Book Review: White Fragility

White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism 

by Robin J. DiAngelo

Amazon Synopsis:

In this vital, necessary, and beautiful book, antiracist educator Robin DiAngelo deftly illuminates the phenomenon of white fragility and “allows us to understand racism as a practice not restricted to ‘bad people’. Referring to the defensive moves that white people make when challenged racially, white fragility is characterized by emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and by behaviors including argumentation and silence. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium and prevent any meaningful cross-racial dialogue. In this in-depth exploration, DiAngelo examines how white fragility develops, how it protects racial inequality, and what we can do to engage more constructively.

My review:

I purchased this book in January of this year, but was slow to crack it open. However, with current events (the killings of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, protests, riots, the #8CantWait, etc) I felt that there was not time to delay reading it any longer.

In my graduate course work, when studying multi-culturism, our assigned textbook described, at length, how white people have no culture and are (paraphrasing here) the villians of humanity. I was slow to pick up White Fragility becuase a part of me assumed that this book may have been written by someone “a little too radical”, or maybe someone who wanted to vent about the villanous qualities of white people - and I just didn’t feel up to it.

To say that I was surprised, was the understatement of the year. I really, really enjoyed this book. It was written by an educator who helps train companies who are ready to make a more accepting multi-cultural environment. She is not only a very educated woman, but is very experienced in her field.

Diangelo described racism and my racial experience as a privleged white person in simple, but effective ways.

There was no political bend or pushy message in White Fragility.

There were some really good take aways from White Fragility:

• Understanding your position in relation to racism

• Understanding systemic problems and practices that affect people of color

• How not to impose white guilt on your friends of color

• How to better engage with people of color

• Understanding that you’re not “a racist” or “not a racist”, we all have subconscious prejudices

• How to educate yourself moving forward

(Please exuse that I am using my movie rating scale to rate this book)

This book is an absolute must read

While this book is intended to be read by white people, I think it is a worthwhile read for people of all colors to better understand how to best relate with one another.

While the book was supposed to be around a 6 hour read, it took me longer because I took breaks to reflect on the information, re-read some parts, and stopped to talk about the information with friends.

If you read one book this year - let this be it.

Get White Fragility on Amazon:

Hard Copy: https://amzn.to/2NoZX00

AudioBook: https://amzn.to/2CtRu9j

Kindle: https://amzn.to/2zXKlxl

Movie Review: Birds of Prey: And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn

this review contains spoilers

My rating: PRETTY GOOD

I ABSOLUTELY LOVED IT - BUT IT DID HAVE FLAWS

Synopsis:

It's open season on Harley Quinn when her explosive breakup with the Joker puts a big fat target on her back. Unprotected and on the run, Quinn faces the wrath of narcissistic crime boss Black Mask, his right-hand man, Victor Zsasz, and every other thug in the city. But things soon even out for Harley when she becomes unexpected allies with three deadly women -- Huntress, Black Canary and Renee Montoya.

Character Portrayals:

Harley Quinn // Margot Robbie

10/10 - LOVED IT. I was a bit skeptical going in because I didn’t care for her performance in Suicide Squad. I found it inconsistent, obnixious, and generally unremarkable. However, she KILLED it in this movie. Harley was presented with depth, personality and genuineness.

Helena Bertinelli (Huntress) // Mary Elizabeth Winstead

Mary Elizabeth Winstead’s performance was fairly mediocre, likely stunted by very “eh” writing and character development. While Winstead brought very sincere, comedic moments to the table, Huntress was a character that I didn’t care much about, and don’t care to see in a sequel.

Black Mask // Ewan McGregor

Fourty percent of the way through the movie, I realized that McGregor played Black Mask- that man is a chameleon. McGregor’s performance was fine. He brought to life a sincerely villanous, spoiled and angry character, however it was one with too little back story to really tighten the entire story line.

