Ranking the Comics Adaptations - Part V - Less Stinky

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

I've barely begun the actual list, and I'm already regretting some of my decisions. Oh well, gonna keep on keeping on...

43. Daredevil - Even though I'm pretty low on the list, this still feels too high. It probably would have been even further toward the bottom if it wasn't for the fact that I love the character so much and that I've seen the Director's Cut, which while not a great movie, improves things a bit with some  fun dialogue between Matt Murdock and Foggy Nelson. The ultimate problem with this movie is that they messed up his origin a bit (he should have gotten in the accident while trying to save a blind man) and that they tried to cram about three major stories into one movie. Also, there was a lot of silliness that didn't help, but I can't bring myself to completely hate this.

42. Batman Forever -  I actually think that the first twenty minutes or so of this movie are entertaining as hell. It's silly and for little kids, but everything is just so big, dramatic, and kinetic. Unfortunately, Two Face is nothing but a generic villain in this, and The Riddler is actually The Jim Carey. Still, this is the first of the live-action Batman films that I put in for my son. He lost interest about halfway through though. Here's my full review.

41. Hulk - Some folks might put this  lower on the list, but I admire it for director Ang Lee's ambition. It certainly tried to be something other than a simple action flick. While it didn't succeed, I still think that there are enough interesting things going on to not consider it a total failure. Ultimately, the only really bad things about it were the hulk-dogs and the exhausting third act. Plus, the CGI hulk didn't always look very good. I do find it interesting that this movie had not only its defenders, but a fair bit of praise from Roger Ebert. One thing that I definitely thought was cool was how it tried to create the feel of a comic book - something that was done to much better effect in Scott Pilgrim Versus the World.

40. Kick Ass - I'm having a hard time placing this one. I like the comic series, and this was fairly true to it. However, there are things you can do in a comic that just don't work for me on film. The biggest sticking point was the little girl who curses and cuts people up. I dunno, when she's a drawing, I'm okay with it. When they actually have a girl act all that out, it just doesn't sit right with me. It's a fun movie, and I was entertained, but I doubt that I'd ever want to see it again.

39. 300 - I loved the comic book, and the movie did a great job of bringing it to life. Unfortunately, it also made me realize that the comic book is kinda dumb. I guess I'm a sucker for history, and the basic premise of the story is one of those can't-miss "last stand" stories. There's a lot to admire here, even if the visual style that was created was ripped off by a billion other movies, to less effect, ever since. Also, the first time the Persian army rushes into the shields of the Spartans is still pretty intense upon repeated viewings.

38. Punisher War Zone - This movie isn't very good, but I'll be damned if I wasn't entertained by it. Of all the attempts to do Frank Castle, this one comes the closest, as at least it seems to acknowledge that he's a violent sociopath - just a violent sociopath who directs his murderous rage at those who you don't mind seeing dead. Turns out that Patton Oswalt is a fan in the same way that I am. I also wrote a full review here. For more fun, listen to the How Did This Get Made? podcast featuring Mr. Oswalt and director Lexi Alexander.

37. Blade  - The beginning of this movie is stupid-awesome. Much like Punisher War Zone, I don't think that this movie is good so much as I love it. The final battle doesn't exactly work, but the film creates a pretty fun mythology, and Wesley Snipes is clearly embracing the character wholeheartedly. Honestly, I had never read a comic with the character before, and he really was probably thought of as one of the "least likely" characters to ever get his own movie.

36. X-Men: The Last Stand - I honestly don't understand the hate that this one engenders. Yeah, Brett Ratner is a hack, and yeah, Cyclops was offed rather unceremoniously, but I really think that the action scenes were done better than the previous two installments. Plus, we got to see the Danger Room! The Fastball Special! "Oh My Stars and Garters!" There was simply too much fun stuff in this for me to not like it. Plus, I kinda liked the whole "mutant cure" story, even though it wasn't followed-through to its full potential. Perhaps this movie's saving grace is that it's relatively short - and it sets up The Wolverine rather nicely. (Even though that turned out to be more of a happy accident.)

