The Callous Conduct.

This essay is authored by my sister and is not my work in any way–Natasha.

Thoughts from reading “The Bad Beginning.”

Upon this perusal of the first book in the Series of Unfortunate Events, one thing in particular stuck out to me (in fact, the only thing that really stuck out to me), and that was anger.  More specifically, righteous anger. It was not something that was featured in this series so much as the overwhelming sense of sadness and hopelessness that sticks out in every book.  The very word “unfortunate” speaks of remorse and regret, rather than such an emotion as anger.  Righteous anger really only seems to be felt by one character in this book, and that is Klaus, the middle Baudilaire orphan.  His and his siblings’ parents have been cruelly taken from them, they have not a penny to spend at the moment, and they have been deposited, like so much unwanted luggage, upon the dirty doorstep of Count Olaf.  This alleged relative is cruel and unreasonable; he has taken advantage of their helpless state and thinks of nothing except how he may gain their fortune. Why, indeed, should Klaus not be angry?  The more pertinent question may be, why is he the only one?  Where do the helpless have to turn if no one has righteous anger?  The book, The Bad Beginning, by Lemony Snicket, is, I believe, an example of how the idea of different “truths” and “realities” for each person affects the more vulnerable people in society.

These children are being abused and mistreated.  Of all people who plead for the law’s protection, surely they are the most deserving of it.  Why has no one helped them?  Why does nobody listen when they try to explain their situation?  Why are even those who care what happens to them rendered ineffectual?  These are questions that occupy the reader’s mind for the whole of the series, and it gets very frustrating to have to witness over and over.

It is not logical or realistic that every single time the Baudilaires are in danger, no adult can or will help them, and the only ones who really seem to notice or mind this are the children themselves.  True, it is

  Gardner 2

kind of this series’ thing, but one must admit that if something like this happened today there would be outrage.  There would not be a snowball’s chance in hell of Count Olaf escaping the long arm of the law.  The public would despise him and offer pity and support to the three orphans.  Mr. Poe would be fired.

Yet it is not so in this book’s world.  Our heroes just can’t get ahead.  They are friendless, penniless, and helpless.  The only people they can rely on are themselves.  Why is that? Because the books do not follow the rules of logic and reality, and because every  single adult is incurably Stupid.

Each one has a nonsensical idea of what they think life is which they adamantly refuse to give up in favour of the reality the children are actually facing.  Mr. Poe doesn’t believe anything is wrong with Count Olaf.  He chooses to believe that it is merely the children’s grief or petulance that causes their discontentment.  Count Olaf and his theatre cronies refuse to see themselves as bad and evil, instead labeling the children as the nasty and unpleasant characters of the story.  And everyone absolutely will not see how it is completely illegal for a guardian to marry his 14-year-old charge.  Except for the orphans themselves, each person believes what is most convenient for the sake of himself, herself, or the plot.  Violet, Klaus, and Sunny are the only characters who have even a remotely firm grasp on reality and justice.

This is  a literary example of one of the downsides the belief in different realities for

different people can have.  It brings to center stage the utter helplessness of those who depend on justice to save them, when no one around them “sees things” the same way they do.  They have nobody to fight for them, nobody to get angry for them.

We see that they are being treated unfairly, but in the book’s world, who knows?  Perhaps that’s only how they see it.  Perhaps what is outrage to an obvious injustice to them really is only an overreaction to Mr. Poe.  Maybe Count Olaf really is a devilishly handsome hero, just trying to obtain his just desserts.  Who’s really right?  Yet we cannot help but root for the orphans.  We see that they are good-natured, heroic, and resourceful people.   It defies our sense of right and wrong to think otherwise.

 

  Gardner 3

What would it look like if reality and absolute truth were subjective to each individual–if people only saw what they wanted to see?  There would be those, just like the three children, who slip through the cracks, who get abused and mistreated because no one can or will stand up for them in righteous anger.

Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice.

Finally! I can give a more informed opinion on this franchise upsetting piece of work.

Disclaimer, I have only seen the theatrical version and I hear the Ultimate Edition is much better, if you’ve seen that and I don’t address something that was in it, my apologies.

The big question is: Did it suck?

Well, no.

Unlike most folks who cared enough to see this movie when it came out or at least in the same year it did, I didn’t. So my knowledge of it was based on mostly negative reviews, plus one positive one. Maybe two.

I was predisposed to fine the idea of two of my favorite DC guys fighting to the death a terrible experience.

