer, and the murders in the first ending while Michael is at a religious ceremony. Nice touch there, Mr. Coppola. Oh and Mario Puzo as well. It’s a-me, Mario Puzo!! 

High Movie Review #011: The Godfather

“I believe in America.” That is the opening line from this film, one of the most celebrated in American history. Bonasera, an undertaker, loves America because “America has made my fortune.” And yet, it was that same America that, when his daughter is raped, lets the rapists go free by suspending their sentence. It’s “America made my fortune,” and not “America lets rapists go free.” And so he must ask a crime boss for help in securing justice for his daughter. America has failed him. But he still believes.

Anyway, the crime boss, Vito Corleone attends various crime business stuff on his daughter’s wedding day. It’s really a perfect opening for a film, introducing the major characters. The hothead ladies man Sonny, the advisor Tom, Michael coming back from the war and being kind of a black sheep, Fredo the drinker/partier, and Connie and Carlo being the happy [for now] couple. And we even get to meet some minor characters, the loyal Luca Brasi, the desperate Bonasera, and the thinly veiled Sinatra-based character, Johnny Fontaine. Introducing this many characters at the wedding and developing them is just masterful.

Then Tom goes to Hollywood to help Sinatra–I mean Fontaine’s career. And the movie guy, Woltz immediately jumps into xenophobic shite, calling Tom a “goomba” and then a “Kraut-McFriend” once Tom corrects him that he’s German/Irish. Woltz angrily brags about exploiting a young actress for sex, a disgusting element of Hollywood culture. So Tom has Woltz’s prized horse decapitated and placed in Woltz’s bed.

It’s another perfect scene [which is the case for basically the entire movie] as it establishes the Corleone family’s reach, their violence. It shows us the type of thing that Michael was just talking about at the wedding. Great development of the Corleone family as a crime enterprise. 

This leads us into the main plot of the film. A criminal businessman [what’s the difference? hahaha] Solozzo, AKA “The Turk” tries to coax Vito to join Sollozzo and Tattaglia [another crime family leader] in the heroine business. Vito refuses because he believes that, even though he has judges and politicians in his pocket, he feels they’ll turn their backs on him if he gets into the drug business.

In response to this rejection, Tattaglia kills Luca Brasi, Vito’s loyal friend, and Sollozzo tries to kill Vito himself. He then kidnaps Tom Hagen and basically tells him that, since Vito’s dead [he thinks], now Tom has to convince Sonny [the presumed head of the family now] to now become business partners with Sollozzo [who had Sonny’s father killed]. Now that is what I call a bold move. Kill a guy and then expect his son, a known hothead, to become business partners with you. BOLD AF.

Michael, still not interested in the family “business,” goes to visit his father in the hospital. Once he sees all his father’s guards are gone, he realizes his father is about to be killed. His father has another visitor, the baker’s son-in-law, Enzo. Michael acts quickly, and he and Enzo pretend to be armed guards in front of the hospital to deter the would-be assassins. Enzo is terrified, as shown by his inability to light the cigarette, and Michael is calm and collected, as shown by his ability to control his hands, lighting the cigarette with ease. And more importantly, Michael notices this, giving him some confidence. He starts to think “Hey, maybe I can be a part of the family business.” And he also tells the crooked cop to go fuck himself, essentially. 

Anyway, it’s amazing how cold some of these people are about all this. Tom has a horse decapitated and then he comes back like “Oh yeah, the flight was fine.” And then Sonny casually offers Paulie a drink, and then right after Paulie leaves, Sonny tells Clemenza to kill him. And then Clemenza jokes with Paulie.. as they’re about to execute him. I suppose there’s a certain callousness that develops in this type of life. I really can’t imagine being that casual about killing someone. But, you know, I probably am more capable of that callousness than I think, like most people. Like, if I were in an environment where killing was commonplace, I might develop a disregard for human life. I’m not saying I would, I’m just saying how people develop in their surroundings, and people individually think they could never do certain things, but they’re probably more capable than they think. Does that make sense?

Sonny, understandably, doesn’t want to make a business deal with the guy who tried to kill his father. Instead, he wants to kill Sollozzo, among other people. And here we are introduced to their important dichotomy: personal decisions vs. business decisions. Sonny [personal] and Tom [business] argue about what to do. Michael then comes in and says that it is better to make a “business” decision, but that killing Sollozzo and the police captain is the business decision, not a personal one. Which is.. you know, not really true, I mean it’s clearly both. Killing the drug baron who tried to kill your father, and the police captain who tried to let your father get killed and also punched you in your face, is personal, even if it is also a good business decision. He justifies it to himself as strictly business, but it isn’t. 