Dinah Lance (Black Canary) // Jurnee Smollett-Bell

I read that some comic loyalists were upset that Black Canary is African American instead of Caucasian. I say - who cares? Unlike her brother’s staged hate crime in 2019, Jurnee Smollett gave a fairly convincing performance. Like many of the supporting characters in this movie, Black Canary could have had more of a tight back story to make the victory in the end more sweet.

Renee Montoya // Rosie Perez

I really enjoyed the 80’s cop show references to Montoya’s character and would have like to see that teased out a little more, but maybe she was the one character who wasn’t supposed to be a caricature. I was a bit surprised at the character’s roundhouse kicking, which seemed a bit fantastical, but overall liked the character and think that Perez did a good job.

Victor Zsasz // Chris Messina

Messina’s performance was fine, but overall - I didn’t care much for the character of Victor Zsasz. It took me almost 60% of the movie to realize that it was even Zsasz. Is he just a crazy guy? Is he a body guard? I couldn’t get a good feel on this character and his motivations. Zsasz was one of the weakest parts of this movie.

Cassandra Cain // Ella Jay Basco

Unlike Black Canary, I didn’t see much uproar about Cassandra Cain venturing far off from the comics. In the comics, Cassandra is an expert at martial arts, is generally mute, is illeterate and has very few social skills.

I was a bit skeptical about the character of Cassandra Cain prior to seeing the movie, but overall was impressed by Ella Jay Basco’s performance and felt like her character really helped carry the movie. She was fun, realistic, and definitely displayed age and situation appropriate development, which is often missed.

Will Warner Brothers make a Cassandra Cain story line in which she leverages the Birds of Prey story to her eventual development into Batgirl? Probably not, but definitely it could be done.

Direction: Cathy Yan

Prior to seeing this movie, I was super afraid that Yan would butcher it. Suicide Squad director David Ayer had a decent resume and did an absolutely terrible job - so why would Warner Brothers recruit someone with extremely little filmmaking experience to take on a super hero(esque) project?

After seeing Birds of Prey, Yan killed it and I am sold on her future projects. I would love to see another Harley Quinn movie.

Fun fact

Yan was the second woman and the first Asian woman to direct a super hero film

What this movie did right:

When Harley goes into psychology mode

As someone with a mental health degree, I am a bit nit-picky about character development. Subsequently, I absolutely love Harley’s origin story. Young psychologist works at Arkham Asylum - gets too invested in a client - falls in love with client - will do anything for client. Outside of falling into a vat of chemicals on purpose, it’s a not-too-far from reality origin story. In Birds of Prey, Harley has moments where she goes back into analytical-psychologist mode and mades very profound and observant remarks about herself and others. Not only were the remarks astoudingly true, but although Harleen Quinzell no longer exists, there is a part of her past that she still carries with her.

No Jared Leto

I thought Jared Leto’s joker was TERRIBLE in Suicide Squad. I think the quickest way for this movie to be ruined, would have been to include Joker, especially Jared Leto’s portrayal, in it. There was little Harley-Joker chemistry in Suicide Squad, so any inclusion of Joker, other than exposition by other characters, would have ultimately ruined it.

harley Staying true to Harley’s character

One thing I really liked about this movie is that, atypical to ordinary story telling, Harley doesn’t really grow throughout the movie. She becomes more independent and confident, but as far as morality goes - nada. I like that she’s selfish without seeming like an over the top caricature (see: Black Mask), she walks to the beat of her own drum, she often thinks without acting. She doesn’t go through huge growth moments - and that’s what I think really makes Harley a complex and beautiful character.

balance of comedy/seriousness/action

Part of the beautiful direction of Birds of Prey is that it balances Harley’s character development, comedic moments, tense moments and action very well. I felt both engaged and entertained throughout the entire movie. The most funny moments were very real and relatable, but so were the serious and sad moments.

What could have made it better:

canary cry - the implementation

I’m all for Black Canary’s canary cry super power. However, the implementation was at the same time underwhelming and over the top. Why didn’t she use this skill when they were getting beat inside the amusement building? It’s too much of a convenient plot point, it just felt lazy.