35. Superman Returns - This one gets a lot of hate as well, and as much as I liked it, it's slowly starting to not hold up very well for me. Probably its biggest problem was that it was too slavish to the Christopher Reeve films rather than trying to branch out into new territory with the character. I wrote a full review some time ago, and if I was making this list then, I probably would have placed it higher. Anyway, I still like it, but I just don't like it as much.

34. Superman II - Had I seen this movie for the first time as an adult, it would have probably ranked pretty low on this list. However, childhood nostalgia pushes it up further than it probably deserves. Also, the Richard Donner cut improves on the film as a whole, removing all of the Richard Lester randomness (Since when does Superman shoot beams and throw his S-shield?) while sticking on an ending that's dumb as all hell. What else is there to say but the obligatory "Kneel before Zod!"

Ranking the Comics Adaptations - Part IV - The Stinkers

Finally, it's time to get to my 53-movie countdown (if I did my math right, an idea on which one should never rely). When I was looking through the list, it occurred to me that I probably like a greater percentage of these movies than the average person. (I, for one, am not suffering from any kind of superhero burnout as some critics have been lamenting.) However, I can honestly say that I don't like a single movie on this entry's list. Some I can find a good thing or two to say about, but overall, I consider all of these to be outright duds.

Also, before I get started, I'm going to state that I'm going to make no pretense of objectivity. Sure, a list like this is automatically subjective, but I think that while I am able to say that, for instance, Predator 2 is not as good of a movie as La Dolce Vita, I definitely LIKE the former much more than the latter. So, if those two movies qualified for this list, you know which one would be closer to the top than the other. While I think that there is some crossover between what I like and what I actually think is good, this is completely about my subjective reactions to these films.

With that said, here we go with the clunkers...

53. Batman and Robin - Never has more money been spent to tell me that my favorite genre was stupid and a waste of time. Obviously, there are some comic book films with far worse production values than this one, but the fact that this was done by normally competent people only makes things worse. In interviews, director Joel Shumacher talked about how he didn't want his Batman to still be brooding about his dead parents. Umm...then that's NOT Batman, Joel. Why not make a Hamlet where the Danish prince doesn't give a crap that his dad is dead? Makes just as much sense. Also, there are stories of when the cast would point out to Shumacher that the story didn't make sense, his retort was "It's a comic book!" Why not just take a crap on Batman's face? Here's my full review.

52. Superman IV: The Quest for Peace - Check out the DVD commentary from the screenwriter on this one, as it'll be more enjoyable than actually trying to watch the film. Christopher Reeve definitely had his heart in the right place, but clearly nobody was willing to shell out the money to make a proper Superman film.

51. Blade: Trinity - I probably like Blade II more than any human being should, and I can forgive an action movie if it's mindless. Still, it needs to have some sort of forward momentum to it. This just kind of rambled and wasted a potentially awesome nemesis for Blade - Dracula. I think that Jessica Biel might still have a cool action movie in her though, but she was wasted in this confusing mess.

50. X-Men Origins: Wolverine - Lots of important stuff happened in this film that I was supposed to care about, but I went through the whole thing as indifferent as can be. Just like with Christopher Reeve in the last two Superman movies, Hugh Jackman always has his heart in the right place when it comes to the character. Turns out that the director recently revealed that he was having script pages faxed to him while filming. That's probably the least surprising thing, as it's pretty clear that the higher ups were more concerned about having as many mutants as possible in it than telling a compelling story.

49. Fantastic Four - I always tell people that if they want to see a really good Fantastic Four film, they should see The Incredibles. Sure, it's not exactly the same, but it captures the "superhero team as a family" dynamic much better than this film about the original superhero family. The biggest problem with this movie is that it commits the ultimate crime of ruining one of the greatest villains EVER (not just from comic books) - Dr. Doom. I saw the tool who played him at a comic book convention. The man was the anti-Hugh Jackman, clearly not giving a crap about the character of fans. (Did I put the sequel on my list of films I have no plans of seeing? Well, I have no plans to see it.)

48. Superman III - Believe it or not, I've only seen this movie in its entirety one time, and that wasn't even that long ago. I remember a friend of mine had taped it off of cable, but whenever I came over we'd never get to watch the whole thing, as he'd just fast-forward through all of the boring parts. When I sat to watch this, I didn't hate it, but it was pretty clear that it was made by people who didn't give a crap about the source material. Still, it has a few cool moments, like when Clark Kent fights Superman. (How's that possible? Guess you'll have to watch the movie, bitches.)

47. The Punisher - The Thomas Jane version is basically a bunch of really good scenes from a movie that just doesn't come together. I can't say that I hate this film, but it simply doesn't work. It ranks higher than some other stinkers because once again, I think that the lead actor had his heart in the right place. However, the plot can be summarized as follows: criminals hurt Punisher, Punisher hurts criminals, Punisher waits, criminals hurt Punisher, Punisher hurts criminals, etc. Maybe if I watched this movie in five minute increments, I'd think that it was awesome.

46. Green Lantern - Oh, how I wanted this to be good, and I believe that a good Green Lantern movie COULD be made. Unfortunately, this movie fails on pretty much every level. The special effects are awful, and the story stinks as well. The thing that bothers me is that there's a great mythology here, but they tried to cram far too much of it into one film. And then when they realized that it was too much, they altered it into something stupid - like the whole thing with Parallax, an evil entity who took decades of comics to evolve, bu they tried to sum him up in ten minutes. What they should have done is keep Hal Jordan on Earth fighting Hector Hammond, and the only other Lantern we should have seen would be Sinestro. Then they could have saved Oa and Sinestro's eventual turn to evil for the sequel, both of which would have had far more weight. Oh man, Oa...the center of light in the universe wound up looking like a burnt-out crater in a crappy video game. Ugh.

45. Spider-Man III - The team that made my favorite Spider-Man movie completely mucked it up with this one. I've read that Sam Raimi didn't want to include Venom in this one, and he was right for not wanting that, as Venom added nothing to this. As I (and others) have stated before, there might have been something to work with if this one had ended with Peter getting rid of the evil alien suit and then in the follow-up, he would have to face Venom. Instead, there was too much story, too much mucking with the origin, too much crying, and far too much random Peter Parker dancing.

44. The Crow - I absolutely loved this when it was out in the theater, but I watched it recently on Netflix, and it really doesn't hold up very well. It feels like a poor-man's Batman, and Brandon Lee's performance isn't nearly as impressive as I remember it being. It wasn't horrible, but it's really dated, and I probably would have ranked this higher had I never seen it again.

Ranking the Comics Adaptations - Part III

Part I - Movies I haven't heard of and movies I don't plan to see.

Part II - More movies I have no plans to see and some movies I haven't seen but wouldn't mind seeing.

Before I get to my 54 movie countdown, I have one more list of films to get through. These are movies that I have seen, but I don't remember well enough to include them on the list. I will try and guesstimate roughly where I think they would wind up if I had included them.

Movies I'm not including because I don't remember them well enough:

American Splendor  - I remember really liking this story about Harvey Pekar's life, which is basically the same subject of his comic book. Paul Giamatti turned in a fun performance as well. I imagine that this one would probably rank pretty high on the list - easily in the top half, if not the top third.

Ghost World - I read the comic, and I liked the movie. I don't remember too much other than that. This would probably rank in the top half at the very least.

A History of Violence - Never read the comic book, but I thought that the movie was a decent little thriller - not much more than that. It would probably rank somewhere halfway through the list.

Judge Dredd - For crap's sakes - DREDD DOESN'T REMOVE HIS HELMET!!!!! Other than that, I don't remember this as being horrible, but it was more interested in being a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone than an adaptation of the comic book. It probably wouldn't rank at the very bottom of the list, but it definitely not make it past the bottom 25%.

The Mask - Never read the comic, and from what I understand, the movie took a decidedly more humorous tone with the material. I remember liking it, but I have no idea how well it would hold up. I honestly can't even guess where it would belong on the list - probably not the very bottom at least.

Men in Black - This movie was okay, and I can't say much more about it than that. There were enough good parts to probably elevate it past the bottom 25%, but I don't know if it would get much closer than the bottom 33.33333333%.

Mystery Men - I remember this as being pretty uneven. There were some good moments, but overall it didn't quite stick together. Probably somewhere in the bottom 25% but not much further down than that.

The Punisher - Low budget schlock with a character who lacks his defining symbol - a giant skull. Probably be in the bottom 10%.

Road to Perdition - I remember not liking this one as much as the hype made me think that I would. While I don't remember anything particularly wrong with it, I wasn't very engaged in the story either. I'm not sure where I'd rank it, but I don't think that I'm curious enough to watch it again to find out either.

Spawn - I don't mind CGI effects, but I do mind them when there are tons of them and they all suck. It's like the whole movie was screaming: "Hey! Look at this CGI effect! Doesn't it suck?" Dreck. Bottom 10%, easily.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Yes, I saw this. In the theater. Shut up. I think that I even liked it. I'm afraid to see it again and learn just how low I'd rank it.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret of the Ooze - Vanilla Ice is in it. GREATEST. MOVIE. OF. ALL. TIME. No, wait, that was Cool as Ice.

Timecop - I read the few comics that this character actually appeared in, and I wanted to check out the movie because I like time travel stories. It was decent, but I doubt it would hold up very well.

Wanted - I remember thinking that if I was a teenager, I would have absolutely LOVED this movie. I'm an adult, so I was merely entertained. From what I understand, it bears little resemblance to the comic book series.

Weird Science - I had no idea that this was a comic book. I'm also not entirely sure that I've seen this movie in its entirety. I think that I may have seen it on TV once or something.

Ranking the Comics Adaptations - Part II

When all is said and done, I will be ranking 54 comic book adaptations. In Part I, I listed all of the movies that I hadn't seen either because I hadn't heard of them or I had no intention of seeing them. Turns out I goofed on that, and I only included about half of that list, so I'll get to the rest of them here.

After that, I will list off some more that I will not be including. These will be ones that I haven't seen, but I don't object to seeing them.

More Movies I Haven't Seen and There's No Way in Hell I Will See:

R.I.P.D. - This movie stars Green Lantern and The Big Lebowski. It looks lame and a poor man's version of a movie I didn't like all that much in the first place. (Men in Black)

Red Sonja - Schwarzenegger supposedly calls this the worst movie he's ever made, and he was in Hercules in New York.

Richie Rich - I'm only interested in Macauly Caulkin movies where he burns his face with aftershave. (Not really.)

Sabrina the Teenage Witch - Just like Josie and the Pussycats, this one might have been fine for its intended audience. I haven't bothered to look into it further.

Sheena - I have one simple rule: No Ka-Zar, no Sheena.

The Spirit - Tired of Hollywood screwing up his stories, Frank Miller apparently decided to screw up Will Eisner's creation.

Supergirl - There was a time when I really wanted to see this. This was also around the same time when I ate mayonnaise sandwiches.

Surrogates - Oops. This belongs on my "haven't heard of" list.

Swamp Thing - I'm only going to see an adaptation of a magical swamp-based comic book character if it's called Giant Sized Man-Thing.

Tales from the Crypt (series) - I'm not much of a horror fan, and I only tend to see them if they're seem like they're something special. Any horror fans think that this is worth a look?

Tank Girl - Wasn't Ice-T a kangaroo in this or something? Crap! Why the hell don't I want to see this?

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III - I didn't feel like there were any burning, unsolved mysteries from the first two movies.

TMNT - I didn't start respecting New Kids on the Block when they became NKOTB, and this trick isn't going to work for a bunch of talking turtles either.

Vampirella - Go to a comic book convention where a model is dressed like Vampirella and try to not stare at her boobs. I don't care whether you're attracted to women or not, you cannot resist the boobs. I can easily resist a movie though.

Virus - Would you believe that I actually read the comic book series? It was a perfectly serviceable little horror story, but it didn't scream "Make this a movie!" to me.

Whiteout - I heard it was bad, and the story doesn't interest me all that much anyway.

Movies I Haven't Seen but Might if Given the Opportunity:

30 Days of Night - This looks like it might be a perfectly serviceable action/horror film. I don't expect great things, but it might be entertaining.

Cowboys and Aliens - I know that the reviews weren't great, but it looks like it might be fun, and it has a good cast with both James Bond and Indiana Jones (who's been in a movie with James Bond before).

Ghost Rider - I'm sure that I'd regret it after seeing it, but if it ever shows up on Netflix streaming, I'll check it out.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance - Ditto.

Kick Ass 2 - I'll go into this in more detail when I get to the first one, but as much as I like the comics, I don't feel that it works as a movie.

The Losers - I've heard good things about this one; looks like fun.

My Name is Bruce - This was a comic book? Bruce Campbell, right? I'm curious.

Red and Red 2 - Don't know the comics, but I've heard that the first movie was pretty entertaining.

Ranking the comics adaptations - Part I

I love comic books. I love movies as well. This means that I have a pretty soft spot for comic book adaptations. In a way, I'm probably not a good person to ask whether a particular one is good or bad, as I tend to find something good in almost all of them, even the ones where I can objectively see that they're bad. (Although as more and more of these movies are getting made, I'm probably less and less tolerant. If Green Lantern had come out when I was a teenager, I would have thought it was awesome. But with movies like The Dark Knight and Iron Man being out there? Yeah, it's not so good.)

For some dumb, obsessive-compulsive reason, I have decided to rank all of the various comic book adaptations. The first thing I did was start with Wikipedia's list of English-language comic book adaptations. This leaves out the Asterix movies, which I haven't seen, but as a fan of the comics, I'd like to one day. From there, I took off every movie that didn't have a theatrical release - so no rubber-eared Captain America nor Dolph Lundgren Punisher. Also, I'm not counting anything that came out before 1978's Superman. (There weren't too many of those anyway - mostly action serials from the 1940s.)

With that out of the way, there are a whole lot of movies that I haven't seen, or it's been so long since I've seen them that I don't feel right categorizing them. So, for the first two parts in this series, I'll be listing off the movies I've never even heard of, movies that I haven't seen and am actively avoiding, movies that I haven't seen but would be willing to see, and the movies where I just don't remember well enough to properly place. I'll give some thoughts about some of these if I've got something to say, but first:

The Movies I Don't Know Anything About - For all of these, I am unfamiliar with both the movie and the comic, and some of them could very well be direct-to-video or TV adaptations. I don't feel like taking the time to research each one of them. Leave me a comment if you've seen any/know anything about any of them.

2 Guns
The Amazing Cynicalman - Nothing amazing about that.
Faust: Love of the Damned
G-Men from Hell - This sounds vaguely familiar.
I, Frankenstein
I Sell the Dead
Model by Day - What is he/she by night? A dentist? Probably.
El Muerto - I'm intrigued by the title.
Oblivion
The Perils of Gwendoline in the Land of the Yik-Yak. - WTF?

The Movies I Haven't Seen and There's No Way in Hell I Will See - I'll tell you why for each of these.

Art School Confidential - This has been on my Netflix queue forever. I was intrigued because I liked another adaptation of a Daniel Clowes story, Ghost World, but I've heard that this movie is only so-so. I'm not totally opposed to seeing it, but it's probably just not going to happen.

Barb Wire - I actually read most of the comics from Dark Horse. The movie seemed to have little in common with them, and Pamela Anderson's acting doesn't exactly bring me running. I understand that she gets naked in it, but I have this feeling that there are other ways one can see that, if one were so inclined.

Bulletproof Monk - Never read the comic, heard the movie wasn't very good. Pass.

Catwoman - Yeah, right. I actually had a free ticket to see this that came in a DVD collection of Batman: The Animated Series. I still have it just in case they ever re-release it in theaters. Seriously though, anybody who likes this movie needs to rethink their standards considering that its star admitted that it was crap. And that costume? Ohhhhhh...sooooooooo....awful.

Constantine - I've never read the comics, and from what I hear, the movie bears little resemblance to them. Making him an American seemed to be the first of many things they got wrong.

Elektra - Okay, Daredevil wasn't very good, and supposedly this one was worse. Why would I do that to myself?

Jonah Hex - The comics are pretty much straight-up Westerns. This movie seemed like something else entirely. No thank you.

Josie and the Pussycats - I'm sure it's fine for what it is, but what it is isn't very interesting to me.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen - This looked like crap on wheels and the reviews confirm it. I haven't read the comics, although I'd like to, but this seems to have little to do with them.

Son of the Mask - Umm...no, just...no.

Men in Black II - Didn't like the first one all that much. And did enough copies of the comic exist for this to even count for this list?

Men in Black III - See above.

Monkeybone - Despite all the Oscars and critical acclaim, I'm just going to have to pass on this one.

What can skepticism and freethought offer a person?

I wrote about a month ago how I wanted to start advocating for skepticism and free-thought rather than atheism. It's my belief that those two modes of thinking naturally lead to atheism, so I figure that it's best to put the horse before the cart. After all, advocating a non-belief is telling people that you want to take something away from them rather than offering them something good.

I suppose I should note that while I'd love it if people of all types read my blog, I think that this one is directly addressing the fence-sitters - the people who just aren't sure what they believe. Perhaps you're somebody who believes in God, but there are a lot of doubts that are gnawing away at you. One way or the other, the issue is important to you, and you want to make the right choice. With that said, let me tell you why I think that looking at the world through a skeptical, naturalist, freethinking point of view is best.

For starters, let's get out of the way what WON'T happen to you if taking this path causes you to reject belief in the supernatural in general, and God in particular. Here are a few things you won't have to worry about:

1. You won't fall into despair thinking that the world has no purpose. We human beings are generally pretty resilient animals. Even though you might no longer see purpose the way you used to see it, that doesn't mean that you still can't create purpose - one that's as satisfying or potentially more satisfying than the one you had before.
2. You won't lose any sense of awe or wonder about the world, despite what Oprah might tell you. The universe is an amazing place, and it doesn't suddenly stop being amazing when you no longer accept supernatural claims.
3. You can still believe in love. It's an emotion that you feel. Sure, it's not tangible, but realizing that it's brought about by the natural phenomena of millions of years of evolution among a cooperative species doesn't suddenly make it less real to you. If anything, that's one more thing at which to marvel.
4. You won't become a drug-abusing murderer who no longer has to answer to a higher power. Even if religious faith "saved" you from drug abuse, abandoning it won't make you revert to your old ways. I don't say this from personal experience so much as from people whom I have personally known. Also, if you weren't a murderer before, it won't suddenly seem like an appealing thing to do. Even if I knew that I could get away with killing a random person, I wouldn't do it. Even if you paid me to do it, I wouldn't do it. Why? Because empathy, that's why. Where'd I get that? From my ancestors who developed it to help them survive in groups when they didn't have fancy things like sharp claws and wings.

Okay, so those are things that won't happen to you. Is that all it is? Just a break-even if you completely alter your approach to the world? How about some advantages? Well, I can name a few:

1. You can trust your doubt. It's a good thing, and while I hear religious people say that they embrace their doubt all the time, I just don't see that as being a genuine sentiment coming from them. After all, what do they tell their fellow believers when it comes to doubt? Pray about it. In other words, it's okay to doubt so long as you realize that you're wrong for doing so and you eventually have to come back to your original position. With free-thought, you can fully embrace your doubts. Your doubts might even be pulling you in the CORRECT direction. Listen to them, consider them, and then make your decisions accordingly.
2. You won't be troubled by so much cognitive dissonance. One thing that really troubles a lot of people of faith, Christians in particular, is the issue of how to treat gay people. On one extreme, you have complete intolerance. A bit better than that is "hate the sin, love the sinner" which still puts gay people as doing something wrong for simply being who they are. Recently a friend of mine posted this article from the Huffington Post, where the author abandons that particular phrase, but at the end of it all, he's still left with the thing that homosexuality is a sin; in other words, it's wrong. I see so many Christians struggle with this because on one hand, they don't see how gay people are doing anything wrong, yet they still have to think that it is because The Bible says so. Well, here's a possibility you get to have if you approach things from a skeptical point of view: The Bible might be wrong. This gets to be a very real option, and when you embrace it, you find yourself struggling a whole lot less.
3. The world becomes less scary. I realize that this one will hold more appeal for some people than others, but I know that before I embraced skepticism, I was troubled by demons. I also know of people who have scary instances in their lives where they feel some sort of presence that makes the hairs on their arm stand on end. The world seems to be full of all kinds of hidden terrors that aren't detectable through conventional means. However, when I hear strange noises or get random chills nowadays, I don't pay them a second thought, and I'm able to move on with my life. You can read more about those experiences and why I abandoned them here and here.
4. There's no need to fear death. Sure, dying might be scary, but as far as we can tell, our awareness is in the brain, and when the brain ceases to function, there's no reason to believe that it continues on. As it's been said before, there's no reason to think that it will feel any different than how it felt before you were born.

That's just for starters. If that sounds good to you, then what's the next step? What does it mean to be a freethinker and a skeptic? You start with Carl Sagan's maxim: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." From there, determine what counts as evidence, as that's a word that's thrown around quite a bit. But if you want to truly be a skeptic, have your definition be consistent. In other words, don't consider something to be evidence for what you want to believe that you would reject for another claim. (You know,t things like personal experiences. If you can reject it as a likely hallucination in somebody else, then you can't use a different yardstick when you evaluate your own beliefs.)

There are a lot of great books out there by the likes of Michael Shermer, James Randi, Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, etc. to help you to continue this journey if you're ready for it. The best part is that you get to go wherever the truth takes you - you're not bound by anybody's dogma - even your own. You won't have all the answers, and you'll have to get used to using the phrase, "I don't know" but you'll be living as honest a life as you possibly can, and there's a great deal of satisfaction in that.

Can you choose to believe?

I had a conversation recently with a thoughtful theist where we were discussing raising children and passing on our belief systems to them. I was relieved (but not surprised) to hear that she wasn't feeding her children misinformation about atheists like how we're somehow "broken" or "love sin too much" or some other total strawman. She told me that when she explained nonbelievers to her kids, she started off with how God gives us free will, and we can make our decisions from there. I thought that was a really fair response, but it's kinda stuck in my brain, and while I wouldn't tell her to change what she says, I'm not so sure that whether people believe or not is a matter of choice.

I've been told before that my problem is that I need to read The Bible with "an open heart" and "ask God" to help guide me as I do so. I always respond with how that's a strange request, as how can I genuinely ask a thing that I don't believe to help me? Sure, I can mouth the words and maybe even go so far as to think: "Okay, if there is a God, help me out here!" but that's not the same thing as making a genuine request. I compare it to asking Superman for help the next time you're in trouble. Sure, you can say, "Superman, help!" and you can have the mindset where if Superman actually comes along to help you out, you're not going to question it. The point is that in both situations, you're not genuinely expecting help from something that you don't think is actually there.

I think that this works both ways, and that's why it's pointless to try and talk somebody out of belief. If a person genuinely believes in Allah, for instance, and you offer them a billion dollars to stop, he or she might go so far as to tell you that the belief is gone, but if you believe you believe. No matter how much you tell a person that his or her belief is nonsense, that's not going to get you anywhere. If anything, it'll just make that person dig his or her heels in even further.

I should note though that I'm not saying that there's no point in debating beliefs. If it weren't for people who debated with me, along with numerous debates that I listened to, I'd probably believe a whole lot of different stuff than I do now. The point though is that it wasn't somebody trying to cajole me into changing my mind that did the trick. What made me change my mind was a slow process, but much of it had to do with how I approached the world. Different people introduced me to new ways of looking at things, and once I opened my mind up to the possibility that I was wrong, my faith's demise was inevitable.

I realize that theists hate it when atheists compare the belief in God to the belief in Santa Claus, but if any believers out there really want to understand it from our point of view, then don't take it as an insult when I say that it's as likely that I can start believing in God again as I can start believing in Santa. It's not that nothing will change my mind. If I got some empirical evidence for St. Nick, then what choice would I have but to believe in him again? It's the same with God. Yes, I know, belief in God is a deeper, more life-altering belief than the one in Santa, but that doesn't address the reason why I don't believe - a lack of evidence. If I were to ask you to write a letter to Santa next Christmas, you'd look at me the same way I (really want to) look at you when you ask me to ask God to help me with my understanding of The Bible.

So, if you're on board with me that belief is not a choice, then what can you actually choose to do?

1. You can choose to have an open mind. This is a bit of a loaded phrase, as it's unfortunately come to mean that you should give equal weight to any and all claims that come your way. When I say it, I mean that you should be willing to follow the evidence to whatever conclusion is supported by it, and once you reach that conclusion, be ready to change it as new evidence comes your way. That doesn't mean that you can't feel secure in saying, "There probably aren't any chimpanzees that live in my ear." but just be ready to change your mind when a bunch of chimps start flying out of your auditory cavity.

2.  You can choose to expose yourself to other points of view. This step is pretty much pointless if you're not willing to take the first one. Many people only like to expose themselves to the opposing point of view through the lens of those already on their side. This is why you get so many creationists still saying the same old canards like "If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" or "If evolution is true, why is it just a theory?" (If you think that those are good questions, then you haven't looked into evolution from the point of view of those who actually accept it - and not even in the most cursory way at that.)

3.  You can choose to embrace your doubts. When a doubt comes along about a particular belief of yours, you can shut your brain down and blame yourself for not thinking correctly, or you can say, "Maybe I'm doubting this for a good reason." From there, you can put your belief into a holding pattern of "I'm not sure about this." until more evidence comes along to sway you one way or another.

4.  You can take the time to figure out what would change your mind. For instance, I personally believe that it's a good idea to let my son decide how much he should eat at dinner time. I don't make him sit at the table until he "cleans his plate". I know precisely what would make me change my mind though. For once, if he started to look malnourished, that would be a pretty big indicator that I could be wrong. (But not quite enough to convince me entirely - there could be other factors at play.) The point is that I have no problem saying what would get me to think differently. Some people seem to act like it's a virtue to say, "Nothing can change my mind." That sounds pretty unreasonable to me.

5.  You can choose to lie. Unfortunately, there are many people out there who do just this, and I don't judge them for it when it comes to this particular issue. Some folks are afraid to tell their friends and family how they really feel out of fear of being ostracized. In that case, you have people who do things like go to church and pray at the dinner table, but they believe about as much as I do. Like I said, I don't judge, but I would encourage more people to "come out of the closet" in that case, so others can learn that nonbelievers aren't evil people.

That's all I've got. If you've got something else, feel free to comment and let me know.