The restaurant scene is my favorite in the movie, and one of my favorites in any movie. Michael sits and eats with Sollozzo and the police captain, and they talk business. The plan is for Michael to go to the bathroom, get the gun that’s taped behind the toilet, then kill both. He gets the gun, but he sits back down. Sollozzo keeps talking, but Michael isn’t listening, he’s thinking. This is it, this is the moment of his life, the turning point. It’s a fork in the road, and what he decides to do and how this goes will change things forever. He protected his father at the hospital, he came up with the plan, but this is the actual big leap, the test, can he kill for “the family?”

I think there are moments similar to that in life, even if they don’t involve shooting people. There are huge turning points and, depending how they go, your life ends up totally different.

I gotta say, Marlon Brando is one of the greatest actors of all time. As is Al Pacino. As is Robert Duvall. There are perfect performances by everyone in this movie. It’s really incredible. I haven’t seen many Diane Keaton movies, but she gives a great performance in this movie. 

So Michael flees to Sicily and Sonny continues running the family, which means he’s killing a bunch of people. Sonny beats Carlo half to death after he finds out that Carlo hit his wife who happens to be Sonny’s sister. Can’t say I feel bad for Carlo. Well, I don’t really “feel bad” for many of the characters, but at least there’s some complexity with the others, like they do all this bad shit, but they’re “loyal” to their family or whatever. But Carlo just comes in, beats his wife, then gets his brother-in-law killed. Fuck him.

Anyway, Michael gets married, and that was the first time I ever saw boobs in a movie. Which, you know, that’s not really important, BUT it is different seeing boobs in a movie instead of online, for some reason. Probably a lot we need to change about how we view nudity [get it? “view” nudity? (like literally view it, but also how we “view” it as in consider it??] and sexuality, but that’s a bigger topic.

There’s a domestic violence scene between Carlo and Connie that is.. very brutal. I mean, the movie’s got a lot of violence, but that scene is particularly intense and repulsive to watch. She calls Sonny for help and he immediately drives off, to kill Carlo. But there are a bunch of guys with machine guns waiting for Sonny at the toll station, and they slaughter him. 

We get these intensely violent scenes back to back, and then a scene that’s intense in an emotional way, as Tom has to tell Vito the hard truth, that his son was shot to death. It’s just masterful acting from Marlon Brando, possibly the greatest actor ever in his greatest performance. Vito decides, then and there, to make peace with the other families, despite his intense grief, something Sonny could never do.

Michael’s wife gets blown up after his bodyguard betrays him [they were trying to kill Michael]. And we see her dead leg dangling out of the car, just as we had seen Sonny’s dead hand lying on the street in a previous shot. This event starts Michael’s distrust that continues on and gets stronger as he grows more powerful. His killing of Sollozzo and the police captain was the biggest turning point for him in terms of him “joining” the family, and his recognition of his capability for violence “for the family,” but this was another big turning point. He may not have agreed with the family, with his father, or Sonny, or Tom, or Clemenza or whoever, but at least none of them had betrayed him at that point. He realized then that he must have a keen, distrusting eye if he [and his family] is to survive.

In the meeting of the five families we see this warped morality of the heads of the families. They want to keep the drug trade “respectable” by not selling it to kids [okay, that’s good, I guess], and then immediately saying that black people are “animals” and should “lose their souls” to drug use. And then there’s the overarching thing like, they’re corrupt, they’re crime families. “Oh let’s keep it respectable.. but also I’m the head of a crime family.” Weird morality with the so-called “mafia.” 

Anyway, Vito makes peace with Tattaglia about their dead sons, but Vito basically says that if anything happens to Michael, I’ll kill all of you. To him, Michael was not supposed to be part of this crime family shit. Vito, in his crime family wisdom, says that he thinks it was Barzini that actually killed Sonny [he was right, we find out later].

Michael comes back to America and meets up with Kay, a teacher now. Michael says “whaddup I’m part of the crime family now,” and Kay says, “You said you weren’t gonna do that, your father is bad,” and Michael says “He’s just like any other powerful man, though [which doesn’t really justify what he’s doing, but whatever] like a President or Senator,” and Kay says “Presidents and Senators don’t have people killed,” and Michael says “you fool! Of course they do!” 

