Church Pop Prays for Celebrities

Church Pop is a cringe Novus ordo website owned by EWTN and aimed at young people. 

On June 12th 2025, the english sector of the blog published "6 Celebrities We Should Pray for and the Saints Who Can Help Them". It was written by Mr. Will Tynan, and when I first read it made me very angry. I expected normal prayer petitions and instead I got an example in superficiality and immaturity. I didn't expect anything and yet I was disappointed!

So today, in the Pasture of Knowledge, we will roast this article and provide it's writer with some advice for the next time he wants to pray for celebrities. 

Introduction 

The article starts with a fairly decent reflection on fame, except when Tynan says this: 

"Knowing so much about their lives might be a boon for us because it allows us to know exactly what we need to pray for to help them." 

I disagree with this statement because the reason why so many celebrities are scandalous is precisely this ability to know all about their lives. 

For example, Miley Cyrus would not be able to scandalize me aside from public statements and songs, but since she has an entire army of professional gossipers, any sin she commits is paraded across the world instead of staying in the privacy of her house. 

Also, it should be possible to pray for them without feeding from the constant detraction and sludge of celebrity gossip. 

The Celebs 

Tynan proceeds his article by numbering 5 celebrities and the reasons he believes they need prayers. He then mentions the saints who can help them and the reasons why. 

First we have Trump and Elon, paired with St. Peter and St. Paul. Then it's Rihanna, paired with St. Norbert. Mr. Beast was placed with St. Augustine, and actor Tom Felton was placed with St. Matthew. 

He also included the basketball player named Caitlyn Clark, but we will not talk about her today. 

There is nothing wrong with praying for these people, albeit I think it would be better to pray for all celebs without being specific. The problem comes with what Tynan reasons about their faults and problems. 

Trump and Elon: Friendship is Magic? 

Trump and Elon wield great power and privilege. The day of judgement will probably fall upon them with unmeasurable wrath. Yet Tynan thinks they need prayers because they fought with each other! See for yourself: 

"In the past week or so, however, the relationship between Musk and the president has become a bit… well… rocky. The two have had one of, if not the most public, fallouts of all time. But don’t think this is the first time two prominent figures on the same side of history have clashed! 

Saint Peter and Saint Paul, two of Christ’s closest friends, also had a seemingly critical feud between them. The two saints, while sharing the same ultimate mission, had vastly different approaches to evangelism. In a particularly fiery encounter, Saint Paul scolds Saint Peter for making salvation seem like an act of the people and not the mercy of God. In Galatians 2:11, Paul writes, “And when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong.”

Trump is actively funding a genocide in the middle east, betrayed his fan base by protecting a child trafficker and lied about coronavirus. Elon grifts people with electric cars. And yet, Tynan treats them with the maturity of a My Little Pony episode. It would be better to pair them with saints who were either public sinners or held positions of power 

Rihanna and Tom Felton: Worldly Blindness 

For Rihanna, Tynan felt equally short. For him the problem with the singer is not scandalous songs or raunchy outfits, but the simple fact that she has pretty much given up her musical career.

He writes "Unfortunately for fans, she hasn’t released a new album since 2016. A few movie tracks and features here and there, but nothing from studio to table for nearly 10 years."

This could be because of her success in the makeup industry with her brand Fenty Beauty, but it is a shame for listeners everywhere that she hasn’t bothered to grab a pen and paper and jot down some lyrics." 

I am sorry, but Rihanna is actually better off like this. The music industry is demonic; whether is the songs themselves or the people who move around those circles, you are certain to find untold evil. 

While Fenty Beauty can be scandalous in other ways, Tynan doesn't mention that, nor does he prove that it is worse than singing about breeding in front of millions of children at the Super Bowl. 

Instead, Will Tynan compares the conversion of a man to the Lord with Rihanna going back to the studio. 

"Saint Norbert was a high-ranking member of the German imperial court in 1075. Just like Rihanna, Saint Norbert showed no real signs of piety and chose for a period of his life to pursue luxury and comfort rather than using his wealth and brilliant mind for others. In a dramatic encounter with the Lord at age 35, Saint Norbert was struck by lightning and dedicated his life to discernment and monastic life. 

The switch from comfort and apathy towards dedication and hard work is exactly what fans hope to see from Rihanna. If there’s anyone who can get her in that studio, it’s Saint Norbert."

Tynan comparing Rihanna's musical apathy with the conversion of St. Norbert is blasphemous. Rihanna surely needs conversion, but I think we know she will not get it by synergizing generic songs. 

Tom Felton and St. Matthew received similar treatment. I am blissfully unaware of what has been going on with his life, but he doesn't seem to be a particularly notorious source of scandal. 

However, Tynan thinks we need to pray for him because he hasn't been able to have a successful career outside of playing the Harry Potter character Draco Malfoy.

"In 2022, he released his book “Beyond the Wand,” -Tynan informs us - recounting his years on the set, and has recently announced he will revise his role in the Broadway play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child."

"Many fans have echoed the sentiments of another actor from the series, Miriam Margolyes, who encouraged “Harry Potter Adults” to grow up and move on. If there is anyone who can give Felton help on this path, it is surely Saint Matthew the Apostle." 

If "moving on" means involving himself even further with Hollywood, then you might as well wish he becomes a narco. Considering that Hollywood is corrupt and full of evil, Mr. Felton is actually better off with a dead career. 

Not to forget, of course, that Harry Potter is a wiccan/alchemist fantasy series were school directors hire soul-sucking entities to "protect" students. 

Despite the fact that both of them need true prayers, Tynan focuses on superficial success - things that fans want - and not in true spiritual benefits - things that celebs need -.