Huntress: very little payoff for character development

Huntress had a mini origin story in this movie- and i didn’t hate it. however, I would have liked for that origin story to have more pay off. It serves the story well that she is seeking revenge, but there is no real “umph” when her family’s murderer’s are killed prior to her showing up and, subsequently, her decades of training are for nothing. Why does she keep hanging around the birds of prey when she doesn’t have a vendetta anymore?

Arkham fair grounds fight scene

I absolutely loved the fight scene in the Police Headquarters, so maybe my expectations were high. The Arkham fair grounds fight scene left a lot to be desired. How in the world did Cassandra Cain get out unscathed? Why would Cassandra Cain sit down during a fight? I would have liked to see the characters interact more with the environment or pull off greater stunts. It felt unbelievable that the Birds of Prey were so outnumbered, had fewer weapons, and somehow managed to beat a bunch of baddies.

Deadpool-esque moments

Birds of Prey felt deritivative of Deadpool (the recent ones, not the crappy Wolverine version) at times. It was inappropriate just to be inappropriate, minimally moving the story forward. In particular, I didn’t care for Harley snorting cocaine during the warehouse scene. It felt like a cheap move, an easy out for her to be re-energized to fight, and just seemed like lazy writing to me.

Also - the scene where Zsasz is cutting off a family’s faces, a bit too much for such little pay off.

Overall - I loved this movie

I’ll definitelypick it up when it comes out and may even go see it in theaters again

pre-order the movie from amazon
4k Movie Blu-Ray Movie DVD

Bible Commentaries

Systematic Theology:
An Introduction to Biblical Theology

The Christian church has a long tradition of systematic theology, that is, of studying biblical teaching on centrally important doctrines such as the Word of God, redemption, and Jesus Christ. Wayne Grudem's bestselling Systematic Theology has several distinctive features:A strong emphasis on the scriptural basis for each doctrineClear writing, with technical terms kept to a minimumA contemporary approach, treating subjects of special interest to the church todayA friendly tone, appealing to the emotions and the spirit as well as the intellectFrequent application to lifeResources for worship within each chapter Bibliographies in each chapter that cross-reference subjects to a wide range of other systematic theologies.

Exalting Jesus in John (Christ-Centered Exposition Commentary) 

Exalting Jesus in John is part of the Christ-Centered Exposition Commentary series. Edited by David Platt, Daniel L. Akin, and Tony Merida, this new commentary series, projected to be 48 volumes, takes a Christ-centered approach to expositing each book of the Bible. Rather than a verse-by-verse approach, the authors have crafted chapters that explain and apply key passages in their assigned Bible books.
 
Readers will learn to see Christ in all aspects of Scripture, and they will be encouraged by the devotional nature of each exposition presented as sermons and divided into chapters that conclude with a “Reflect & Discuss” section, making this series ideal for small group study, personal devotion, and even sermon preparation. It’s not academic but rather presents an easy reading, practical and friendly commentary.

• MARK • HEBREWS • ESTHER • JONAH/MICAH/NAHUM/HABAKKUK • PSALMS 51-100 • MATTHEW • THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT • PHILIPPIANS • 1+2 KINGS • GALATIANS • EZRA+NEHEMIAH •LEVITICUS • JAMES • ACTS • 1+2 TIMOTHY + TITUS • LUKE • GENESIS (RELEASES MAY 2020) • PROVERBS • EPHESIANS • REVELATION • 2 PETER + JUDE • ISAIAH • DANIEL • EXODUS • EZEKIEL • 123 JOHN • ECCLESIASTES • 1+2 SAMUEL • 1+2 THESSALONIANS • JEREMIAH+LAMENTATIONS • SONG OF SONGS • ZEPHANIAH/HAGGAI/ZECHARIAH/MALACHI •

Hebrews: New Testament Commentary by John McArthur

The early Jewish believers had come from a background of legalism and works. When God came to earth in human flesh as the New Covenant, these believers discovered the freedom they could have in Jesus and the relationship they could enjoy with Him. Yet in the midst of persecution and rejection, they were often tempted to hold on to the former symbols, rituals, and traditions grounded in the requirements of the Old Covenant.