And yeah, I agree that power is generally a corrupting force, and my response to that would be that we should try to limit people’s abilities to develop power over other people. That’s a general principle that’s difficult, but Michael’s basically like, “Welp, my father is powerful and he has people killed, but so do all kinds of powerful people, so it’s not really that bad and now I’m powerful anyway, so whatever.”

So the Corleone family transitions from Vito to Michael, and Tessio’s like, “With you [Vito] gone, Clemenza and I will come under Barzini’s thumb sooner or later.” Foreshadowing?? Also kind of a weird statement. Like, without you, I’m gonna betray the Corleone family, for some reason. With the transition to Michael, they’re also transitioning to Nevada instead of New York. Fredo loves partying and Michael loves, well, business. Michael talks about a deal with some casino dickhead named Moe Green. Michael wants to buy the casino/hotel and Moe tells him to fuck off.

Michael and Vito discuss business, which is yet another perfect scene, perfect acting from Brando and Pacino. Vito, the wise, seasoned Don, warns Michael about Barzini planning to assassination. It’s a prediction that comes true, except that Michael doesn’t fall for the trap, but it shows how smart Vito is, knowing his rival’s next moves. And in this scene we get the whole marionette analogy, how Vito “refused” to be a fool, dancing on the strings for all those big shots, and so he became the one holding the strings. And, you know, powerful people always delude themselves into believing that their power is justified by their strength of will. There are systems at play where you can’t just “refuse” to be a fool/pawn or whatever and then rise to “the top.” That’s another bigger discussion though. But anyway that’s literally the logo of The Godfather, a hand holding the strings. Vito expresses his regret Michael had to get wrapped up in all this, how he wanted a different life for Michael. Very common. Very common for parents to want some kind of greatness or success for their child and.. it doesn’t happen. 

Vito dies in a scene which Brando came up with [I think], which shows his utter genius as an actor. At the funeral, Tessio tries to arrange a meeting between Michael and Barzini, which is exactly what Vito warned about. And later Carlo says that it was Barzini who killed Sonny, which is exactly what Vito assumed.

Michael literally becomes the Godfather, and wipes out all opposition, the other heads of families, Moe Green, Carlo, and Tessio. This is done so well, cutting back and forth between Michael’s religious ceremony, where he denounces Satan and evil, and the murders he orders. Great work by Francis Ford Coppola, as is present throughout this entire masterpiece. And it completes Michael’s journey of the film, from skeptical war hero that doesn’t agree with the family business, to the crime lord that kills anyone who gets in his way.

One minor thing at the end is the parallel between Sonny, who tells Connie “What, you think I’m gonna make that baby an orphan?” as in “I’m not gonna kill Carlo,” which he eventually tries to do, and then Michael telling Carlo “What, you think I’m gonna make my sister a widow?” as in “I’m not gonna kill you, Carlo,” which he does right after. And the door closes on Kay, and that’s the end.

There are a few movies I’d call “perfect,” and this is one of them. The plot, the dialogue, the acting, the casting, the directing, the editing, it’s all perfect.

The Doctor Strange Argument

All right, I’m about to go on a rant, and I’m gonna reference an MCU movie in doing so. I don’t like doing it, but I think it’ll help clarify what the fuck I’m talking about, and provide a decent parallel. And maybe this is already a logical fallacy with a name, I don’t know, I haven’t memorized all the logical fallacies and their respective names.

So, in the movie Infinity War, an evil being called Thanos wants to kill half of the life in the universe, and Doctor Strange wants to stop him. Strange has a magic stone which allows him to see into the future. And that’s exactly what he does. Strange sees all 14,000,605 possible outcomes of the battle. Thanos wins 14,000,604, and the good guys win 1. So they have a 0.000007% chance of winning, which they do, of course.

The “Doctor Strange Argument” is when a person hyper-focuses on the 1 [metaphorically speaking] and ignores or downplays the 14 million [metaphorically speaking]. This often happens when one person mentions a wider societal issue that affects many people, and the second person responds with a snarky “solution” for a single individual suffering from that issue. They might both be snarky, to be fair. Lotta snarky people these days. Since the second person is providing a “solution” they feel a few things. First, they won the argument. Second, they can ignore the wider societal issue and pretend that it’s not even an issue at all. Third, they feel that the first person is just whiny.