With that somewhat unique perspective, watching this movie was not the fresh take on the characters that it seemed to be to others. And I’ve seen so much dark and gritty from superheroes now that it wasn’t so big a shock.

This movie tuns one of the most beloved superheros, if not the most, into a bad guy. Who murders and makes irrational decisions. It also turns Superman, who is normally confident and cheerful, into a troubled and uncertain hero.

But this Superman is a lot newer to crime fighting then his previous versions, so maybe I can excuse that. And honestly his perpetual frown didn’t bother me, since every scene he was in there was something depressing happening, I wouldn’t be smiling either. He’s never been the wise-cracking kid of super who never gets down.

I could forgive Batman a lot less readily. But upon seeing it for myself, I actually don’t think Batman was acting entirely on his own initiative.

It may be grasping at straws but I felt like all Batman’s nightmares and oddly rage-filled actions seemed a lot more like they were pointing to mind control then to just him. It sound convenient, but being a DC animated series watcher, I can tell you it’s just the sort of thing that they would do. So why not in a movie. (Actually the whole dream-mind control thing has been done before. It was pretty terrifying.)

Even if you don’t buy that an alien force (hint: Darkseid) could be twisting people’s minds (and I’m not the only one who thinks Luthor was acting like he was being influenced by Darkseid) I think it’s not too big a stretch to say that everyone had a darkness they have to face. Wonder Woman said that in her movie.

So with that in mind, I’ll analyze the movie.

I won’t talk about cinematography or acting, or the Martha line as it relates to good story telling; you can get that a dozen other places. I’m going to talk about what I think the story actually means if you just look at it as a story. An analogy. Which is what all superhero movies really are and always have been.

The first thing this movie introduces us to is Batman/ Bruce’s fear of bats and of superman. Which appear to be connected. The bats aren’t literal, they represent the batman side of Bruce, and how he fears it taking control of him. The reason he fears it is because deep down he knows he’s going down a dark path. With the branding and all. I think his disturbing dreams indicated that several times.

For Bruce that fear is still subconscious, and he blames Superman for the sense of danger he keeps having, of helplessness, Alfred tries to warn him about this, but he doesn’t get the hint.

So over a two year period Bruce’s resentment of Superman grows, for no real reason that we can see since Superman doesn’t destroy any ore cities and often prioritizes saving people over catching up to other people he’s suspicious of. But Bruce isn’t going to be bother with facts, since it’s the possibilities that concern him and he doesn’t realize that we can’t base our decisions on all the possible outcomes of something.

Superman is compared to God a lot. But it’s also pointed out that he should answer to God. Superman doesn’t seem to believe this himself, but the comparison bugs him. As it should. Still, he rightly thinks that Batman’s actual Brutality is a top priority over Superman’s possible damage. I mean, one is a fact and the other is a hypothesis right?

But Bruce is having none of that logic crud when Clark Kent tries to point this out to him. Instead he keeps brooding over Superman and finally decides to get rid of him by making a bunch of Kryptonite weapons. After first meeting Wonder Woman a. k. a. Diana Prince. Whom he eventually figures out the identity of.

What we are seeing with Bruce, in my opinion, is the darkness o f fear and hate clouding the judgment. Fear breeds hate anyway. And Luthor is an example of the same thing. Although his is definitely more unstable and out of control (I say more because Batman is the same way) Luthor hates God and blames Superman the way he blames God, because Superman has enough power for one to say “He could save more, but he choose not to. He could destroy us all.” Of course Superman has no wish to do that, but what he intends doesn’t matter anymore These people hate him irrationally.

So Batman tries to kill him, and seems completely shut off to any logic or decency as Superman tries to talk to him and then fights him when Batman refuses to listen. Then that infamous  Martha moment.

I don’ think the idea behind it was terrible, I just found the build up unsatisfactory, but ignoring that, I think it’s true that something as small as a name could trigger the humanity in a person. There are true stories of it happening. And I think all of us can remember moments in our life when our perspective shifted because of one sentence someone said to us.

The idea is that love is the key. Bruce still had love for his mother, even when he’d shut himself off to almost everyone else. And the moment strangely parallels one of the Justice League show episodes in which an alternate Superman had taken over the world, along with the rest of the League, and our Batman convince the other Batman to help him by asking “Mom and Dad, they would be proud of what you did?” and that’s all. But the other Batman realizes the truth.

The truth being that if we love people, then we need to love what they valued also. Provided it was good. Bruce’s parents were clearly good people who would want peace and mercy to be apart of his life.

And since Superman’s mom represents the same a sort of compassion for him as Bruce’s does, the moment does make sense.

I get why people think it’s stupid, but I don’t find it so. In fact I don’t really see how it was much different from Darth Vader changing sides because his son ended up being alive and was almost killed by the emperor.

Anyway, the point is, love conquers fear and hate. Diana tells us in her movie that only love can save the world. And Bruce is showing us how true that is. Because he was actually becoming the greatest threat to the world by trying to kill superman.

I have to say with all it’s faults I like the point DC has been making. That love is the only answer to the fear and hatred and evil we inflict upon each other and the world. Only love will change someone like Batman from a maniac to a man again. And only love can keep someone on the right path.

Love is what convinces Superman to make Earth his new home. Because of the people in it he loves and who love him. Love is what sets Diana on her path of preserving humanity. Love is what opens Batman’s eyes to what he’d become.

And love is all that will make us able to forgive each other for the terrible mistakes we make. Which to his credit Superman does pretty quickly forgive Batman for almost killing him.

So, was this movie perfect? No. Did I like all of it? No, I actually didn’t like most of it. I don’t think I was supposed to enjoy it honestly.

But it is not without its lesson, and the lesson isn’t a total flop. It makes sense. And for setting up the Justice League this movie serves the purpose well enough.

It always could be better, and I think it should have been, but it also didn’t fail completely at what it was trying to do. At least in terms of Batman’s arc. So I’d say it’s worth seeing at least once.

Until next time–Natasha.

Who you are.

If I may, I’d like to use this song to help illustrate my point for this post.

I hope this actually plays, but if not here are the lyrics I want to highlight

You can never fall too hard, so fast, so far, that you can’t get back what you lost, where you are. 

It’s never too late, so bad, so much, that you can’t change who you are.

You can change who you are.

I like the whole song, but the chorus is the point of it, naturally.

What I really like about this song is that it acknowledges that someone might want ot change who they are.

There’s a rare movie out ether even now, and there used to be scores of them, where a main character will admit that they want to change who they are. Take Black Widow as perhaps the most famous superhero example.

Not that change isn’t discussed. Usually it’s called getting over it, or moving on, or being true to yourself.

But what of the now-rare character who doesn’t like themselves? who wants to be different?

I don’t mean they are just unconfident. I mean the character who has flaws that keep ruining their life and they want it to stop.

These don’t have to be evil people, just human.

I’ve never been overly fond of the heroes with fatal flaws, it annoys me, but I wonder if our heroes who lack human flaws are always wise.

Not because I have a problem with good examples, but because I see a missing middle ground. Either we love good examples, or inexplicably we love the bad guys, but we don’t love the ones who are in the middle and trying to decide. Well, really we don’t love the good guys who still do bad things.

Heck, if fictional heroes did as many bad things in a movie as most of us do every day, we’d hate them.

But this isn’t about fiction really. I’m just referring to the missing idea of change in our culture. The lack of accountability. The obsession with being so true to ourselves that we are true to the worst parts of ourselves. Your big mouth, for instance. Or our anger.

Our laziness how about?

You know, the non-glamours stuff no one likes to admit.

The sins.

Maybe it’s just me, but one thing that always bugged me about sitcoms and stuff is how little always like that are just played for laughs. Like we’re just supposed to accept that people will always choose to be lazy, or tell “white” lies, or whatever.

In real life, we usually don’t like that stuff about ourselves.

We’ve all done stuff we’re ashamed of. Even me. I try to forget that stuff, but I know I’ve done it. I don’t like thinking about it.

You know why I use the words “we all” a lot? Because I think that real truth applies to all of us. To all humanity.

We all suck.

But we all can change.

That’s the point of the song.

We have to want to change though. That doesn’t always mean we will, but we have to start there.

To me, one of the best hopes we have is that we can change. Most of our pain in life is because we’re messed up. Maybe someone else messed us up, maybe we messed up ourselves, whichever it is we can only get better if we change.

We can’t just decide to change of course, the song is also about how Jesus can change us. That is part of the whole point after all.

And that’s all for now, until next time–Natasha.

P. S. (I might be posting a review of Dawn of Justice soon because I’m planning to finally watch it, so all my superhero fans out there watch for that.)

 

 

Reaction to The Incredibles 2 trailer.

