Nov 25, 2016
The Ernest movies are among Hollywood’s surprise success stories. The “Ernest P. Worrell” character originated as a redneck pitchman played by Jim Varney for a series of Nashville-produced ad’s. Ernest was so popular that he quickly began making ad’s for products throughout the country, often produced at director John Cherry’s Nashville home with a hand-held camera. The character became so popular that Varney was invited to take part in a holiday parade. When Varney (as Ernest) received a bigger response from the crowd than Mickey Mouse, Disney executives took notice and offered Varney a movie deal.
The first film, Ernest Goes to Camp, has become a cult classic since its release in 1988 (and also was the final film of Italian-turned-Native-American character actor, Bill “Iron Eyes” Cody). The unexpected success of Camp meant Disney wanted another Ernest film. The follow-up was the charming Ernest Saves Christmas.
For those of you unaware, Ernest Saves Christmas stars the titular redneck character who gets inadvertently sucked into a quest by Santa Claus himself to find a suitable replacement. While Ernest may be the star of the film, the story really does revolve around Santa, played beautifully by Douglas Seale (most famous as the voice of the “Sultan” in Aladdin).
According to this film, the role of Santa is one that isn’t held by one individual, but is passed on over generations. This particular Santa admits that he has held onto the position longer than he should have, resorting to hand-written notes to keep track of who is naughty or nice as his magic continues to fade. The magic is only replenished when a suitable replacement takes over the role. This is quite an interesting idea, and one that was revisited somewhat in another Disney film, The Santa Clause. The difference here, however, is that Santa has to convince his chosen successor of his validity.
This proves to be harder than expected, as the one Santa is eyeing for the position is a former children’s television host, Joe Caruthers, who is attempting to break into mainstream films as a legitimate actor. The kind-hearted Joe seems willing to at least hear the jolly one out, but Joe’s agent, Marty, sees Santa as a senile old man who is getting in the way of Joe’s big break. It’s with the help of Ernest’s convoluted schemes that Santa is eventually able to reach Joe and explain the situation to him.
Meanwhile, a teenage runaway is scraping along by conning her way from place to place. When one of her con jobs puts her in trouble, she crosses paths with Ernest and Santa. The two take her in, with Santa being aware of her situation, but allowing her to learn her own lessons in a genuinely touching side story.
Director Cherry admits that this is his favorite among the many Ernest films made over the years, and its’ easy to see why. Rather than being a series of set-pieces strung together by a thin plot, the idea of Santa actually putting Christmas at risk due to his own selfish desires puts the typically-joyous Father Christmas at a more human and vulnerable level. This isn’t a perfect Santa. He gets hurt. He gets frustrated. He makes mistakes. He even gets angry. Seale’s performance only adds to the magic – you completely buy into his Santa Claus, even at his lowest.
Since he doesn’t have to carry the film all on his own, Varney is free to play with the Ernest character (as well as several other characters), creating some truly funny moments. You definitely have to suspend disbelief at times, but such is the case with this type of comedy – embellishment and exaggeration. Noelle Parker’s runaway has enough attitude to cover up her own vulnerability, which she plays very well.
While this isn’t a beloved classic along the lines of It’s A Wonderful Life or A Christmas Carol, Ernest Saves Christmas nonetheless is a fun, enjoyable 90 minutes of silly humor mixed with a unique and often touching Santa story. If you have Netflix, the film is currently available to streaming. It’s worth a watch if you haven’t seen it. Knowhutimean, Vern?
Nov 24, 2016
There are so many things I can be mad about in this life. At the same time, there are so many things that I should be thankful for, often as the result of my frustrations. For example:
FRUSTRATION: I struggle to pay my bills sometimes.
THANKFUL: I have a roof over my head, water and electricity.
FRUSTRATION: I need to get gas in my car.
THANKFUL: I have a car to get me where I need to go.
FRUSTRATION: I have to go into work early.
THANKFUL: I have a job to support my family.
FRUSTRATION: My kids are running wild throughout the house.
THANKFUL: I have been blessed to be a parent.
FRUSTRATION: My wife and I are in an argument.
THANKFUL: I have a wife who loves me and is willing to accept me even with my faults.
As you can see, even in the worst of times, there is always a blessing to be found.
Jun 6, 2016
I’ve been listening to a wide variety of music lately. It seems to vary day by day. One day, I’m listening to 80’s synth pop music. The next, I’m listening to old-school country music. Today, it’s been church music. Not your stereotypical hymns and organ music, mind you! I’m talking old-time, down-home, runnin’ and jumpin’, pentecostal music – the kind of music that if you played it in a baptist church, they’d kick you out for being over the top. The kind of music where you don’t sing the words so much as you preach and shout them.
