Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Film, Music, nature, hiking. I play the drums and some guitar, and have been drawing cartoons for over 20 years.

    I also have a deep interest in experiencing, and comprehending God, and believe that one of the ways to do this is through the arts. This is a thing that Christianity has sometimes lost sight of .

    This interest often leads to a theological quest.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,496 profile views

Attica's Achievements


Member (5/5)

  1. See my apology in the short parking section. I shouldn't have decided to walk away from this community. People should be able to follow any interests and political pursuits they chose (within reason of course) without fear of rejection.
  2. I'm leaving Artsandfaith and won't be taking part in this discussion any longer. Enjoy the film.
  3. Yeah, they did a lot of neat tricks with him. The part of him jumping out the window the way it did was fantastic. Goofy, funny, yet also entirely creepy. Yeah there was so much going on there.
  4. Right. They also manage to make the character frightening, but then at times kind of like able, quirky, and fun. His singing in the apartment comes to mind, he was having a great time. My favourite scene with him was the scene where he got slapped. Such fine acting. I had to rewind it several times. Welcome. Remember, this was made under communism. I'm surprised that it had what it did. I think it could have been integrated further in the sense that connecting the dots of the connection between those variety of things might be a leap for some. Not sure if that would have made a film which can be too obvious in places, too much more obvious. Yeah, that really showed different sensibilities. The same with their choices of the music that went along with the humour. That field and song scene was one of the "weird" parts I had mentioned. But really, what a neat scene, he was so weird and goofy, but at the same time and partially because how this was handled, the character came across as so unnerving.
  5. IMO Suicide Squad wasn't too "light", so far as that goes. My biggest complaint is that the middle section started to drone on with basically the same unchanging story, and then started to become garbled when it jump from scene to scene with no apparent rhyme or reason. I found myself wondering if I had phased out and missed some transitional shots, but then I realize that I hadn't, it just kind of jumped there. That's almost certainly in part to do with the reshoots. But it's also almost certainly to do with a lack of editorial control in piecing them together. Or maybe they just didn't realize that they would need to reshoot any needed transitional shots. It almost certainly comes from straying from the original script's roadmap. Surely this film will be able to avoid some of these problems.
  6. I'm pretty sure it does. Although I think it's fairly clear that there are other aspects to the character which are a bit hazy to us. Oh, yes. It is great. The ideas surrounding it are fantastic. I love that this part of the film gives such an interwoven commentary on science, faith, the arts, communism, culture, history. etc. So much of which is depicted in those images. When I think about it, it's pretty much all there. There also might be little bit of a 1950's type sci-fi/horror flick thrown into the mix. There's a lot to dig. You might not have made it into the more surreal (and weird) stuff yet. There's some great cinematography coming up.
  7. Our interaction with "the world" really is a tricky thing. I happen to think that some things in the world and secular culture can be of benefit and can speak to us, and even correct us, but other things.... not so much. I've always been a big advocate of engaging culture with intentional discernment, but it seems that some people have more of an ability to be discerning than others. I can also see why, at least a times, some would want to quit worrying about discerning things all of the time, to just give it a rest. To be honest, last night when I read through the thread I was a little baffled with the idea of being driven out of the church because of the cultural wars. This just hasn't been my experience. I mean I've been plenty annoyed by the lack of understanding often found in regards to the arts, but I think that is a slightly different thing (although this lack of understanding could have roots in the cultural wars). Then upon further reflection I came to thinking that what is going on is probably coming from a difference between the American church and the Canadian church, where the "cultural wars" don't seem to be as prominent or intense. Over the years I just haven't heard as much of a squabble about these things. Maybe Peter or other Canadians here are more aware of something that I may have missed????
  8. Seems to me that he was practical effects with some CGI tweeking.
  9. Okay, I can live with that. Yes, I completely agree that with at least certain people outside of the pulpit it isn't productive. Some people are also too *far* to really even comprehend the argument I would be making. I had written that here with the understanding that many, or most, at Artsandfaith could be considered to be at least somewhere "within the pulpit". I still do think it's noteworthy. Some people are not interested in what Christians have to say and feel that it has little answers for the culture. In C.S. Lewis' time, people who were not Christians would be more likely to listen to a Christian voice. IMO. Yeah, to much of an emphasis on these with a neglect of probably more important aspects of the Christian life have not helped us. I agree on that. I still think that the dialogue is important. I run in some online groups (which include several philosophers) where this kind of thing is often being discussed (and it usually starts with someone slinging mud at the "stupid scientifically illiterate Theists"). I used to respond to the mudslinging and point a few things out to them, but in the last year or so I've been trying not to get involved, unless someone calls me into it. It's terribly frustrating and a guy can feel like he's rehashing the same old problems and issues, questions and answers, just with another person (or even worse sometimes with the same person who has conveniently forgotten what has been said before). Round and around it goes. So I can certainly understand why the majority of people in the church have grown tired of listening to them. But I still want to defend the Discovery Institute for what they are doing. If I find it all frustrating, I can only imaging how it must feel to them. They also get beaten up quite a bit by people who obviously don't really understand what they are saying. Yes most people are not interested in the more heavy type of philosophy that one would find in Plantinga or Moreland. I get that. Some of the people I interact with just wouldn't find books like those from C.S. Lewis as sufficient arguments for the faith. That's not to diss Lewis of course. The fact that he reached out to such a broad number was almost certainly because he had an accessibility that those others don't have. But it's always been that way, the general person has a limited interest in truly deep philosophical works. To be honest I find the ideas of philosophy interesting, but can get bored with the nit pickiness of it all. I mean sometimes it can get REALLY nit picky. FWIW. I found this to be an excellent recent philosophical work, looking at the various philosophical arguments for God, their strengths and weaknesses, and then pointing out an underlying truth that they all rely on. I think it shows that the debate can help us grow in theological reflection. I guess I've had the poor fortune to have fallen within that niche in the last couple of years. I would much rather be reading novels and watching film, and have been trying to move away from those debates, as touched on above. One of the reasons why I know a little bit about the Discovery Institute is because they are one of the main groups to come up in these kinds of debates, and they have stuff which *does* strongly challenge certain people, and which they *haven't* been able to properly respond to. Hence one of the reasons I thought they should be included as public intellectuals. In a strict sense, yes. But I can see his point.
  10. I found Pete's Dragon more touching and personal, but the new Jungle Book is a sweeping adventure with some pretty impressive animated characters.
  11. I think Plantinga would have definitely had more influence overall. He was an influence on many current Christian philosophers to follow that craft, and is held as one of the fathers of the recent resurgence of Christian philosophy. I would think that the others are on a current list simply because they have published widely regarded books of late.
  • Create New...