The Incredibles, the best superhero movie I know of. And after 14 years, the movie in the new trailers is the best they could come up with?

I think anyone who really liked the Incredibles will see why I’m upset, but for those of you who might not ever have been that into it, or even watched it, here’s my objections to the ideas in the new trailer:

  1.  Role reversal done wrong: Am I expected to believe that Mrs. Incredible, supermom, is going to decide to pursue a career as a superhero while leaving her children to be guided by their often clueless father. Am I seriously supposed to buy that her mindset will completely change in the span of a few months? That she would feel like it was right to do that? That she would wold become the one pushing for superheros to be a part of the world again at the cost of getting to watch her family grow up…Please.   And am I supposed to believe Mr. Incredible would not want to be a part of the bigger picture, whether or not anyone asked him to be. This is what he believes in, down with mediocrity! Yeah! Tell the kids to embrace what makes them special.
  2. The incompetent male twist: Am I also the only one who remembers that Mr. Incredible is a very adept spy. He hacked into a supergenius’es computer, tricked a probe, knew  a bomb was going to go off by listening to a wall beeping, has a self driving car, and figured out single handedly how to defeat the robot. Remember that, Disney? He was the one who figured it out. Oh, and he defeated the darn thing by himself before it got upgraded. he also got Syndrome monologueing and almost took him out. He is Mr. Incredible for crying out loud! Yet I am supposed to buy the stupid dad cliche? He never had any trouble connecting with is kids, or believing int hem, or handling them. and suddenly Jack-jack is going to be too much fro this resourceful, intelligent, experienced man….?
  3.  The demon baby cliche: If I have to watch one more “baby is too smart for adults” movie I’ll…obviously do nothing, but I’ll be very disappointed in it. Boss Baby was probably the funniest and least gag worthy presentation oft hat, and even then it only worked some oft he time, but when it’s not Alec Baldwin pretending to be a baby and an actual baby being a little unstoppable force, then…seriously? Furthermore, Jack-Jack was never a mean baby. He was very sunny tempered until Syndrome took him away. Now if you wanted to play the angle that that traumatized him (though it didn’t seem to) at least that would be interesting but I don’t give the movie that much credit. I don’t buy the idea that Jack-Jack would enter the terrible twos while still an infant who can’t even walk. His personality is completely changed. Also, why would he even be eating cookies? If he’s not toilet trained, he’s definitely not needing sugar and chocolate. He was still on freaking baby food a few months ago.
  4. The uncreativity: My siblings ad I could come up with three different plots that would have been way more interesting than what the trailers show. We had hoped the movie would be set ten ears into the future, but even for the immediate pick back up we had better ideas for who the whole issue of superheroes cold be handled. Why not do an X-men like story? The Incredibles are already ripping off the Justice League, why not Marvel? (Oh right, Jack-Jack’s become the incredible hulk. Ha!) The Croods was more original then the idea behind this trailer. It seems just like Despicable Me.
  5. What about the kids?: When I saw the trailer show Mr. and Mrs. Incredible run off to defeat the Underminer, leaving the kids to warch, I was like “What the heck? Didn’t we see all of them suit up at the end of the first movie?” The parents were finally willing to let the kids be superheroes too, it was “in their blood” as I recall. And the kids were good at it. Also, I recall that Violet flat out refused to be left out of the fray. Am I supposed to believe the parents are going right back to keeping them out of it and telling them to hide under a bushel. By all means, let’s play the cliche “mom and day won’t let me be me” card. It’s such a nice change for the unusual “parents encourage their kids to be exceptional” vibe of the first movie.

I guess you get the picture.

You know, I don’t hate the idea of a superhero movie that tackles the balance of fatherhood and letting your wife do great things, and teaching your kids not to let one gift define their personality. That’s fine.

But it has nothing to do with the Incredibles. The Incredibles was much more than that. It tackled hard subjects with such apparent ease, such grace, that it made its points without even seeming to try.

And does anyone argue with how it ended? Whether the world agrees or not, you should use your gifts to help people. To save them. End of story.

Embracing your whole self, Violet shows us, will make you confident. Even if no one else knows why, you know what you’re capable of.

not flaunting your powers but using them when necessary is what Dash learns, and he puts it into practice, while his mom lets him still be good at something that other people can see. Because it’s not wrong to be exceptional.

Letting your talents keep you from your family is a mistake, as is lying to them, but also you need to let them help you bear the weight of the job you have to do, that’s what Mr. Incredible teaches us.