This is the kind of music I grew up listening to in a small pentecostal church. Not a single person had any formal music training, and a good portion of the singing would be considered mediocre at best to the trained ear, but there was SOMETHING about it that just reached down and grabbed you. It bypassed polish for passion and exactness for excitement. It’s also where I first learned the basics of playing “open jams.” These songs never had a set structure, and often would go on for anywhere from 3 to 10 to even 30 minutes at a time (depending on how the Spirit was moving). When you’re playing the music for those songs, you learn very quickly how to pay attention to where the singer is going and respond accordingly. To say I have a fondness for this music would be putting it lightly.
While listening to this Holy Ghost music, a thought crossed my mind: it sure would be fun to play this during a service at our current home church – a baptist church. And not just play the song, but play a video of these pentecostal singers as well. The shouting, the jumping, the dancing, the running….all of which would be looked upon with a bit of, shall we say, distaste.
Yes, I got a chuckle out of that vision. Then I was saddened. Not because I can’t show said video, necessarily, but the reasons WHY I can’t show said video.
We used to live in a town that had (no joke) approximately 10 churches on one 5-mile stretch of road. Some of these churches sat literally next door to each other (and unless you were familiar with each church, the odds of pulling into the wrong driveway or parking lot were quite high). Baptist churches. Nazarene churches. Churches of God. Non-demonimational. Catholic churches. Methodist churches. All on the same road (which was locally referred to as “Church Street,” despite being officially named otherwise). Why are so many churches present in a single location? Heck, why are there so many DIFFERENT churches at all? And why is one church so completely against what other churches are doing?
In some instances, I feel that some of it is just flat out petty competition. No matter what this church does, that church will have a problem with it, or vice versa. This church believes that. That church believes this. They do this, which we don’t agree with, and we do that, which they think is wrong. It’s no wonder so many view Christianity with disdain – we Christians already to it each other, so why should the non-believing world by any different?
Now, I get that there are some churches that are fundamentally flawed in their teaching and theology (Westboro comes to mind), but where I have a problem is when the doctrines are the same, but the “day-to-day” aspects are separating us. “They do things THIS way, which we don’t like.” Well, is it biblically WRONG? “No, not necessarily, we just don’t do it here.”
Have you found the common link in all of these arguments yet? It’s a very simple word: “we.” The focus is not on God; it’s on US. WE can’t get along with that church because WE think THEY are wrong. Linear focus.
It’s not even other churches necessarily. A lot of times, it’s the people within a single church. “She said this. He did that. I have a problem with that.” Well, I’m sorry you have a problem with it. Why are you looking at them instead of focusing on God? Is your eye completely healed from that plank?
Then we have the issue of numbers. Our goal is to reach the lost for Christ. Instead, churches are too busy reaching members for tithes. Again, don’t get me wrong; I know that there is definitely a business aspect to the modern church (whether we like it or not), but what good does it do us if all we’re doing is bringing in people and not feeding them? How effective is a hospital that brings in hundreds of patients, but fails to treat any of them? Sure, in the short-term, the numbers go up, but failure to help those in need means that the solution is temporary at best.
I admit this is one of my biggest struggles when it comes to my faith – dealing with the church. I’ve dealt with so many different aspects of this same problem for most of my adult life. I have somewhat learned how to handle these issues, but it doesn’t stop me from feeling like we’re failing somewhere. It’s as if we’re just too busy being a church that we forget our calling to be THE CHURCH.
Apr 11, 2016
On this day seven years ago, two families gathered together at a lodge tucked away in a military base, watching as two kids said, “I do,” to each other.
Well, technically, I think we said, “I will.” I don’t know why everyone makes a bit deal out of “I do,” when every wedding I can remember attending has the bride and groom saying “I will.” I guess it’s because “I do” signifies the here and now, while “I will” indicates an on-going commitment, which (let’s face it) is what marriage is. You may now, but WILL you in five, ten, twenty, fifty years??
But I digress….regardless of the lexicon, we made a commitment to each other in front of our families, friends, and God to love one another no matter what. If only she had known what she was getting into….
Seven years later (minus one day), I slept on the couch after an argument that I don’t even care to detail, mainly because it was probably one of the dumber arguments we’ve ever had. I think the sentence, “Stop telling me I’m mad at you, because you’re really making me mad…..” How’s that for stupidity (and yes, it was me who came up with that jewel of couples ammunition). I didn’t even realize that it was the night before our anniversary when I stormed up to the living room, which made me feel all the more guilty when I woke up the next morning and realized, “Oh yeah, today’s the 11th. Well, crap….”