The unknown author of Hebrews sought to address this problem by contrasting the Old and New Covenants, brilliantly showing that Christ is higher than any Old Testament character, priest, ritual, or sacrifice. Because of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, He is the perfect sacrifice and our own High Priest. And He has given all believers unfettered access to God!

The MacArthur Bible Studies provide intriguing examinations of the whole of Scripture. Each guide incorporates extensive commentary, detailed observations on overriding themes, and probing questions to help you study the Word of God with guidance from John MacArthur.

FROM THE SAME SERIES:

MATTHEW 1-7 • MATTHEW 8-15 • MATTHEW 16-23 • MATTHEW 24-28 • MARK 1-8 • MARK 9-16 • LUKE 1-5 • LUKE 6-10 • LUKE 11-17 • LUKE 18-24 • JOHN 1-11 • JOHN 12-21 • ACTS 1-12 • ACTS 13-28 • ROMANS 1-8 ROMANS 9-16 • 1 CORINTHIANS • 2 CORINTHIANS • GALATIANS • EPHESIANS • PHILIPPIANS • COLOSSIANS+PHILEMON • 1+2 THESSALONIANS • 1 TIMOTHY • 2 TIMOTHY • TITUS • HEBREWS • JAMES • 1 PETER • 2 PETER+JUDE • 1-3 JOHN • REVELATION 1-11 • REVELATION 12-22

The MacArthur Bible Commentary

The MacArthur Bible Commentary treats every passage of the OT and NT phrase by phrase, with hundreds of word studies as sidebars throughout.

Websites:

ESV.org

Biblehub.org

BlueLetterBible.org

Challies - Best Commentaries on Each Book of the Bible

Logos - Free Book of the Month

Movie Review: 1917

THIS REVIEW DOES CONTAIN SPOILERS

My prediction before seeing the movie:

I’m not huge into war movies, and wasn’t impressed with director Sam Mendes’s James Bond Movie, Spectre. There were a few things, however, that drew me to the movie theater and helped me keep an open mind- it was a simple war story (you don’t have to know military jargon or much war history to enjoy it), it was a story of determination, and, most impressively, that the movie was supposed to be cut together as if it were one single shot.

Synopsis:

1917 is a story based off of the stories that director, Sean Mendes’, grandfather used to tell him about the war. During WWI, Lance Corporols Schofield and Blake are given outlandish orders to cross enemy war zones and call off an impending attack. If they fail - 1,600 men will die, including Lance Cpl. Blake’s older brother.

My rating: Excellent!

Maybe it’s a bit pre-mature since it’s only January - but I expect this to be the best movie of 2020. This is an absolutely must see movie, and is best appreciated in theaters. The attention to detail, cinematography, and story design really pull you in. It is a beautiful movie about brotherhood, determination, sacrifice, and endurance.

Direction: SAM Mendes

As mentioned before, I’m not a huge Sam Mendes fan. Despite having some extremely impressive cinematography design (i.e. opening scene of Spectre), his movies have been a bit to bro-action for my taste. 1917 is, however, a beautifully relatable story that is loosely based off of his grandfather’s war stories. After seeing 1917, I’m definitely looking forward to Mendes’ next non-007 movie, whatever it may be.

Lance Corporal Blake // Dean-Charles Chapman:

I loved Chapman’s performance of Lance Coporal Blake, and I think he was an excellent pick for the role. He beautifully portrays a young, homesick army boy who will do anything to save his brother. Chapman brought a beautiful range of naivety and ruthless determination to the character, and I was devastated when he didn’t make it to the end of the movie.

