This movie is terrible. But upon reflection today, the premise is actually fascinating. Superman has the best kind of Superman crisis, caused by the limits he places on himself. He has the power to remove all nuclear weapons from the world, but should he? This is the kind of thing Lex Luthor could sound very reasonable to be concerned about: what's Superman going to do next? Throw all bombers into the sun? Ground entire airforces? Ban armies? Why is it okay that Superman is *unilaterally *making this decision?
Of course at this point the movie turns into the bad kind of Superman movie, one where his problems can be solved by sufficient punching.
And then after all the stupid we get this: >I thought I could give you all the gift of the freedom from war, but I was wrong. It’s not mine to give. And there will be peace – there will be peace when the people of this world want it so badly that their governments will have no choice but to give it to them.
I suppose Israel and Hamas made me think of this.
This. Peace cannot come unless the civilians on both sides are loudly and forcefully willing to die rather than kill civilians on the other side. The problems can only be solved on an individual level.
You would need to find a way to make food spontaneously emit microwaves so it loses energy and cools off. That probably involves altering the strength of one of the nuclear forces or something.
I wanted a web app where a group could study the Bible together, make notes on passages, and discuss each others' notes. I couldn't find one, so I'm making one. Progress is good so far! What features might anyone like to see in such an app? What do you need when keeping your notes and discussions organized?
Yes! My thinking is that Riker stayed on the Enterprise as long as he did because Picard is the first male authority figure in his life that he can respect and learn from. Riker is hyper-competent, but he has no sort of relationship with his father, his first captain barely survived a mutiny while performing illegal experiments, he had no problem pushing back on the captain of the Hood doing dangerous stupid things, and he would rather step down than work for Jellico. Not to mention having to phaser a few admirals to death. Riker's whole history is a search for a man he can trust, and he found that in Picard.
So what changed, that he finally gave that up and moved on?
Most of what works in the Star Trek movies evolve from what we know about the characters. Kirk's love for his ship and history with the Klingons, Picard's history with the Borg, Data's struggle with emotions, that sort of thing.
What character threads from any of the series could have been picked up and expanded on in movies?
I suggest a different approach in some blog posts I worked through a couple years ago: https://saladeggs.blogspot.com/2021/06/reconstructing-christian-ethics-01.html
In short, I suggest sin is that part of you that drives you to self-destruction and destruction of others, and the actions flowing out of it. Discipleship is the process of becoming a non-destructive person.