#and clearly they aren't the highest quality movies

[girlscience]

Watched transformers with the family last night and I have opinions!! Mostly about Mikaela tbh. I just think she should have been the mc or at least gotten a spin-off or had the second movie be about her. She is just so much more interesting than Sam. You learn nothing about Sam the whole movie except that his great great grandpa was a cool explorer and that he wants a car. No backstory, no knowledge of his home life really other than he has jokey parents that bicker frequently and that he has a dog. He likes girls?? Literally that's all the personal information you glean about him. I guess he gets braver through the course of the movie as well.

Mikaela though? She has a full and interesting backstory. She was raised by her dad, they were poor, he stole cars, sometimes she stole cars with him, they were caught at some point, and she went to juvie while he went to prison. She is now out of juvie and attending a regular high school. Her experiences as a kid led to her having an interest in cars and mechanics. I know it mostly came from objectification, but with the way she dresses you can get a sense of her personal style; it has a very strong aesthetic. She even gets a bit of a character arc starting off as a pretty shallow individual who doesn't seem interested in anything but herself, and by the end of the movie she has formed meaningful relationships with Sam (at least on her end) and with Bumblebee (to the point she risked her life for him in the final battle and helped him take down a 'Con). All of this points to her being intelligent and caring and brave. She is cool!!!!

And then movie two comes around and she gets dropped like a rock :/ I get why Megan Fox would want to separate herself from the franchise. They clearly didn't treat her well, and only wanted her for male gaze eye candy, but it sucks. Mikaela was very interesting and I think they could have done something really neat with her, but instead they went for the "everyman self-insert fantasy" because who would want to watch a robo smash-up gore fest with a female main lead.

[lingshanhermit]

Lingshan Hermit: Why are you hypocritical?

In Western society, Catholicism has been regarded as one of the most sacred religions for hundreds of years. According to the latest data, about one sixth of the people on Earth are Catholics. Historically, Catholicism has given birth to many great figures like Joan of Arc. However, as a great denomination, the stains of Catholicism should not be ignored either.

Since the 1980s, a series of scandals about Catholic child abuse began to be sporadically reported by the Western press. People in Western society began to be horrified to realize that the priests they revered were not as holy as they thought. Because of the huge influence of Catholicism in the West, those Catholic clergymen accused of child abuse were mostly dealt with discreetly, and most of them were transferred to other areas to continue their pastoral duties. In 2019, Australian Cardinal George Pell was sentenced to six years in prison by an Australian court for sexually abusing two boys in a choir decades ago, probably the highest sentence a Catholic priest has ever received so far. Even today, people have long been numb to such incidents. Such things have even been made into movies by Hollywood. I've seen one of the movies called Doubt. In fact, the history of Catholic child abuse can be traced back to the 11th century book Liber Gomorrhianus, but this is only traceable history. Many things happened but were not recorded.

I did not mention Catholicism here to accuse them. In fact, such things exist in almost all religions (of course, not just religions, but also in many secular groups.) Catholicism is exposed simply because it is in the West, in a society where news reporting is relatively free. In fact, this is a universal human problem, not a problem unique to any particular religion.

Such things always provoke our thinking. People will ask, why do they do this? Aren't they people of faith? Do they still believe in their God? In my opinion, the Catholic case is not an isolated one. In the East, Confucianism faces similar problems. I am certainly not saying that Confucianism abuses children. What I am saying is that Confucianism has long been accused of producing hypocrites in Chinese society - this is a fact. As a Buddhist, I must point out that Buddhism also produces hypocrites, and for reasons similar to Confucianism. So this is not a problem for Catholicism as a religion alone, it is a problem faced by all religions.

I have pondered this issue before. In my opinion, the plight faced by Catholicism is similar to that of Confucianism. They have these problems largely because they lack practical self-cultivation systems. Historically, the great founders of those religions, be it Jesus or Confucius, all had genuine practical self-cultivation and enlightenment experiences. It is said by many researchers that Jesus went to India when he was young to learn the Dharma, but clearly, what he learned in India was not passed down to later generations. He only gave them some basic theoretical teachings. The same thing happened in Confucianism. Confucius was a quite enlightened person, but he obviously did not pass down those practical methods to his students either. He only taught a lot of theoretical things. The result is that the descendants of Confucius and Jesus only got theories, but could not experience the enlightenment that the founders of religions once experienced. They only knew that such a state was good, but did not know how to arrive at such a state. It should be known that the realms advocated by those saints were just naturally manifested after they reached a certain level of enlightenment, not something they deliberately did. And an ordinary person without such experience, if they naturally manifest their own nature, they would only do the opposite of saints. If such a person unfortunately holds a position like a priest, in an environment that requires them to exhibit certain sacred qualities, they can only pretend that they possess such qualities. But I don't know how long such pretense can last.

Imagine that something like this happened in Buddhism. If one day, all the practical methods of Buddhism were lost. But Buddhists are still told not to cling, to be like the Buddha and not have emotions about anything. But there is no method at all, no place to start. What would that look like? You may continue to stay in Buddhism, but doubt everything described in the Buddhist scriptures. Or simply not believe them. There is no one around you who can experience the state described in the Buddhist scriptures. Slowly you will feel that they are all myths, but you are still in Buddhism, you cannot say those are false. Over time, you will become very hypocritical. This is the plight faced by Catholicism and Confucianism. In religions without practical systems, the emergence of hypocrites is almost inevitable. Without real practical systems, real religious experiences cannot be produced. Without real religious experiences, true faith cannot be generated. And without true faith, your faith cannot withstand any test, and corruption is only a matter of time. If you cannot experience the state once experienced by Shakyamuni Buddha, the Sixth Patriarch, and Vimalakirti, you certainly won't believe what the Buddhist scriptures say. You won't believe what your guru says either. You won't believe in reincarnation, karma. You won't believe Milarepa can pass through stones, nor will you believe you can become a Buddha. You will only treat these as myths. But you will pretend to believe, while in fact not believing. Things like this happen every day in Catholicism and Confucianism, and of course, in Buddhism as well.

I have been to Catholic cathedrals. In those beautifully magnificent cathedrals, on those colorful stained glass windows, are painted miracles of saints from the past. When I look at those beautiful paintings, look at those magical stories from those distant eras depicted in the paintings, look at the saints floating in the air in the paintings, I wonder how many priests would believe those are true historical events. Most priests without real religious experiences would only see them as a distant myth. They would not believe at all that those things really happened.

Imagine if a person is placed in a position where he can dominate others, if he has no real practical experience, if he does not really believe in what he professes, if he only pretends to believe, and such a person is also required to be celibate, what would happen? Unfortunately, this is the reality for many religious people.

There are many demons wandering in our world. What they love to do most is to sabotage your practice. They love to drag others down. They will seduce you, provoke you, whisper in your ears. And those who are close to God and Buddha are their prime targets. If someone without true faith becomes a priest, if he runs a Catholic orphanage, if there are many children in the orphanage, if those children revere him unconditionally, if he has the power over life and death over them - he can make a child clean toilets for half a year with one word. What would happen in such a situation? One should know, demons are prowling around him, whispering in his ears. Even someone like me who has been immersed in Buddhism for over 20 years and has no doubts sometimes gets influenced by them, let alone those with no true faith at all. Those without true faith, when placed in such positions, you cannot expect them to control their desires. This is like putting a beauty-loving woman in a room full of beautiful clothes. Do you think she won't touch those clothes? Once he opens the door of desire, he can no longer close it. He can only cover up sins with more sins.

Many years ago, I said that if there is no faith, laws alone are not enough. Humans are very smart. They can think of many ways to circumvent laws. 200 years ago, America's founding fathers spent 127 days constructing the US Constitution. They envisioned all kinds of possibilities to contain potential evils. But in today's world 200 years later, the legal system they painstakingly built is obviously overwhelmed. The things happening on Earth these days are proving my point. I have always believed that morality without faith cannot withstand impacts. And those superficial faiths are also far from enough to withstand the temptation of demons. They cannot withstand any test and are easily defeated. These days, you can see what those people you once thought were fair, objective and faithful are doing. You can see many seemingly faithful people brazenly doing many jaw-dropping things. In fact, this is no surprise at all, just the inevitable result of not having true faith. Such things have actually been happening all along, it just so happens that you saw it this time.

Finally, it should be noted that although Buddhism has practical systems, this does not mean Buddhist practitioners all understand practice well. - So, what has happened in Catholicism can also happen to Buddhists. - In fact, most Buddhists do not understand what practice really means. Those who think they are practicing, their so-called practice is usually not practice at all. Many people's understanding of practice is just spending a lot of time reciting mantras or going into retreat. But this is not necessarily practice. I have seen many people who make efforts reciting every day, for over a decade, but their ego and afflictions show no signs of wear and tear at all. The way they think about issues is exactly the same after a decade as it was a decade ago. This is because the self is much smarter than them. They think they are smart and can fight the self, thinking the self won't steal their practice right under their nose. But the self is much smarter than them. It will very covertly turn all their efforts to its own use. They won't notice at all that their practice has long been corrupted, transformed and tamed by the self, without damaging the self one bit. Such people are usually very superstitious about rituals. They emphasize a lot the function of rituals. They think that by getting a very powerful ritual or secret instruction, they can attain liberation - this kind of thinking is as ridiculous as those who think getting the Dragon Slaying Saber will allow them to command the realm. They spend a lot of time seeking and practicing rituals, but never observe and change their own values. This kind of practice is really no different from having no practical system at all, and is even more misleading. You will become even more unclear about your own state. You will think you have been practicing all along. This will make you hypocritical, because you have practiced for a long time without results. You practice without results for a long time, but you don't want others to know you have gotten no results from long-term practice, hence hypocrisy arises.