Let me give you an example so you can get what the fuck I’m talking about. This happens all the time with the issue of the minimum wage in the United States. Person A says, “Hey, society would be better if people who are working full time can afford to live, especially since places like McDonald’s and Walmart earn billions in revenue and can easily afford it. People who are working shouldn’t have to work 60+ hours to survive.” Then Person B snarkily comments “Just quit your job and get a new one [smirk face]” Person B is hyper focusing on the 1 [quitting your job and somehow getting one with a livable wage] and acting like 1 proves that the 14 million [millions working long hours for non-livable wages] is not a problem.

See, Person B is not engaging with the actual issue. They’re not saying “No, I don’t think that people who work full time should be allowed to live because *some bullshit excuse*” That would be actually engaging in the issue. Person B is not engaging in the issue of millions of people working for wages that do not support life. Person B is engaging in the issue of 1 person not liking their job.

So what if we take Person B’s advice? If anyone upset with their minimum wage job should “quit and get a new job” then every single person working at McDonald’s, Walmart, Target, Wendy’s, Burger King, Amazon, Carl’s Jr., Chipotle, etc. should all quit right now. They should all just walk right out this very instant. And maybe, realizing they have a common bond in this society, they can form a union of sorts. And they can develop a system of support for each other. And, realizing their labor is what generates profit for these giant corporations, they decide to support each other while they demand better wages, better working conditions, more vacations, and more democratic control of their workplace, and so on. And the companies, realizing their profits won’t materialize out of nowhere, concede to the demands of the united workers.

Somehow I don’t think Person B wants all of that to happen, even though they tell minimum wage workers to simply quit their jobs. They only want Person A to shut up, so they provide the illusion of a solution to the problem. Person B wants people to work minimum wage jobs, doesn’t want them to be paid enough to live, and wants anyone who suggests otherwise to shut up.

It’s common with older people too. When you criticize the United States, you often hear “If you don’t like it, move to [insert country here].” Really? So, because the electoral college is a bad system, I’m supposed pack up my things, sell my possessions that I don’t need, quit my job, say goodbye to all my friends and family, and move thousands of miles away to Russia, where I don’t know anyone, have a job, or even know the language? Seems like an extreme reaction.

I’ll talk about one more example: the student loan debt crisis. The average 2019 graduate had around $28,000 in student loan debt, which of course means many students had much higher debts. Tuition costs have risen drastically, interest rates are high, jobs for graduates are scarce, and they don’t pay as well, the cost of living has increased, and wages.. haven’t. This puts young people in a sort of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation where if they go to college, they’ll be crippled by debt, and if they don’t go to college, they’ll likely have to work for minimum wage.

It’s a big deal that affects millions of people, preventing them from buying homes or starting families or other things like.. paying for healthcare, but that’s another issue.

Given that the U.S. is the richest nation on Earth, and considering that other nations don’t have this problem, we don’t have to have this problem.

So, whenever someone makes a post about this, on youtube or instagram or wherever, there’s always a smug guy commenting something like, “stop majoring in gender studies,” the implication being that if people simply stopped studying gender studies [or other “bullshit” degrees], then the student loan crisis would somehow disappear. Back to the Dr. Strange analogy, they’re ignoring the huge problem of the student loan crisis [14,000,605] and providing a “solution” of not majoring in gender studies [1]. Are they right, though?

Well, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, of the 1.98 million graduates in their study, 44,262 majored in “Liberal arts and sciences, general studies, and humanities,” and 7,717 majored in “Area, ethnic, cultural, gender, and group studies.” So a combined 2.6%. There might be a couple more so-called “bullshit degrees,” but the most popular, by a wide margin, was business. The second most popular was health profession programs, and engineering and biology were also very popular. Yet according to educationdata.org, 52% of students with loan debt feel it was not worth it, and 53% half not bought a home due to their loan debt. That is.. a lot different from 2.6%. Not majoring in gender studies is not a real solution for this issue.

So why do people comment about gender studies all the time? First, the Dr. Strange argument. Commenting “gender studies” allows them to ignore or downplay a large, serious issue by providing a phony “solution.” That’s what all these Dr. Strange arguments are about. Second, it adds to the caricature that they’ve constructed in their mind. Anyone who criticizes our society must be a blue-haired, shrill-voiced, white woman with scary pronouns in her bio, who has a gender studies degree and uses scary terms like “patriarchy.” And if they’re all like that, they can all be dismissed outright, they think. Thirdly, it makes them feel superior. Gender studies people are stupid, and if they’re the ones complaining, they’re wrong, and I’m right, and I’m smart.