Lance Corporal Schofield // George MacKay:

Lance Corporal Schofield is the more experienced, organized of the two young men sent on mission. At the beginning of the movie, I was generally disinterested in the character, yet I related to his hesitancy to run a suicide mission. At the end of the movie, I was completely invested, and all in on his character. I wanted to see him succeed, and make it back to his family. I enjoyed that the audience knew little about Lance Corporal Schofield, and I believe that the mystery of his motivation to survive really pushed the story forward.

Lieutenant Joseph Blake // Richard Madden:

While he only gets about 2 minutes of screen time, I was incredibly moved by Madden’s unforgettable performance. Within those two minutes, he displays excuisit and dynamic range of emotion/character including professionalism, happiness, and devastation that is not only believable, but might bring a tear to your eyes. 10/10

What could have made it better:

Although I was extremely impressed by the single shot direction, I was a bit pre-occupied at times looking for the seams in between shots. Maybe if you don’t know that it’s a one-shot, it’s not so distracting.

I was somewhat unconvinced by the passage of time in the movie. Some moments were very well done, but when Lance Corporal Blake gets stabbed, he goes from rosy to grey extremely quickly. It took me out of the movie, which was unfortunate because it was a huge plot moment.

What this movie did right:

Some of the shots were spectacular. Particularly, the shot in which Corporal Schofield ran the 300 meters on the battlefield to deliver the message.

The trailer didn’t spoil anything for me.

Richard Madden’s performance in hearing that his brother was dead. WOW.

Basically everything else.

Preorder the movie on amazon:

DVD Blu-Ray 4K

Movie Review: Richard Jewell

THIS REVIEW DOES CONTAIN SPOILERS

Synopsis:
Richard Jewell, a wannabe cop, is a security officer at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia. At a Jack Mack and the Heart Attack concert in Centennial Olympic Park, on-duty Richard Jewell discovers a suspicious, unattended bag and alerts Georgia’s Bureau of Investigations of a potential bomb. The bomb explodes, injuring over 100 civilians and killing one. Four days after the explosion, it is publicly announced, without Jewell’s prior knowledge, that Jewell is the lead suspect in the bombing. The FBI portrays Jewell as the epitome of the lone-bomber and for 88 days, the media and FBI harass Jewell, trying to trick him into confessing to a crime he did not commit.

My prediction before seeing the movie:
Having little prior knowledge about the 1996 Olympic Park bombing, I had very few expectations for this movie. However, I am a sucker for true stories and was pretty excited to learn about the implications of the FBI investigations on Jewell’s family. I predicted that Richard Jewell would be an enjoyable movie, one that would pass time time, but not excellent.

My rating: Excellent!
I really enjoyed this movie! It had some weak story points, but I believe that it told the message it was trying to tell. Richard Jewell was an ode to an under-told story from almost 25 years ago, yet has implications today about journalistic integrity. I liked that this movie had a subtle message without taking a particular political stance.

The FBI investigated Jewell and his family for 88 days before releasing him as a suspect. However, many news stations would not go back and make a statement to the public that Jewell was not guilty. Surveys show that a significant percentage of people still believe that Jewell was guilty, despite the actual bomber confessing. This was an important story to tell, not to criticize the media, but to show the world that Jewell was innocent.

I feel that this movie was a good gift to Bobi Jewell, Richard’s mother as her son was still under public scrutiny up until his death in 2006, and he never had true justice from the media outlets.

Controversy:
There’s been some controversy about the portrayal of reporter, Kathy Scruggs. In the movie, Kathy sleeps with FBI agent Tom Shaw to get details about the case, but former co-workers dispute the portrayal- saying that Kathy, although wild, would never sleep with someone to get information. The controversy stems from Kathy’s inability to defend herself, as she died from a drug overdose in 2001.

Whether Scruggs slept was Agent Shaw, was neither here nor their to the story - it could have easily been left out and made no difference to the story line. Case and point: I went to the bathroom during that part, so I didn’t even know it happened until later.