My wife has one simple rule – do NOT wake her up unless I absolutely have to. My job is to wake up while it’s still dark, get myself ready for work, then start getting the boys ready for school, all while not disturbing my wife, who prefers to be left alone to wake up at her own pace. I do my best to honor that request, although it’s difficult to pull off on some mornings when one of the kids refuses to get out of bed. You try talking loud enough to wake someone up while simultaneously NOT talking loud enough to wake someone else up. It’s not easy!!
On this morning, I decided that it would be worth the risk, and I woke my wife up anyway to make sure I told her happy anniversary before I left for work. At this point in our marriage, we’ve come to appreciate acknowledgement, so — I’m sorry, my youngest son is sleeping on the couch right next to me as I type this, and he’s got a nose whistler that is driving me nuts. Be right back….MUCH better!! — I felt that it would be in my best interest to at least acknowledge that A) it was our anniversary, and B) I was sorry for being stupid. If there were a speed-dial for apology reasons, stupidity would be in my top slot.
I’m sure seven years ago, this beautiful bride never once thought that “I will” would one day mean, “I will tolerate the massive stupidity and stubbornness that is my husband, and I will do so with love, grace, and just enough attitude that he’ll hopefully not do it again, but even if he does, I will again deal with it.” And yet, seven years in, she’s still here, and she’s still dealing with my stupidity. It’s not like she doesn’t have her work cut out for her already; we have three sons, so her day already consists of massive amounts of head shaking, forehead smacking, utter disbelief. Add me into the mix, and….let’s just say there are some nights that I earn my spot in the couch.
But in the end, that’s what “I will” means. Sure, we loved each other on our wedding day, which is where “I do” would fit, but we didn’t say that. We said, “I will.” And you know what? We still do, and still will!!
Mar 29, 2016
Well, that escalated quickly.
In today’s world of instant global communication, it seems that we are seeing much more violence and rebellion now than ever before. Kids are bringing guns to school (and using them) simply to get attention. Criminals are tempting police (and often sacrificing themselves) simply because they refuse to abide by laws (and some police officers are reaching the ends of their rope and responding similarly).
We live in a society where “rules are meant to be broken,” and authority is to be questioned. There are entire movements today against authority of any kind, with anti-police and anti-government rhetoric all over society. Part of this is due to the widespread use of the Internet, wherein news is accessible and can travel virtually instantaneously to anyone you want. There is no cooling-down period before news can be processed and presented. If something happens, 10 people have cell phones trained on it, and it’s on YouTube within minutes for the entire world to see (rather than being published the next day in a newspaper or aired a few hours later on television). A fire is sparked and fuel is added immediately.
Why is this such an issue? Well, to put it simply, anger is a high. According to Psychology Today:
It overrides all other moral and rational brakes in the brain because it originates from our primordial, original limbic system: the brain center of our most automatic emotions like fear and desire.
Basically, anger is the body’s way of handling stress in a very primitive way. It’s a knee-jerk reaction that occurs without thinking, and if left unchecked, it can turn us into raging maniacs, clouding our judgement. That’s why we’re told to go “cool down,” so our bodies have time to process what is happening and we can make rational decisions.
But what happens when our anger is fueled rather than cooled? Instead of calming down, what if we’re told, “No, stay angry, and get angrier!” Like an addict, we begin to crave the anger and the feeling it gives us. It creates the illusion of power (“We’re angry, and we’re going to do something about it!”). That’s why angry mobs are often uncontrollable. They are a group that is fueling each other’s anger beyond rational thought.
And thanks to the Internet, that anger can be fueled continuously. Someone commits a crime against someone else, and immediately, an entire group of folks can rise up in anger (without taking the time to process it), and react however they see fit, creating their own version of what happened based on their anger rather than actual events.
Think I’m being over dramatic? When was the last time something made you angry? Odds are you went and vented about it on a Facebook post, where other folks chimed in to tell you how right you are and how wrong it is for whatever made you angry. It’s confirmation of our anger, which again, fuels it. And if anyone questions why your angry (or attempts to calm you down), we instead get even more angry, because you’re not getting your anger fix. Instead, you’re being denied your anger.
Am I saying that anger is wrong? No. It’s an emotion that we all feel at some point, and it is often justifiable. What we DO with that anger, however, is what can be right or wrong. Do we stop and try to process why we’re angry, or do we simply lash out and let our anger take over?
I am not writing this as a lecture to others, either. I have dealt with anger issues my entire life, and usually, it’s born out of what I perceive to be a lack of control over a situation. When I feel like I no longer have control over something, I get angry, because it gives me that illusion of control, or at least an attempt at regaining control (however spectacularly it fails). It’s something I’ve dealt with and worked on for most of my adult life.
And this is the same mindset that society has as a whole today. They want to regain control over something that they never really had control over in the first place, leading to anger that is unexplainable, yet somehow makes us feel better, if only for that moment.