Mr Beast: Portrayed as a Psychopath as his Real Evils are Ignored 

The next celebrity we have is Mr. Beast. Also known as Jimmy Donaldson, he is a successful you tuber famous for giving money to people and organizing Wipeout-style challenges.

Recently Mr. Beast has been losing popularity because many of his ex-employees have accused him of mistreatment and exploitation. 

However, Tynan says nothing about it and instead portrays this competitions as some sort of gladiatorial torture contest. See for yourself: 

"Mr. Beast is a YouTuber with more followers than any other creator on the platform. When he posts a video claiming to test whether someone can survive one hundred days trapped in a room to win $500,000, he means it. His success has taken him far enough to launch his own TV series called Beast Games. 

Mr. Beast is estimated to have a net worth of around one billion dollars, but along his journey to success, many have raised concerns about the ethical implications of his videos. Putting people into psychological experiments that can only really be labelled as voluntary torture has become his primary mode of income." 

Forgive me if I am wrong, but while the content of the challenges might be questionable, people have not attacked him for this. They demanded him for not paying his employees while forcing them to work for long periods of time. 

Furthermore, a brief resume of these  infractions would be better than attempting to judge his intentions. 

Tynan writes: "Considering the immense wealth he has already amassed, it seems clear that he is continuing these experiments for the thrill of dehumanizing his lab rats... 

One story that stands out is Saint Augustine stealing pears in his youth. He recounts how his desire to steal pears from someone’s tree was not driven by need or hunger, but the sheer desire to steal, which he looks back on as a profound moral failing. 

Saint Augustine wasn’t hungry, and Mr Beast isn’t starving for viewer engagement. The only reason Mr. Beast continues his callous trials is for the love of a wicked game."

Who cares about Mr. Beast's intentions? If he did something evil we call him out regardless of his interior malice. Tynan focuses on condemning his fake and overtly acted videos when the he could have easily pointed out the real allegations made against him as reasons for prayer 

Conclusion 

Overall, the article suffers from a striking level of superficiality. Praying for someone because they don't want to write lyrics or because they fought with their friends is something that children can do, not adults.

I am also kind of shocked he didn't point at the celebs that are clearly suffering, like Justin Bieber and Kanye West. 

Church Pop themselves seem to be aware that his blog post was not very good, because at the end we find this note: 

"Of course, these prayer proposals are less inclined towards true conversion and may have been (slightly) based on this author’s opinion. These recommendations are certainly things for which you can pray. Prayers for the conversion of souls are probably more likely to be answered. Whether for these celebrities or others, for these specific intentions or anything else, the best piece of advice is to follow the guidance given in 1 Thessalonians 5:17, “Pray without ceasing".

Yes, I agree. We should pray for Will Tynan, that he might never write such a superficial, tone-deaf piece ever again. 

Toy Story 4 is a Corrupt Movie

In 2019 Pixar decided to release the 4th installment of the Toy Story movies. While the media praised it's endearing animation and storytelling, others have called out this movie for  highly questionable morals. 

What is the story of this controversial movie? 

A new toy is added to the Toy Story family when Bonnie's art project (an anthropomorphic spork) comes to life. The utensil thinks he belongs in the trash and constantly throws himself in it. Woody, who is experiencing an existential crisis, constantly has to save him from the rubbish. 

During one of this confrontations Forky and Woody get lost and encounter an evil doll, Gabby Gabby. She demands Woody's voice box for herself, arguing that her own device is broken. Woody escapes but Forky is held hostage until the cowboy agrees to the organ trafficking operation. 

Fortunately for the eating utensil, Woody encounters Buzz Lightyear and his long lost love, Bo Peep. Together they attempt to save Forky but fail.  This causes them to fight and take separate paths, with Woody alone against the doll. 

During the confrontation Gabby Gabby talks about how much she would love to be with a child, so Woody agrees too surrender his voice box. Forky is freed and they help the doll to find an owner.

 

At the end of the movie Woody stays with Bo Peep and abandons his friends to help other toys looking for owners. 

On the surface it might look like those who condemn this movie are acting out of insecurity and nostalgia, showing excessive anger towards a mere movie for children. However, upon closer examination we see that their criticisms are justified and as a result this movie should be shunned. Today, in the Pasture of Knowledge, I will show you why Toy Story 4 is an evil film. 

Forky's Self Destructive Tendencies 

One would never expect the topic of suicide to be explored in a movie about living toys, yet the directors went out of their way to connect Forky's trashy obsession with self deletion. 

At some point we see a montage of Woody saving Forky from the rubbish multiple times. While this happens, a song with the following lyrics is played in the background: 

"Don't you wanna see the sun come up each morning? 

Don't you wanna see the sun go down each day? 

Don't you wanna see that little girl that loves you so? 

Her heart would break if you should go"

A topic like this should never be touched in a family movie, at least not without the utmost seriousness and subtlety, properties which I do not find here. 

The message is clear for anyone over the age of 10 and yet the montage consists on a plastic scrap running to the trash while a cowboy ragdoll tries to stop it on the most ridiculous scenarios possible. To call it disrespectful is an understatement. 

Buzz Lightyear: To Stupidity and Beyond 

Through the initial trilogy Buzz is a competent, highly intelligent, and skilled military man. Despite his initial inability to understand he was a toy, Lightyear is capable of quick thinking and resourcefulness.

However, 2019 Buzz Lightyear is remarkably stupider and is treated as a joke character. Instead of using his wits for decision making he presses buttons on his chest to listen to pre-recorded lines which then he interprets according to whatever the plot needs. 

