(Side)Kicking It With Jesus

Hello! And welcome back to our podcast. Danielle and I hope you’re enjoying our discussion. We’d love to hear what you think! You can comment below or email us at picturingtheword@gmail.com.

This past week we watched:

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Mike Newell, 2005)

Raiders of the Lost Ark (Steven Spielberg, 1981)

Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back (Irvin Kershner, 1980)

The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008)

“Doctor Who” (Rise of the Cyberman / The Age of Steel [2.05-2.06]; The Impossible Planet / The Satan Pit [2.08-2.09])

We also read the “Fall” chapter of Superman for All Seasons.

In our podcast, Danielle and I discuss this week’s theme of “Coming Out of the Light,” and examine the dark periods that Heroes often undergo. This idea  of “Hero Darkness” leads John and I to ask if someone can be a “bad” hero? In the case of Batman, for instance, is he a flawed hero for becoming Gotham’s “Dark Knight”? Lastly, we move to discussing the role of sidekicks, which finally received the needed attention in class.

Next week we’re looking at Passion movies: Passion of the Christ, The Jesus Movie, The Last Temptation of Christ, and Ben Hur.

Happy Listening! ‘

  • http://rachelmotte.com Rachel Motte

    See, when I ask my husband whether something looks good on me, I actually do want to know. If said no, I’d go and change. Or I wouldn’t, if I didn’t feel like it. Not a big deal.

    I just figure that if I ask him a question, I should expect a straight answer. Am I really in the minority here?! ;)

  • http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com Dustin R. Steeve

    During the healthcare debate as the bill was moved forward, Republicans accused Democrats of “not listening” to the people and triumphing the Dems lust for power over the will of the people. However, a more charitable read of the situation is that Democrats feel that what they were doing was in the best interest of the people even if the people were not aware it was in their best interest. In politics, many controversial decisions have been made in the best interest of the people – historically some of those decisions (like Lincoln’s decision to repeal habius corpus) have proven wise and beneficial for the people.

    I see a parallel between these historical, political maneuvers and Commissioner Gordan and Batman’s decision to act on behalf of the people even if it came at the cost of a decision which may be controversial and not reflective of reality. It seems to be a very human impulse for leaders to take risks in this way if they feel it ultimately serves a greater good.

    Danielle and John, do you believe that there is a greater good worth risking truthfulness or justice for? Do you think decisions, like Batman’s, ought to be judged immediately or ought judgment to come after the consequences are known? It seems like you circle the “ends justifying the means” problem when you reserve immediate judgment on Batman, yet, at the same time, it doesn’t seem like one has enough information to render a responsible judgment.

  • http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com Danielle H.

    Rachel: in my experience, the question, “How do I look?” is both an invitation for genuine critique, but more often a request for affirmation. I think if you ask a genuine questions, you should expect a genuine answer. I also think people are frequently afraid of straight answers that may be hurtful. So…kudos for being secure. :-) I think you (at least in that way) are what we should aspire to be.

    Dustin: You’re always one week ahead of us! Next week’s podcast is very much about the utilitarian nature of leaders’ decisions. The short answer is: I absolutely think that there is a greater good worth risking truthfulness and justice to attain. I think a fair judgement can only come after the consequences are known, which is somewhat unfortunate but true. Sometimes the long-shot gamble pays off and sometimes it fails miserably. You can’t know, however, until you try.