Analysis & Symbols: Fantastic Beasts 2, Trailer #2

In all, there will be 5 Fantastic Beasts films, primarily focusing on the conflict between Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Grindlewald; if you don't know anything about their relationship and history, I can highly recommend MovieFlame's Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Grindelwald Origin/Relationship Explained on YouTube. Morgan Ross does an excellent job of providing the backstory and details of the interaction between these two wizards and why Dumbledore feels he can't move against Grindlewald, wanting Newt Scamander to do so in his place.
Now, let's at least briefly discuss an important point regarding Dumbledore: he's gay. A gay character who does not act upon his or her homosexual temptations is in accord with Church teaching, specifically, that if a person is gay, they are--just like single people, such as myself--called to be chaste and celibate. It appears that Dumbledore has actually done this. At this point in Dumbledore's history, the only "love interest" Dumbledore has had is that for Gellert Grindlewald when they were young, and it was not reciprocated by Grindlewald, so they didn't become lovers, and there was no one after Grindlewald in Dumbledore's life. So, as this stands at the current time (and a recent interview with Jude Law confirmed that Dumbledore's sexuality is not going to be explored anytime soon, but that is still fairly open-ended about the future) this is an acceptable presentation of someone who has been given this Cross to bear and his bearing it in accord with Church teaching. In this interview with author JK Rowling, she revealed that she is a practicing Christian and Christianity guided the story. I am, therefore, taking the time to read the books (it was the detail someone mentioned regarding Harry placing a cross at the grave of Professor Moody's eye that caught me unaware) and re-assessing the books. The truth is, there are some things in life which act as a greater temptation than others, and sadly, beyond Rowling's control, those who have encompassed themselves in witchcraft and WICCA have abused their own free will and, if not with magic, then with something else. That doesn't mean we, as Christians, should abandon ourselves but, as in all things, use discretion, test the spirit and always put God's will before our own.

I would like to be perfectly clear about this from the start: I am not going to be clear about anything throughout the rest of this post. We have a couple of minutes of a 2-hour long film, and there are too many factors of which I cannot possibly have access to in order to make a clear and definite statement; in other words, regardless of what I say, I am likely to have to walk it back after viewing the entirety of the film. To refresh our memories, let's take a look at the first trailer.

When this trailer came out, and before I had seen Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them (which was definitely a pro-socialist film) I was confident that Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) would be a Trump figure cast in the most horrific light in the sequel; this is still possible, especially considering how the cast behaved in the panel discussion during the San Diego Comic-Con (the cast was saying, "Impeach Trump!" and trying to make links to the film) but there is a problem with that, and we see it in this second trailer:

In Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, I have to identify with the character of Mary Lou Barebone (Samantha Morton), the missionary who has launched the New Salem Society to expose witches and wizards (talking about socialism/communism makes me a witch-hunter, too, and I am a Christian), so I am not a member of the elite wizard class, I am a muggle. Further, Jon Voight's role as Henry Shaw Sr, and his son, suggests that these characters are an accurate view of how Republicans and Conservatives are viewed by the Left, while the Left sees itself as the elite wizards and witches who have been forced to hide (the Left fits this description because--like the wizarding world--they have had to hide being socialists, or gay, or wanting to change their sexual identities. or being drug addicts).
SO, metaphorically speaking, who does that make Grindelwald? 

The way Dumbledore is presented in both these trailers is quite interesting: how many times do we see Dumbledore's back? When we first see Dumbledore, it's the back of his head (same shot, both trailers); when he sits down on the desk in the classroom, we see him from behind; when he's meeting Newt atop the building, he has his back to Newt; at 1:16 (first trailer) we see Dumbledore looking at the proverbial "writing on the wall" and again when Dumbledore stands before the Mirror of Erised (pictured above, bottom image). Granted, we see the backs of other characters as well, however, at least the way he's being presented in the trailers, we see his back; why? The back symbolizes our shadow, the part of ourselves we can't see and so the part of ourselves that are likely to be vulnerable. The back is a complicated symbol, however, because there are also the shoulders--which symbolize the burdens we are willing to take upon ourselves or not take up--as well as the back of our heads; since the head symbolizes our thoughts, the back of the head usually symbolizes our history or past, sometimes those things we have buried, or at least tried to bury. Now, if you will notice in the top of the two images above, Dumbledore has his hands in his pockets; he also has his hands in his coat pockets when he meets Newt on top of the building; our hands symbolize our honor, so there is something regarding his honor which Dumbledore is hiding, e.g., that Dumbledore himself should be hunting down Grindlewald but sends Newt to do it instead (Dumbledore will be begged over the course of five years to battle Grindlewald, but he manages to put it off). In the bottom image, when Dumbledore looks into the mirror of Erised--the mirror that shows you what you most long to see--please note Dumbledore's arms: he has one sleeve rolled up and one sleeve down. Why? Arms symbolize strength, so it's possible that Dumbledore is exposing a strength he has (the "naked" arm, he's exposing his skin) while at the same moment hiding another strength he has (the sleeve rolled down covering his arm). Just because Dumbledore is seeing Grindlewald in the mirror in this moment doesn't mean that Grindlewald is to Dumbledore what his parents are to Harry Potter when he looks into the mirror (remember, towards the end of The Philosopher's Stone, when Harry sees himself, and not his parents, and he had the Stone in his pocket; that's not what he wanted to be seeing). At this moment, however, Dumbledore most wants to talk to Grindlewald and discuss something with him. Mirrors, after all, are glass, and we know that glass symbolizes inner-meditation, our ability to "reflect" upon our own selves, and it's likely that's what Dumbledore's doing in this scene: reflecting on exactly what it is he wants and doesn't want.

We know Grindlewald hates muggles, he believes that only pure-blood wizards should rule everyone else and wizards should dominate the world for the benefit of everyone, for the greater good. How can you possible get Donald Trump out of that? I know some Liberals will claim that Trump's policy on building a wall to keep out immigrants sounds like Grindlewald, that somehow Americans wanting to keep themselves safe and have people enter the country only legally and not illegally is about protecting our blood purity,..... what?!?!? No, that just doesn't make any sense. But that's not what Grindlewald is arguing anyway and that's not what Trump is doing: Grindlewald is arguing that they should come out of hiding (Republicans and conservatives haven't been in hiding) and they should use their greater power to enslave the lesser muggles (Republicans don't want anyone enslaves, Republicans want a strong, healthy middle class so the free market will flourish and the greatest number of people possible can become as wealthy as possible). So, what is it about Grindlewald that the Left can possibly pin as to pertaining to Trump or Trump supporters?
Nothing.
Which makes Grindlewald,....

This scene is an obvious reference back to Professor Remus Lupin, the Defense Against the Dark Arts (DADA) teacher who turned into a werewolf and was a good friend and mentor to Harry in The Prisoner of Azkaban. As in that story, when Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) escaped, so Grindlewald escapes in Fantastic Beasts 2, but I think that--just as Professor Lupin was hiding that he was a werewolf, Dumbledore, too, is hiding something, and it's possibly that it's his homosexuality (I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to make the case that homosexuals are treated like werewolves) but it might be that Dumbledore is actually hiding at Hogwarts rather than facing his fears of taking the role of leadership he's meant to take, and this could be because Dumbledore knows how easily he was hooked into searching for the Deathly Hallows with Grindlewald and planning with him the subjugation of muggles "for the greater good."
In the top image, I have pointed out what might prove to be some of Newt's classmates: Leta LeStrange is likely standing behind him, and oddly emotionless to everything that is going on; the red-head girl might be part of the Weasley clan and the boy standing behind her might be one of the Longbottoms,.... but these are just my guesses.
Now, let's discuss briefly what type of hero Newt Scamander is. The name "Newt" serves two purposes: first, it's short for Newton, the name of the famous scientist, so it suggests an atheist, but secondly, a man who has lost his genitals (please think of Monty Python's The Holy Grail during the witch trial, when John Cleese's character yells out, "She turned me into a newt!" and then everyone looks at him and he mumbles, "I got better.") A "genital-less male" is the only acceptable white, heterosexual male hero in today's world for the Left (note Newt was sorted into gentle Hufflepuff, not bold and brave Gryffindor). His last name "Scamander" references an ancient river which was supposed to bestow beauty upon women, so that, too, is a feminine reference So, this is a reason why, as a general characteristic, I don't particularly like Newt.
On a different note, however, why does Newt not want to work an office job? There are lots of people good at office jobs, however, Newt knows that he has other talents--singular talents unique to himself--which will go to waste if he files into a bureaucratic position in the Ministry of Magic rather than pursuing his dream and passion. Does this sound familiar? It should, because this is basically the reason why capitalism exists, and bureaucracies exist because of socialism and the government needing to create jobs for people to fill. This might be the wrong vein to pursue with this scene, however, there are mirrors on the bureau in which the boggart is kept, and the boggart itself is a kind of mirror, mirroring for you that which is your greatest fear, so there is meditation taking place in this scene. No doubt, when Newt says, "Riddikulus!" some fantastic beast will appear in place of the desk and scare everyone else. 