Why would that be? Would it be because he is the figure of a man, a symbol of competency and intelligence that could possibly offend journos and give the wrong message to children? 

Hollywood calls you sexist for noticing this kind of stuff, as if women outside or Meryl Streep meant anything for them. Maybe they genuinely think people press buttons on action figures for life advice. 

Gabby Gabby is an Organ Trafficker and an insult to Handicapped People

When the movie came out many praised the character of Gabby Gabby for "representing" handicapped people. However, I am yet to hear of amputees willingly mutilating other people in an attempt to get new legs. 

Gabby Gabby appeals to violence for her physical improvement: In Toy Story 4, children are taught that kidnapping and ripping off other people's body parts is okay as long as you have suffered and they say yes under pressure. The evil doll goes unpunished, getting her cake and eating it too, cornering Woody for a voice box that might not even work for her. 

Those who praised this movie for "representation" need public shaming, because instead of recognizing that there was nothing wrong with not having a functional voice box, Gabby Gabby "fixes" herself with mutilation and manipulation. 

The Deconstruction of Bo Peep

Bo Peep is a porcelain lamp with the shape of a shepherdess. Fragile and hearty, she was a kind woman who supported everyone with her empathetic character. 

And yet, as soon as I saw her new design in the movie posters, I knew she was going to get the Girlboss treatment. 

It makes sense for her character to roughen up after so many years as a lost toy, except that Pixar changed her personality even during the flashback scenes. Now Bo Peep is another girl boss: competent, always right, super tough and a warrior. 

The movie wants you to believe Bo Peep and Woody love each other, but the reality is different: The shepherdess seems to have changed her mind quite a bit about the cowboy. She sees him as a clingy, weak ragdoll who is too obsessed with working for his owners. 

She even disrespects him multiple times; she calls him an accessory, doesn't appreciate his ideas, and it's quite clear she considers him an obstacle. 

If anyone says that you are not a friend but an accessory, they are not marriage or couple material of any kind.  And yet, this is what Bo Peep tells to everyone about Woody! She treats him with condescension. Are we supposed to be happy that he abandoned his family and friends for her?

Woody's Choice Was Questionable 

Based on what we have seen, Woody did harm himself by choosing to stay with an abrasive woman... But, did he abandon anyone else? 

Firstly, Woody abandoned Forky, the suicidal toy. While the spork had found motivation during his conversations with the cowboy, there is no reason to believe he will need no help in the future. Since Woody was his first friend and none of the other toys cared about him, he should have stayed with Forky. 

Secondly; Through the movie Bonnie shows attachment to Woody. While not as great as it was in Toy Story 3, Bonnie still plays with Woody during the movie, meaning she is still willing to keep him. Does the cowboy ragdoll not know how children feel when they lose their toys - specially if they can't understand why? - What if he becomes the favorite toy again but Bonnie can't find him?

Furthermore, there are clues in the movie that Bonnie's dad is not exactly a good person. One of the toys -a unicorn named Buttercup, constantly gets excited thinking the father will end up in jail.  This comments are random and have no development. Why would Buttercup hate him so much? Many have speculated that he knows something really bad about Bonnie's father, something that would make him worthy of punishment. 

Previously in the franchise we have seen them trying to intervene in defense of other toys; defending a child against an abusive father or dangerous assassins is not entirely impossible for the internal consistency of the franchise. 

Woody took the choice with little premeditation and without considering his responsibilities (namely, being Bonnie's toy). If he wanted to help other toys, he could have done it from Bonnie's house or at least waited until Forky was healed and the child didn't want him anymore. Instead, children are taught that abandoning ones family for that girl who used to be your girlfriend is a cool and elevated thing to do. 

Conclusion: Toy Story 4 is an evil movie

The devil is in the details, and no matter how much people gloat about the impressive 3D animation and the nostalgic soundtrack, one only has to pay attention to see him lurking within. 

Toy Story 4 is a corrupt movie that received praise when it deserves hate. Certainly, we must throw it away from our lives. 

Independence Day and the Blue Beam Project

 

The 1996 movie Independence Day has a very interesting story to tell, and today we will analyze some of its messages. We will also get into hidden history and conspiracy theories, so get ready, because today, in the Pasture of Knowledge, you will learn multiple things. 

NPC People Love Aliens

The first half of the movie revolves about some different characters. We have a redneck who claims to have been abducted, a hacker protestor who loves the planet and dislikes people who is played by Jeff Goldblum, a funny black american who is on the military and is played by Will Smith and a president of the United States who actually cares about the United States. 

A series of massive spaceships approach the earth and it is unknown whether they come in peace or with the intention of destroying humanity. This ignorance doesn't prevent people from stacking below the doors of the spaceship and dancing excitedly below them, with the equivalent of "Refugees Welcome" cartels in their hands, begging E.T. to take them to their planet. 

When the establishment has found out the intentions of the spaceships, they warn people to leave, but they are so fascinated by the aliens that they never leave.

And the result? They get smothered by blue lasers and die. 

The moral is that you should not be a pijama person who gets so excited about something new or unexpected and forgets self preservation and situational awareness. Stay away from what the NPC masses do if you do not want to be like the people in this movie.

As the movie progressed, I realized it was propaganda for the American people, in favor of the government and military. 

For example, many of the battles are protagonized by very cool pilots riding very cool planes and fighting against evil psychic squid alien demons. The president isn't the Mascot of an evil deep state looking for excuses to abuse its own people and people from overseas, but a highly-likable character, a good father who deeply cares about people and blames himself for not stopping the first invasion.  

