Modern Mars Hill

The Sokovia Accords were (supposedly) because of the Avengers' rampant property damage and third-degree murder. Shouldn't a trial have come first? A trial that involved the appearance of at least one legal representative of the Avengers, each member of the Avengers, and witnesses? How would that trial have gone if it had happened during Civil War and the Sokovia Accords hadn't happened yet? Here are my guesses. Hawkeye would get off almost completely. He caused the least property damage, killed no humans, and while he might be charged with assault, he could get off with a temporary insanity plea since he was mind-controlled or in self-defense during each instance of assault. He'd probably get even less of a penalty since he's not an active member of the Avengers after Sokovia. He'd probably get a $10,000 fine for property damage. Assuming the UN still bothers to try Banner after the events of Infinity War (when Banner finally gets back to earth)...

Sexual misconduct is inappropriate no matter who you are. I don't care how rich or powerful you are, and I don't care how good of a movie you made, you don't have license to engage in sexual misconduct. I do think a fair trial is necessary for sex offenders before punishing them with anything, including being fired. Not because I don't believe the accusers, but because a fair trial is necessary for every crime, and this should be treated as an actual crime, not as something taboo that at best ge ts you fired or gets you 3 months in prison as a warning to others. Are there some flaws in a fair trial? Yes. A jury might declare a guilty person to be innocent or declare an innocent person to be guilty. A fair trial might give too light a sentence, though I'm not sure I would consider that a fair trial. But I think it would frequently give people the punishment they deserve instead of the slap on the wrist and publicity they too frequently get.

There is a fallacy in supply and demand theory that all remotely relevant supply will equally fulfill a particular demand. While the idea seems reasonable, it's not accurate. Let's take an example from film. This could apply to visual arts, music, or any business. It's just easy to find the numbers on film, see what goes on in the making of the product, and theorize about what led to a particular success or failure. There's an argument that so many movies come out each year that any particular movie has (statistically) a less-than-0.7% chance of being a box office success (the math usually checks out). Deadpool was considered a box-office success. It made $783.1M on its $58M budget. In Hollywood, making 2-4 times your budget is considered a success. Deadpool made more than 13 times its budget. It was a passion project from a 1st-time director. Now, that doesn't mean that passion projects will succeed or that movies have a better chance of succeeding...

CBS: Please reboot the Mission: Impossible TV show The 2 most recent Mission: Impossible films have been box office successes, allowing a TV show to ride off the success of those films. The original series was well-received enough that the grandparents who watched the original series would want to see the new series. Mostly, the movies have a serious problem that a TV show would fix. Problems=opportunities to make money. Here's the problem: We've had 5 Mission: Impossible mov ies, and in 4 of them, Ethan doesn't have the support of the IMF for the most important parts of the film. The characters are always shocked to have no IMF support, but the audience isn't anymore because we have barely any concept of what the IMF even is. We see a few shots of the inside of the IMF during the cold open of Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation, and that's the best we've had in over 11 years. Of course, having Tom Cruise in a TV show would be insanely expensive. Gett...

Wait a minute... In Inception , Cobb says no one can legally get him back to the US because of what he's done. What on earth did Cobb do that made him so sure that nobody  in the word could do anything to get him back into the US legally? Couldn't someone have pulled strings or get Cobb a new identity? What was his crime, anyway? He's engaged in corporate espionage full-time since around the time of his marriage, but apparently he managed to stay undetected during the film and before the film, so apparently corporate espionage wasn't the crime. They make it sound like what he did was commit the inception that led to his wife's death. Mal and Cobb both consented to the dreamshare, and Cobb's intent was not to kill Mal. At worst, he committed 3rd-degree  manslaughter - he woke someone up from a coma in a way that would accidentally lead to that person's suicide. That shouldn't be a crime that would cause Cobb to get exiled from the entire country. He co...

When you're describing the similarity between two plots, the more general you are, the less credible you are. Here's a general sketch of the worst versions of "every story is the same" or "these two stories are remarkably similar": "A character who is uncomfortable with his/her life is has a situation that forces him/her to reluctantly go on an adventure (possibly involving 1-2 companions who are total opposites of him/her) in order to get something (s)he really wants. Along  the way, (s)he encounters a lot of obstacles, has conflict with other characters, gets taken to his/her lowest point, and changes as a person. He/She finally gets the opportunity to return to his/her old life and either chooses to refuse it and continue in his/her new life or go back to his old life as a changed character." It technically describe virtually every plotline, but it's so vague that it shouldn't make anyone surprised about how similar the plotlines are. No...

We each occasionally hear people giving other people a hard time for sending thoughts and prayers to the people involved in a tragedy. Sitting around feeling sorry for someone else won't do any good any more than sitting around feeling sorry for yourself. And when someone says that they're sending "thoughts and prayers" when they're really just sitting around feeling sorry for someone, they're not actually sending thoughts and prayers. When they're just going abou t their normal lives and not thinking about or praying for the victims of tragedy, that is obviously not sending thoughts and prayers. But when someone is actually sending thoughts and prayers, that is a wonderful and essential part of helping people overcome both personal and public tragedy. Prophets and Apostles have clarified for decades that true prayer requires acting on our prayers, not just wishing that God would do it all for us (Sources may include David A. Bednar's April 2006 Confer...