Sunday, April 30, 2017

SHORT TAKE: THE WASP WOMAN

Wasp Woman, The

Vanity, thy name is woman…

…is something William Shakespeare never wrote; he actually used the word frailty. Still, that hasn’t stopped people from using the misquoted ‘vanity’ line to disparage women for ages now. And that’s despite a rash of recent studies which have shown that men care more about their appearance than women do, take more selfies of themselves than women do, and look at themselves in the mirror more than women do.

All that’s minor league stuff, though. As we learn in The Wasp Woman, only a female has the testicular fortitude to go so far as to steal a scientist’s untested youth potion made from the jelly of a queen wasp and inject herself with it on the off chance it might make her look a few years younger.

Now, to be fair, there’s a little more to Janice Starlin’s choice to risk becoming a wasp-headed monster than just seeing some crow’s feet and frown lines in the mirror. You see, Janice also happens to be the head of a cosmetic empire whose success, in part, has been based on having her image plastered all over its products’ packaging. But now that Janice has the ravaged face of a woman in her forties (really?), it was considered necessary to remove her ancient visage from all advertising. Unfortunately, doing so turned out to be just as bad for sales as having a hag on the box, so profits are sagging anyway.

The film seems to imply that, along with all of the usual stuff, society places an extra burden on women to maintain their physical attractiveness more so than it does men. if they don’t, there will be emotional and financial consequences. Because of this, a number of reviewers have heralded The Wasp Woman as one of the first feminist monster movies.

I suppose if we view Janice as symbolic of all women, then there is something to that notion. But on a more individual level, what Janice is going through is pretty common to just about everyone, man or woman. Writing for The Atlantic, Joseph Burgo, Ph.D., a psychotherapist and the author of Cinderella: A Tale of Narcissism and Self-Harm, Why Do I Do That?, notes…

“In his [eight] stages of psychosocial development, the psychologist Erik Erikson identifies the ‘crisis’ of middle age as a conflict between generativity and self-doubt. Generativity means we come to place increasing value on guiding the next generation—as parents, educators, artists, or social activists. A person who instead remains self-centered, unable to accept the changing of the generational guard, grows increasingly dissatisfied and stagnant.  People who make contributions to the younger generation and to society at large tend to feel good about themselves at this stage and find it a consolation for the loss of top billing. They will grow old with a sense of grace and acceptance. Those who can’t bear the shift to a supporting role may become increasingly narcissistic in the unhealthy sense of the word. Even adults who haven’t seemed particularly narcissistic for most of their lives may become so as they age. They will ape the behaviors, clothing, and attitudes of the young, trying to preserve their sexual appeal. They may opt for plastic surgery. Socially, they become more self-absorbed and insensitive, demanding to remain the center of attention.”

In other words, people who live their lives in service to others tend to be happier as they age, while those who remain self-centered become increasingly miserable as time goes on. Heck, they may even start making stupid decisions such as injecting themselves with wasp queen jelly and turning into homicidal monsters. You know, it’s almost as if all those times the Pope has harped on the necessity of serving others (like here, here, and here, for example), he might have actually been on to something.

Saturday, April 08, 2017

SHORT FEATURE: LEANING

Another day, another depressing poll. According to the most recent Gallup survey on American’s perception of honesty and ethical standards amongst various professions, things are still looking dour for the clergy. According to the study…

“Americans' ‘high’ or ‘very high’ ratings of the clergy slipped to 44%, its lowest point since Gallup first asked the question in 1977. The clergy rating first dropped below 50% in 2013 to 47% and slipped one point to a new low in each of the past three years.

Clergy ranked at the top of the list in 1977 with a 61% rating when Gallup first included the profession in the list. In 2001, almost two-thirds of Americans rated the honesty and ethical standards of the clergy as ‘high’ or ‘very high.’ But the sexual abuse scandal that engulfed the Roman Catholic Church in 2002 brought the rating down to 52% that year. By 2013, after a series of further revelations of abuse, less than half of the public gave the clergy a ‘high’ or ‘very high’ rating.”

So, yeah, perception of the clergy would seem to be at an all-time low. But you know the problem with perceptions, right? The initial ones aren’t always the most accurate, as the short film Leaning aptly demonstrates. (Content warning: there will be blood.)

Perceptions can change. Even Gallop’s survey hints at it. For instance, go further into the data and you find this tidbit:

“Among those most likely to give the clergy a ‘high’ or ‘very high’ rating this month were Protestants (59%), those aged 65 and older (58%), those who attend religious services at least weekly (57%), and Republicans (56%). The groups least likely to rate the clergy's standards as ‘high’ or ‘very high’ were the nonreligious (22%), 18- to 29-year-olds (30%), those with annual household incomes under $30,000 (31%), those with a high school education or less (37%), and liberals (37%).”