Let us not forget that this is the movie where america saves the entirety of the world from an alien invasion; for they are the ones who figure out how to destroy the aliens and their spaceships. The movie is full of patriotic scenes that I actually found hilarious. 

 They are also the ones who inspire the entire world to ignore their differences and get together to stop the greater menace; something that brings us to the next question. 

America bringing forth the New World Order? 

It seems that while for the people this is a fun popcorn movie with destruction, action, tender moments and Will Smith, for the establishment (at least, the establishment of 1997) the story is quite different.

As they prepare to fight against the evil psychic squid conquerors, the president clears his throat and gives as speech, suggesting people should forever ignore their "petty differences" because for one moment they had to unite and fight extraterrestrials. 

This theme is central to the movie: We see different americans all over the country uniting against the treat: the president, the crazy redneck, the military black american (presumably a reference to the so-called right wing) the protestor hacker who does science (a reference to the so-called left), the stripper, the rabbi and the female politician all play the role of representing different americans from all walks of life. 

Later, when America passes the cheat-code to other countries to defeat the aliens, we see countries that fought the United States somewhere in time. I recognized Japan, Russia and Britain. This movie was intended to tell Americans they would be responsible for uniting the whole world under the New World Order. 

Israel makes an appearance too, of course. They probably identify with the aliens a bit too much, as they love smashing buildings, people, and symbolic locations.

It also has a bit of religious ecumenism, for example, when the rabbi guy prays with people of all so-called faith traditions. 

The Blue Beam Project 

This consists on a possible false flag made by the establishment. By faking an alien invasion (presumably, using CGI, directed energy weapons and the media), they could send the people into a panic and force them to accept dictatorial mandates they would never consider otherwise. 

Consider for example, how much the US government tried to hide (or pretended to try to hide) information about UFOs, and extraterrestrials; but in 2021 they suddenly were showing off their footage and driving attention to the topic like if it were very important. 

The mexican government followed suit, of course, with some cheap imitation of a psychological operation.

Some people have suggested too, that some "alien abductions" have actually been mind control experiments by the government who then blamed it on E.T. This distracts the population and prevents people who suffered the trauma from being taken seriously, because they remember it as an alien abduction and not a government experiment. 

An even scarier Blue Beam project could involve not only extraterrestrials, but interdimensional beings. The reason for this is that movies like Event Horizon and Hellraiser have already presented demons and/or ghost as entities from other dimensions, rather than biological beings from other planets. 

The idea that humans should unite is not bad in itself, it is just that I do not want it to happen by the hand of neocons, Israel or freemasons. Neither do we want it to happen by the hand of the people who would lie to us about an alien invasion. 

The Soulless Remake for Modern Audiences

In 2015 a "sequel" for Independence Day was released, albeit it kind of works like a remake. It is almost like if the directors had a checklist for things that worked in the original movie and just remade them for Independence Day Resurgence. 

+ Funny pilot gets inside Alien spaceship? Check

+ Psychic Alien Squid strangles a man and uses it to communicate its plans to the audience? Check

+ Massive destruction of well-known locations? Check 

+ The cheesy musical theme from the original movie? Check

+ New World Order Message? Check 

+ Ecumenism? Check

+ Area 51? Check

+ Angry military man who needs to sit down? Check

+ A character sacrifices himself to defeat the aliens? Check

Except that this time it falls flat and nobody cares. 

The only thing missing was the cheesy american patriotism that gave me so much cringe and made me laugh so hard. Perhaps the current establishment doesn't like America as much as they used to do.  

The movie actually seems to suggest President Whitner as some sort of antichrist or messianic world leader because after the invasion of the last movie, they reverse engineered the alien spaceships and used them to improve their technology. There had been no sign of wars or division since the last alien invasion, meaning President Whitner actually managed to unite the whole world and bring some sort of an utopia. 

Eventually he sacrifices himself. Will they resurrect him on a sequel soon?  

There is also a white sphere who speaks like a female and is a member of a different alien species. It is a transhumanist thing that transferred its conscience to a computer. She explains she is holding a "resistance" against the squid people and she might consider humans to join them. There is some cheap teasing for a sequel and the movie ends without shame or glory. 

Conclusion

Independence Day is a new world order movie that doesn't care if people accuse it of being propaganda. In fact, it is a masterpiece on propaganda, something that isn't hidden but doesn't prevent you from having fun. 

If you disagree with my interpretation of the movie, come and tell me your own opinion. Just make sure to avoid CGI deceptions anyways, whether they come from "the right" or "the left". 

Movie Review: Coco

 

Recently I watched the 2017 Pixar production Coco, based on the Day of the Death, a ripped-off version of All Souls Day which focuses more on leftover pagan traditions than on purgatory. 

On this tradition, people make tables honoring their dead relatives. They place photos, bread and skulls made of sugar, as well as Cempasuchil (mexican marigold) flowers and some of their favorite objects. Some people actually believe their family members come to pay them a visit and even enjoy the gifts offered to them.

Such pagan BS was bound to attract Hollywood. This flick was really popular and it attracted my attention, not only because of it's problematic theology but also because I live in Mexico, so in a way this is how Pixar wants you to look at us. So today, at the pasture of knowledge, I will descend into the world of this movie, it's defects and messages. 

The Portrayal of Mexico.

Some people complained that Coco is "cultural appropriation" and doesn't offer a good representation of Mexican culture. This is actually not true, because for the most part, the portrayal of the movie is accurate. It was loved by the mexicans for a reason. 

There are some inaccuracies, however, and I would like to point the most relevant to the plot: while Day of the Dead is celebrated everywhere, not everyone takes it as seriously as we see in the movie. 