Why am I writing about this? Well, because it’s extremely common, and people think they’re “winning” by using this Dr. Strange argument, and if we can recognize this, we can [hopefully] force them to actually engage in a discussion instead of giving a pathetic, inadequate “solution.” Explain to them that they’re not really giving any position at all, or engaging in the discussion, and ask them to elaborate what their actual position on the matter is. Now it likely won’t work often on the internet, but I’ve seen it work a lot in person. Oftentimes these Dr. Strange arguments are easy one-liners that people have used over and over again without challenge, but once they actually have to flesh out a full idea and say it out loud, they’re forced to actually think about it. And that will open up actual discussion, and hopefully, growth.

https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-statistics/

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_322.10.asp

The Absolute Comedy of It All

WARNING: Descriptions of explicit sexual acts

On June 17th, 1972, five men were arrested at the Watergate complex in Washington D.C. for burglary. The five men were attempting to plant various listening/recording devices in the building. Oh! It’s important to note: the building was the location of the Democratic National Committee Headquarters. Wow, that sounds important.

The five men were named Virgilio Gonzalez, James McCord, Bernard Barker, Frank Sturgis, and Eugenio Martinez. McCord had been a CIA officer, and they were all part of the anti-[Fidel] Castro movement. So, you know, a former CIA officer [only recently resigned] breaking into a political party’s headquarters with recording devices and cameras?? Kind of a big deal. Kinda sketch, to be perfectly frank.

Strange things began to happen and the story turned into a scandal. White House counsel John Dean basically told Congress that Nixon was criminally involved. White House Chief of Staff Haldeman and Domestic Affairs Advisor Ehrlichman both resigned on the same day. There were reports of White House tape recordings which [might] implicate high-ranking officials and [maybe] Richard Nixon himself. And there was also the “Saturday Night Massacre,” when Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire the special prosecutor Archibald Cox [in charge of investigating the scandal]. Richardson resigned in protest. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Archibald Cox. Ruckelshaus refused and also resigned. Nixon then ordered the acting head of the Justice Department, Robert Bork, to fire Archibald Cox. Bork obeyed the order, meaning that Nixon basically fired the man who was responsible for investigating him.

Lotsa shady shit, I’d say. That’s why it’s called a “scandal” and considered one of the biggest political scandals in U.S. history. That’s why all these other scandals are called “______gate.” Deflategate, Bountygate, Gamergate, Pizzagate.. well that one is made up nonsense.

Anyway, during the Watergate scandal, there were these two reporters that worked at The Washington Post. Their names are Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, and they’re the main guys reporting the dirty details of this evolving story, especially at the beginning. It was a “juicy” story, as reporters weirdly say. Woodward and Bernstein obtained their information from a mysterious, unknown whistleblower. A man in the shadows. And that added to the intrigue of the story.

But they couldn’t call him “unknown-mysterious-whistleblower-guy” every time. They needed to give him a code name. The name that they chose, with their own adult brains, was “Deep Throat.” Deep Throat, as in the sexual act of putting someone’s penis in your mouth as far as you can and sucking it, was the name of their source. Biggest news story of the decade and they’re like “Yeah our source’s name is Deep Throat,” and everyone read about it, talked about it, heard about it, knew about Deep Throat.

That’s just so fucking funny to me. Like they could have called him John Doe or Mr. X or literally anything, and they decided to name him Depp Throat and then tell everyone that name. Everyone knew Deep Throat. People talked about it casually. My DAD has mentioned Deep Throat to me when we were talking about U.S. history. The biggest scandal in U.S. Presidential history and they decide to call their informant Deep Throat. So funny.

How’d that conversation go?

Woodward: “Hey Carl, we’re following the biggest story of our lives, and I know this whistleblower, what should we call him?

Bernstein [horny AF]: “Uhh, how about Deep Throat?”

Woodward: ..

Imagine if something like that happened today. If, let’s say, during one of Trump’s impeachments, there’s a big investigation and there’s all this shady government shit going on. And then an insider turns on the administration and starts leaking important information. Their code name, it turns out, is “Rimjob,” and everyone’s talking about this mysterious person called Rimjob. And people would be at work talking about Rimjob this, Rimjob that, Rimjob is saving democracy. It would be hilarious. Pandemonium would ensue. The memes would be poppin, as they say.