The irony of matter is that people are irate about the poor portrayal of Kathy Scruggs, when the public scrutiny of Richard Jewell went on for many years. Jewell filed defamation lawsuits with dozens of networks, asking for them to clear his name - but many networks refused and decided to make a financial settlement instead.

Character Portrayals:

Richard Jewell // Paul Walter Hauser: 10/10 - Paul Hauser did his homework for this role, and really portrayed an accurate picture of the character of Jewell. For his first ever lead role, I was thoroughly impressed with his performance. Hauser is used to playing quirky characters, but never a character with such depth.

Bobi Jewell // Kathy Bates: Historically, I’ve felt like Kathy Bates brings little to the table, but boy was I wrong. Her nomination for Best Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture was spot on for this film, she brought an impressive range of emotion and brought an extra level of depth to the character of Bobi Jewell. Rumor has it that the real Bobi Jewell was happy with the performance, which is the highest praise.

Watson Bryant // Sam Rockwell: Rockwell’s performance of the fatigued lawyer, Watson Bryant, was convincing and helped to carry the story. He brought a level of tension and compassion that pushed the movie forward. I appreciated how Bryant brought out the best and worst characteristics of Jewell and helped tell a deeper story of the man who wants to serve his community, but is digging himself into a deeper hole.

Kathy Scruggs // Olivia Wilde: Ms. Wilde was one of the weakest parts of this movie, likely unrelated to her performance though. She gave a consistent performance of the too-cool, party girl, but there was little depth to the character. Her portrayal of Scruggs helped to move the story forward, but didn’t add to the story in a meaningful way. I would have liked to see some resolution of Scrugg’s journalistic integrity at the end, but left wanting instead.

FBI agent Tom Shaw // Jon Hamm: I felt that Hamm was a really good pick for Agent Shaw. Hamm brings a level of confidence and intimidation that was necessary for the FBI agent who is sure of Jewell’s guilt. He gives a level of charm that convinces Jewell that they are on the same team, while simultaneously trying to trick him into a confession. I wish we could have gotten to know more about Agent Shaw in the movie.

Direction: 89-year-old Clint Eastwood did an excellent job telling the story of Richard Jewell’s wrongful accusation in the 1996 Olympics bombing. I appreciated that the story did not have an explicit “anti-journalism” political bend, but it did make you reflect on journalism integrity in our own times. He told an action packed, feel bad then feel good story, that provides some level of justice to a family that still hurts.

What could have made it better:
• Eastwood could have really leaned into the depth of pain Jewell and his mother felt. There was a sense of inconvenience and offense, but not a deep level of pain that Bobi and Richard felt. While they did display frustration from the characters, it really wasn’t earned.

• I would have liked to see why the FBI was so sure that Jewell was guilty, and why Agent Shaw was so sure that Jewell had committed the crime, even when evidence proved otherwise. That part of the story wasn’t well rounded. I understand that Eastwood was telling the story of Jewell’s innocence and wasn’t trying to make the viewer question Jewell’s innocence, but it would have been nice to see why the FBI was berating Jewell.

What this movie did right:
•It’s one thing to tell a story showing someone’s innocence when they’re still alive, but I really appreciated that Eastwood told the story of Jewell because it was a good, and right story to tell.

• From my research, this portrayal of Jewell’s life was fairly accurate. I thorough;y liked that the writers didn’t skimp on Jewell’s failure in trying to be a cop, and that he made many mistakes in his security jobs, including mistakes that got him arrested.

Should there be a sequel:
In general, I think the story is best wrapped up how it is. It would be neat to see a dramatic portrayal of his fight to get his name cleared in the public. I could do with or without, but Eastwood isn’t one for doing sequels.

Pre-order the movie on Amazon!
DVD pre-order Blu-Ray pre-order

Read more about the incident:The Suspect: An Olympic Bombing, the FBI, the Media, and Richard Jewell, the Man Caught in the Middle

Richard Jewell: And Other Tales of Heroes, Scoundrels, and Renegades