This feast is mostly a thing of the poorer among us, the rich make the altars to people like Gandhi and Nelson Mandela while mixing it with Halloween. Children ask for "calaverita", which is a way of saying trick or treating. Not everyone believes the dead come to visit us, and even some novus ordo priests have openly criticized it. 

The Be Yourself Message Strikes Again

The plot follows a kid named Miguel and his dog Dante. The child wants to be a musician, but his family forbids it. Their great grandfather abandoned his family to become a successful mariachi and as a result they hate music. Here we have yet another be-yourself movie! Child must prove to his oppressive family that his dream is worth following.

Miguel is obsessed with Ernesto de la Cruz, a legendary mariachi and actor; the kid believes Ernesto is the aforementioned great-grandfather. This creep tells the audience to "follow their dreams and be true to themselves no matter what", and the kid swallows it up like a true fanboy. He comes out of his musical closet, only to be chastised and have his grandmother go full Pete Townsend and smash his guitar on the floor. 

Miguel does the Disney thing which is he runs away from home crying and attempts to find a new guitar. He steals the one that belonged to Ernesto, but some magical nonsense happens and he is transported to the realm of the dead. 

I know that be-yourself movies always portray the family as exaggerating on whatever they are imposing on the protagonist, but that is precisely the problem. All teens would like to believe their parents are going too far with those rules they don't want to follow. All teens would like to believe that their families are as ridiculous as the one we see in this movie, but that isn't necessarily the case and movies like this do not help the discernment.

 

The Coco Afterlife 

I feel this movie could actually use their themes as an opportunity to teach on the deception of worldly fame and material goods. It's a movie about dead people after all. But instead they do the be-yourself thing of giving the protagonist his cake so that he can eat it.

The afterlife in Coco has no remains of Judgement, Hell, Heaven or anything spiritual. This afterlife is in fact very similar to the world we live in: there are immigration offices, social classes, shows and celebrities, even food. There is even a "final death".  

One would expect a movie about death to consider how we will leave everything when we die but for people who like to treat the afterlife as a nice little coping mechanism there is no purpose on meditating on this. 

The aforementioned "final death" on this afterlife is being forgotten by your family, something that drives most of the plot. Miguel needs to "receive a blessing" from one of his ancestors in other to go back home, but his great grandmother will only bless him if he promises to never play music again. Desperate to get his wish, he and a friendly skeleton named Hector who claims to know Ernesto try to access him so that the kid can leave as he wills.

Ernesto de la Cruz

When Miguel finally meets his idol, the mariachi is obviously egocentric but he treats the child kindly, showing him around his mansion. However, Hector appears and angrily calls out Ernesto for stealing his songs. It is revealed that Hector is not lying and that he was poisoned by the mariachi because he wanted to quit and go back with his family. Ernesto used his compositions to "have his moment". 

What I like about this character is that he shows the logical consequences of following the be-yourself message. If your only purpose in life is following your dreams, your passions and your desires, you are likely to do stuff like this. Whether on the little or on the big ways. Nobody can accuse Ernesto of being a hypocrite who acted in contrast to his beliefs. 

With this shocking plot twist Miguel learns that his family is more important to him, and that perhaps persecuting worldly fame and pleasures is not worth it because it may make you evil and you face punishment from the wrath of God, right? 

Well, yes but no. Miguel learns to appreciate his family, but since he gets his cake and eats it too by reconciling with his parents and getting to be a musician, the audience misses the message you would expect from a movie about dead people: that not everything is worth living for. 

And about the punishment from the wrath of God... well, Ernesto gets punished not because he went to judgement and was found worthy of hell, but because he is exposed as a liar and a murderer. He remains stuck below a cathedral bell, waiting for people to forget him with the help of Miguel's family, who somehow managed to convince the world with Hector's story. 

According to this movie being forgotten is the real deal. This links with another message subtly suggested to the viewer: poverty. Hector wore a fancy white mariachi dress when he died, but throughout the movie he dresses like a beggar because nobody remembers him fondly. People about to be forgotten (including some suspicious ladies), live in slums, while the powerful keep their mansions. 

These are the people less likely to be forgotten: serial killers, celebrities and politicians. Is Disney telling us that men of fame will remain in their pleasures while the humble are obliterated into nothingness? That will certainly encourage children to pursue attention and fame, wouldn't it? Even if their family goes extinct, everyone else will remember them for as long as the world stays with us. 

Conclusion

Overall this movie is mostly well written, presenting some heartfelt moments of reconciliation between heartbroken family members. This movie could be so much better if it had focused on the message I pointed out above, managing to tell a story that took death more seriously.

Of course this would mean Coco would be a completely different movie, with a completely different perspective on the afterlife, perhaps even being less colorful and energetic as it is now. Right now, it stands as a wasted opportunity. Let us hope that our life is not a wasted opportunity as well.

This is the Most Popular Movie of 2025

It almost came from nowhere and took everyone by surprise. K-Pop Demon Hunters is a massive hit among audiences, particularly teenagers and children. Despite being released just this summer it quickly became Netflix's most successful movie in the history of the platform. 

But we are not here to celebrate. This movie is likely the most discordian family animated film ever released, and today, at the pasture of knowledge, I will take you through the story of the K-Pop Warriors and it's questionable messages. 

So, what is this movie even about? 

K-Pop Demon Hunters tells the story of a popular Korean pop band named Hunter/x. Rumi, Mira, and Zoey secretly work hunting demons. With their blazing white weapons and generic songs they maim and decapitate this entities, following a long tradition of Korean shaman women. 