A Liberal.
Grindlewald is one of the Left, a figure of the New World Order. If Gindlewald is going to be seen as a "Trump figure" for the Left (that is, the Left views Trump as the incarnation of ultimate evil in the real world), then that really muddies the water of what the Left is going to have to concede (again, I could be wrong about details in the film, but this is a generalization): namely, if Trump is a Grindlewald metaphor, and Grindlewald is the most powerful wizard in the wizarding world, Trump is the most powerful, accomplished person in the world and Trump's "trying to help the wizarding world" (i.e., the Liberals) by bringing them out of the closet, so to speak and helping them to enslave unworthy muggles,.... like myself.

We haven't seen this top image in the trailers as of yet, but it's been released as part of the film's stills, and when I saw it, for some reason, I immediately thought of James Bond's file which appeared in Spectre (bottom image, I couldn't find a better picture of it, sorry). Even I recognize this is a bit of a stretch, but there is also the moment in the first trailer at 1:15-6 when we see a man in a cellar or underground tunnel (just his back) and he's looking at white, glowing writing on the wall (the image of this moment is below in the next set of stills), and this "writing on the wall" might also be a reference to Spectre, since that was an important scene in the movie and the title of the theme song. There is also the scene when Dumbledore meets Newt atop the building, much as Bond did with Moneypenny at the end of Skyfall; so, I will be the first to admit that these might be stretches, but there are at least three things in which we can connect Skyfall and Spectre to FB2; why bother? Because in both films, but especially Spectre, Bond was fighting against the New World Order, quite openly, and if Grindlewald is meant to be a anti-NWO metaphor, these links will substantiate that as proof.
On a slightly different note, it's important that the film is taking place in France; why? While not officially socialist, the French economy and social structure has long suffered from socialist programs making for inefficiency and sectors with too many workers and the government unable to do anything about it. Prime Minister Macron has begun the implementation of reforms to ease the problems which plague all socialist systems and create unnecessary stress on the national economy; only time will tell if he is successful, but the protests have been widespread even as the country has begged for such reforms. So, the setting of the French capitol will be an interesting backdrop to the political undertones of the film.

There is at least one more reason why Trump can't be seen as a Grindlewald metaphor: Grindlewald wants to end "the old ways" (probably a reference to the accord signed several hundreds of years ago to keep the wizarding world secret and separate from the muggle world) whereas Trump was elected by his followers and on the platform that he would protect and defend the old ways, namely, make America great again, return it to a role of leadership in society and defend traditional values (Christian values). Knowing how the phrase, "Make America Great Again" is acid to the fragile hearts of those on the Left, we might deduce that this very leadership is of itself the reason why the Left will view Grindlewald as a Trump figure, but let's examine that a bit closer.

In the top image is Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller) from Fantastic Beasts and beside him is Maledictus; now, The Super Carlin Brothers have theorized that Maledictus is Voldermort's pet snake Nagini. It's an interesting theory, so you might check it out. In short, "Maledictus" is a blood curse which can be passed down through generations, and it turns one into a beast from which they cannot turn back. It makes sense that Credence is an obscurial--one whose magic is suppressed--and Maledictus is becoming something she doesn't want to be either.
Now, if you will note the second image, the man (Dumbledore) looking at the writing on the wall, it's very important to know that this is a family tree; for whom? Corbus LeStrange, aka, Credence Barebone, who is actually Leta LeStrange's (Zoe Kravitz) half brother. I don't know how else this is going to play out, but we know how important family trees are to certain segments of the population in the Harry Potter universe, so this is going to be a very important realization in the film.
Lastly, if you note the bottom image, (you can click on it to enlarge) Credence is sending out his obscurial to wreck destruction; the large, black "curtain" like creatures we see in the trailer draping buildings and covering people are something like dementors, and Credence is sending them out. The point is, he's using his left hand; in occultism and witchcraft--in reality, not just the books and movies--the Left Hand Path is not only associated with witches, warlocks and demons, but also the really Dark Arts (just google it) and we've been seeing more and more examples of the left side of people and things being employed to suggest that something wicked this way comes.

First of all, if one wants to see Grindlewald's vision to make the wizarding world the leaders of the muggle world in line with Trump's Make America Great Again, America can't rule the world; on the contrary, the US wants all countries strong with strong, free markets because that boosts trade and trade boosts living standards (this is why Trump supports Brexit and other European Union members getting OUT of the European Union, it's a death-trap for the free market). Grindlewald wants to enslave muggles; who does Trump want to enslave? (I wouldn't be surprised to hear some outrageous claims from the Left, but those would be desperate and utterly preposterous). "Muggles are not lesser. Not disposable." I think this is Dumbledore saying this; the question is, who is it that thinks muggles are lesser, are disposable?
The Left.

Well, in a way, Jacob is seeing a ghost because he's a ghost from the very first Harry Potter film, The Sorcerer's Stone, in which Flimmel is responsible for having created the Sorcerer's Stone which prolongs his life. Now, I do have a bone to pick: when he meets Jacob, he says, "I'm an alchemist and therefore immortal," and there are two problems with this: first, there were lots of alchemists (okay, all of them) who never found/discovered the Sorcerer's Stone (the elixir of life) but tried, so just because he's an alchemist doesn't mean he is automatically immortal. Secondly, he's not immortal in the way God is immortal, because he has to keep taking the elixir (Dumbledore mentions this in the film that Flimmel, who would live to be 666 years old--yea, the mark of the Beast--had just enough left to put his affairs in order and then he was going to die) so he's not immortal. Now, alchemy has always, always been a huge sin: not only is one trying to defy God's plan for them by prolonging their life indefinitely, they are also searching for the means to turn base materials into gold, which Flimmel supposedly accomplishes. Perhaps this is the reason that, when Jacob shakes his hand, we hear Flimmel's bones cracking. Hands symbolize honor, and for the structure of the hand (the bones) to cave in to pressure suggests that Flimmel doesn't have much honor about him because he has gone against God's will for his life and chosen his own.

In the "Interrogation Scene" from Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, Mr. Graves (really Grindlewald himself disguised, the clip is at the bottom of this post to review) questions Newt about his purpose in bringing the beasts into New York, and Newt denies it was to cause chaos, mass slaughter and bring open war; now, who is it that is always rioting, causing death and destruction and trying to bring the country to open war? Not Trump and the Conservatives, that's the Left with the Ferguson riots, the Baltimore riots, the riots on the night Trump was elected and all the other "protests" they have violently staged on George Soros' paycheck. Either the Left has to concede that they are the superior wizarding world, and therefore muggles would be the despised "lessers" and "disposables" (and who hasn't talked to a Liberal who treats them that way?) OR the Left has to concede that Conservatives/Republicans are part of the wizarding world and of that world, Trump/Grindlewald is the greatest and actually trying to put the Left in power over the muggles.
Which is it going to be?

I don't quite understand this theory, but I will mention it to at least mention it. A rumor going around suggests that Queenie is going to be "propositioned" by Grindlewald to join her because he wants her mind-reading capabilities. The basis of the theory is that Grindlewald is going to use Jacob being a muggle against her and that she can't marry Jacob if Grindlewald doesn't come into power,.... which doesn't make sense because Grindlewald doesn't want anything to do with muggles, so this must be a one-time exception to the rule. However, what I can contribute to Queenie's vulnerability in the story is that, the first time we saw her, she was undressed--she wasn't naked, she was wearing her slip--but Tina told her to get dressed and so she put her dress on. When someone is "undressed," it foreshadows they are going to be "exposed," and this could be the meaning (or a part of it) in the trailer when we see Queenie holding her head in distress, not that she's going to be exposed to Grindlewald per se, but she will be exposed to something which will alter her character or our understanding of her.

At this point, it appears to me that Grindlewald is a figure of the New World Order, he who wants to dominate and be in charge over everyone, wizard and muggle alike. The key to this movement is the purity of bloodlines, and who is it arguing for that? The New World Order, the 13 families who value their own bloodlines (the Astors, DuPonts, Rockefellers, Collins, Freemans, Kennedys, etc.) and believe they have the right to rule over others because of their purity and view everyone else--like myself--as lesser and disposable because I am not a member of one of their families, just as I am not a member of the Malfoys, the Blacks, the LeStranges.

Before we analyze what Grindlewald looks like, let's start with his name. "Gellert" is a form of "Gerard," and it means something like "strong spear." In German, "wald" means "forest," and "grendel" usually translates to something like beam or gate. So we could come up with something like the strong spears of forest beams. This could be that there is a forest of beams (regular witches and wizards) that Grindlewald is going to transform into strong spears; then again, the "beams" might not be wooden beams, but beams of light, or magic, and those magical beams could become his strong spears (like what he was attempting to do with the obscurial in Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them). Then again, it's hard to ignore the obvious reference to Beowulf and the monster Grendel.
Grindlewald is pale and so is his hair. The color white either symbolizes that someone is alive to the virtues of faith, hope, innocence, purity, or they are dead to those virtues (a corpse turns white when it dies). So, not only is his skin pale and white, but his hair (symbolizing his thoughts) his eyebrows (because they are part of his eyes, which we shall discuss in a moment, it symbolizes that he sees death and the death of virtue) and his mustache (the mustache is part of the mouth, which symbolizes the appetites, so he has an appetite for death). In the top image, his hair has "fallen," but in the bottom image, we can say, when he's in "peak condition," his hair stands straight up, with the back of his head shaved close. The hair standing straight up suggests his thoughts of mobility, that is, achieving (like finding all three of the Deathly Hallows) and the shaved hair suggests that he doesn't give thought to anything that doesn't help him gain his goals. In the top image, his "fallen hair" means that he's thinking his goals might be out of his reach since he's been captured, and it will be more difficult to escape then he lets on at the end of Fantastic Beasts. His clothing is mostly blue, suggesting he has had a difficult life and goes through depression, and that depression has "colored" how he sees himself and life in general. What is most interesting about his clothes, to me, is the tie around his neck. The neck symbolizes that which leads us in life, and this is a black tie (black always symbolizes death) but the tie is worn on the inside of the shirt, not on the outside the way it usually is, suggesting that what is guiding him in life is something he's going to use for that which it wasn't created (the Deathly Hallows to subjugate muggles to slavery, for example).

It is at least refreshing to know that someone on the Left isn't running head-first into the horrific nightmare that has become politically known as "the New World Order."
And then again, I could be completely wrong about all this.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner
P.S.--Here is the interrogation scene from Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, elucidating the "chaos" element of Grindlewald's tactics and the "parasitic nature" of the obscurist he was attempting to locate and use for his own good, ignoring the "host," or human attached to it:

GLASS: First Trailer

This is truly an excellent image. First, melding the four faces together--Kevin, Dr. Staple, David and Glass--demonstrates that which is not possible: all four of these characters are their own, that is, they have their own role to play in the film, just as you and I have our own "roles" to play in our individual lives. No matter how badly one hates individuals, one can't simply decide all people are alike or created equally and then attempt to make them fit into a pattern or a perception of reality, which is what the Left is attempting to achieve all over the world today.
Now, we have an issue of "erasure," specifically, that the word GLASS is written over the eyes and part of the nose of the conglomerate face in the poster. Erasure is meant to demonstrate that something is inadequate, and yet necessary. So, the word GLASS "erases" the dominant features of the conglomerate face, because the conglomerate is not adequate to relay to the viewer what the film makers want to say, however, it's necessary because there is not a better image which can, so the image is in a state of inadequacy but necessity, because there is so much more they want to say, but can't.
Surrealist artist Rene Magritte did a famous image of a pipe and titled the work, This Is Not A Pipe, and it caused a bit of an uproar, because, of course it was a pipe; but no, it was only a picture of a pipe, not a real pipe. We can "deconstruct" the word GLASS in the same way: this isn't actually glass, it's a digital image of glass,... or does GLASS refer to the character Mr. Glass? Or does GLASS refer to the title of the film? We actually don't know to what GLASS refers, and so this open-ended word, "erasing" the identities of the characters, fractured by all the shards, splinters and cracks, leaves us with quite a mess; or does it?
Symbolically, we know that glass means meditation: when someone looks into a mirror, or through a window, for example, they are meditating upon themselves and matters of the interior world; likewise, GLASS is calling for us the viewers to meditate as well, especially given the fractured and damaged nature of the glass we see with the fragments of characters; have our own identities been damaged, or are they endangered? Between the A and the first S is a big white spot, suggesting that the "glass" we see that produced all the damage and splinters was hit by something really hard; there is a saying, "to hit someone between the eyes" so they can see something that is obvious and apparent to everyone else, and that looks like what this poster has exactly tried to do: that is, hit the viewer between the eyes with the reality of what is happening to our own identities and why. 

In 2000, writer/director M. Night Shyamalan released his super-hero film Unbreakable starring Bruce Willis as David Dunn, a man who had been the sole survivor of a train wreck (and a devastating car crash) unscathed, and Samuel L Jackson as Elijah Price, aka, Mr. Glass, who suffers an extremely rare disease that makes his bones excessively susceptible to breakage. In January 2017, Shyamalan released Split, starring James McAvoy, who portrays Kevin, a character with 23 distinct personalities inside him, including one called "The Beast." Willis' David Dunn has a brief cameo in Split; when Split proved to be a critical and financial success, it was announced that Unbreakable and Split are part of a trilogy dubbed, The Eastrail 177, for which we now have the first trailer for this third film, which picks up 3-4 weeks after the end of Split.

The job of a great artist (and Shyamalan has had a rough road to walk these last 15 years, so he deserves this) to recognize, distill and then articulate what is happening within the world and then present it in a comprehensible format for their audience so the audience can have a "privileged perspective" upon current events, and this trailer does just that. With the opening lines, "It's amazing to meet you," to the diagnosis of delusions of grandeur, it's not difficult to connect this doctor with the world-wide socialist trends of associating individuals and people who are truly gifted with inflated egos who lack consideration for the mediocre. In short, the struggle of the "mental instabilities" of the three men--Glass, Kevin and Dunn--reflect (just like a piece of glass) the struggle of the world today, and the self-appointed superior socialist who thinks they know how to "solve" a problem they can't begin to comprehend. When she notes it's a growing field in psychiatric research, it's Shyamalan quietly jabbing us in the ribs and saying, "Can you believe how elitist these socialists are with their phony labels?" because there have been two main prongs of the socialists' attack which Shyamalan appears to be taking upon himself.

Sarah Paulson portrays Dr. Ellie Staple; the name is particularly interesting because when we staple something together, we want to "keep it together," such as pieces of paper; that's probably at least one level of the symbolism of her name, that she views the three men as nothing more than "case files" and not really human beings with individuation and gifts, rather, she is the arm of the psychiatric institution (a great socialist monolith of government control, think about what happens at the end of The Chernobyl Diaries and what happens to the American tourists).
This is an interesting little note: the psychiatric hospital being used (although we don't know if it will be named as this in the movie) is the Allentown State Hospital, which perchance references the 1983 Billy Joel hit song Allentown about workers who are depressed because the steel industries are closing; the song is meant to give hope and sustenance to the hard-workers; if there is a link between the hospital and the song, it suggests that the "delusion of grandeur" being investigated by Dr. Staple is that of the American work ethic and our belief in the strength and perseverance of individuals. Perhaps you will recall the 2016 film Cure For Wellness which also takes place in a psychiatric hospital: that was the same hospital where Adolf Hitler recovered from his wounds after World War I, so I don't think it's such a stretch to link the mental hospital with the 1983 hit song Allentown.

First, masculinity.
It's been plaguing the news--anyone keeping up with The Drudge Report at least--that "toxic masculinity," i.e., masculinity, that traditional masculine gender roles are viciously under siege by the Left; why? Like David Dunn who sees himself as a "protector," masculinity means leadership, courage and justice; three traits socialists hate (did Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders have even one of these in any measurable degree?) because it makes otherwise easily herded people into thinking and self-actualizing individuals, and individuals (as opposed to those who want to mindlessly belong to a group) are the greatest threat to a socialist society. 

This is really a great costume. We know that feet symbolize will, and the shoes Mr. Glass wears looks like slippers rather than proper shoes. Purple symbolizes royalty and suffering; why? Well, back in the ancient days, purple was exceedingly expensive to produce, so much so, that only the royal family could afford to wear the color; after the Crucifixion of Christ, the King of all, purple also came to symbolize suffering as that is what a "good king" would do for his people, rather than have his people suffer for him, so the positive symbolism of the color denotes suffering (I know this sounds crazy, but without suffering there is no wisdom, and because wisdom is the greatest of all the treasures, one becomes royalty through their suffering because they have gained the greatest treasure of wisdom) but negatively symbolizes royalty: think of DC Comics' The Joker and his wearing purple; he wants to be treated like royalty, but is a psychopath. Because Mr Glass wears slippers instead of practical shoes, this suggests a life of luxury rather than a life of work and practicality, so Mr. Glass feels entitled to be treated like a king. The color of his jacket lapels are purple, so the same "royalty" theme applies, however, the rest of this amazing coat (from a costume perspective) has a metallic blue-into-purple quality, suggesting that the depression which blue symbolizes gives way to the "royal complex" Mr. Glass has. Compound this with the wheelchair: this king doesn't have a throne, but he's using his wheelchair has one, why? He's entitled. 

The second topic is that of individuality. I know it appears to be close to the first, however, this is where analysis of Mr. Glass comes into play. In spite of being a villain, Glass' extremely rare medical condition makes him highly individualistic--unique, singular, special--and socialists hate to admit that we are NOT all created equally; when presented with people such as Mr. Glass or David Dunn, one cannot honestly propagate that we are all created equally. This is evidenced by Shyamalan creating Kevin: 23 different personalities live inside of this one; why? Socialists believe, and I think we have to take Kevin as the unmasked face of socialism in the film (whereas Dr. Staple is the masked face, pretending she isn't really, but she really is) that all these different people (the various personalities of Kevin) are really all just the same as Kevin. If there were no individuality, in other words, then everyone would be just like Kevin, and there would be no boundaries of identity between one person and the next.

This is a highly-stylized shot; for example, what hospital do you know of that has violet colored lighting? As with the symbolism of purple discussed above, but we will articulate that meaning in just a moment. First, please note the windows behind Kevin in the middle and on the sides of the room; on the floor, in-between Mr. Glass and Kevin, we see the reflection of light, but it's what called "disembodied light," that is, it's being diffused and not valued, so the symbolic light which could be filling these characters with self-awareness and a sense of right-and-wrong, is, literally, being thrown on the floor and lost. Mr. Glass, on the left, looks like an old grandma in her rocking chair, and this isn't by accident, because Mr. Glass isn't just on the left side, he IS the Left, with their gender-switching, victimization and self-entitlement; Kevin is the image of false dignity because he's wearing yellow. Yellow is the color of gold, and because gold is always associated with kings, it denotes the kingship within us, our great dignity; however, we can choose to abandon that dignity, and that's when yellow symbolizes cowardice. David Dunn is, literally on the right, that is, the Right of politics. He's bound and chained, so he's suffering, this is where the violet light comes in: David Dunn is the image of suffering, but Mr Glass and Kevin are the image of self-proclaimed royalty who are entitled to not have to suffer. David wears a pale green hospital outfit, and we know that green is the color of new life and hope, so whatever happens to David in this scene is actually giving him a new purpose in life, even if it isn't readily apparent by the time the scene ends.

In the last few seconds, one of Kevin's personalities asks, "What do we call you, sir?" And Elijah Price says, "First name, Mister, last name Glass." This superbly echoes the introduction in Marvel's Dr. Strange when Kaecilius (Mads Mikkelsen) asks Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) who he is and starts by calling him "Mister?" and Strange replies, "It's Doctor," to which Kaecilius asks, "Mister Doctor?" and Strange adds, "It's Strange," and Kaecilius concludes, "Who am I to judge?" By giving a title as his first name ("Mister") Elijah Price/Mr. Glass erases a part of his identity: Elijah. Elijah, one of the most powerful prophets of all time, meaning "My God is Yahu," Mr. Glass prefers to identify himself with his sinful nature, rather than the divine nature to which every single person is called (our soul which is God's Gift to each of us) and this is why he "teams up with" The Beast in Kevin: as an unmasked face of socialism, The Beast is the animal that socialists believe each and everyone of us actually is, not a child of God, merely an accident of nature with no dignity, vocation or purpose. The fruits of these labors have been a long time in coming for Shyamalan, but I'm confident they will be well worth the wait!
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

Comic-Con Trailers Coming Out

As you may or may not know, San Diego Comic-Con is going on this week, which means a slew of new images and trailers!!! One of the most anticipated is that of M. Night Shymalan's Glass, and I promise, I am getting that up right now! Godzilla 2, the first trailer for James Wan's Aquaman and the second trailer for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald are being released tomorrow (Saturday). As always, thank you for such loyal support of yet another prolonged absence! I am particularly excited about Glass and Godzilla 2; if you haven't seen Godzilla, you might want to refresh your memory with this post Erasure & Time: Godzilla.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

The Nun Trailer (2018)

At this moment, I am truly excited about this film. As you may recall, the first film, The Conjuring, was definitely pro-socialist, but then, the follow-up, Annabelle, was definitely pro-capitalist; then the biggest surprise came when The Conjuring II: The Enfield Poltergeist (made by the same writers and director as the first one) did a complete round-about and was pro-capitalist! There is always the possibility of making a mistake when I analyze a two-minute trailer from a two-hour film, so you and me need to keep that in mind, but I am excited and think this is going to be a really great film on several levels!
This is an interesting poster, most notably, the nun's face is cut in half by the boundary of the poster, and the eye that shows is yellow. When a character is presented in this situation, it demonstrates that there is a part of the character we are not seeing, a part of the character we can't see. Her eye is also yellow; as we know, yellow symbolizes our dignity so, as a nun, when she was alive, she was supposed to recognize the dignity of her calling in being a Bride of Christ, however, she failed to do that, so she became a demon instead. Also interesting is the visible eyebrow: we know that eyes symbolize our "sight," as in spiritual sight into ourselves/others, or even our ability to see things in a truthful light; the eyebrow, the hair above the eye, symbolizes our ability to think upon what it is our eyes have seen, so, when a character has "damaged eyebrows," or no eyebrows, that character lacks the ability to meditate upon the truth, which is the whole point of entering the religious life, to mediate upon God and the Truth He has passed onto us, and how we are called to manifest that Truth in the world.
We can also faintly see veins in the eye area, and this is a technique that has always impressed me (think, if you will, of the aged Louis [Brad Pitt] towards the end of Interview With the Vampire and how his pale face showed those same veins). The purpose of veins is to carry blood throughout the body and insure healthy circulation so there is a healthy body; when we see an emphasis on veins like this, it suggests the exact opposite: this is a "bloodless" person who doesn't have any healthy circulation, therefore, not a healthy body. When we examine a character's cheeks, we need to think of Matthew 5:39 when Christ tells us, whoever hits you on your right cheek, turn and offer them the left cheek as well. When a character has normal or fat cheeks, they tend to let things (like insults or harm against them) roll off, they don't hold a grudge; when we see characters with shard cheekbones, like Angelina Jolie's Maleficent, these are characters who hunger after revenge and don't let any insult or slight escape them, and it may prove to be true with the protruding cheekbones we see of Valak.
The face symbolizes our identity, because it's our face by which others identify us; the nose is the most prominent feature on our face, so our nose identifies our honor and whether or not we have an overall good or bad character; when we see a character who has something wrong with their nose, or something happens to the nose of a character, it's usually a sign that they have done something to disgrace or shame themselves. Below, I will discuss Valak's nun's habit (that's an entire subject in and of itself) however, this poster brings to light an interesting detail. Please note, if you will, the side of the face at her eye level and then to your left and the different "layers" of her head coverings: there is the layer closest to her face, then a slightly crinkled layer, then the outer layer of the heavier, black exterior head-dress (this has a proper name, and I am sorry I couldn't find what it's called). Note how that inner-layer is "crinkled," almost like it's shriveled, and because it's on her head, anything on the head is going to denote our thoughts or our thought processes, so something about the core of her thoughts is shriveled and distorted.
What about "The Nun" title? Obviously, the "T" in "The" is a cross, but what's the purpose of the cross? To fight the backwardness of the reversed "N" in "Nun." "Nun" is a palindrome--the same word spelled forwards or backwards--but with the "N" reversed the way it is, it's not just a palindrome, it's also a mirror-image, that is, if you held it up in a mirror, it would still spell "NUN" but with the first "N" reversed. This is going to be an important image for the film, for example, we know the nun who became possessed by the demon Valak killed herself, so it might be a commentary upon the way "death" is taken up by religious: when one becomes a monk or nun, they are called to "die to the world," but this particular nun died to God in killing herself, so she turned her vocations backwards. The same kind of device is at work at the beginning of the trailer when we see the painting of Valak which Ed Warren painted from his dream and then the lights go out and we still see the glowing eyes of the painting, the (photographic) negative, if you will.

Work has been absolutely crazy, please, please exclude another long delay in getting posts up, however, I hope this will excite you as much as it does myself! The first trailer for The Nun has been released, and it's loaded with material for us to discuss. The Nun is a part of The Conjuring universe based upon the real-life journals of paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. The third film in the series (after The Conjuring then Annabelle) was The Conjuring 2: The Enfield Poltergeist, and it was in the opening sequence that viewers were first introduced to the malefic but ambiguous figure of the demon Valak inhabiting the body of a Catholic nun (when Lorraine goes into the basement at the Amityville house they are investigating). Now, in The Enfield Poltergeist, I interpreted Valak/the nun as a temptation for Lorraine Warren that she should have done something different with her life rather than marry Ed, specifically, that Valak was tempting her to think that God wanted her to become a nun rather than marry Ed (please see The Conjuring 2 for more); that interpretation still holds because that is what the film makers decided to do with it in that film, however, we now have a significantly expanded body of information from which to draw (the trailer warns you to watch it until the end, however, after the release date is given, there is nothing else to see):

By the way, the woman portraying the young nun is Taissa Farmiga, the sister of Vera, who portrays Lorraine Warren in the other films (and, in The Nun 2, we are being promised that the stories of the nun will be linked to Lorraine and why she experienced Valak in The Enfield Poltergeist). Now, here are the two official synopsis-es providing us with some additional information the trailer has not yet provided:

In 1952 Romania, a nun, a Catholic priest and a novice, sent by the Vatican, investigate the mysterious suicidal death of a nun at the Cârța Monastery. (Wikipedia, The Nun)

When a young nun at a cloistered abbey in Romania takes her own life, a priest with a haunted past and a novitiate on the threshold of her final vows are sent by the Vatican to investigate. Together they uncover the order's unholy secret. Risking not only their lives but their faith and their very souls, they confront a malevolent force in the form of the same demonic nun that first terrorized audiences in 'The Conjuring 2,' as the abbey becomes a horrific battleground between the living and the damned.  (Written by Warner Bros., Internet Movie Database)

This is what remains today of Carta Monastery in Romania where much of the film's events take place; does it look somehow familiar? It reminds me of the monastery opening the first scene of last year's The Mummy with Tom Cruise. Both Carta Monastery (pictured above) and Waverley Abbey in The Mummy are Cistercian--emphasizing self-sufficiency through labor--so the similar aesthetic would have been applied to the construction of both holy houses. By linking up with The Mummy through visual and locational clues, The Nun--in effect--wants to "quote" The Mummy and remind audiences of what they saw in The Mummy so The Nun can join-in on that same dialogue. Another important link-up (although many films do this, it's not unique to The Nun) is provide us with a specific date of something taking place in a religious house (and, by the way, neither monastery nor abbey are still in use today): The Mummy opens in 1157 and The Nun takes place in 1952, which actions of those dedicated to the service of God had taken leading to the events being depicted in the film. 

Let's start with 1952 and Romania.
What was happening in Romania in 1952? Like the rest of Europe, Romania attempted to recover from the ravages of World War II, however, under the Paris Peace Conference of 1947, Romania fell to the Soviet Union and became communist (if you examine this brief but painful history of Romania post-WWII, you can see all the trade-marks of the brutal communist regime at work). In 1952, Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej solidified his power and leadership of Romania as General Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party through his party purge (getting rid of his rivals) making Romania the most loyal satellite of the USSR: this lead to the re-distribution of valuable Romanian resources to the USSR and the furthering of the communist agenda throughout the world. All of this, I am certain, is important for the understanding of this film (please see the caption below for more explanation). Now, let's turn our attention to the reason Sister Irene and Father Burke (Damian Bichir) go to Carta Monastery.

These two stills are seen in the trailer above when Sister Irene looks down a hallway and is then followed by the nun with the blacked out face (top image), followed by an attack from another nun (bottom image). We have no idea where in the story this scene takes place, but we can still make some important deductions about it. Sister Irene walks down a hallway, and this image hearkens us back to The Conjuring II: The Enfield Poltergeist when Valak appears to Lorraine Warren in Lorraine's home at the end of her hallway. Hallways--as we have seen in both Spectre and John Wick Chapter 2--have the same symbolic significance of a bridge, that is, the hallway/bridge shows a progression, something has changed or is about to change; whereas bridges are exterior to the character (symbolizing things which are likely beyond the control of the character) hallways are interior thereby communicating to the audience that a progression takes place within the character and their free will is at play, i.e., they are about to make an important decision which will effect their own outcome. Without the sub-titles on, it's impossible to hear/understand (an excellent strategy of "noise," that is, the interference with our ability to hear because the noise serves a purpose, for example, Sister Irene has a calling to fulfill, she can hear the calling, but we can't, and the "noise" of what the nun behind her says puts us in our place and why Sister Irene has been called); so, what does the nun tell to Sister Irene? "Sister, please, this way," and when Sister Irene begins to question her instead of going down that way, the other nun side-swipes her to force Sister Irene's will.
A word about Sister Irene: she's a novice, which means she has not yet made her final vows to become a nun, she's in the "courtship" stage and discerning whether or not the life of a nun is actually her calling. We saw Valak challenge both Ed and Lorraine regarding their calling to matrimony is The Conjuring II, and now Valak challenges Sister Irene about her calling as well (what was right for Ed and Lorraine is different compared to what is right for Sister Irene because of the individuality and gifts each have been blessed with by God; our vocations in life is how God wants us to use our gifts to glorify Him and gain salvation for our souls as well as, hopefully, the souls of others, so one cannot simply state that the religious life is absolutely the greatest good, nor the married life the greatest good; rather, the greatest good is for the one being called to a particular state to answer that call so their gifts can be maximized and their full individuality revealed: a woman might become a nun out of fear for not finding a husband, for example, and so her gift of faith is undermined by fear, while a woman who was called to become a wife might become a nun instead so she doesn't have to take care of a husband; this is what "discerning" is, not only understanding what God is calling you to do, but understanding your motivations for wanting or not wanting to do something). The name "Irene" means "peace," and we see her holding the lantern--the light symbolizes the inner "illumination" of her spirit, but also the light of illumination of her calling to be a nun and carry the light of hope to others. We see Sister Irene walking down this hallway, and we also see her looking down a hallway but not going down it; this might be a manifestation of a choice she has made or will have to make in the narrative. After she decides not to go down that hallway (what she is looking for--and this should be taken on a deeper level--isn't down that "path" the hallway represents) then the blacked face nun appears behind her, suggesting that Irene has made the right choice, so now evil has to come in and tempt her or, more likely, frighten her from taking the right path she has decided upon (the nun coming out from another hallway she didn't check). It's not a coincidence that the "tactic" the demon(s) use is reminiscent of Jurassic Park: the raptors, if you recall, hunt in groups of two, so one raptor acts as a decoy to draw the attention and focus of the desired prey, while the second raptor hunts the prey ("Clever girl"). What's the point of quoting this scene? So that we understand that, just like the raptors, these demons are hunters, and we are the hunted.
Now, what about the black-faced nun? I would like to suggest that this is an example of "erasure," that is, something is stricken out to show that far more is being implied than what is being seen, because what the artist/film maker wants to say, is impossible to say, but some means must be employed to achieve at least a partial understanding of what the artist/film maker needs to communicate (please see Sous rature for more, as well as scrolling down to the image of the Zero Dark Thirty poster in my post for The Man From UNCLE where I discuss "under erasure" extensively). So, to try and clear-up this muddled mess, the nun's face is blacked-out because the importance and true-nature of her presence, her being, cannot be communicated, so it's "erased" to show that she is an agent of evil, and we might even add, that Sister Irene herself is at risk for losing her identity if she makes the wrong decision (the "face" symbolizes the seat of our identity, it's how others identify who we are, which is why blacking-out the nun's face is such a serious concern, it means that her devotion to evil has completely over-taken her entire being; for more on this topic, please see the first caption under the mask of Michael Myers in Lessons From Horror Films: Why People Do Stupid Things). The nun with the blacked-out face "distracts" Sister Irene while another nun out-flanks her and pins her against the wall; this is the part I think will relate to Romania in 1952, and to the rest of the world today. Romania, like Sister Irene, were going down their path, when they themselves were distracted by Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej's rise to power and his purges, and--like the nun who out-flanks Sister Irene--the Soviet Union moved in Romania and took them by total surprise, pinning them down into a position from which they couldn't escape; similarly, we can interpret the nun with the blacked-out face to the distraction of identity politics throughout recent international elections (the face is the seat of identity) so that the real socialist-thrust of the movement could side-swipe us and pin us against a wall (for more on the role of identity politics in recent elections, please see this excellent article at The Intercept).
One last note about this brief scene: when Sister Irene is about to turn to look behind her and see the first nun, she switches the lantern from her left hand to the right hand; why? The left side is typically associated with evil (practicing witches, for example, refer to the path of witchcraft and Satan worship as the "Left Path") so Sister Irene, sensing she is about to face evil, switches the symbolic "light of illumination" from her weaker side--the left hand--to her stronger side, her right hand. She knows she is about to face something evil, and she's preparing herself. It's not just that God has given Irene the gift of vision to "see" the spiritual battle against Valak that must be waged; we, the audience, have also been given the gift to "see" what is happening in our country and in the world by the under-handed ploys of socialists trying to destroy the world and bring in their New World Order, and because we can "see" the evil they manifest, like Sister Irene, we, too, must fight this spiritual battle on all levels.

At the time of this posting, it's scarcely been two weeks since the high-profile suicides of fashion-designer Kate Spade and celebrity-chef Anthony Bourdain, and we now have the fictional suicide of a nun in a distant land and a distant time. What I am about to say does not reflect suicide in real-life: it's a horrible dilemma in which a person finds themselves, and I am in no way judging them, so please, remember these two troubled people in your prayers, as well as their loved ones, and everyone facing the temptation to end their life. Art, however, is a experience both connected to reality but beyond it, where the discussion of events are real, but the arena is entirely sealed-off in by its own rules and purpose, so, again, this is a total and absolute disclaimer that what I am about to say applies only to fictional narrative and not real individuals and their souls.

Father Burke (pictured left) is portrayed by Damian Bichir, who was an interesting choice for the role (we'll discuss that later after we discover what Father Burke's "haunted past" means). Just as Sister Irene's name means "peace," I don't think "Burke" was chosen without purpose. I will be the first to admit this is a stretch and not a likely possibility, however, Edmund Burke (pictured right) was a political philosopher and conservative politician who was a defender of the moral fabric of society and the Church; when I saw that Bichir's character was named "Burke," this was my first thought, although it's probably just a stretch of my imagination. It's also possible, though not likely, that his name refers to Archbishop Raymond Burke, a staunch conservative of the Catholic Church, and one of the first leaders Pope Francis "moved" to a symbolic role away from real policy making and power. Hopefully, when the second trailer drops, we will learn more of his role, in the meantime, we will just have to keep our options open.

At least at this point, we don't know why the unnamed nun kills herself, nor do we know the method she has employed to end her life. What we do know, however, is that this demon makes a habit of possession, which has been the theme since the very first Conjuring film. "Possession," in The Conjuring was a play on words, because when the Perron family moves into the "haunted house," they take possession of it, and in taking possession of the house, Carolyn Perron becomes possessed because Carolyn wanted that house (please see The Devil's Hour: The Conjuring for analysis on how the film is pro-socialist). In the following films, however, "possession" became a device to illustrate how socialism "takes over" people and a system, in effect, the demon is a parasite feeding off the person and wrecking everything in its path. This is how I think (after having seen two minutes of a two-hour film) the role of the nun's suicide is going to be reflected by Romania in 1952: Romania committed suicide in allowing themselves to become communist, and were then over-run by the USSR sucking up all their resources for their own country and projects. So, where does Sister Irene come into play?

If you will recall, in The Conjuring, the Annabelle doll (which is real and actually kept locked-up in the Warrens' personal museum to this day) was dramatically changed from the original "Raggedy Ann" type doll that was the original Annabelle from which they exorcised a demon (you can find the original and The Conjuring doll at this link, scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see it) and they had every right to make that artistic change; we can see the same being done with the habit of the nun on the left, vs the real Cistercian habit pictured on the right; again, they have every right to do so, however, comparison with the original helps us to draw out the differences and understand what the film makers wish to communicate with the stylized changes. So, the demonic nun's habit is predominantly black. Black, as we know, always symbolizes death: the "good death" of the devout, spiritual religious is to die to things of the world so they can nourish the spiritual values that will be their treasure in heaven; the "bad death" is to die to things of the spirit, and nourish the worldly appetites (power, sex, money, addiction, etc.). Knowing this is a demonic nun, we know she is dead to things of the spirit; why? The white piece surrounding her head and extending to her shoulders tells us. The shoulders symbolize the burdens we carry, whether we willingly take them on or they are forced upon us (super heroes, like Thor, for example, wear a red cape because he takes the burden upon himself and he is willing to spill his blood for those he has vowed to protect). The nun's white shoulder covering should symbolize the burden of faith, which is what white symbolizes; so, she wasn't willing to carry the burden of faith, and because the piece also covers her head, it might be a sign that she rationalized away her faith in God, or she didn't have sufficient faith to get her through her trials and temptations. The black belt she wears is meant to be a sign of chastity and the resisting to temptations of the flesh; when we learn more about her, we will be able to comment upon this further, but for now, it's interesting that they did, in fact, keep the belt as part of the habit. Just as a note, when we first see Valak confronting Lorraine Warren in the Amityville basement, Valak wears a brown habit (I think it's a Franciscan or Carmelite habit) because brown denotes humility in its virtue; when Valak wears brown, however, it means "dirty," of the earth, because Lorraine is being accused of Valak for marrying Ed (and having sexual relations with him) rather than becoming the Bride of Christ; they have since changed Valak's habit to make it black, however, that doesn't negate the symbolic significance of when Lorraine first encounters him wearing the brown habit.
Her face, of course, is deathly white; why? Because of Western funeral practices today, we often don't experience this, however, when a body begins to decay in death, it turns white, and that symbolizes that the person's soul has died, and her face is, after all, the seat of her identity. Her eyes are blacked out (black make-up surrounds her eyes) because she cannot tell the difference between "good death" and "bad death" (recall our discussion of the "yellow eye" we see in the poster at the very top of this post, and please also look at the very last image montage of this post for examples of women with blacked-out eyes from other films). Her mouth is also blacked-out; why? The mouth symbolizes the appetites, so since it's black, she has an appetite for death, or things which cause death (sin). Her hands are the only other part of her body visible; hands symbolize our honor, because our hands do our deeds, and if we have done honorable deeds, our hands are clean; if we have done dirty deeds, our hands are dirty. Her hands have blackened nails and are shriveled and bony, because she's a corpse, but she's also one who has done the work of the devil, rather than the honorable work of God. This is just a superficial, general analysis, once again, when we learn more about the story-line, we can complete our understanding of why they have dressed her in this specific way. 

Sister Irene can see the nun, Valak, the same way Lorraine Warren can see spirits, that is why Sister Irene is chosen to go on the mission with Father Burke; however, I predict at this point, that it's also Sister Irene's ability to "see" (in the meditative, spiritual dimension) which is why God has granted her the visions so Irene can accept the mission, do battle and claim victory for her soul. We can't know what gifts God has given us until He sends us the test or battle to put those gifts to work. It's of critical importance that it's the Vatican which has sent Burke and Irene to the monastery because that demonstrates the authority of the Church, the Hand of God at work, the obedience of the two Catholics and not the whim and self-direction of two individuals who have decided what they want to do on their own.
Why is this important?

Finit hic, Deo, Latin translating roughly, "Here ends God." Now, we know that God is, literally, everywhere because nothing exists without God willing or allowing it: God is even "in hell" in the sense that it's His divine justice enacting the torments of the damned and not just some random, accidental chaos. It's not to say, "God ends here" and there is no one to protect you, rather, this is the section of the battle grounds, the testing arena where God is with you, but you will sink or swim on your own; God has allowed this evil to exist because, as Pope Saint Leo the Great wrote, "There is no great victory without great battles."
There is, however, a second meaning to "God ends here." Think of socialist/communist countries where God and religion are outlawed, such as Cuba, Vietnam, China, the former USSR and its satellites; God is still there in those countries, but God is illegal; why? The government tries fulfilling the role of God to the people, and the government doesn't like competition.

Well, there was a great film made (completely panned by everyone but myself) called The Devil Inside about two young priests being trained by the Vatican to do exorcisms, but the two priests started doing exorcisms on their own, which means they were committing the sin of pride in thinking they knew better than the Vatican did; even though people make mistakes--including those in power--God allows these trials for us so that we can become like God (which was the promise the serpent made to Eve in the Garden in eating the forbidden fruit) but God wants us to become like Him in holy obedience because Jesus was obedient, even obedient to death on a cross.

This is an interesting scene for a couple of reasons. First, a "forbidden hallway," like we have above, is a passage (as discussed earlier) but one guarded by the cross. Now I don't think the director is Catholic, or has a Catholic background because to Catholics, two pieces of wood nailed together are just two pieces of wood nailed together; the reason it's a Cross and not just a cross is because Jesus died on it for our sins and paid the debt we could not, which is why Catholics always have a Crucifix, that is, a cross with a representation of the body of Christ upon it, that's where it's power to fight evil and protect us comes from. Be that as it may, this image looks a lot like the scene from Monster Squad when one of the kids has to go into a room that has been protected by crosses to guard the amulet so Dracula can't get it; the same kind of theory is used throughout the recent Tom Cruise version of The Mummy, when quicksilver guards the tomb of Ahmanet from being opened, and specifically, the four watchers statues surrounding her sarcophagus, but in terms of Christianity, it's at Waverly Abbey that the Knife of Set was kept in the reliquary (a statue containing one or more relics of saints to guard over the church and alter) and the Stone of Set being buried with the Crusader monk at the start of the film. What's important about this image is the validation that it's the visuals of Christianity which protect from evil and have power to keep evil from creeping out into the rest of the world, especially at a time when there is such a powerful, secular war being waged against Christianity and Christians.

On the last note, we should remember that "Valac/Valak," the name of the demon possessing the nun, and whose name was given in The Conjuring II, is "an angelically winged boy riding a two-headed dragon, attributed with the power of finding treasures." The "angelically winged boy" is the "good" that appears to people that allows Valak to deceive them: for example, becoming a nun is a good thing, however, it's not what God intended for Lorraine Warren, and that disobedience to God's will, or the lack of faith that God will direct your path and where you need to go, is the two-headed dragon, the doubt or indecision (the head is where our ability to think and reason comes from, so two heads means confusion and not able to make up the mind). The ability of Valak to "find treasure" is the demon's ability to see good, Christian people and the "treasure" they are storing in heaven, and steal it from them. Remember, we see the same treasure-thief in Smaug the dragon from The Hobbit, and it's up to little Bilbo Baggins to steal back that which was taken, specifically and symbolically, our relationship with God that was robbed from us with Original Sin. For our own world, we can see Valak as presenting himself to be some good, e.g., universal income, because you don't want people to suffer, do you? And then the two-headed dragon sweeping in of people not working at all and prices rising. So, at this point, I am very excited about this film, and I all ready can't wait for the second trailer! (I have also posted on the follow-up trailer, noted as the "Coffin Trailer" which you can find at this link here!).
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

At the very top of this image we see Valak as painted by Ed Warren in The Conjuring II, and the same image which opens the trailer. Below that is Charlize Theron's character from Mad Max; next is Cate Blanchett from Thor: Ragnarok and, at the bottom is Katheryn Winnick as Lagertha in The Vikings. Besides being all females, each of these characters has their eyes blacked-out; why? The eyes symbolize our ability "to see" that not readily available to regular sight, it's our spiritual vision, our ability to look at ourselves and see our motivations, fears, hopes, dreams, sins and faults; we know that black symbolizes death, but none of these women are actually seeing "good death," (dying to themselves) rather, they have become the vision of death (quite literally for Cate Blachett who actually portrays Death, and of course the Valak-possessed nun). What's so eerie about these images is that woman symbolize life, women give birth, but not these women, they have become vehicles of death and death is what they see, but death is also what we see when we look at them. This is a fairly recent strategy in make-up (to black out women's eyes) as far as I know (if I am wrong, kindly drop me an email and let me know!!!) so what recent development regarding women can we say has given rise to this trend of painting their eyes out? Feminism. Feminism doesn't advocate women giving birth--rather, birth control and abortion--feminism doesn't advocate women looking at themselves and improving themselves, rather, looking at everyone else (especially white men) and blaming them for all their problems and demanding that everything be changed to accommodate them. There is a lot more to say about this, however, I am going to wait until the second trailer.

The Grinch Trailer #2

I am working on the post for The Nun, but the second trailer for The Grinch just dropped so here it is to tide you over, enjoy!

Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

I have been working 12-15 hour days. I am SO SORRY. I am exhausted and trying to catch up. Please forgive me, but thank you so very much--as always!!!--for stopping by and always checking in. I have a great post on John Wick Chapter 3 I am trying to get up (filming has started and there is some rough footage) but just to give you a good laugh, enjoy this trailer for Destination Wedding:

What will be so awful is if all the funny lines in the film were in this trailer. It's good seeing Reeves in a comedy role, but I didn't even recognize Winona Ryder, even after I saw it was her, I still didn't recognize her.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

Sherlock Holmes 3 Is Happening!

It is official.
Sherlock Holmes 3, starring Robert Downey Jr. as the famous detective, and Jude Law as Dr. Watson, has officially been scheduled for release December 25, 2020. SH3 will open the same day as Sing 2 and a week after Avatar 2,... which means, Avatar 2 is happening,.... No word as of yet if Guy Ritchie will be returning as the director (just rumors he will) or if any of the other leading characters--such as Mrs. Watson played by Kelly Reilly, or Mycroft Holmes, played by Stephen Fry--will be returning; there does appear to be a rumor that Rachel McAdams will return as Irene Adler, based on the billing at Internet Movie Database. I hope this brightens your day as much as it did mine!
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

Ant-Man & the Wasp

Ant-Man and the Wasp is set after Captain America: Civil War but before The Avengers: Infinity War; Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is on house-arrest after Captain America's team was arrested in Civil War.

I don't deserve you.
It has been nearly a month since I posted anything, and you just keep coming back, and you will NEVER know how much that means to me. Thank you, with all my heart.

As any blogger knows, our normal, daily lives often interfere with our commitment to post; I don't know of any blogger who says they post enough, but I know I have severely fallen short of even the most basic of expectations, and I am sorry. Again, there have been countless and important interferences which have been unavoidable: I haven't even been able to go watch The Avengers yet, that is how much interference there has been.

So, the second trailer for The Ant-Man and the Wasp has been released (film coming out July 6) and, with Mission Impossible: Fallout and The Grinch, it's one of the last three remaining big anticipations of the year (by the way, Daniel Craig has confirmed that Bond 25 is his next film project). So, just to refresh our memory, here is the first trailer released for Ant-Man and the Wasp:

The first trailer is an introduction to Evangeline Lilly's Wasp heroine; we don't really see the villain. Now, recall, if you will, in Ant Man, there is a short scene when Hope (Lilly) tries teaching Scott (Paul Rudd) how to control the ants, and the light above her shakes and fades in an out; that's an omen, a prophecy, communicating to us that she has "control" issues and "dark places" in her soul; why? Not just the disappearance of her mother--which we have reason to believe will be rectified in this second installment ("Janet" is being played by Michelle Pfeiffer)--but her relationship with Hank Pym (Michael Douglas), which might have been the reason he gave Hope wings and blasters, overcompensating for her mother not having been there all her adolescent years. This might backfire. It's quite possible that Hope simply doesn't have the emotional maturity or even positive self-image she needs to be a hero (remember, she kept trying to get Hank to let her get into the Ant-Man suit, and he refused; she thought it was because she was a girl or not powerful enough, so she has something to prove, not only to her father, but to herself and even her long-lost mother, and these are probably going to be deep issues), but that is exactly why the villain, Ghost, is introduced in the second trailer:

"Ghost" is an interesting name, because it might describe how Hope felt growing up; Marvel has a way of employing the "mirror villain," that is, they take the negative traits of the hero and embody them in the nemesis the hero must fight and overcome, thereby purging himself of those traits so he can advance to greater virtue; we saw this in Ant-Man with Yellowjacket (please see Margins Of Power: Ant-Man for more). In other words, Ghost (and since the villain is being played by a woman) will likely be the embodiment of Hope's vices so she will have to overcome them in order to progress to joining the Avengers,.... or what's left of them. What is interesting is about this is that, while Hope appears to be stronger and better armed than Ant-Man, Pym tells Scott Ghost can only be defeated by both of them.
This is awesome!

We don't know a lot about Ghost, but that she steals Pym's technology and she can go through walls and other objects; we can make some other deductions as well. As in Ant-Man, we know Yellowjacket Darren was a mirror-image of Scott because "yellow," the color associated with the villain, symbolizes kingship: the only gift worthy of a king is gold (the yellow color), but if a king doesn't live up to his duties, he's a coward and unworthy of being a king. Scott, then, had to deal with issues of self-worth and his ability to provide for his ex-wife and daughter and prove to them he was a man worthy of them and could provide for their needs (and overcome Scott's own poor self-image and bad habits of turning to crime when things got tough). If we look at the image above of Ghost, it's an incredibly non-human suit; at least Yellowjacket was a living being, Ghost doesn't resemble any living thing; this actually fits Hope. Please recall that throughout the first half of Ant-Man, Hope wore only black: black always symbolizes death; "good death," is when we are dead to things of the world (our worldly appetites) but alive to things of the spirit (virtues, like Hope); "bad death" is when we are alive to our worldly appetites--fame, fortune, drugs, sex--but dead to the things of the soul. Hope was like dead to both: we can't say she pursued things out of her appetites, but she certainly didn't have any virtues either, she was just dead, and her mother's disappearance, then her father leaving her alone at school, probably made her feel like she was a ghost who didn't belong to the world since she didn't have her parents giving her any guidance or love. Now, what about the eyes? Ghost's eyes--the windows of the soul--are tiny, red; red symbolizes blood, either because we love someone so much we are willing to shed our blood for them, or we have so much anger and wrath against someone that we are willing to shed their blood. Since this is the villain, we are probably safe in betting on the later interpretation. There is also some red,... "thing" on the forehead and between the eyes. It's interesting because Laurance Fishburne's character and Scott discuss the "Goliath" program, and it was between the eyes (like where that red thing is on Ghost) that we see another symbol of Ghost's anger. Ghost also doesn't have a mouth. This might well symbol that Ghost doesn't have any appetites--appetites are actually necessary, because they lead us in life, and we need to have a healthy appetite for love and virtue, otherwise, we won't pursue them--but it can also be interpreted that Ghost feels she doesn't have a voice. Ghost's costume is an ashen gray, even a grayish-white. Gray symbolizes the pilgrim and the novice: the pilgrim puts ashes (which are gray) upon their head and body as a sign of penance and humility (from dust I came, to dust I will return) and the traditional color of the novice (the beginner) is gray because they have not advanced to a state of virtue/accomplishment in their field (like Gandalf the Grey in The Hobbit and The Lord Of the Rings: it's not until Gandalf fights that Balrog and falls into the abyss that he advances to Gandalf the White. Hope, of course, is just beginning her career as a hero, so we will have to keep these details in mind and weigh different aspects of the narrative to see if we are right. 

It's my pet theory, so far supported by the women warriors in Black Panther, and the Valkyrie in Thor: Ragnarok, that Marvel is slowly but surely drawing a "new" feminism, the kind we see Guy Ritchie arguing for in King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, and even in DC Comics Suicide Squad: ditching men doesn't make a woman strong, being strong with a man is what makes women strong; feminists make themselves strong at the expense of others (exactly what they argue men have done over the centuries), rather, women are stronger when they help everyone become stronger (for greater discussion on this issue, please see the wonderful video below by Praeger University). Hope most likely wants to go it alone, she probably feels she has something to prove, but I am guessing the film will demonstrate that even if she is the stronger of the two heroes, she still needs Scott for what he has to offer her and she can't give herself: love.

In this image, we see the van which has become super small, but will enlarge again in just a moment. The oscillation between the very big and very small demonstrates that the writers are staying in the current they began in Ant-Man, namely, "the margins." In terms of criticism, "the margins" are the places to where we push what we don't like or understand; imagine a child learning to read and coming upon a word they don't know; what do they do? They skip over it, and we do the same when engaging with the world or art and encountering something that "doesn't make sense," so we push it to the margin of our mind and forget about it. Jacques Derrida, however, argued that such spaces are usually where the really important stuff takes place, and we recognize that something doesn't "make sense" because we are meant to be drawn into the illogical to explore it, not dismiss it. So, in Ant-Man and the Wasp, we see things that are incredibly small and incredibly large--both "spaces" which we aren't used to seeing being employed--so the question is, why are the film makers using this vocabulary? Well, from Hope's perspective, we can see her as going from being really small and insignificant (a bureaucrat at her father's company) to a super-hero with incredible powers; that makes for a dizzy trip. What I expect to happen--but of course I could be wrong--is that, through the events and her journey of discovery, Hope will accept having "been little" so she has a better grounding to now being powerful. Why should we care? Mostly because we ourselves are little. Most of us are rather insignificant and don't matter (or feel we don't) so understanding how important it is to "be good at being little" is important to us the audience and our real lives, recognizing that being a good parent, spouse and friend is necessary, and our own souls are the most important battle front where we have to "fight the bad guys" who want to convert us to their own vices by becoming bitter over being small and insignificant. 

We are likely to get either a few clips or another trailer before the release of the film, so having that "head start" on the film will help us to know what to look for. In the meantime, I have at least caught up on the Marvel films I missed (Spider-Man: Homecoming--which was much better than I anticipated--and Thor 3: Ragnarok--which was awesome!) but, as excited as I was that The Avengers was opening on my birthday, I was so bogged down with obligations that I missed it; maybe this weekend. But, as promised, here is an excellent video on Feminism from a former Feminist.

Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner