
STARTING CAPTIONS:
- Sand people crowd in on Luke Skywalker in Asian remake of Star Wars.
- Man plays "cochie-coo" with baby sand monster.
- Youth rushes to stifle sneeze that could threaten sand civilization.

STARTING CAPTIONS:
The last three or four months have seen a remarkable sign of box-office slump: For sixteen consecutive weeks, domestic weekend box-office receipts have been lower than the corresponding weekends from the previous year, 2004. Added: That’s one week away from the record 17-week recession set in 1985 — "one box office record we don’t want," Exhibitor Relations chief Paul Dergarabedian commented this week.
It’s not just that ticket sales are down — that’s been happening for at least three years. But because ticket prices continue to climb, Hollywood seldom takes in less money each week on a year-over-year basis for more than two or three weeks in a row. (For example, during the same 16-week period in 2004, the weekend box office never dipped below 2003 levels for more than two consecutive weeks. Of course, as a friend of mine observed, the early part of last year might have been unusually strong due to the lingering effects of The Return of the King and the powerhouse presence of The Passion of the Christ.)
In any case, in the last 16 weeks not even the release of a the third and final Star Wars prequel could boost the box office to the levels it enjoyed a year ago. Nor could media blitzes, drummed-up controversies, or big names like Ron Howard, Russell Crowe, Adam Sandler, and Ridley Scott, Orlando Bloom pump movies like Cinderella Man, The Longest Yard, and Kingdom of Heaven to box-office success.
Hollywood execs, of course, are scrambling to point to all kinds of factors, from the continuing rise of DVDs and Internet use. But a few bold voices are wondering whether the problem isn’t the movies themselves. Amy Pascal, chairwoman of Sony Pictures Entertainment’s motion picture group, has a startling suggestion for Hollywood: Try making better films.
"We can give ourselves every excuse for people not showing up – change in population, the demographic, sequels, this and that," she said. "But people just want better movies."
Better movies. What a concept. Mrs. Pascal’s suggestion may not be the most popular advice in Hollywood — but it sounds pretty good to Paul Dergarabedian, who actually puts a positive spin on this view of things:
"It is much more chilling if there is a cultural shift in people staying away from movies… Quality is a fixable problem."
The reason I’m mentioning this now is that this week a movie opens that could turn around the box-office slump… and certainly deserves to. Batman Begins is the best Hollywood studio film of the year so far, in addition to being one of the best super-hero movies of all time, and easily the best Batman movie ever.
Considering the years of trouble Warner Bros had even getting this picture made, what with directors, scripts and stars coming and going on a regular basis, it’s amazing that it turned out so well. In the end, they did everything right: Instead of a schlockmeister director like like Joel Schumacher (Batman Forever, Batman and Robin), they got a gifted filmmaker, Christopher Nolan (Memento, Insomnia); instead of casting a marquee name like George Clooney or Val Kilmer, they cast talented, brooding Christian Bale. And instead of making the villains the real stars of the film, they made the hero the star.
What’s more, the film has real-world relevance. The bad guys are a crypto-organization that wants to wage war on human decadence — but their methods include decapitating prisoners, instilling terror, and unleashing weapons of mass destruction on large metropolitan areas. Hm, sound familiar?
It’s a terrific film, though some viewers, critics and otherwise, would apparently prefer a return to the first two Tim Burton films, and don’t know what to make of a story in which Batman’s parents were killed by somebody other than the Joker, or where the film is more interested in character development and moral themes than colorful villains, big explosions, and campy dialogue.
One caveat: If you decide to go see Batman Begins this weekend, don’t bring the kids. It’s way too dark and scary for young viewers (a mature 10 or 12 would be the cutoff in my book).
33 years ago today–June 17, 1972–five men were caught breaking into yonder building, leading to congressional hearings that would so dominate television that they would shove off the air all the cartoon programs I, as a young feller, wanted to watch in the afternoons after school.
The building is the Watergate building, and the congressional hearings were over the Watergate scandal.
In case you’re a young feller yourself (or young enough not ot remember Watergate), this is the scandal that (a) led Richard Nixon (he was a president) to resign and (b) led to every subsequent government scandal having the suffix "-gate" applied to it. Watergate was the first.
33 years ago today–June 17, 1972–five men were caught breaking into yonder building, leading to congressional hearings that would so dominate television that they would shove off the air all the cartoon programs I, as a young feller, wanted to watch in the afternoons after school.
The building is the Watergate building, and the congressional hearings were over the Watergate scandal.
In case you’re a young feller yourself (or young enough not ot remember Watergate), this is the scandal that (a) led Richard Nixon (he was a president) to resign and (b) led to every subsequent government scandal having the suffix "-gate" applied to it. Watergate was the first.
A reader writes:
I am emailing you about a question concerning
Catholicism and Buddhism. I am aware that several Buddhist
beliefs cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the
Catholic Church, Christ’s true Church. And, I am aware that
Buddhism holds somethings as truths in common with the
Church. It appears to me, at least on my college campus, is
that Buddhism (as a class) is very popular mainly because of
the meditations (zazen). What is the Church’s teaching on
incorporating such meditation ways (not what is meditated
on, but the way it is done)with the Faith?It seems to me that there is something "not-right"
about expecting all people to become catholics AND to
forsake their own culture so as to replace it with a heavily
European influenced Catholicism. If there is nothing wrong
about how buddhists or hindu meditate or pray, can that also
be carried over into one’s faith life? It seems that it has
been done so in the past such as the rosary, aristotle,
plato, etc. Of course the process by which this would be
done would be that anything that is contrary to the True
Faith would be tossed out, but those things that are merely
ways of meditation/prayer, could be adapted into the Faith.I hope you are able to answer the question that I am
asking and I hope that I did not ask it in too confusing of
a manner. I do not want for you to doubt my faith in Christ
and the Catholic Church because of my interest in how other
religions practice their faith. I hope to hear back from
you!