Their mission to maintain the barrier between worlds closed is threatened with the appearance of the Saja Boys, a rival boy band formed by demons. The leader of this group, Ji-Noo, discovers that Rumi is half a demon, but helps her hide the secret. This makes them develop a relationship, in which they hear each other's feelings of shame and Rumi attempts to make him sabotage the Saja. 

But as the barrier between the worlds weakens, the demons expose Rumi's secret, as wound-like patterns show in her skin. Huntr/X breaks apart and the Saja hypnotize everyone (even Mira and Zoey) into their last concert. 

Eventually, Rumi accepts her demon heritage, she becomes stronger and frees her friends. They fight a final battle with the demons - in which Ji-Noo sacrifices himself for Rumi (!) - and the breach between worlds is shut down. 

The Most Discordian Love Interest in History 

First of all, let me begin my criticism by saying that having a demon be the love interest of our main character is intensely condemnable. It reminds me of Twilight, where a 16 year old girl falls in love with a vampire, except this time is more satanic. 

It is not uncommon for women to be attracted to broody, complicated men, only for those men to willingly or unwillingly ruin their lives. 

When that man is a demon who eats souls, its like jumping into an igniting supernova, without a spacesuit, and holding the core of a nuclear weapon. 

Some people attempt to defend this movie by claiming that the demon redeemed himself. And yet that is precisely why women end up in relationships with this people: they think they can save a man's soul with their sheltered lives and beautiful face. The movie feeds into this destructive fantasy with an entity that shouldn't even be able to be redeemed in the first place.

When this argument is uttered by Christians it is even more laughable because no demon will ever be redeemed. 

Others have attempted to save K-Pop Warriors by stating that the demons seen in the movie aren't the demons of christianity, but simply the demons of Korean mythology. They claim this are  generic fantastical supernatural entities without a particular connection with evil. 

However, this excuse is not to be accepted. 

Firstly, the demons are similar enough to Satan and other western devils for this excuse to be invalid. They cheat and deceive the humans to consume their souls. Gwi-Ma torments them with shame for their past actions. At some point and despite being Korean, they sing in latin the following verses: 

Dies irae illa 

Vos Solve In Faviliam 

Maledictus Erus 

In flammas aeternum

Furthermore, the master of the demons, Gwi-Ma, takes the following form during the final confrontation: 

Gwi-Ma, the demon king and main antagonist, at the final battle

This form is remarkably similar to western  medieval art, in which hell is represented as a massive mouth: 

This type of representation is called "Hell mouth"

Self-Acceptance To a Whole New Level 

The problem with the message of self-acceptance is that some things about the human character are not to be loved or embraced. The fact that Rumi embraced her "demonic side" is extremely subversive. She is not accepting a physical or mental condition which she can't change; she is not accepting a harmless quirk or a trauma from the past: she is accepting demon-kind, evil dwelling within herself. 

Demons are entities of pure evil, and in fiction they represent all that is abominable. While Rumi herself was not responsible for whatever her mother did to conceive a half devil, there is no reason to praise her for embracing the demonic within herself. Are we supposed to believe this kind of behavior could banish demons to Hell? 

Finally, the idea of devils breeding with humans is common through legends all over the world, but it's stupid (how can a demon conceive a child?) and quite frankly, disgusting. 

The Songs 

The songs in my opinion would likely need an entire article for themselves, but I will make a brief criticism.

"My Idol" is the villain song by the Saja Boys. It is a very popular song, with the Netflix sing-along video marking it as the moment with more reproductions. 

Here the demons sing about how they deceive and seduce people. Tell me, who wants to sing along to a song like this? 

Then we have "Soda Pop", the debut Saja Boys song, which is quite suggestive. 

The songs by Huntr/X are less condemnable, with my main concern being the context in which they are presented. 

For example, Free is a love song about people who love each other because of their common shame, and Golden is the song where Rumi completes her character arc and closes the gap between worlds. 

Finally, we have Takedown, an aggressive song in which the shamans sing about how much they loathe demons and will mercilessly smother them. 

The Sexual Side of K-Pop 

Let me tackle this quickly. K-Pop fans seem to be very interested on the physical appearance of the stars, sometimes to a point where it is quite uncomfortable. 

Zoey is one of those fans that are always focusing on this. She is fascinated with the pretty faces of the Saja Boys even as she fights them. 

In my opinion publicly showcasing a crush on stars is likely negative for the mental health of the celebrities themselves and it's a bad message to show in a movie. This is true not just in K-Pop but in any celebrity with a pretty face. 

While the movie satirizes this aspect of K-Pop fans, it also feeds into it. With characters like Ji-Noo and his overall plotline, as well as the attractive design of the majority of the singers. Anyone who is not an adult can be deceived into falling for this kind of behavior - after all, the breeding instincts are very powerful. 

Conclusion 

K-Pop Demon hunters is the next step into discordian family movies. It's so telling that many mainstream conservatives and Anti-woke sloptubers praised this flick because it doesn't have lesbian cameos and diversity hires. 

Feeding into a toxic complex of the human mind while attempting to redeem a pair of demons is condemnable in spite of any nuance the viewer can find on the movie. 

If anyone gets anything positive from this thing, good for them. But in the meantime, I will do what's necessary to take it down. 

ROBLOX IS BAD

 

Roblox is a platform full of different types of videogames, usually tycoons, obbys (obstacle courses) and "horror" games. Roblox is extremely popular for children. 

Everything seems fine at the beginning: colorful scenarios full of lego like characters, but this is only the surface. 

Roblox is full of groomer pedophiles.

 This has been known for multiple years, (unsurprisingly, for what can one expect about an kids game with a CHAT function). 