In other words, those who rate clergy low on the trustworthiness scale are those unlikely to interact with them on a regular basis. Those who do, such as regular churchgoers, tend to rate clergy much higher. Just as in Leaning, perceptions change once you see what the clergy is actually up to. The truth is, once you get to know the majority of clergy (there’s always a few duds), the more you discover just how much these people devote their lives to serving others. So, if we want to increase the positive perception of the clergy, the solution is simple. Help get more people into the Church. And we do that by becoming better Christians. Somehow, it always comes back to that, doesn’t it?

Sunday, April 02, 2017

HAPPY 10TH ANNIVERSARY!

anniversary

I’ve been so ridiculously busy lately that my anniversary completely slipped my notice. No, not my wedding anniversary. What do you think I am, suicidal? I mean my blogging anniversary. As of February 2017, it’s been 10 years since I started The B-Movie Catechism.

Now, that hardly makes me the longest running Catholic blog around (I’m pretty sure The Curt Jester has been going strong since before Al Gore invented the Internet), but 10 years is still a pretty good run considering the subject matter here. After all, how many other Catholic sites do you know that are offering essays on Scream Blacula Scream and Gymkata? Of course, my particular taste in movies has guaranteed me a niche position as a bit player in the big picture that is St. Blogs. So, while many of my contemporaries have gone off to book deals and radio spots and the like, I’m still sitting here trying to sound intelligent while talking about stuff like Frankenstein Island.

And you know what? I wouldn’t have it any other way. If God’s happy with me here, I’m happy with me here. Plus, the well never runs dry when it comes to religion or bad movies. I’m pretty sure I have at least another ten years worth of material to get to. So, as long as all of you keep showing up, I will too.

Thanks for a great first ten years, everybody!

SHORT TAKE: AMITYVILLE EXORCISM

Amityville Exorcism, The

Last year it was announced that the 19th motion picture to bear the Amityville name would soon make its way to theaters. Produced by the unstoppable Blumhouse Productions, the creative force behind the Paranormal Activities and Conjuring franchises, and featuring such recognizable faces as Jennifer Jason Leigh, Bella Thorne, and Kurtwood Smith, it was hoped the movie would be the one to reinvigorate the Amityville brand.

This is not that movie.

This is Amityville Exorcism, the 18th movie to bear the Amityville name. It’s produced by Polonia Brothers Entertainment, the creative minds behind such films as Triclops, Muckman, Peter Rottentail, and Splatter Farm, and features Marie DeLorenzo and Jeff Kirkendall, actors you would only recognize if you’ve watched movies like Empire of the Apes, Sharkenstein, or Bigfoot Vs. Zombies (and Lord help me, I have).

You see, producers of low budget schlock learned long ago that the name Amityville can’t be trademarked. So, not only do we get high profile productions like the original The Amityville Horror and the supposedly upcoming Amityville: The Awakening, but we also get tons of slipshod knock-offs like The Amityville Asylum and The Amityville Playhouse (not to be confused with the slightly superior The Amityville Dollhouse).

All I can say is that it’s a good thing for such movies that Amityville is a town and not a person, otherwise they would definitely be guilty of breaking The Eighth Commandment. That’s the one which forbids any falsehood that does injury to one's neighbor, including unjustly ruining their good name. Heck, despoiling someone’s reputation is considered so loathsome that some of the Church Fathers have even likened it to being akin to murder. Watch something like Amityville Death House and you’ll understand what they mean (Oh, Eric Roberts, why?).

But anyway, back to Amityville Exorcism. The story is a simple one. Cursed lumber from the original Amityville house has been used to construct another residence, and it isn’t long before the young(ish) woman residing there becomes possessed by a demon dressed in red and develops a bad skin complexion. Fortunately, the somewhat frumpy Father Benna has been tracking down the cursed wood ever since his brother, also a priest, died while fighting the Amityville demon. The good father arrives just in the nick of time and, aided by the girl’s pickled paterfamilias, attempts an exorcism to drive off the evil Amityville spirit once and for all.

Now, it would be easy to criticize Amityville Exorcism for being cheap, poorly acted, and barely scripted. Easy, because it is all those things, in spades. For example, every ‘special’ effect in the film was obviously picked up at Party City, from the zombie makeup kit used to create the girl’s possessed look, to the red plastic masquerade mask worn by the demon. I looked it up. You can get both those items for $8.98 plus tax. Throw in another 20 bucks for the priest shirt and you’re ready to go.

Ultimately, though, such criticisms are futile. Director Mark Polonia has been churning out these kind of no-budget homemade films since the mid-80s, and everything in them that appalls the average movie viewer is exactly what Polonia’s long-time fans clamor for. If you count yourself among them, Amityville Exorcism is more of what you’ve crave. If you don’t, you’ve been warned.