And Mrs. Incredible learns that keeping your family safe often means letting them learn how to protect themselves, and sometimes you have to bring out your dangerous side again to be the best mom and wife you can be. Also, she remembers that she’s a super with or without her husband, but she chooses to be with him.

Jack Jack doesn’t really learn anything, because he’s a baby.

Now, is it just me, or did I just cover all the problems the trailer sets up for the sequel, that the first movie already solved. There’s nothing new here.

Well, I  hope I’m wrong, but we’ll always have the first one at least. Until next time–Natasha.

Race.

So, it’s black history month and I actually did watch a documentary type film about an important black historical figure. So, let’s talk about it.

I happen to like movies of this sort. Hidden Figures, The Help (not a documentary,) and other films of that sort ar really interesting stories.

But it’s only fair to say they have an agenda.

I have no problem with representing the struggles men and women of a certain race went through, when those struggles actually happened. But these movies very often “stretch the truth” about some of the characters.

There was real adversity I have no doubt, but often racism is best expressed in subtlety. I think these movies tend to make it too blatant. It’s actually more maddening to me when racism is a subtle thing because it’s so hard to pinpoint and remedy.

That being said, this movie wasn’t the worst of offenders in that area. It helped that a lot of the problems of the movie centered on the Germans and their ideas. Which cannot be denied since they were documented. And we know the Germans were pretty blatant about it

Funny isn’t it, a nation advancing in technology and athletics subsequently falls into the rut of racism, which America was just beginning to climb out of.

Never tell me racism is the result of only ignorance and stupidity. Some people are willingly ignorant.

I spend so much time talking about racism against white people, that I don’t want to seem like I’ve never given a thought to the real racism against blacks (and others.) Believe me, I’ve read the books and gotten mad over the accounts. A lot of shootings happen because of racism. Not always between whites and blacks, often it’s between Hispanics and blacks, but it’s still a problem.

The whole idea of skin color meaning anything when it comes to how smart someone  is is ridiculous.

These are differences to be sure, but not ones of essentials. It’s also not racism to simply be prejudiced against one kind of people.

Not color-based racism anyway. There are more than one kinds. Racism of color is a lot less of a problem now than racism of culture. You can be prejudiced against a people because you have heard or seen a lot of the same traits in them. That’s called stereotyping. But it’s not always negative.

For example, thinking all black people are good at gospel music is a stereotype, and it may be silly to assume that, but it is not racism. Because in no way dos thinking that make you think they are inferior.

Also a common mistake now is that portraying any race of people as happier then they should be is racist, because it denies their suffering. It’s propaganda perhaps, but it doesn’t imply inferiority to that race, therefore it’s not racist.

We tend to lump a bunch of different sins all into the one of racism.

This movie, Race, is interesting and informative in some ways. I just read a book that talked about how the Nazis wanted touse eugenics (the controlling of mating people and animals to get a more perfect race) to make their own sort of Garden of Eden world.

One of the best scenes in this movie was when the German racer, Luz Long, was talking to Jesse Owens, after being a good sport to him about the long jump. Luz told Jesse what was easily the most horrifying thing in the movie, that he believed the Germans in charge of the Olympics had sent a girl to him who wanted to get pregnant by him…because he was so talented, they want to breed his genes.

Jesse, who was concerned about the bigotry had this cool moment of realizing he wasn’t the only one who had problems.

Another part was when Jesse had to replace one of the Jews who were suddenly not allowed to complete because of the Germans bullying the Americans into it. (Not that it was right.) The scene was a lot more compelling then most of the other scenes regarding discrimination against Jesse.

Nothing against Jesse, but let’s be real, we’ve seen the poor, looked down upon black character a hundred times. It’s true maybe, but it’s no longer shocking. It doesn’t move us. because we expect it. In fact we’re spoon fed it from the media so often that it’s almost impossible to feel shocked. Familiarity breeds contempt.

The reason this movie’s brief touch on Jewish aimed racism and the creepy factor of eugenics is brilliant is because it makes you feel something, it makes you think about it. How racism against one people leads to racism against another, and even leads to misusing your own people, like they were animals.

Germans became obsessed with the strong and talented, and grew to hate the weak and ordinary. Even among themselves. Germans hated half wits, now known as special needs cases. They hated most people actually.

I don’t bear any ill will to modern Germans, I don’t even hate the ones who did what they did, I pity them. But this movie provided a much needed reality check on the situation. It’s not just in America, and it’s not limited to people of a certain color.

I would not get on a soapbox and preach tolerance. That’s not the answer. Tolerance will never eliminate hatred. Eventually it fosters it. I think twitter ought to be evidence of that.

All that can eliminate hatred, as Wonder Woman would say, is love.

The kind of love that will stick up for other people, no matter what nationality they are. I hope, though I have not been tested on it yet, that I would stand up for anyone I saw being mistreated.

Whether they were a muslim, an african american, a hispanic, or whatever.

Anyway, check out Race if you can, until next time–Natasha.

Easy A

Review time again! Yay!

I wish I had picked a better movie to watch today, but Is til have chances to make it up. There’s always Titanic in a pinch, right?

In all honesty the description of this movie sounded better than it was.

In case you’ve never heard of it, Easy A is about a girl who’s friend thinks she’s slept with a college guy, and Olive lies and says she has because her friend is digging for it so much. then a christian girl overhears and spreads the word. Eventually everyone thinks Olive is a slut and a prostitute, and she starts getting paid to say she’s slept with a bunch of different losers. Then one loser actually want her to do it for real, and she is horrified.

In the end she makes a webcast telling the truth about the whole mess, and finds a guy who actually likes her for her. The end.

Ugh….picture me rolling my eyes right now.

The story is supposed to be a retelling of The Scarlet Letter. Which is about a woman who actually had committed adultery, but without realizing it till it was too late, and who ends up pregnant. She gets ostracized, and she ends up embroidering the scarlet letter A, which she is forced to wear, on all her clothes, and when she has her baby she beautifully embroiders her clothes.

She ends up being more sympathetic character.

unlike Olive, who you get frustrated with for continuously lying and giving in to peer pressure over her sexuality. I’m not sure why movies like this continuously portray doing stupid things as somehow daring and indicative of a unique personality. Pretending to have sex with some guy at a party falls under the stupid category in my book…but hey, she did it all the way so…she’s spunky?

Even though Emma stone is hard not to like, in her own sardonic way, she was wasted in this role. By the end of the movie she’s learned nothing. Except that lying about sex is a bad idea.

No one else in the movie has an aha! moment where they change their perspective. And not once is the idea that sex outside of marriage might actually be a bad idea seriously considered.

even though by my count, two people’s reputations and 1 marriage were all ruined over the idea; as well as many others faking their way to popularity.

I don’t want to be petty, but Christians were stereotyped within an inch of our lives, which is what I would expect, because Holly wood forbid that they make us look like rational, compassionate creatures.

Not that all of us are, sadly, but I find it hard to believe any christian teen in public highschool would act the way these ones did. They have more gall then me.

And that parents i this movie were sick. They had no problem with their daughter dressing like a whore, and being labeled as having an STD, and getting detention. (actually on the last one I had to sympathize.) They encouraged her to be promiscuous.

No parent worth their marriage license would react that way. It was so stupid.

In the end Olive concludes that her sex life is none of anyone’s —-business (imagine that!) but she still thinks she might lose her virginity to her new boyfriend. Because clearly that doesn’t lead to any problems.

I mean, duh. What the heck was the point of this movie?

If that’s how much power a rumor had, how much worse to actually do all those things.

even though Olive realizes how disgusting everyone’s obsession with sex is, and that’s a good point right there, she never seems to realize why it got to be that way. Why not having boundaries leads to so many problems. Why if people just honored sex by keeping it in marriage none of the things in the movie would have happened.

And forgive me for getting on my soapbox, but when the movie is making that point without even trying to make it, you know you have an issue.

Really, it missed the whole point of the “source material” which is that sexual promiscuity has consequences, and people can not see the forest for the trees when it comes to one woman’s mistake and their own hypocrisy, but in the end patience and virtue will win out if you practice them diligently.

That’s what the woman in the story did, it is not what Olive did. continuing to make the same dumb mistakes that got you into your problem, and embracing the reputation that ensues, is being stupid. It’s not being brave or noble about it.

Olive admits she had no notion of being either of those things, or being patient and meek. Even if that would have spoken volumes more about her innocence then what she did do.

So basically, this is a what not to do movie that never even really shows why the religious people it was critiquing were so wrong to think they way they did. Weren’t they right? Didn’t it all lead to a lot of bad stuff happening?

Anyway, I don’t recommend this flick, until next time–Natasha.