Recently a groomer hunter named Schlep was banned from the platform, causing a huge scandal since the company does little to prevent grooming in the game. 

Another problem is that some creeps make their degenerate videogames in the platform and purposefully let minors in. 

This is more infuriating when you realize most of the games in the platform are trash, and your children would be more entertained flipping a water bottle or fingering car keys. Roblox is putting children at risk with bad quality content. 

If you play without using robux (Roblox money), it's essentially a walking simulator in poor quality scenarios. Brain rot made a game.

In general I would recommend avoiding multiplayer videogames with chat. Some like Minecraft do offer the possibility of entering a server; however, unlike Roblox, you can play them without having the possibility of talking to weirdos. 

Reading this article from Bloomberg, I get the impression Roblox's groomer problem is by design. It would be so easy to simply take away the Chat feature, but Roblox refuses to do so, insisting instead on "regulating" the content, a recourse that has proved to be ineffective and will fail to protect everyone. 

Furthermore, as I mentioned before, playing comfortably is virtually imposible without Roblox money, which provides to the predators an easy way of baiting the children who can't stop playing Roblox. (Ie., do what I tell you and I will give you free robux) 

If you insist on letting them play, monitor their gameplay, but I don't see why would anyone let their children use Roblox when there are so many free mobile videogames without open chat, and so many family friendly options like Nintendo or Cool Math Games.

The Zack Snyder Trilogy: Man of Steel

The DC Extended Universe (DCEU) is a collection of movies inspired by the characters of DC Comics. Most of this movies are not very good and the DCEU itself had a very troublesome history. They didn't know how to please audiences and constantly changed from dark, desaturated and depressing movies to corny and funny flicks that attempted to attract children. 

In 2022-23, the DCEU died with the movies Flash and Black Adam. A new version of the DCEU will be rebooted in 2025 with a Superman movie. 

Speaking of which, I will analyze the movie that brought Superman to the 2010's box office. This movie is: 

Man of Steel

This movies give special attention to Superman, as Zack Snyder's adaptation of this character offers quite a lot to discuss. 

Snyder saw Superman as some sort of Jesus Christ figure. (or, should I say, rip-off). A savior from another world, a lover of humanity who uses his power to save everyone.  

Man of steel is a rather dark adaptation for the kryptonian. Instead of the charming boy-scout character most people knew from the comics, movies and television shows, here Superman barely ever smiles and behaves grimly, even suggesting some degree of madness. 

The reason this movie catched my attention is rooted on an article I read on a lefebvrist website long ago. This article was written by a protestant minister and claimed that Man of Steel was a movie in which Superman would be the Antichrist and his enemy, Captain Zod, the God of the Bible, who would be of course portrayed in a negative way. 

So, today, in the corner of madness, I will attempt to answer this questions: Is Man of Steel about Antichrist? Is Captain Zod a parody of God? How far did Zack Snyder go to bring parallels between Jesus and Superman?  

Synopsis

First we have to resume what happens in this movies. Therefore, let me begin: 

Man of Steel begins in the planet Krypton, which is about to explode because the kryptonians used its core to fuel themselves. Superman's father, Jor-el, chastises the kryptonians for their stupidity and warns them of their impending doom. 

Kryptonian society is decaying too. For starters, their children are fabricated; motherhood and fatherhood do not exist. This isn't the case with Kal-El, the future Clark Kent; whose birth is natural. His father infuses within him the genetic codex of his species and prepares to send him off, while his mom suggests he will be treated as an outcast and executed. 

But Jor-El insists he will actually be appreciated "he will be treated as a god" and off he goes. 

General Zod, who is our generic space-nazi villain attempts to take control over the planet and preserve only the best Kryptonians. After killing Jor-El he and his followers are defeated and sent to the phantom zone in capsules. He warns Supie's mom he will find the codex & baby as Kal travels its way through the galaxies and krypton explodes. 

Kal-el is found by Martha and Jonathan Kent. The later doesn't want his adoptive son to save people because he is afraid the government will find him and do things to him. That's reasonable, but he takes this fears to the extreme. He is smothered by a tornado for refusing his son's help, and even suggests he should just let people die before risking being recognized. 

Later on, the young Clark Kent dedicates himself to save people while hiding at the same time, following his desire to save people while honoring Jonathan's desire for anonymity. 

He has an identity crisis until he finds the Fortress of Solitude, where an AI version of his dad - "his consciousness" - tells him the story of Krypton and simultaneously asks him to be a guidance for humanity and chose his own path. 

While this two seem to be contradictory statements, I think that Jor-el wants his son to teach people to chose freedom, and to incite others to chose freedom by his example. 

Pay attention to his words:

"You will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun, Kal. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders"

Why would they join him in the sun? Does Jor-El worship Apollo?  

Just as Kent and Lois Lane are starting to fall in love, Captain Zod arrives to earth and informs the whole of humanity about his existence. Zod says he knows there is a kryptonian on the planet and wants him to present himself to their spaceship or else he will punish humans. 

Kal-EL starts doubting whether he should trust the American government to capture him and present him before Zod, betraying Jonathan's sacrifice. Clark could fly all the way to the spaceship and present himself; he could also look for advice to NPC Jor-El, but instead he goes to the worst place you could possibly go for advice: a novus ordo church. 

The novus ordo priest gives him generic advice about "trusting your gut". He also says that sometimes you have to give a "leap of faith", which based on the context of a movie he is talking about faith in humanity. Only after "the leap of faith", Superman will be able to see if people are worth trusting. 

After this he offers himself up to be captured by America and extradited to Zod. 