The absolute comedy of Deep Throat!

Wouldn’t It Be Nice?

Wouldn’t it be nice if people were, well, nicer? The answer is, “yes,” obviously. It would be better if more people were more nice more often. I was thinking about this one day, and I thought of niceness as a thing to be studied. Niceology, I called it, and I started writing “lessons” on the subject. It is a way to think about niceness, spread niceness to others, and become nicer myself [hopefully]. 

So far, I’ve written fifty lessons on the subject, and I compiled them into a cute little book, which looks like this:

It’s available here https://www.amazon.com/Niceology-Life-Lessons-How-Nice/dp/B093KW3ZQB/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=niceology&qid=1620240921&sr=8-2 if you want to purchase a copy for yourself or for a friend. It’s an easy way to support me. Hopefully I’ll be able to publish some other books I’m working on without amazon, but for now that’s what I’ve got.

Thanks.

High Movie Review #010: history of the entire world, i guess

history of the entire world, i guess is a movie that was released on May 10, 2017 by bill wurtz on youtube. It tells the story of the last 13.8 billion years in the span of 19 minutes and 25 seconds. So obviously it’s fast paced the entire way through. EXCEPT right at the beginning.

So we start of with bill trying to comprehend the incomprehensible idea of the non-existence of time and space. The non-existence of existence is just something that’s so crazy and hard to think about. Even talking about it is hard because you’re trying to say before time and space, but that word before is explaining it through the lens of time itself. You can’t even have “before” if there’s no time. It’s fucking crazy, man. bill explains this idea by saying that there isn’t everywhere, you don’t need a where [space], you don’t even need a when [time]. Then there’s a big pause, the only pause in the movie. Then bill says “forget this” and we launch into the beginning of the universe.

And it’s so funny to me, like nonexistence saying “forget this,” and then existence happens. Like nonexistence is just like “man, this sucks, let’s do something else,” and that’s why the universe exists. That’s such a funny concept.

Everything is anthropomorphized, which gives the movie so much of its charm. Even tiny plant cells, he treats them like people you can communicate with. He sings “now you can eat sunlight!” to the plants. And even later he tells an ocean animal “learn to use an egg,” to which the animal responds, “I was already doing that.” And that adds so much charm. Like it seems like early life was just unintelligent creatures making random choices and evolution took its course, whatever. But they’re important characters in the story of the world, and bill treats them as important characters, shaping the story.

I’m a mammal, so once it became “mammal time,” I was pretty excited. My friends are all mammals too, and to see our development from having breasts, to grabbing things, to walking, to banging rocks together, to setting things on fire, to talking, was incredible to see. We’ve come a long way. And that’s just the period from mammals to the first humans. Obviously we’ve come a long way since 200,000 B.C., as we’ll see shortly.

So there’s an ice age, and people walk to the Americas, which is just insane. Like, I can’t imagine being a person back then and just like “Well, I guess we’ll walk this way.” That’s incredible. Imagine if they didn’t do that, or if they didn’t make it. That would have a colossal impact on the course of history. Of course they weren’t thinking about, you know, the eventual arrival of Columbus or anything, they were just moving. But I like to think about the environmental impact on history. It’s easy to think of history as just people doing stuff because of complex, human things. But obviously they’re doing stuff in relation to the environment that’s around them. It’s no coincidence that these early civilizations developed around rivers, as bill points out.

The movie is very fast-paced. It has to be, given the premise. There’s a lot of brightness and a lot of movement of pictures and quick displaying fo maps and words. It’s a style that is unique to bill and it works so well in this film.

It’s about time to talk about the jingles. These jingles are brief, musical.. things. Basically he’s talking, telling the story of the world then he breaks out into singing! But very briefly. And these jingles are extremely catchy. I find myself just thinking, “It’s the golden age of Indiaaaaaa” randomly in my life.

I think it’d be funny if I ran into some mind readers from time to time. Like a waiter can read my mind, let’s say, for the sake of this bit of fun. So the waiter is about to ask if I have any room for dessert and he hears my brain singing “It’s the golden age of Indiaaaaaa,” and he’s like, in his mind, “Why the fuck is this guy thinking about the Golden Age of India right now?!” Although, come to think of it, if he was a mind reader, he probably has heard some way weirder shit than that. But still, it’s funny to think about.