This article was first published on Lingshan Hermit's Sina Weibo, Google Blogger and other social media on November 22, 2020. Copyright owned by the author. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.

Copyright Notice：All copyrights of Ling Shan Hermit's articles in Simplified and Traditional Chinese, English, and other languages belong to the natural person who owns "Ling Shan Hermit". Please respect copyright. Publishers, media, or individuals (including but not limited to internet media, websites, personal spaces, Weibo, WeChat public accounts, print media) must obtain authorization from Ling Shan Hermit before use. No modifications to the articles are allowed (including: author's name, title, main text content, and punctuation marks). We reserve all legal rights.

灵山居士：你为什么会虚伪？

[denimbex1986]

'Experiencing Barbenheimer fatigue? Moviegoers aren't, so suck it up.

That Greta Gerwig's "Barbie" is on track for a mere 41 percent drop after its gangbusters $162 million opening weekend shouldn't come as a huge surprise; it received an "A" Cinemascore from audiences, and has crazy repeat-viewing appeal (if only to spot all the visual gags). But Christopher Nolan's "Oppenheimer," which also got an "A" Cinemascore, would, given its unsexy subject matter and three-hour length, seem to have a more clearly defined commercial ceiling. A sobering drama about the creation of the nuclear bomb isn't exactly typical summer movie fodder.

Whether it's the Barbenheimer effect or the Nolan seal of guaranteed quality (the guy just doesn't make bad movies), this much is certain: "Oppenheimer" is an unprecedented box-office sensation. The film is on track for a meager estimated 44 percent dip from its $82 million opening, and should close out the weekend with another $46 million added to its domestic total, which will be the highest grossing second weekend for an R-rated movie in box office history (passing the $43.5 million racked up by "Deadpool 2" in 2018).

And with a deeply underwhelming August on the horizon, "Oppenheimer" appears poised to break at least one more semi-significant record.

A historical drama on the cusp of making box-office history

Hey, maybe they'll wind up being great movies, but the lineup of "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem," "Meg 2: The Trench," "The Last Voyage of the Demeter," "Blue Beetle," "Strays" and "Gran Turismo" are not likely to throw a dent into the "Oppenheimer" market. Also, keep this in mind: older viewers, who have been slow to return to theaters, are more likely to wait out the crowds and check out the film when jerkwads aren't commemorating their viewing on their smartphones.

There are two records to keep an eye on here. The first, which should fall easily, is the highest grossing film of all time to never rank number one at the box office. That title currently belongs to Garth Jennings' "Sing," which topped out domestically at $270 million. "Oppenheimer" will finish this weekend with $173 million in domestic ticket sales, and should hold onto enough screens throughout the month to pass that milestone.

The second record is a longshot: highest grossing R-rated movie of all time, for which the domestic record is currently held by Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" at $370 million. Ordinarily, there wouldn't be a high-enough weekly multiplier to get "Oppenheimer" there, but with studios moving wide releases from the fall and winter 2023 schedule because they refuse to pay writers and actors a fair wage (i.e. the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes), "Oppenheimer" could continue to be the best adult-skewing show in the multiplexes.

While I'd love to see Gibson's movie dethroned, it will only happen because studio skinflints have decided to inflict pain on exhibitors at the exact moment moviegoing has returned to pre-pandemic, 2019 levels. That would be a shame.'

[scifigeneration]

Why superhero films such as Infinity War aren't ruining cinema (or our minds)

by Joel Hodge

Avengers: Infinity War is more than empty spectacle, particularly due to its complex villain Thanos. IMDB

Avengers: Infinity War has burst into cinemas, bringing together a vast array of Marvel characters. It has had a record opening weekend at the US box office, and is expected to be one of the highest grossing films of all time. Indeed fantasy and science fiction films feature prominently on the list of all-time biggest blockbusters, with the two previous Avengers’ movies, and Black Panther, sitting in the top 10.

Yet, not all are happy with this trend. In January, Jodie Foster, said of superhero films such as those made by Marvel and DC:

Studios making bad content in order to appeal to the masses and shareholders is like fracking — you get the best return right now but you wreck the earth…. It’s ruining the viewing habits of the American population and then ultimately the rest of the world.

I have written previously about the power of science fiction, especially Star Wars, to offer audiences a sense of transcendence and mystery, a moral compass and even hope for some kind of “salvation”. Like Star Wars, superhero films such as the Avengers franchise offer an integrated mythology that engages the viewer imaginatively, cathartically and transcendentally. They even do so with humour.

