There were times and even recently where I thought I knew everything and worried about it. Well then I realize. . . I DON’t KNOW EVERYTHING. That is such a comforting thought.

The thought that there is such a greater being that is in control of the world. . . who knows the names of the stars (Hey, I can count to one hundred or more but He KNOWS THEM BY NAME. . . faster than I know the states of the United States of America), who has all of us somewhere in life and knows our hearts. . . He is in control of all of our lives. Wow.

He has us somewhere in this world and whether we believe in Him or not. . . He is there. He loves us so much, He cares for us. . . and His thoughts of us outnumber the grains of sand.

Ignore that blog entry I put down that says “What do you think?” because. . . I didn’t know WHAT I was thinking when I wrote it. ha ha ha

I might have a blog one day. . .

Sometimes I haven’t looked to the heart or the heart that is beating in me. I want to hear from people who are wherever they are today. . . I want to hear people and how they are doing. I feel sometimes like I have been a light in a big world. . . but that simply isn’t true. I am not the only one.

And I hope that, Unk, you will forgive me for being like a shark and posting answers for people on this thing before you get to . . . because this is YOUR BLOG. It isn’t mine.

God warms hearts. . . He comforts . . . and when we want to live for Him . . . He has us GROW IN HIM. . . like branches on a vine.

Love ya. . . and if you don’t think I do. . . I love ya in God. . . and Christ because He is so much and we have done so little.

What up, Unk?

:)

They are not villans, which are generally just considered to be selfish and mean douchebags with moralless, or even counter-moral values (by counter moral I mean, they enjoy doing terrible things just because). Villans also tend to have an AGENDA of hurting people both innocent and guilty. While an antihero may hurt people, they never derive pleasure from an innocent, unless that is one of the flaws they are specifically working to change.

An antihero is also not a pure hero. Pure heroes are heroes who have few to no flaws, and definately no major flaws. They have agendas which revolve only around helping people and tend to follow a do no harm (or at least as little as physically possible) rule. If a pure hero has to choose between saving a few and saving many, he/she will try to find a way to save everybody first, and then reluctantly choose to save the many. If a pure hero fails to help someone because they can’t it doesn’t make them an antihero, but it might still turn them into one. A pure hero will still read the morally gray as black and white, but will then dole out punishment and reward in proportion to the action, sometimes with a little extra reward for good things cause they’re “just so darn nice”.

An Antihero is essentially anything between these two extremes. This means that there are any number of different types of antiheroes, some closer to hero, some closer to villan. However that is exactly what makes the antihero such an interesting character type. He is not some simplified representation of morals and ideals, or complete lack of or opposition to them. Antiheroes are supposed to be more like real characters, whether they are rigid black and whiteists or morally grey characters, they are flawed, underinformed, misunderstood/misunderstanding, they do things for reasons which sometimes conflict.

Antiheroes are also the most versatile characters. They can play any role, antagonist, protagonist, or plot development. They can also switch sides as their understanding of the situation changes, or as their emotions lead them. they are essentially the playground for writers who like character development. True villans can’t change much and heroes can be turned into antiheroes given certain extreme situations, but antiheroes can readily grow and change and regress and conform and break away like it’s nothing.

Using this very extended definition, most if not all characters can be classified as antiheroes if they have any measure of complexity about them.

Jean Valjean is the true “Hero” of the story, but he is more pragmatic than Inspector Javert, the apparent “Antihero.” What defines Hero vs. Antihero is not HOW people function, but WHY they function. Valjean devoted his entire life to a nobler, higher cause: To be an Upright Man. Upright does not necessarily mean “Honest,” but the two are related. Valjean was willing to do whatever worked in order to maintain being an Upright man and to do the morally right thing when the situation called for it. Javert, the antihero, believed that the Law was right no matter what, and that all people were treated justly under it. If people subverted the law, they deserved a fate worse than death, because they were horrible people. There is nothing wrong with Javert’s style of thinking, except that it was based on a flawed system of what was right or wrong. Javert’s principles of right and wrong were absolute, not relative, like Valjean’s. Because of the inflexibility of his decision-making processes, he inevitable killed himself at the end of the book.

Rather than define Hero and Antihero by their virtues, I prefer to define them BOTH by what they are not. They are both NOT the Villain, which is something all men don’t want to be (Thenardier in the case of Les Miserables). The Hero is right, but the Antihero is not in the wrong.

The world can be such a harsh place. . . but there are heroes out there (in the real world, I mean).

God bless the heroes of today.

God Bless.

To speak neutral, he was to some a “figure to Christianity.” Wasn’t he more than that? Wasn’t he more than a person who spoke and “influenced” others?

C. S. Lewis has written about him. He has said that people may have killed Him because He was not right in their eyes.

TO the Jewish, he “Blasphemed” because he did things during the Sabbath (miracles).

A hero? He is definitely one to me and many others today.

FYI, for all of you guys:

The NYT has lots of great articles on film (reviews of course, but also articles on ‘the biz,’ profiles on screenwriters, directors, festivals, independents, etc.). I think it offers a lot of valuable insight when it comes to wrting your screenplay (or at least some worthwhile procrastination).

Friday is the paper’s big fil review day. Sunday is good too. But you’ll pretty much find something of value any day of the week. Plus it’s full of great ideas for screenplays (the obit section can really offer some fascinating stories).

Boyer

People that are like brothers and sisters; the troops who fight for the Lord and the ones who don’t know, YOU are ALSO the definite HEROES of this country. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I love the “trying to get through the door to survive” and the other “trying to prevent it;” I never saw plot that way.

Plus: The one girl on the right is not completely innocent.

God bless writers.