Another one I like is “Now the Phoenicians can get down to business!” It sounds very cool and it’s fun to sing.

The jingle that I love a lot but don’t really know why it’s in there is “The Sultan of Oman lives in Zanzibar now..” and that’s it! He just moves on immediately. And there’s no buildup to it. It’s like, he’s talking about “The Great Game” between Britain and Russia, and then he quickly tells us where the Sultan of Oman lives now, and then moves on to an Indian revolt and the continued occupation by Britain. It’s like, why the fuck do I care where the Sultan of Oman lives?? No explanation, I love it.

Now I’m not a historian. I like learning about the Cold War and other periods of American history and sometimes British history, but I definitely don’t know much about Asian, African, or South American history. All that to say that there’s probably some significance [of which I am unaware] to the Sultan of Oman living in Zanzibar. But it’s still funny cause it seems like the only jingle whose importance goes unexplained. Here’s the thing: if I learned the significance of the Sultan of Oman living in Zanzibar, I might not enjoy the jingle as much, because part of my enjoyment comes from not understanding.

ANYWAY, in addition to being fun and entertaining, the film’s goal is to tell the story of the world. And it achieves this goal pretty well, given the time restraint. I actually learned a lot watching this. You probably will too. Also you’ll probably find something in there that seems interesting so you’ll go read about it more.

It’s also funny how bill spends more or less time on certain events. For example, he takes a lot longer to explain the Spanish-American War than he does to explain the Black Death. He just says “Whoops, half of Europe just died,” and then moves on. I actually missed it the first time watching. The movie has jingles, charm, jokes, and a kind of dry humor at points. But, you know, it’s talking about real events and a lot of them are pretty brutal, as history is. It’s a strange dynamic, and it makes me think about how the rest of this century will go. I don’t know any exact details, but I imagine it will be quite brutal. Wars, droughts, floods, poverty, starvation, etc. I will be alive during much of it. And I hope to do my own small part to make it not as bad as maybe it could be. I want to do some good, is what I’m trying to say.

As of the writing of this review, the video has 117 million views. If you haven’t seen it, I HIGHly recommend it. It’s one of the best videos on youtube.

Stuck on Specks

I am currently stuck in Denver, Colorado. All flights out of Denver International Airport, including mine, got canceled yesterday due to a blizzard. I haven’t been around snow that much during my life, but apparently this is one of the worst blizzards on record in Denver.

I was at a ski resort about 100 miles from Denver, and I took a shuttle yesterday [while my flight was still active] from the resort to the airport. On the way, my flight got canceled, and luckily the driver took me and the other passengers to hotels. The driver was a very friendly, positive guy and happily conversed with us during the trek. I was the last passenger to be dropped off, and when we were about a block away from my hotel, we got stuck. The driver yelled, “Fuck!” and tried to get the shuttle moving a few times with no success. I’m not sure how that went for him, but I walked through the wind and snow into my hotel. 

During that drive, we saw cars spinning out, a minor accident, cars being towed, and multiple vehicles stuck in the snow. I looked out the window most of the time and, before the blizzard got really bad, I watched some tiny specks of snow land on the window here and there. And that’s just what it was, a speck. A tiny piece of snow that I could squash between my fingers. And yet, I thought, it caused all this. Cars stuck in the snow, people stuck in a city a thousand miles  from home, roads closed, businesses closed, the airport and train stations shut down. Basically, human society, in this area, shut down. All from this from a bunch of tiny specks [and a lot of wind].

And I started thinking about other things like that. Carbon dioxide is an extremely tiny speck. So much smaller than a speck of snowfall. But since we’ve pumped so much of it into the atmosphere in the last 100 years, that insignificant speck has caused, and will continue to cause, much more damage than shutting down a city for a couple of days. In the U.S., extreme weather events are on the rise, and this is a result of this tiny speck that is carbon dioxide [and methane]. Hurricanes and wildfires are getting bigger, more destructive, and more frequent. Harvey, Maria, and Irma were extremely destructive, both in damage costs and human lives. California’s three worst years for wildfires have been in the last five years. 

Ice is melting, sea levels are rising, certain highly populated areas will become uninhabitable for humans. And it’s this little fucking speck. So small you can’t even see it.

