« hosts | Main | congrats to harry! »
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
thanks for visiting my blog. i realise it's a bit old school to expect you to actually come to my world, but subscribe to the feed or select the relevant presences from the middle column and hopefully i'll come to your world and tweet or whatever to save you the hassle of coming back :-)
there are five broad areas of content - click on the buttons below to delve deeper. or below is a list of all the categories i have posted under.
hope it all makes sense. do say hi either here or where our digital presences collide, send me an e-mail, leave a comment...
where i come across creative ideas, liturgies, movies, music tracks, service outlines or anything that strikes me, i add them as worship tricks. i started these in april 2002 when i first began blogging and they have built up over the years so that i am now on the third series. this has proved a pretty popular feature of the blog.
You speak it, ian!!!!! People need to get a life!
Posted by: Existential Punk | February 09, 2006 at 08:49 AM
mmm...I think ian's comment is rather tactical: surely there are serious movie-makers who wish to present a point of view (sometimes with the aim of persuasion), and then there are movie makers who wish to gather the money of folks who want to spend two hours watching anything with special effects. Does Michael Moore, for instance, merely wish to entertain folks with war stories for an hour or so, or does he wish to persuade? Does the Terminator wish to promote serious thinking about international relations & the time/space continuum, or is he content to blow things up? We have both/and in the film industry. The comparison ian makes is clever, but maybe not altogether accurately reflecting what the medium is about, and the varieties of film makers that are out there.
While the original poster to whom ian is replying used the term "convert" (a word with built in baggage), I suggest that it would not be unfair to say that the film offers to "persuade"; some films do, implicitly or explicitly. Is there an intentional effort at persuasion to a certain point of view? If so, a] what is that point of view; b] what are the merits of that point of view?
blessings
Posted by: Joseph | February 11, 2006 at 07:09 AM
Inclined to agree with Joe - also, King Kong and Big Momma, really!! The "Bad Boys" films made it cool to shoot people and not care about the consequences; "40 Year Old Virgin" implies that you are a complete freak if you have been pure for 40 years of your life - there is a life perspective that is going to be skewed in the production of ANY film, Brokeback Mountain included - because it is only through Jesus that we can have life to the full - not, as in Brokeback Mountain, have your cake and eat it - also, regardless of the gay thing, the film encourages us to think sympathetically about those who commit adultery.
Posted by: Ali Campbell | February 21, 2006 at 10:30 AM