Black Panther, Captain America, and Black Widow in Avengers: Infinity War. IMDB

The literary-critic René Girard has argued that it is possible to read great literature, such as Shakespeare, on two levels. On one, there is action and violent spectacle. On the other, there are more complex themes, which include an implicit critique and exposure of the dynamics underlying the violent spectacle. Likewise, many of the best films appeal to multiple audiences at the same time. While I am not equating the superhero genre to Shakespeare’s works, Girard’s schema can be helpful to analysing these films’ appeal.

Deep themes

In Infinity War, the 19th film produced by Marvel Studios, dozens of Marvel superheros are united to fight a galactic enemy, Thanos. They include Captain America, Iron Man, Spiderman, Black Panther and many others. Marvel’s competitor DC has also made its own superhero films such as Batman v Superman, Wonder Woman and Justice League. The competition for superhero supremacy is intense, and involves a lot of money.

In Infinity War, Thanos wants ultimate power to restore balance to the universe. This involves killing half of the universe’s living population. On the surface, the tale can be viewed as a simple one of goodies-and-baddies, complete with an inter-galactic spectacle.

But there are deeper themes. Through Thanos, the film explores ideas such as the value of life, what’s morally permissible, utilitarianism, environmental ideology, and sacrifice. In a sense, Thanos is selfless – he is seeking a higher good for the universe, not himself - and offering a systematic answer to the problem of sustainability.

The question is: what do the Avengers offer? Hence the film flips the good-bad dichotomy, challenging the heroics of the Avengers by asking if their “good violence” is enough to save the universe.

The superhero genre also offers insight into human relationships and the transcendent mysteries of hope, friendship, goodness and love that bind people together and give them purpose.

For example, in Infinity War, the theme of sacrifice looms large: will friends or family be sacrificed to gain power or stop Thanos? Even the good guys have to choose whether they’ll sacrifice others (even when requested to do so by one person).

For Girard, sacrifice is the key to revealing the type of person one is and community one lives in. Do we sacrifice others for security or power (a form of scapegoating) or do we offer ourselves in service to others (self-giving love)? The most complex superhero films entail an exploration of the hero who suffers or must sacrifice themselves, like Thor in Thor: Ragnarok, Batman in the Dark Knight trilogy or Superman in Superman Returns and Batman v Superman.

Chris Hemsworth in Thor Ragnarok: the most complex superhero films entail an exploration of the hero who suffers. Marvel Entertainment, Marvel Studios, Walt Disney Pictures

In Infinity War, Thanos shows clearly and brutally where he stands in this debate. He puts power and his vision of order and sustainability above his most intimate love. In performing a heart-wrenching act of sacrifice, he also shows that both the means and ends of a moral act matter.

Despite such themes, some criticise fantasy and science fiction films as mere escapism for a consumerist, affluent society. Their plots, they say, neglect the real problems faced by modern people, distracting us from consideration of wider systemic injustices.

While there is a clear escapist element to superhero films, they do deal with many of the problems of modern life, especially the rise of heinous forms of evil. Thanos might be seen as a brutal dictator who believes his utilitarian vision of life is best.

Moreover, we should not regard viewers of these films as merely naïve or gullible. After I saw Infinity Wars, I heard someone remark: “They played us hard.” Viewers are aware of the filmmakers’ tricks of the trade and enjoy (or criticise) the journey.

What about all that redemptive violence?

Superhero and sci-fi films can give the false impression that “good” or vigilante violence will always - or effectively - solve our problems.

Still, superhero movies are aware of this issue and grapple with it. Infinity War confronts the failures of heroes and their violence. Moreover, in earlier Marvel films, there was a split amongst the Avengers about the legal apparatus for authorising superhero action (centring on whether they would accept international oversight).

Of course, the “hero” category itself can become clichéd and unhealthy, projecting a range of qualities onto one person in a way that divorces him or her from the rest of us. For instance, Captain America can appear one dimensional in his unshakeable courage and wooden one-liners (though his character has been explored in more depth in recent films).

While the films’ portrayal of heroism can be uncritical, recent Marvel TV series, such as Jessica Jones and Daredevil, do grapple in complex ways with the “hero” label. They explore the humanity of each character, with his or her faults, traumas and difficult relationships, as they try (often against their will) to make the world better.

Because they offer us powerful mythologies, superhero and science fiction films can become all-consuming for some. They can act as a replacement for or replication of religion. However, if their significance is not exaggerated, they can inspire and challenge - both emotionally and existentially.

The reaction of the audience when I watched Infinity Wars attested to this – they gasped at the arrival of Captain America and applauded the heroics of Iron Man. At that most basic level, these heroes inspire, making us want to be better. But as the film shows, more than heroics alone are needed to face complex problems.

Joel Hodge is a Senior Lecturer in Theology at Australian Catholic University

This article was originally published on The Conversation, a content partner of Sci Fi Generation