That was pretty sad so I started thinking of another example: the sun. The sun is the biggest speck in the solar system, but it emits specks even smaller than carbon dioxide. Specks so tiny that they don’t have mass or volume. Photons. Light is our source of energy, which, you know, we need for living. This infinitesimal speck is the reason we have human civilization at all. And that’s pretty incredible. Flowers, trees, insects, mice, snakes, tigers, humans, we all need that continuous supply of that tiniest of specks. Of course there’s plenty of other specks involved, but the photon is the ultimate source of all we love and enjoy. It is the greatest speck in the universe.

Who is the Hero of Robin Hood [1973]?

Robin Hood was released in 1973. Produced by Walt Disney Productions and distributed by Buena Vista Distribution

The film is a re-telling of a story from English folklore. The legend of Robin Hood, Maid Marian, Little John, Friar Tuck, the Sheriff of Nottingham, Prince John, and King Richard. All these characters are portrayed by animals in the film. 

Upon a casual viewing of the film you might simply think that it’s an interesting story with fun characters and a couple good songs, but as I dug a little deeper into the film, I began to ask myself: “Who is the hero of this film? Who is the hero of the Robin Hood story?”

I initially considered Prince John. He’s a lion, he’s regal, he’s got a crown. And he’s leading England, so you’d think he might be the hero of this tale. But at the same time he’s kind of a wimp, sucking his thumb all the time. He doesn’t have courage, like a hero should. And he abuses his assistant, Sir Hiss. Prince John’s also pretty stupid, getting fooled by these ridiculous digsuises of fortune tellers.

Okay, so what about the Sheriff of Nottingham? Now that could very well be the hero of our story. He is the sheriff, a member of law enforcement, a civil servant. It’s a dangerous job, and he does it with a great sense of duty and honor, maintaining the system of law and order which protects the citizens. He puts his life on the line every day to recover stolen property and return it to its legal, and therefore rightful, owner: Prince John. The Sheriff of Nottingham is the only thing standing between the people of England and complete and utter chaos. That, to me, is a clear frontrunner for the hero of this motion picture.

Now let’s take a look at Robin Hood himself. He is the star of the movie after all. How would I describe him? Liar. Thief. Impostor. And not just stealing stuff here and there, but he commits grand larceny against the crown, using a pulley system to steal bags and bags of money. This is a huge deal, and was probably the “crime of the century” in England at that time. This is a guy who brazenly breaks the law, contributing to the large crime rate of England. He wears disguises to evade law enforcement. Overall he’s just a pretty disreputable character.

He does have a couple heroic things, though. He’s amazing with the bow and arrow, but even that is tainted by the fact that he entered the archery contest under false pretenses. He cheated, in order words. That’s called fraud, and it has no place in a civil society. So his victory was obviously tarnished and, one might argue, completely devoid of any value.

And, you know, he did give his hat to a kid, which was nice. But when you consider Robin Hood, his complete lawlessness greatly outweighs his heroic qualities. I mean, he has such a total disregard for the rule of law, it’s hard to root for him. Maybe if he just applied himself, he could’ve become a professional archer instead of a free-loading anarchist. 

Little John is pretty much an enabler of Robin Hood’s behavior and a frequent accessory to his crimes. He’s so caught up in Robin Hood’s cult of personality that he can’t see him for what he really is: a criminal. Little John is blinded by his admiration for Robin Hood that he actually contributes to his crimes against the state.

And then there’s Friar Tuck. He’s supposed to be a model member of the clergy, a pious, Christian man. Yet, he also enables Robin Hood’s criminal activities, accepting, and thereby encouraging, Robin Hood’s felonies. Hold on a second, let’s see. *flips through Bible* Ah yes, Exodus, here we go. Yes, here we are: “Thou shalt not steal,” does that ring any bells, Friar Tuck? Try practicing what you preach.

This type of hypocrisy can never be considered heroic. 

What about Maid Marian? Again: hypocrite! She pretends like she loves poor people, dancing with them in the forest and playing with the poor children, yet she lives in a castle, living a luxurious life, playing badminton. Typical virtue-signaling, SJW celebrity. They don’t really care about poor people. And she’s an enabler of Robin Hood’s criminal activity, just like Little John and Friar Tuck.

So, after considering all these characters, one would have to conclude that the Sheriff of Nottingham is the true hero of the Robin Hood story. Risking his life, in the face of lawless, dangerous bandits, to uphold law and order for English society. I salute you, Sheriff of Nottingham.