Zod extracts the codex from Superman, and explains to him that he will terraform the earth so he and his fellow space nazis get to inhabit the planet. He is making a "new krypton" and will use the codex to perpetuate the species. 

However, terra forming the planet will kill all humans, so Superman decides to push his limits and defeats the space nazis. While fighting with Zod, he destroys half of Metropolis. Superman also exterminates kryptonian eggs, meaning the species will be extinct once he dies. 

At the end of the movie he promises the American establishment that he doesn't hate them but will work independently. He chooses to hide himself behind a pair of glasses and live as a reporter for the Daily Planet.

Jesus, Superman & The Antichrist

We begin the discussions by pointing out the similarities.

 Someone from the skies is sent and decides to use his power to save people. He hides from them and lives as a misunderstood outsider, eventually to reveal himself. After he is captured and taken from earth, people are saved from something evil. 

The part when he goes to the church is like the prayer in Gethsemane because the evil of humanity overwhelms a doubting Superman. 

Even the over the top destruction of Metropolis we see in Man of Steel - which was criticized by classic superman fans - makes sense from this perspective: let us remember what happened to Jerusalem after rejecting the Messiah.  

In fact, something that Zack Snyder understood about the Messiah is that the Messiah is saving people who reject and ostracize their Savior. In other Superman products this isn't the case because Supie has few doubters. 

On top of this all, there are many scenes where the framing suggests this similarities to the viewer. For example, as Superman returns to earth from the nazi spaceship he positions himself like if he were crucified.

 When he decides to offer himself up he stands in front of an image of Christ. In fact, Clark is 33 during the main events of the movie.

I take retellings of the story of Jesus quite personal, because while there is nothing wrong with writing a character who imitates Jesus, both should be sufficiently distinct to avoid cringe and/or blasphemous comparisons and avoid telling the story of Christ in an irreverent or ridiculous manner. 

I believe Snyder went too far but still retained many important differences. People were waiting for the Messiah, while nobody expected Kal-el. Kal-el had a natural birth instead of a virgin birth, he was not sent by God, but by a creature, and his mission stays within tangible things. 

Kal-el does not come to preach an ancient religion, but convinced himself of generic "chose fweedom" and "trust humanity" messages he stole from Jor-el and a novus ordo priest. 

All of this leads to the next question:

Is the Man of Steel an Antichrist Figure in the Zack Snyder films?

My opinion is that this version of Superman is an imperfect antichrist figure, an imperfect antichrist analogy. Let me defend my position: 

Antchrist is someone who pretends to be Jesus to deceive the masses into accepting a false religion. Antichrist refers to an individual who will do this in the strongest manner, close to the end of times. 

Man of Steel is an antichrist figure in the sense that he is some sort of faith-in-humanity and freedom messiah. This was the intention of Jor-el who sent him, and eventually he agreed to do this. 

I believe Kal-El is sufficiently similar to Jesus to pretend to be Him (at least, in an allegorical manner), but their doctrinal differences are sufficient to set them both apart. In Man of Steel, this doctrines position Superman as a humanist-antichrist. 

There are however 3 reasons why this is imperfect and might not even be a correct interpretation of the movie: 

1: Kal-El isn't specifically similar to the antichrist as described in Scriptures. Had he been, he would have been jewish, would have explicitly claimed to be Jesus and would have asked people to worship him. He would also have more luciferian symbology, like the characters in the book series The Golden Compass. 

2: The movie is riddled with disjointed ideas, and there might be a legitimate way of interpreting this movie in a way contrary to what I believe. 

Is Captain Zod a Demiurg? 

The writer for the lefebvrist article argued that Captain Zod was a figure for the Demiurg, the evil creator from the gnostic religion. The gnostics believed the Demiurg stole power to create a world almost as evil at itself, which is the one in which we live in. 

The reason this is important is that some people interpret the Demiurg to be our God, the God of the Old Testament. This article claimed that Zod was the demiurg, who came from the heavens, and had a confrontation with Supie who would either be satan or antichrist. 

The problem with this article is that Zod is not a good figure for a demiurg. He never claims to be divine, but most importantly, he never participated in creating the world. Unlike accurate demiurg figures in fiction (like The Celestials in The Eternals or The Architect in The Matrix), he is not the creator of the world we live in. He is not even able of achieving omnipotence. 

Unlike the God of the Old Testament, Zod doesn't judge people based on a judgement of their character but on the power of their species. He doesn't come to impose a law and physical limitations, he just comes to destroy because he was programmed to perpetuate Kryptonians since he was conceived. 

A real parody of the God of the Old Testament would be King Magnifico, from the Disney movie Wish. Unlike Zod, he actually pretends to be a good person and look for the interests of his own people. However, his real motivation is power and he seeks to prevent the protagonist from becoming like him. This is similar to God punishing humans for attempting to be like him; the Tower of Babel and the Garden of Eden being prime examples. Zod is nothing like this. 

He is just a space nazi who hates people and wants a planet for himself and his fellow space nazis. Rather than representing God, Zod represents those racial supremacists who conspire against freedom and refuse to take the "leap of faith" in humanity that we are told Superman did. 

Conclusion 

It is likely that Zack Snyder wanted to tell his own analogy for the history of Jesus. Since Zack Snyder is not a fundamentalist, he reinterpreted and deformed the Messias to his own liking, making an imperfect antichrist figure. On the other hand, Zod is not a parody of God but yet another cinematic Hitler for the protagonist to kill. 

I do not want to do a temerarious judgement of this directors, and this might just be one of many internet theories. However, I consider the evidence is sufficient for this theory to be worth pointing out.

If anyone disagrees with this interpretation on the movie, let him post his arguments and we will listen to him.