You are correct that Buddhism, or what people regard as Buddhism, is popular today, but I don’t think it’s simply the fact that Buddhism has meditation that is what makes it attractive. Christianity also has a tradition of meditation. I think Buddhism in significant measure is a cultural fad. Buddhism seems mystical and exotic to Westerners, who then get caught up in a spiritual analog to the saying "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence."
That being said, the Church does recognize that there are ways in which the practices of other cultures can be harmonized with the Christian faith. The process of doing this is known as "inculturation." As you indicate, elements of other cultures that are in conflict with the Christian faith have to be weeded out, but parts that are not in conflict can be retained.
This is similar to the Christian assimilation of elements of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy. (I’m not sure why you put the Rosary in that list, though.)
Meditation tends to be a religious practice, and it is especially difficult to harmonize anything coming from another religion with the Christian faith since there is a danger of indifferentism or syncretism. Attempted fusions of that nature can even result in people sliding into the other relgion. Thus assimilating elements of the practices of other religions is much more dangerous than assimilating non-religious cultural practices.
In regard to meditation in particular, I suggest that you read the document
INSTRUCTION ON SOME ASPECTS OF CHRISTIAN MEDITATION,
which was released in 1989 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI).
A reader writes:
I don’t know if you’ve seen this bouncing around the blogosphere, but a friend’s brother was featured on USA Today when his 26-yr-old pregnant wife died and he decided to try to keep her alive long enough to give birth. They’re almost there, but the cost is prohibitive. If you don’t mind blogging about it, the USA Today story is here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-15-saving-baby-cover_x.htm
Video of Jason is here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/susansbaby/flash.htm
My blog on it is here:
http://www.theologyofthebody.info/#111893288981521347
And the website to donate is
Absolutely, I’d be happy to blog on the subject. I encourage folks to check out the above links. The story is heartbreaking, but there is real hope.
Phillip R. Johnson, executive director of John MacArthur’s Grace To You ministry, comments on his blog about reports that payouts in priestly sex-abuse cases have topped $1 billion dollars. His premise is that these payouts prove that the Catholic Church’s claim of infallibility is false. My thanks to him for offering me the opportunity to step into the world of fisking:
"Start with the pretense of papal infallibility [of which we will not define so that you do not know it has nothing to do with impeccability]; forbid everyone in the core hierarchy of the church to marry [except, oh, say, Eastern-rite priests, Protestant clerical converts who are already married, and permanent deacons]; embrace a notion of <scare quote>‘spirituality’</scare quote> with <overblown rhetoric>the most superstitious form of sacramental externalism at its core</overblown rhetoric>; and demand that all your members blindly and reverently accept the authority of the church’s earthly leaders no matter what [and even though those same leaders deny they have this kind of absolutist, tyrannical form of authority I’ve heavily implied, make non-members blindly and reverently think such a demand is made of Catholics] — and what kind of result would you expect?" [emphasis Johnson’s].
Certainly not truth-in-advertising from non-members who presume to attempt to explain to other non-members what the Catholic Church believes and teaches, that’s for sure.
A reader writes:
I don’t know if you’ve seen this bouncing around the blogosphere, but a friend’s brother was featured on USA Today when his 26-yr-old pregnant wife died and he decided to try to keep her alive long enough to give birth. They’re almost there, but the cost is prohibitive. If you don’t mind blogging about it, the USA Today story is here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-15-saving-baby-cover_x.htm
Video of Jason is here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/susansbaby/flash.htm
My blog on it is here:
http://www.theologyofthebody.info/#111893288981521347
And the website to donate is
Absolutely, I’d be happy to blog on the subject. I encourage folks to check out the above links. The story is heartbreaking, but there is real hope.
Phillip R. Johnson, executive director of John MacArthur’s Grace To You ministry, comments on his blog about reports that payouts in priestly sex-abuse cases have topped $1 billion dollars. His premise is that these payouts prove that the Catholic Church’s claim of infallibility is false. My thanks to him for offering me the opportunity to step into the world of fisking:
"Start with the pretense of papal infallibility [of which we will not define so that you do not know it has nothing to do with impeccability]; forbid everyone in the core hierarchy of the church to marry [except, oh, say, Eastern-rite priests, Protestant clerical converts who are already married, and permanent deacons]; embrace a notion of <scare quote>‘spirituality’</scare quote> with <overblown rhetoric>the most superstitious form of sacramental externalism at its core</overblown rhetoric>; and demand that all your members blindly and reverently accept the authority of the church’s earthly leaders no matter what [and even though those same leaders deny they have this kind of absolutist, tyrannical form of authority I’ve heavily implied, make non-members blindly and reverently think such a demand is made of Catholics] — and what kind of result would you expect?" [emphasis Johnson’s].
Certainly not truth-in-advertising from non-members who presume to attempt to explain to other non-members what the Catholic Church believes and teaches, that’s for sure.
HIGHLIGHTS: