Kudos to the city council and mayor of Los Angeles, California for exhibiting rare leadership by mandating that pornographic film actors wear condoms when they make their films within the LA city limits.

With just a few strokes of his pen, the mayor has saved literally dozens of lives, probably. Actually, it’s probably millions of lives, because now not only will the performers in pornographic films be completely protected from uncovered penises, but the people who watch pornographic films will be reminded of how great condoms are, and they will emulate their pornographic film performer heroes and put them on when they engage in their own coitus.

That is what you call a “win-win.”

I’m not going to pretend to know anything about pornographic films, myself. If I tried to talk to you about pornography, I’d come off like Mitt Romney talking about shooting “small varmints, if you will.” But I would like to think that seeing James Deen wrap up his pecker before sticking it into the buttocks of, oh let’s say Naomi Russell, would be a welcome development for the pornographic film connoisseur, of which I am not one. Seriously, if you presented me with a lineup of Tori Black, Stoya, Carmen Kinsley, Eve Lawrence, and Jennifer White and told me to tell you which of them was whom, I would probably not be able to tell you, especially if they weren’t wearing any makeup. I understand they all look different without makeup.

I don't know who this is.

It’s just not my world, you see. As far as I know, the letters “ATM” stand for “Automated Teller Machine,” and nothing else. The only “Bang Brothers” I know are Archie and Chester Bang, of the Hampton Bangs. I met them while summering in the Hamptons in my long-ago youth. Oh, the times we had! That special summer I learned the true value of the word “teamwork,” when I and Chester and Archie and Bobo and Fritzy and the Jimster all worked together to win the big regatta against an upstart team led by the son of the groundskeeper. I digress. Anyway, the LA government has been on this beat for awhile now:

Los Angeles County public health officials backtracked Tuesday on their statements last week that at least 16 unpublicized cases of HIV in adult film performers had been reported to them since 2004.

Despite their release of data to The Times describing the cases as “adult film performers,” the county’s top health official acknowledged that the agency does not know whether any of those people were actively working as porn performers at the time of their positive test.
…
County public health officials said they had mislabeled all reports from the AIM clinic as adult performers when, in fact, information about their occupation is unclear. Although the clinic was created primarily to serve the porn industry, it serves other clients.

I would also like to commend the Los Angeles city council for the money-saving steps they took in adopting this requirement without going to the mess and bother of holding an actual vote on the subject.

The city would have had to spend over $4 million to hold the election, and city officials said a decision to simply adopt the condom requirement allowed them to dodge that costly poll.

Los Angeles City Councilman Paul Koretz, who brought the measure, said he expected residents at the ballot box would have overwhelmingly approved the condom requirement, so it was a “no-brainer” to adopt it now.

“For us right now, our only real policy issue is do we spend $4 million and have this become law? Or do we not spend $4 million and have this become law?” Koretz said.

The LA city council is known for its frugality. They’re always looking for ways to save money. Not only does this save the city the cost of holding an election, it also saves the pornographic film companies the expense of mounting some kind of campaign to convince voters to let their workers decide for themselves whether they want to use condoms or not. It’s my hope that the city council will extend this money-saving practice to other “election” issues. For instance, it’s pretty clear that Barack Obama is going to carry Los Angeles. So why don’t they just pass a resolution saying that Barack Obama carried Los Angeles, and then spare the expense of holding an actual vote? The city council can use that money to go toward Los Angeles’s storied mass transit system.

As happy as I am that the city of Los Angeles has adopted this no-brainer condom mandate, I have to wonder why it is that the mayor and the city council are only looking to protect pornographic film performers? After all, they’re not the only ones having coitus. It’s my understanding that a lot of people who don’t actually film themselves also enjoy having sex. And yet, the city council has said to these people, “Go ahead and have unprotected sexual relations with each other! Go ahead and catch diseases. We don’t care! If we did, we’d pass a law mandating that everyone who has sex wear a condom!”

Oh, I’m being farcical. Obviously I don’t think that everyone who has sex should have to wear a condom. Just those who are not currently married. Think about it. These people are out having sex with who knows whom, catching who knows what kinds of diseases, and then we all end up having to pay for it.

I am tired of it. We have to do something about it.

People do not have the right to abuse themselves. We don’t allow people to take just whatever drug they want. We don’t allow people to sell their own organs. We don’t allow people to just walk on an airplane without being frisked. We don’t allow people to drive without wearing a seatbelt. We have decided — as a society — to make certain decisions for you. In case you’re too stupid to make the right one.

Just as I don’t want to have to pay for your lung cancer treatment because you smoked, just as I don’t want to have to pay for your diabetes or heart disease medicine because you’ve eaten too much fast food, just as I don’t want to pay for your drug treatment because you got addicted to the marijuana, so too I don’t want to pay for your Valtrex because you think you’re too “cool” to remain in a committed relationship with one single sexual partner for the rest of your life like society says is the right way to do things, and you signed that social contract when you were born here if you didn’t like it you should have been born elsewhere.

I am totally unbiased in this argument. I don’t know Sunny Lane from Faye Reagan, and if they and Lexi Belle invited me to engage in some MFFF action I wouldn’t know what the hell they were talking about. But I do believe in protecting people; especially those people who refuse to protect themselves in the manner that I know is best.

I don't know who this is, either.

10. It’s Larry the Cable Guy’s first dramatic turn

9. Your movie was the basis for the television show “Working It”

8. It stars either Smurfs, gnomes, or chipmunks

7. The opening and the closing credits meet in the middle

6. The jury at Cannes recommended the death penalty

5. It’s called Incredibly Quiet and Extremely Far Away

4. During its in-flight run, people kept walking out

3. Like The Artist, it’s a silent film, but only due to a technical error

2. Instead of Meryl Streep, it stars Merle Haggard

1. In his review, Roger Ebert said he wished he had more than two thumbs to put down
 
Bob Sullivan’s Top Ten Everything appears every Monday.

On Sunday, I was leafing through People when I spotted somebody I used to work with in the gossip pages. Apparently she’s dating a movie star and they are about to get married.

Wow.

The fact that she was marrying a movie star didn’t shock me so much (her sister is a well-known actress) but rather that somebody I knew had made it into the pages of a tabloid. A law of nature had been violated: celebrity magazines should contain pictures of people I don’t know, like Angelina Jolie, or Jennifer Aniston, or Michael Jackson’s (ex) doctor.

So, I thought if my former colleague can get in then why not me? All it takes is a chance encounter. Last week, for instance, I read about an actress on some cop show that left her rock musician husband for a pizza delivery boy. For three years she and the pizza boy lived together. I saw a picture of him with her on the red carpet. He looked embarrassed.

Actually, now that I come to think of it, this isn’t the first time I’ve been surprised like this. A few years back I was riding on a bus in Ukraine. Remarkably, the bus had a TV and a DVD player on it and for a few hours I watched a terrible Russian Die Hard knock-off in which Chechen terrorists took an entire circus audience hostage. Suddenly a dude I knew appeared on screen. He was playing an editor at CNN.

I was so startled I wanted to tell the other passengers: Hey, see that really bad actor on the screen, the big fat guy? I know him! But it would have meant nothing to them, so I kept silent.

That kind of thing used to happen to my brother all the time. He went to Cambridge University, which (along with Oxford) is where many of the people who run the UK’s media- politico-business establishment spend their wild youths taking drugs, sleeping with each other and sitting the occasional exam. Shortly after graduation he started seeing lots of people he had known showing up on children’s TV shows, writing for newspapers, or (in one instance) even co-writing a movie with Mel Gibson. Some of them were genuinely talented; just as many were hacks.

My brother was perplexed. Coming from a small town where nobody does anything or goes anywhere, he had naively spent his time at Cambridge getting a good education, not realizing that the actual purpose of the institution is to make lots of contacts within Britain’s nepotistic establishment. Doh!

As for me, I don’t know anyone famous. However, I have had a few encounters with the press whenever I’ve written a book. At first I hated posing for pictures so much I used a wooden effigy of myself instead. These days I wear a hat and dark glasses.

The truth however is that in Britain, and especially in America, writing a book is considered such an eccentric thing to do that you’re in no danger of becoming famous unless by some miracle you make a mountain of cash. But once I went to Poland for a book tour where some of the socialist era- reverence for the written word still remains. My first appearance was with a very famous Polish author. A TV crew had shown up and they wanted to talk to me. Why? I asked.

But that was only the beginning. Everywhere I went, I was interviewed. My face was in the papers. People knew who I was. It was a very strange sensation. Then I got home to Texas, where I resumed my position on the social ladder slightly above a homeless person- which was a relief, I can tell you.

That kind of attention, even on a small scale, can be very seductive. My ego was delighted in Poland. But just take a look at ancient rock stars like Mick Jagger, or Paul McCartney and you can see the deleterious effects of flattery on a person. Long after the creative spark has sputtered and died, these old codgers continue prancing about in public just so they can score another hit of the ultimate ego-boosting drug, adulation.

But back to my acquaintance in the gossip magazines: later that evening I was standing in line at the grocer’s when I picked up a copy of The National Enquirer. The cover screamed CELEBRITY PLASTIC SURGERY DISASTERS! and I couldn’t resist.

So there I was, reading about Britney’s great big chemical breasts, when I turned the page and… it was my ex-colleague again! This time the story was different though, she had been introduced to her fiancé not by her sister but rather MERYL STREEP!

Well, who was it? I wondered, my mind nearly cracking under the strain.

Guess I’ll have to buy next week’s issue to find out. Then again, I could just send her an email.

Originally published at RIA Novosti, the home of awesome

10. Homo for the Holidays

9. Makin’ Gravy

8. Deep Turkey

7. Pull My Wishbone!

6. Debbie Does Plymouth

5. Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Gay Pride Parade

4. Butter Balls

3. Do You Want A Breast Or A Thigh?

2. Poke-ahontas

1. Go Ahead and Stuff It!
 

Bob Sullivan’s Top Ten Everything appears every Monday.

Dear Executives of Film,

The other day,  I was at the movies when a PSA flashed on the screen before the previews.  It was a plea from theater owners who are doubtlessly lamenting the move of their audience from the movie theater to their own living room thanks to game changers like Netflix and OnDemand. The PSA was actually pretty effective- there is something huge and remarkably profound that gets loss in the move from big screen to small screen. But I was shaking my head because it seems that you are all still missing the point regarding why we’ve, largely, stepped away from the movies.

We haven’t left the movies because of the prices and the sudden inconvenience of trekking to a neighborhood theater with sky-high gas prices (although none of this has helped). We’ve left because, frankly, you’re not telling the right stories.

You’re terrified of the “riskiness” of original stories

Sequels, prequels, remakes, movies adapted from video games and board games and old television shows. That’s what we get now. When Lion King was re-released and trounced the box office, you hurried to re-release other old Disney classics. We’re not flocking to them just because they’re familiar, guys. They’re just way better than the paltry family fare you’ve offered of late (with some notable exceptions from Pixar and Dreamworks). When’s the last time we saw a live-action family movie that didn’t star Johnny Depp as a pirate?

You’re lazy and greedy, a bad combination

Let’s thank 3D for exposing the ugliest of your ingrown hairs. When Avatar did wonders for movies in 3D, did we see an uptick in beautiful, big screen examples of the genre? No. You slapped on cheesy 3D effects on already terrible movies and asked us to pay $16 to see them. It was crude, insulting and now you’re paying the price.

And the biggest reason- you still don’t get us

When Bridesmaids came out, the public endured endless sound bites from executives like you about how you were scratching your heads over the fact that women actually like comedies too. You said the same things when the first installment of Sex and the City was released to blockbuster attendance. You said the same things when Something’s Gotta Give and It’s Complicated came out and were hits, despite the presence of (distinctly not 26 year old starlets) Diane Keaton and Meryl Streep on the marquee.  You sit and you stew over Tyler Perry’s prowess at the box office, wondering about his secret formula when anyone who visits the Apple Movie Trailers site can see it immediately- pages of movie posters featuring white people in various states of distress.

Imagine what it would do for movies if you suddenly started making original films that reflected the rest of America- family dramas and romantic comedies and action movies and horror flicks that also happen to be brimming with cultural identities other than that of the Caucasian Male. Why does a romantic comedy starring two Chinese-American leads have to feel like such an anomaly? Or, for that matter, why is it so mind-boggling to imagine an action movie with the heroes being from the Middle East, a family drama that focuses on the grandparents, a movie that’s set in Hawaii that doesn’t star Adam Sandler? How about just one big, tentpole movie that doesn’t simply relegate African Americans to the background or wisecracking sidekick roles?

Do you really think that I, as a white woman, can’t relate to the trials of human experience? And even if I find myself in a movie home that doesn’t resemble the one I was raised in, do you really think there’s nothing left to be learned from each other’s experiences? Movies taught me how to dream big. That’s why I’m so surprised to find you all thinking so small.

Movies are not dead. The theater where I saw that PSA, for instance, was decently filled for a random Wednesday night in November. There is still clamor and chatter online over new trailers for upcoming films, podcasts and blogs filled to the rafters with posts about movies, their stars and the stories behind them. We love movies and we will always love movies.

You’re right about one thing- it could be better. But until you start making (good, smart, original) movies for all of us, nothing will really change. And we will all continue to lose.

Officially stated for the record,

Judi

By now you have no doubt heard that according to astronomers and anthropologists, December 21, 2012 correlates to the “end” of the Mayan calendar. And, despite having repeatedly heard about this for many, many years now, it is also very probable that you still have no idea exactly what this means. The reason is because it’s very complicated. To even begin to understand it you need to look to the Mayan myths of the Sacred Tree and understand their incredibly complex Long Count calendar of tuns, k’atuns, and b’aktuns as well as their concepts of the Great Cycle, the Great Great Cycle, and cycles within cycles. You’d also need to understand astronomical occurrences involving the precession of the equinoxes and the conjunction of the sun at the intersection of the plane of the ecliptic and the Milky Way. You can do all that, or, you can simply read my interpretation of this summer’s Green Lantern movie, which shares the same message as the Mayan mythology.

If you’re unlike most people, you actually saw Green Lantern, the critics’ least favorite of this summer’s slew of superhero movies that included Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, and X-Men: First Class. Going in with really low expectations, I actually enjoyed the film, but was a bit disappointed on how little of Green Lantern’s abilities were explored. Unlike every other superhero, Green Lantern must rely on his mind to conjure up his powers. For this reason, he is only as powerful as his imagination. He is the superhero of creativity, but the film only touched on this briefly towards the end, choosing instead to focus on fearlessness as the source of his power.

On the face of it, the film was pretty standard superhero fare, but looking deeper, I really dug the film’s unintended, subconscious message, channeled by the movie’s shamanic writers. In The Myth of Lost and previous columns, I wrote how I believe today’s writers, musicians, artists, and poets are modern day shaman, translating the messages of the collective unconscious to the masses—even if they themselves are unaware that they are doing so. There are many messages out there, and different groups of writers and artists are in tune with different channels, or frequencies. It’s like there is a giant universal radio playing and the shaman have the volume tuned up louder than most people but are all listening to different stations. I’ve suspected that I have been listening to the same station as Damon Lindelof, J. J. Abrams, and M. Night Shyamalan because their stories often share the same mythological messages as whatever I’d been working on at the time of their release. It’s also the same station that Matt Stone and Trey Parker of South Park listen to. In fact, this week’s episode focused on a spoof of Thor and The History Channel involving pilgrims, Native Americans and a space portal while my translation of the same message (which hit me back in June) involves Green Lantern, The History Channel, the native Latin Americans and an energy portal from space. It’s the same core message for different audiences. This particular message is also the same as that of the Mayan legends relating to 2012, since we are approaching the end of the same cycle that they are based upon.

To begin with, let’s get something out of the way. To the Mayans, the end of their calendar had nothing to do with the end of the world. In fact, they made prophesies about dates that would occur well after the December 2012 end date (correlating to their calendar’s K’atun 4 Ahau). The end just marks the end of a Great Cycle (5,125 years). Upon its completion, it simply begins again, with events, life lessons, and growing experiences occurring in a similar fashion to the way they had when the cycle was run through previous times. Only now, with societies having grown since then, these events would play out differently. It’s just like a vertical spiral where each point plays out similarly to the corresponding point directly below it but in a slightly elevated way.

So if this is the case, why all the focus on world disasters, crashed economies, and world upheaval? We’ve seen major uprisings in the Middle East, devastating tsunamis in Japan, floods in the Mid-West and earthquakes all over the place. In New York City this year alone I’ve experienced a hurricane, earthquake, and massive blizzards, not to mention a major Nor’easter in October! What gives? Well, since we are reaching the end of a cycle, we are coming to a checkpoint that allows us to continue up the spiral. If we had been proactive and grown enough on our own, it would’ve been smooth sailing. However, we have not done this and so must experience challenges that will help us to grow. Government upheavals are happening to help rid the world of corrupt dictators, crippling tsunamis to push us away from our reliance on nuclear energy (since the station in Japan was flooded), a major oil leak to encourage us to move away from our reliance on fossil fuels, global economy crashes to try to get us to move towards a more equal system, and natural disasters to help us to work together to solve many our current problems including water shortages, crumbling infrastructures, and bankrupt cities. We are not being punished; we are being pushed to grow because we did not do enough on our own. The world is about to evolve and if we are going to stay here we must evolve with it.

So, what does any of this have to do with Green Lantern and how does that film in any way resemble Mayan mythology? As described in Kenneth Johnson’s Parabola article, “The Shape of History: Time and the Mayan Calendar,” the final segment of the Mayans’ Great Cycle calendar is known as K’atun 4 Ahau, representing a roughly twenty year period that began (in its most recent appearance) on April 6, 1993 and ends on December 21, 2012. Each of these k’atuns last about twenty years and has its own set of prophecies expressed in poetic metaphors. The most repeated prophesy for this k’atun is: “Hulom kuk, hulom yaxum,” translated as “Come is the quetzal, come is the blue-green bird.” The quetzal is a bird that is symbolic of the Mesoamerican god Quetzalcoatal—the Feathered Serpent whose spirit was believed to return during each repetition of K’atun 4 Ahau. If you know mythology, or at least my writings about it, you probably know that snakes (most likely because they shed their skin) often represent the illusion of time in the physical realm (as opposed to the spiritual realm where time does not exist as we know it). To me, a feathered serpent would be a portal between the material world of time and the spiritual world (spirit is light as a feather, and feathers allow creatures to fly high, where the spiritual realm is thought to exist).

According to Johnson, “the reference to the ‘blue-green bird’ is puzzling when applied to the quetzal which is in fact bright green in color”—green, much like our superhero friend and the ring that is the source of his power (which I’ll get to soon). Johnson goes on to write that, “In Mayan thinking, the center of the universe is blue-green” and the word used to describe it, “yax” is also often used to refer to “beginnings or to the center point.”

So during this final k’atun, which we are quickly approaching the final year of, the Mayans believed that the spiritual energy of the Feathered Serpent will reach our world from the very center of creation. While it may bring about massive growing pains, this energy is in fact meant to lift us higher so that we can exist on the next, higher plane of existence, just as it did the last time it came around. Since the Mayan Great Cycle is the equivalent of 5,125 years, that is how often each of these k’atuns repeat and how long it takes for the Great Cycle to go full circle and begin again. The last time humanity experienced the end of a Great Cycle was in 3,114 BCE (the scientific equivalent of B.C.), which corresponds to the beginnings of civilization in Egypt and Mesopotamia and with it the start of urbanization, writing, and the spread of metallurgical technologies. Before that the Great Cycle came full circle in 8,239 BCE, which marked the transition from hunting to agriculture, allowing humans to settle down and build societies. Since 1993 when our current k’atun began, we’ve seen the rise of the Internet, which has helped unite the world and push technology along faster than any other time in history. We are now at a point however, where we must grow to be responsible for the effects of this technology on ourselves and our world. That, will most likely be the theme as we enter the next Great Cycle beginning December 21 of next year.

Interestingly, there is an incredibly rare astronomical event that coincides with December 21, 2012.  This event is foretold in Mayan mythology and has remnants in our own mythology involving the snake in the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Life. On that day, our sun will align at the exact intersection between the plane of the ecliptic (the path that the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars appear to travel, from east to west, as seen from Earth) and our Milky Way galaxy. This cosmic cross was known as the Sacred Tree (Tree of Life) to the Maya with the north-south band of the Milky Way being the trunk of the tree and the main branch intersecting the tree being the plane of the ecliptic. The ecliptic intersects the Milky Way at a 60 degree angle near the constellation Sagittarius where there is a 13th constellation that crosses the ecliptic known as Ophiuchus. It is represented as a man (humanity) grasping a snake (the illusion of time) and is often considered the mysterious 13th sign of the zodiac. According to Mayan mythology, when the sun crosses at the center of the Sacred Tree (the center of the Milky Way where there is said to be a massive black hole), an energy portal is created between the earth and the world beyond so that we can interact with the spiritual realm. Many spiritual types today believe that the alignment will open a channel for cosmic energy to flow to Earth, raising us to a higher vibration.

Due to a phenomenon known as the precession of the equinoxes caused by a slight spinning top-like wobble of the Earth, the position of the stars as seen from our perspective slip a little from year to year (one degree every 71.5 years), becoming more noticeable over long periods. For this reason, the apparent location of the Winter Solstice (December 21st) sunrise has been inching towards the galactic center. Because of the Earth’s wobble, a true alignment takes even longer than a Great Cycle of 5,125 years. In fact, the sun has not aligned this precisely with the galactic center in 25,800 years—long before the Mayans even existed. So December 21, 2012 not only marks the end of the Mayan’s Great Cycle, but also the end of the Great Great Cycle of 25,800 years known scientifically as a Great Year or Platonic Year—the time it takes the precession of the equinoxes to make one complete rotation. This is a pretty big deal.

The question you may be wondering then is how did the Mayans know all this? Did they learn it from a more advanced civilization that predated their own? Was it gleaned using an ability to mind-meld with the planet? Did ancient alien visitors clue them in? While I am open to any of these possibilities, the real answer is probably more feasible. As a society that lived much more directly off of the land, they were far more in tune with its cycles than we are today. Having a simpler way of life also made it easier to recognize repeating patterns, and having a far clearer sky not polluted by smog or lights made it possible for the average person to see the stars and calculate their movements fin order to chart crop cycles and other important rituals. Like many civilizations of its time, Mayans also relied on shamans to interpret events and make predictions. While shamanism is making a comeback today, for the most part our modern society has lost a way to get in tune with the natural pulse of the planet and the heavens.

Ancient shamans were gifted with the ability to hear the frequencies of the world and their people, and they used the fresh, natural plants all around them to enhance these abilities further. These medicines were a more natural mix of plants than the synthetic, enhanced, pesticide-rich, nutrient-poor drugs of today and were used by skilled shaman who either took them themselves or guided others on how to properly do so. Ancient drugs used by Mayans, Egyptians, Greeks, and others allowed shaman to connect with consciousness, or what they would consider their gods. When Christianity came around, it banned drug use because why should anyone need the church to interpret what God wants when drugs allowed you to do it on your own. Being illegal and then synthesized into increasingly potent combinations, drugs than led to abuse, which is why we have such a negative connotation of them today. Truth is, the banning of natural mind-enhancing drugs has effectively slowed our evolutionary process and losing our connection to relevant rituals, shamans, and a connection to the rhythms of life have practically brought it to a standstill. This is why ancient man could build gigantic pyramids, predict the movement of the heavens without telescopes, and move gigantic stones on top of one another while the average modern man wouldn’t last a week in the wilderness without any technological toys.

Thankfully, due to the incredible challenges mankind has overcome over the past 5,000 years, we have grown to the point that we can connect to universal wisdom without the use of drugs, and many artists, inventors, and game-changers have used them anyway to help fill in the gaps. The problem is that modern man no longer recognizes the messages of artists and storytellers for what they are—clues to where we are and where we are headed. I’m sure that few people walked out of Green Lantern with a message that ties in with Quetzalcoatl the Feathered Serpent, the galactic alignment, and the new era we are entering in 2012. For whatever reason, I did.

Green Lantern is our Quetzalcoatl. In our modern mythology, he represents the same archetype of the Feathered Serpent. Green Lantern is a bright green, just like quetzal, the symbolic bird representation of Quetzalcoatl. He is able to travel though portals like Quetzalcoatl, and in fact, the ring, which is the source of his power, took him through one of these portals to receive his initial training after he stated the oath.  That oath is:

In brightest day, in blackest night,
No evil shall escape my sight
Let those who worship evil’s might,
Beware my power… Green Lantern’s light

Interestingly, since the Earth will align with the sun and the Galactic Center on December 21st, I assume that it is also in relative alignment six months later on June 21st 2013, albeit, on the other side of the sun. These two dates are, of course, the Winter and Summer Solstice when we have the blackest night and brightest day on Earth. The oath also alludes to Green Lantern’s light—much like the blue-green light that emits from the center of the galaxy, the Mayan word for which also denotes a beginning or center point.

This brings us to the symbol of Green Lantern’s ring that he also bears on his chest—a glowing circle between two horizontal lines in another circle. Viewing the symbol through the lens of Mayan culture, it initially reminded me of the hoop for one of their games called pok-a-tok that is similar to our basketball and that I first learned about on a History Channel special about 2012. According to the special, the Mayan’s goal of getting the ball into the hoop represented the alignment of the sun with the galactic center. The victor of the game would be decapitated allowing him to pass directly to the spiritual realms without having to take the usual 13 steps to get there (correlating to the 13 constellations perhaps?). For the record, the loser would be killed as well, but without the express ticket to heaven.

The symbol of Green Lantern could also represent the galactic alignment itself. The glowing center would be the center of the galaxy with the lines above and below it representing the straight band of the Milky Way. All of this occurs behind the spherical sun represented by the bigger circle that surrounds the two parallel lines and the smaller, glowing circle. Put it together and the symbol represents the galactic alignment as it would appear from Earth

If these similarities weren’t enough, even the plot of Green Lantern can be seen to represent the galactic alignment. It involves an evil entity known as Parallax—a dark, shapeless creature that sucks up all in its path—much like a black hole (such as the one at the center of our galaxy) would. Interestingly, the December 2012 alignment also occurs with the Dark Rift—a dark band that runs along the Milky Way, parallel (sounding like Parallax?) within it from its galactic center northward. The Mayans called this Dark Rift the Black Road. So in a sense, on December 21, 2012, we will be aligned with our sun at the crossroads of dark and light.

At the conclusion of the film (spoiler alert), Green Lantern defeats Parallax by using its own immense gravity against itself, causing it to suck into the sun. To do this Green Lantern, representing the Earth, aligns himself with Parallax (the Dark Rift black hole) and the sun and must keep from getting sucked into either as the sun pulls Parallax into its fiery core. By proving himself, Green Lantern elevates all of humanity which is now accepted among the Guardians of the Universe as an elevated species worthy of protection. And what initially chose Earth for this honor? The alignment-shaped ring, representing the galactic alignment of 2012. It is interesting to note that while Green Lantern was created way back in 1940, the same year Batman appeared in his own comic book, it took until 2011—the year before the galactic alignment—before he would star in a motion picture. Why? I’d say because only now are we ready for the mythological message that the character represents. Its the same message that Quetzalcoatl represented for the Mayans: that we are entering a new era and are on the verge of being ready to enter it. To be deemed worthy, we must successfully overcome challenges we have never faced before. Challenges that will force us to grow so that we can handle the higher energy of this new era. Successfully doing so will earn us the respect of other entities and perhaps even other beings of this universe which may reveal themselves to us during this next Great Cycle.

As I mentioned earlier, we have many modern shaman and it isn’t just Green Lantern that is giving us this message. I also recognized it in this Summer’s J.J. Abrams/Spielberg film, Super 8. , The film is about a group of children in 1979 who discover a dangerous monster that adults are unaware of (due to a government cover-up) and are initially belittled for their belief that it exists. They use their childlike innocence, inner spirit, and imagination to repel the monster (which represents adult fear, superficiality, materialism) and send it away from our world. On a metaphorical level, the movie speaks to how people today have become disillusioned by government, big business, and materialism and believe we are headed for certain doom. Only those who are tune with a higher vision will be able to steer our world away from devastation (those who were kids in the 1970s perhaps?). Both Green Lantern and Super 8 share a hero who is courageous and creative and an otherworldly villain that threatens mankind by consuming it. They also both feature governing bodies that initially are hindrances to mankind (the Guardians in Green Lantern and U.S. government in Super 8) because they don’t view them as mature enough to handle the real-world challenges.

Getting away from movies, someone else who was preaching a similar elevation message is the recently ridiculed Harold Camping who made the failed predictions of a worldwide rapture/judgment for May 21, 2011 and the end of the world for October 21, 2011. While his predictions didn’t come to pass, I think he may have been onto something. Perhaps we are currently going through a judgment of sorts. One where we are tested with day-to-day challenges—some even seemingly trivial like a handicapped person asking for help or a homeless person angrily threatening you. Your response may determine the level of challenges you will need to undergo in order to handle the world to come.

I may be wrong, but just in case, I’ll be keeping my eyes open for strange encounters and tests from now until at least December of next year and really make an effort to grow out of my comfort zone. And you might want to do the same. Because even if nothing out of the ordinary happens on December 21, 2012, the world we live in now already requires us to tap into inner strengths we didn’t know we had. And challenging yourself is the best way to get them to rise to the surface.

May your inner spark grow to light your way,

Marc

Marc Oromaner is a New York City writer whose book, The Myth of Lost offers an alternative solution to Lost and uncovers its hidden insight into the mysteries of life. He can be contacted on the wall of The Myth of Lost Facebook page or on his blog The Layman’s Answers to Everything.

The Myth of Lost is available on Amazon and barnesandnoble.com.

Recent demonstrations by the disaffecteds occupying Wall Street and calling themselves the 99%, coming as they have on the proverbial heels of another populist revolt, the TEA Party, suggest that one thing is clear: people on the left and the right have had it with the status quo in Washington D.C…

…or have they?

Not likely…and I blame The Lion King.

A 3D version of the Disney epic is in theaters now promoting the film’s debut on Blu-ray disc. I went and saw it over the weekend for the first time since its original release in 1994. The intervening 17 years had faded my memory of its central themes, and I was struck by how illustrative the film is of nearly everything that’s currently wrong with American politics today: narcissism, elitism, and cronyism. Further, the film’s lasting popularity seems to suggest that no substantive changes are coming to American politics anytime soon, despite recent protests, because Americans want their king.

Recall that the plot pits the film’s young protagonist and heir to the throne, Simba, against his uncle, Scar, in a political battle for the kingship of Pride Rock. Through song, we learn that Simba is “brushing up on looking down“ and “just can’t wait to be king” so he can be “the mane (sic) event” and tell everybody to do things “all his way;” while Scar croons that “A shining new era Is tiptoeing nearer” and he’ll “be seen for the wonder [he is]…king undisputed, respected, saluted.” In other words, they both essentially represent the narcissism prevalent in so many of today’s leaders (Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Romney, Perry, Gingrich) while spelling-out their common position relative to Main Street: you need us to tell you what to do.

On cronyism, while Scar is explicit, “I know it sounds sordid but you’ll be rewarded…Of course, quid pro quo, you’re expected to take certain duties on board. The future is littered with prizes,” Simba’s cronyism is on display. His friends, Timon and Pumba (a meercat and a warthog, respectively) are protected from being eaten by other lions—at the expense of the lives of other animals—for no other reason than they’re Simba’s friends. I have to believe that the whole “circle of life” stuff is meager consolation for the animals who suffer in their stead…and the same can be said of the American taxpayer tired of bailouts, handouts, and corporate subsides.

The only apparently significant difference between Simba and Scar is their ascension to the throne. Scar murders his brother, the king, and forces Simba into exile. And while murder is certainly an immoral route to power, is it much more immoral than Simba’s route, the divine right of kings and succession? Hardly. The kingdom fails miserably under Scar’s rule and Simba returns to claim his rightful place as king. Of course under Simba’s rule the kingdom flourishes and returns to its former greatness, reinforcing the popular (but mistaken) notion that drives American politics: if only the right person were in charge, everything would be better, fairer, more prosperous, or whatever.

Until the American polity comes to grips with the fact that Simba and Scar are the same guy, that an all-powerful state (red or blue) is not the answer to a peaceful and prosperous social order, and that The Lion King is the mirror into which we look that needs to be broken, no amount of outlier protesting will likely lead to substantive societal change.

Shark Night, 3D came out a few months ago, you know. I saw in a preview commercial — just one time. Didn’t go out to see it. What I gathered is this: it is a movie about a night with lots and lots of sharks who come at you in 3D. Oh, and there are girls in bikinis — who, I imagine, come at you in 3D as well, but that is neither here nor there. 

It might have been a great movie (though I doubt it).  

As I say, the movie might be good (though I doubt it). Why, you ask, do I doubt it? 

(Stephen and Bruce)

In 1975, Stephen Spielberg found himself on Martha’s Vineyard with a techno-shark named Bruce that barely ever worked. This, if you don’t know, is why the shark appeared so seldom in the final film. And this, as Spielberg has said, is the best thing that could have happened. He needed to rethink things and to use his inner-Hitchcock to make the film scary. What is not seen in that film is the heart of its success as a thriller. 

Can Shark Night 3D have been good? Perhaps (though I doubt it), but only if its chances of success are not piled upon the catapult of 3D technology. Innumerable dimensions can exist in two, when you really think about it, while three dimensions can be flat and lifeless.

The human heart is 3D on a flat sheet of paper, as long as it is drawn well or written well, but no one can inflate a heart-balloon with holes in it. 

Well, I just hope that we are not going the direction, in all of our cultural thinking, of believing that “more,” “faster” and “more vivid” are necessarily scarier (or more effective) than a shadow moving under the water and looking up, hungrily, at the dangling legs of unsuspecting swimmers.

Chris Matarazzo’s ARTISTIC UNKNOWNS appears every Tuesday.

You know what I am sick of? George Lucas bashing. That’s what I am sick of. That said, I don’t think George Lucas is the Jesus of movie makers. I like Star Wars well enough. I really like Indiana Jones. The guy is great, but I’m not going to declare him the Shakespeare of Hollywood. He makes good, entertaining films with enough depth that they hold up for numerous viewings. What more can you ask?

But can we admit something, please? The original Star Wars trilogy is not the apex of film-making. Are those films the equals of Citizen Kane or Lawrence of Arabia or, heck — Schindler’s List? No. Of course they are not.

So, why, when Lucas made the second trilogy, did people act like he was spitting on the grave of Mother Theresa? — or even like he intentionally demolished a church he had built so many years before?

The Indiana Jones films are better than Star Wars, I think. This is certainly due to Spielberg’s genius. But I would wager that even Spielberg doesn’t see them as his finest work. I’m sure he is proud of them. He should be. They are iconic and wildly entertaining. But, as an artist, I think he has reached higher vistas.

So, why, when he and his pal George made Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did people react as if they had laid a big fart and floated a fedora on it? Why do they seem to act as if the two actually conspired to make a bad movie?

Oh, I’ll tell you why. But not yet.

Cut to earlier today and the question that inspired this article: My seven-year-old, a huge Indiana Jones fan (and a lad committed, he says — albeit not without some disappointment — to being an archaeologist one day, even if they don’t really carry guns and whips), asked me, “Dad — what was the very first Indiana Jones movie?” It was then that it occurred to me: the kid simply did not experience Indy the way my fellow forty-somethings and I did. We saw one movie and waited for the next and the next and the next, etc. I made sure my boys saw them each, the first time, sequentially, but, now, they pop them in all of the time and watch them over and over, including Crystal Skull and even “Young Indiana Jones.”

See, we oldies waited, and as we waited, we built up expectations, learned quotes, bought Yoda T-shirts (and, consequently spent prom night with a bag of Doritos and a Lindsay Wagner poster) and, over the years, allowed the earlier movies to grow into legendary megaliths in our own minds. The question is: are the earlier Indy movies and the Star Wars original trilogy really that much better than the new ones? — or better at all?

Granted, there are things not to like in the new ones. CGI in the new films makes certain things hokey. Jar-Jar is annoying. But, as a whole, are they really worse as films? (I can never, ever again watch the desert chase scene in Last Crusade. Enough, already. And those teddy bear guys in Jedi? Cripes.)

(Somewhere, a guy with a goatee and a soggy Slurpee cup just sputtered and said, “Really? Sure. Yeah. This guy should be critiquing Star Wars,” called his friend by voice-command on his new Droid and said, “Yeah, Cooper? Dude. That arts dope on When Falls the Coliseum just called Ewoks ‘little teddy bear guys’!” — to which, they sang out, in unison: “Tool!”)

Wait for it . . . Here come the flood of reasons why Lucas has “lost it” and why I am an idiot to compare the new films to the old ones, blah, blah, blah. And I accept everyone’s opinions, but I also accept that even though there is a lot to criticize about the old films, no one does it because the movies are thought of  as classics — which they truly are. But the viewing public is much less likely to see a follow up to a classic as a future classic than they are to pre-judge it as a substance-less cash-in.

Well, there is only one way to really answer my question. When my boys are my age and their generation of Indy and Star Wars fans have lived into adulthood with both the originals and the sequels, we will ask them. It will be interesting to see the opinions of mature minds that have taken in the movies as a group and not as cinematic miracles that became a challenge fueled by decades of idealization — and quoting. Lots of quoting.

Chris Matarazzo’s ARTISTIC UNKNOWNS appears every Tuesday.