Post 124: Write-A-?

Today in Adv. Creative Writing, we tried an exercise where we were told to write (with specfic constraints) off the top of our head. First, we were given the constraint of a setting.

Off the top of my head for setting, I got:

Three years after the civil war's end Arena's border lands were still scarred by the fire's of war. Funeral mounds speckled the land between homes in disrepair. Fields that were once lush with all sorts of life, only just starting to show signs of re-growth. People, though few remained, scoured the land with harsh looks and dirty faces. There were no luxuries to this life of their's, only work and torn collars. It hadn't rained in weeks.  

Then, after setting, we were instructed to connect character. 

From that I got:

Not since the day Ava was born. "It's a curse. She's a curse, " the people thought, but never said. There was no time to talk, only time to work. Ava was born in the afternoon to two ambivalent parents. Her mother would have never known she had, had a daughter if it weren't for the sudden prescence of a tiny person in their home following her horrible stomach pains, she had previously attributed to the old beef she'd had for lunch. If they had known what their daughter would become, maybe they'd have paid better attention. 

Then we were instructed to introduce conflict. 

So from that I got....nothing. Literally, I came up with what I wanted the conflict to be, but couldn't add it to the story the way we were intended too. I decided I wanted her to go to the Capitol to see if she could raise awareness and get resources sent home, but she would only find corruption that would lead to her joining a rebellion. A rebellion that was fruitless, so when one of her fellow rebel friends are killed she and some others break from the main group and start a more violent revolution. Which one lead to another more secondary conflict, that is internal to the character when she sort of loses herself in the cause and forgets why she left home to begin with. 

But we only had like five minutes, how could I allude to all of that in five minutes, especially past the last line I had already created for character. 

It was a very different style for me. I usually have a character, then a conflict and then put it in a setting. It was hard starting with setting and then character. It would have been even harder if we had started with setting then went into conflict. Or conflict, then setting, then character. 

I probably would have completely frozen up. Or just come up with something really obscure. 

Post 123: Counterpoint - Hercules

I was trying to find plot holes for this series, and so many are truly impossible to fill. But this movie has a plot hole that I think with my background in Philosophy and old TV shows can be filled in no time.

Movie: Hercules

Plot hole: How was saving Meg what made Hercules a true hero when he had already risked his life on a number of occasions for more people who meant nothing to him. (i.e. when he went up against the Hydra to save the town's people even after they ridiculed him, when he saved Meg from the Centaur before he was interested in her, etc.)

Well, I think this goes back to my old TV show knowledge. ( Charmed ). More specifically the episode of Charmed on the Seven Deadly Sins. I don't remember the exact line, but it was something along the lines of "there is no selfless deed to pride".

Everything Hercules did before he saved Meg from the Underworld was towards his dream of becoming a hero, from saving her the first time to saving the town's people. It didn't matter that he risked his life or genuinely wanted to help them, because in the back of his mind every action was always attributed to his desire to prove himself a hero and gain glory. 

When he risked facing death to save Meg, it was fully selfless. He didn't think he would survive. He didn't care, so it was the first act where he was fully putting himself towards a selfless act. 

If he died, he would never be a God. But, even though it meant giving up on everything, he still put Meg before himself. 

So, I think that is what I have wrapped it up as. Not that what he did before wasn't heroic, but that because he only set off to be a hero and do heroic deeds to benefit himself and become a God, it wasn't until he made a choice that wasn't so much heroic as human that he was able to be truly selfless and prove himself a "true hero".

Post 122: Define Friend

In Phil of Ed. (what I will be calling Philosophy of Education from now on), we discussed necessary and contingents truths, which isn't as important as one of the truths the Professor put up as one he believed was necessary: "happy people have friends".

And it got me thinking, is that really necessary? I mean, I think that people need to form relationships, that is like a basic part of human nature, but does that mean they have to be friends?

Let's use a student as an example.

If the student has lots of good relationships with people in classes, (they talk, walk out of class together, laugh together), does that mean they are really friends? If they are friendly with every one in all their classes, they could fulfill the need for human interaction. But does friendly mean friend? 

There are a lot of people I am friendly with, but wouldn't classify as a friend. And I think that this is an important distinction and idea to think about, especially in the age of social media where anyone can "friend" anyone without knowing much, if anything, about them. 

I can "friend" a professor, TA, stranger, classmate, celebrity, etc. But that doesn't mean they are my friend. And I wouldn't really recommend "friending" your professors, maybe your TAs but that kind of depends.

Anyway, back to the student.

Let us assume that they have had Facebook for three or four years now, and they have had group projects in half their classes, and during each group project they have added their group mates. If they are a third year having taken four classes a semester, with no summer semester that is at least 6 "friends". Plus the friends they had from high school that they no longer talk to, so maybe "60". Then the friends of friends that come up as suggestions, "10". Then the people they have met at parties, who lived in their dorm, who they met on the bus, "60". Then the celebrities they follow, "10".

That is almost 150 people.

That is a low estimate. On average Facebook users (adults) have over 300 friends, the mean is about 200 friends.

So, that is a lot of people that sit there in their "friends" list. But how many do they talk to?

More importantly, how many of them are real "friends"?

I guess, it depends on the definition. I think that there are certain things required in a relationship between two people to count as friendship: like trust, loyalty, etc.

I mean, I have friends that I am very different from, but I know that I can trust them with a secret or count on them to help me when I am in trouble.

If all 300 and some odd number "friends" were real friends, then great!

But that doesn't really seem the case.

So, if the student has people to talk to and has formed relationships, do they have to be friendships?

I honestly don't know. I think it depends on what we define as "friendship", in this day in age where it extends to anyone with internet access, then maybe it does require friends. I don't know what a friend is, not in a way that can be defined, but I do know who my friends are and that is really good enough for me. It doesn't answer my questions, but I didn't really expect to find the answer. 

Post 121: Outside the Box

Well, out of all my classes this semester I didn't expect Philosophy of Education to be the most inspiring, but so far - it has been. Though, most of the inspiration that has come from it is the reminders of all the things I found most interesting about Philosophy.

One that did not link back to Philosophy, but rather Education, was the idea of out of the box thinking and kids that don't color within the lines. 

In an ideal world education would benefit everyone, would be suited for helping everyone. However, that is not always the case. There are abstract-thinkers, students that dance to the beat of their own drum and other similar cliches, who are not always receiving the education best suited for them. 

This has come up both in class and out of class. Both seem to hold the idea that education shouldn't stifle their creativity or individuality. But is that really the point of school? Can it even be done?

I actually don't think so. Schools have structured systems of grading so that everyone is graded by the same means, and this might benefit some students more than others, it doesn't mean that there are better options available right now. 

If every student was graded as individuals, on their own scale, based on their learning style and thinking style, it would be exhausting for teachers. And who would come up with each of the individual grading schemes? 

There are not really enough teachers in the field to do this. And it doesn't really prepare students for the world. 

When they go off to work, some might find jobs that are suited to a more loose performance scale, but a lot of employers aren't going to look at their employees' work and say, 'well they didn't get as much done, but they did do it in a very creative way'. 

I think that schools should have Philosophy classes and Art classes so that students are exposed to out-of-the-box and creative thinking. But, I don't think that schools should reorient themselves for everyone who thinks differently. Sometimes you need to think inside the box or stay in the lines, and it is important that students are taught how. 

I like creative thinking and I am an outside the box person when it comes to a lot of things, but I can think practically and linear if I need to. At least, that is my thought now. Change is slow in education and a lot of teachers who have been teaching for years and years aren't looking at changing. A lot would need to change to get this to a place where it would work as it should and I think that the time it would take to start getting it implemented would just be an awkward phase for those involved. 

BoxTrolls (2014)

Cute and creepy, the two words that would succinctly wrap up what this movie was. The BoxTrolls are cute, but creepy. The little girl was cute, but disturbed. Like really disturbed. Overall, I am not sure whether the movie was weird or inspirational, or really if it was trying to be either.

There seems to be a message that: material things do not make you who you are.

But the overall message ends being kind of diluted by the sheer ridiculousness that someone would really be willing to murder for cheese, or rather the right to wear a white hat and eat cheese. They don't even get to keep the cheese themselves, and this person is ALLERGIC to cheese. I mean, his face swells up and they have to use leeches to stop it.

I think that overall I liked the movie, but would have liked a few more laughs. It looks like a kids movie. But it isn't really what you would expect from a kid's movie.

It starts off with rumors spreading around town of a baby being kidnapped and taken down into the sewers by monsters where he is supposedly eaten alive, while his father is murdered when he tries to save him. Creepy, right?

Then it jumps ahead, the kid wasn't eaten but was adopted as one of their own (like with Timon and Pumba in Lion King, except...not). The BoxTrolls are being captured and killed. The boy-BoxTroll decides to go find out why and see if he can't stop it.

He meets the crazy little girl who seems a little too interested in BoxTrolls and spends a lot of time thinking about them and romanticizing the idea that they might come tear off her face and wear her toes as a necklace. She meets BoxBoy and one of the first things she asks him is if they LET him watch them murder his parents. LET HIM. She later corrects it to MAKE him, but she meant let. She is psychotic. I mean, I found her to be one of the scarier characters and she was meant to be one of the good guys!

So, you can see why I'm not really thinking of this as a kids' movie. Which makes the whole message a little murkier, because who is it even for?

Anyway, it wasn't bad. It had some cute moments and it had a happy ending. Would I recommend it? Sure. Would I recommend seeing it in theatres? No. No, I would not. Wait until it comes out on DVD.

Post 120: What Big Picture? Killers

Killers (2010) a movie starring Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher. Basically the plot of the movie is:

Watch a hit-man fall in love with a female control freak. Then watch as a few years later the people in their lives turn out to be killers who try to kill them but fail and die in horrible ways all because of a misunderstanding that doesn't make sense.

Katherine's character is a control freak who meets Ashton's character while she is on vacation. He was a spy and retires after meeting her. They get married and years later his old boss calls him and gives him a post card. Then their neighbors, coworkers, etc. all turn against them and try to kill them.

The big twist at the end? All of the killers sent after them were sent by her father for a large bounty. Turns out Ashton's character's boss was corrupt and when Katherine's dad saw the postcard, he thought Ashton's character was corrupt and because apparently her dad works for the government Katherine's dad thinks Ashton's character is trying to kill him.

My big issues with this?

For one, some of them were their neighbors for years. If Ashton's character just came under suspicion, then why were all these killers already in their lives?

Also, a lot of the killers that attacked the couple, while mainly aiming at Ashton, almost killed Katherine's character in the process. Why her father didn't just kill Asthon himself is beyond me. I mean, he had access and he could have just given him something that made it look like he had an allergic reaction and died.

This would be easy. It would be cheap. And it wouldn't put his daughter in any danger.

But, no, he sent killers after his son-in-law and, at the same time, put his daughter in great danger. Without warning her, helping her, trying to get her out of the way, or even instructing the killers not to hurt her. I mean, why not have her and her mom go to a spa together for a few days. That gets her out of harm's way. Or, do anything at all for that matter? Oh, that's right! It might give away the nonsensical plot twist.

My second issue came at the end, when the father and son-in-law are arguing at gunpoint. The father says that he saw the postcard and wanted to kill Asthon before Asthon killed him. Which didn't really make sense because the postcard was asking for a meeting, not telling him to kill someone. So, it wasn't really definitive proof of anything. I mean, one post card asking for a meeting and suddenly he is sending dozens of people to kill his daughter's husband.

I mean, her father was supposed to be some high level member of the intelligence agency and he didn't even bother to do any more research or observation after that. He didn't try to see how the meeting went or check to see if there were any more communications between them, he just took out a hit. I mean, if he had checked in, he'd have seen that Ashton refused his old boss's offer to get involved in anything and insist he was retired.

My third issue, also with this scene, is the only reason that her dad dropped the gun and calmed down was because she said she was pregnant. He didn't bother seeing if his son-in-law was actually corrupt, he just dropped it when he found out that he was going to be a grandfather. Like really? You weren't that worried about your daughter's safety before. You weren't worried about depriving her of her husband before. But suddenly, it doesn't matter, because she's pregnant.

My last big issue is that a lot of people died over this misunderstanding. And if they actually worked with or for her father, that meant that they were spies working for the government not just killers looking to collect some money. Yet, no one seems to have cared at all that so many people died for nothing. Literally nothing. Dozens of people died. More were injured. People they worked with. People they hung out with. But does any one care that they died over a misunderstanding? Nope. My neighbors tried to kill me so I killed them? I blew up my coworker? Who cares?! I'm going to be a dad. My coworkers were all murdered because I leaped to conclusions? Men and women put their life on the line and will no longer be going home to their families because of me? My son-in-law might be corrupt and trying to kill me? Who cares?! Bust open the champagne, I'm going to be a grandpa.

Post 119: Unrealistic Character Changes

So, I get that Disney and other makers of kid and preteen movies will tone things done and wrap up the story with some sort of happy ending, but it often is way too unrealistic.

The biggest examples I can think of are 1 Chance 2 Dance and Cloud 9.

In both there is a main character and an antagonist that are competing against each other. The antagonist in both goes to extraordinary measures to take out the competition but then, at the end, claps for the main character when they win.

In 1 Chance 2 Dance, the main character and antagonist are both dancers. The antagonist is threatened by the main character, so she steals her partner. But that's not all. She also tricks her into coming to party, where she uses the main character's mother's alcoholism and her crush to hurt her emotionally. But that's not all, either. On the antagonist's behalf, a boy at the party spikes the main character's drink and then tries to get her to lie down and starts to climb on top of her. Now, the main character's love interest pulled him off her, but it is hard to say how far he was supposed to go and what he did as it was, was way over the line. But that still isn't all. The antagonist trips the main character with an intent to injure her, and when the main character is injured, the antagonist insults her again and walks away.

But then when the main character wins she basically shrugs it off and claps for her. After everything she has done to the main character or tried to do to her, it is absolutely out of character for her to not be upset about the main character winning.

In Cloud 9, it is the same ending.

Except in Cloud 9 the main character and antagonist start out on the same team. The main character is not a very good teammate, but the antagonist (the coach) cannot kick her off the team without a reason, so he has his son/her boyfriend get her into trouble.

Except that how he got her into trouble was actually pretty dangerous. She could have gotten seriously hurt. In fact, while they wrap it up like it was just to get her in trouble, it seems more realistic that the dad's actual goal was for her to get hurt, but didn't want to tell his son that.

Anyway, the son and the main character stole someone's sled (which really seems like it should have been enough). They were riding in it and all was well, until the son directed the sled towards a sign, which was really more like a giant billboard, and jumped out so that the main character would crash into it (at his father's behest).

She was lucky she didn't get hurt.

I had a friend when I was younger, a neighbor more than friend, and she cracked her skull open while sledding. She needed 19 stitches. Thankfully, she was alright but it was day and there were a lot of people around to help her. And it was not a steep hill and it was not a big hill, she just hit a patch of ice the wrong way and next thing she knew she was in the hospital.

The main character wasn't on a hill. It was a mountain. And it was steep and there were trees and she was sent directly into a giant sign. And it was night. And the guys she was with ran away, if she had been hurt there wouldn't have been people to help her. She was seriously lucky.

And yet, the coach clapped at the end like him sabotaging her and putting her life in danger were really no big deal.

There have been other shows or movies where this has come up and I don't get it. It doesn't really seem realistic and I'm sure (well, I suspect) I am not the only person out there thinking it is ridiculous and unfair.

Both these people got away with it and it is hard to say which is worse. On the one hand, the antagonist in 1 Chance 2 Dance went further, especially when she drugged the main character, but on the other side the antagonist in Cloud 9 was her coach, an adult who is supposed to take care of his team and be responsible for their safety, not jeopardize it. And they both showed in doing these acts, as well as the mention of the antagonist in 1C2D having a history of this kind of behavior, they will probably continue it.

They got away with it after all.

I would have liked to see the coach fired. Especially since what he did came out in front of her dad (who, technically, signs his paychecks and could have fired him or sued him)  but he wasn't fired and his team wasn't disqualified, it showed no repercussions for his behavior. Same with the antagonist in 1 Chance 2 Dance, she wasn't disqualified, or suspended, or punished, or anything.

So, my biggest problems with this should now be clear: they wouldn't have clapped, it isn't in their nature, and they will do it again, so there is no real happy ending.

Post 118: Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas (Dec. 25th)! 

Happy Hanukkah ( Dec. 16th - Dec. 24th )! 

Happy Kwanzaa ( Dec. 26th - Jan. 1st ).

Happy Holidays ( Jan. 1st - Dec. 31st )!

This will be a pretty short post, it is a holiday after all. So, happy holidays all no matter what you celebrate or if you celebrate at all this month.

For Christmas this year, like most years, I am visiting family in upstate New York. In fact, as I write this I am on my way from my dad's to my aunt and uncle's. It is about a four hour drive, and don't worry, I am not the one driving.

Christmas music is playing and there is snow on the ground. It is a very Christmas-y scene. Not quite movie level picturesque as it has been uncharacteristically warm this December. In fact, it was in the 50's the other day. So, there isn't quite as much snow as there has been in the past.

Which makes the drive safer, at least.

Anyway, we are on our way with a van full of gifts and toys for relatives and other random things that have accumulated over the years. 

Every year, I usually get something small for everyone. Which sounds pretty obvious, but because their are so many people in our family, we have a system in place where everyone buys for the kids and then it is set up kind of like a secret Santa where every family gets gifts for another family, but not something for everyone. By family I mean, husband, wife, and kid or married couple or single person or parent and kid, etc. I guess, household might be a better way of explaining it. 

Anyway, since I was a kid I got something from everyone, I (with my dad's sponsorship) got something for everyone. This year I made necklaces. Which was fun. I like making things. There is something both wonderfully entertaining and completely satisfying in creating things, whether it be blog posts, stories, jewelry, paintings, pie, jam, characters, etc. 

It was fun. I really enjoyed it. The first time I ever made anything in the way of jewelry was probably when I was like 11, it was a bracelet. My mom got a jewelry kit because she was considering taking it up as a hobby and she got me some stuff too. I really liked the bracelet I made and I liked making it, but I didn't like how much the beads, wire, fasteners, and other supplies cost. 

The next time I got into it again, it was with rainbow beads and elastic cord. They were not as nice as the previous bracelet. However, they were just as fun to make and the supplies was a lot cheaper. Also, because there were not as many small pieces involved I could make them anywhere. 

My dad has at least four, I probably have at least six and I have probably made at least a hundred in the past few years. Though, I tend to give them away or lose them, so I don't know where a majority of them are anymore.

The necklaces I made for Christmas are not rainbow beads and elastic cord. They are wire and beads and charms and other miscellaneous things that can be found in the crafts' section of any store that has a crafts' section.

I don't have any pictures of them. In fact, since all but two (one for my mom, who I hope doesn't read this before I give it to her, and one I am wearing because I made it as a tester) are wrapped up in a box with wrapping paper and stored in another box in a bag in the back of the van. 

Anyway, this has gotten longer than I expected it would and my hand is getting a little sore from writing this on my iPad without my handy Bluetooth keyboard, so I'm going to end this here.

Happy Holidays!!! 

Post 117: Don't Try This At Home

'Don't try this at home' is something that I remember appearing on the bottom of my TV screen a lot when I was younger, for commercials and TV shows alike. I don't see it as often now. Perhaps it is what I'm watching now. The assumption might now be that the audience is old enough not to blindly attempt the stunts being shown. However, that doesn't seem overly likely. I mean, knives come with instructions and logs for the fire come with warnings that they are flammable.

So, where are the warnings now? Probably buried in the credits or tiny print that shows up for commercials at times which has the warnings and restrictions,  essentially the fine print of whatever it is. 

Why am I writing about this?

Because I ignored the warnings and tried something I saw in a movie. I successfully completed the stunt. By successfully, I mean I didn't kill myself and caught the knife with only a small amount of blood shed.

So, I got a pocket knife recently. Not that I have any desire to use it or really any need to use it, but I'm hoping to take it with me back to CAN. My idea of Canada as a safe place is not as strong as it used to be. This year alone there were approx. 44 murders in the lower mainland area alone in BC. Including a teenage girl who was found murdered not far from my school campus. 

This new knowledge as well as the the recent statistics coming out about rape (98% of rapists won't spend a day in jail, approximately 70% of rapes aren't reported, 1 out of every 6 women in the U.S. has been the victim of either sexual assault or rape, 17.7 million American women alone have been the victims of sexual assault or rape, etc.) makes commuting home especially after late night classes a little unnerving.

I mean, I want to say that it's not likely something will happen, but statistics suggest that it is more likely than people would like to think.

So, I think I would feel more comfortable just knowing I had something that I could use if the worst were to happen. 

Anyway, with this new pocket knife, I was kind of playing around. I mean, I have never had one other than the little Swiss Army ones so I wanted to make sure I knew how to open and close it. Which was actually a little more difficult than I had imagined. And I happened to remember something I had seen someone do with a pocket knife in a movie. It was like a flick and spin thing. 

I tried. I got the spin except it spun down instead of up. I got the flick except it flicked a little more than I had expected. Long story short I have two band-aids on the back of my leg and one on my finger, because that is the extent in which this went wrong. And yet, I still caught it and I didn't lose any fingers or nick any major or minor arteries. 

So, for the most part, I would list this as a successful attempt that I will not repeat again.

Anyway, I didn't have that much to say with this other than what I've written above. So, Happy Holiday Season all!

Post 116: Don't Die, Just Dye

This is kind of a review, but kind of not. So, it will be my review post for the month, but will also be counted in my post count (Post 116). If I had the time I would separate the three main brands I use and post them as part of my monthly reviews. However, I don't have that much to say and what good does it do people if I only do one or two. They can't compare them.

So, as anyone who has met me in person may know, my hair tends to change color. As of late I have been adding less natural colors. I've pretty consistently had a streak in my bangs . It goes from green to blue to purple and I recently added red to the end of the streak. However,  I also added a green and red striped streak for Christmas. 

For this I used three different brands, mostly because that is what I have and it is expensive to buy new product every time. The three main kinds I use are Splat!, Manic Panic, and Punky color.

Splat!

The cheapest from most places for what you get and how far it will go, but more limited color selection. I think there is only red, green, blue, purple, pink, and aqua. Which is really enough.

It comes in a box with a bottle of dye, a pair of gloves, and a set of instructions. Which is nice. I usually buy a pack of cheap, disposable plastic gloves from the Dollar Store to use but the instructions are nice for people who don't dye their hair often and wonder about timing. Also people who don't do it as often as I do, won't need multiple pairs of gloves for constant upkeep.

This one is also nice because it works for either streaking or for doing all your hair.

It also comes with a product to lighten the hair before adding color. 

Over all, this is probably my favorite. It takes the least amount of time to get the color to stick, the time between fading is the least and it smells the best.

The only downside is that sometimes it bleeds. This isn't always the case, but on occasion I have had colors bleed. By this I mean that if it rained, sometimes slightly tinted streams of water would run down my face. This isn't always the case, as I said, and most often it only occurred when I mixed colors or products. 

Manic Panic

Both Manic Panic and Punky color some in small jars. Manic Panic being in the smaller of the two selections and the most expensive. It usually costs about $15 dollars per jar. It takes longer than Splat! but not as long as Punky color.

Manic Panic does have the added benefit that it is Vegan and not tested on animals. Though, I'm not sure what would be in hair dye that would make them non-Vegan. It has a wider variety of colors than Splat! and various shades with in the basic colors.

It also adds new colors every once and awhile as well, so their selection is growing.

I have not had the problem of color bleeding with Manic Panic that I had with Splat!

However, it is also the most expensive for the amount that you get and I have had to double the time in my hair for some of the colors to show up (meaning, some colors can take two hours or two one hour applications - this often happened with green).

Punky Color

Even though this costs about the same amount as Splat! and doesn't bleed it often takes at least an hour for the color to stick. However, the main reason I don't use it whenever it is possible (sometime it is the only brand I have the color I want in), is because I find that it seems to make my hair feel dry. Splat! and Manic Panic while surely not great for my hair, don't seem to negatively effect my hair as much as this product does.

Overall, Splat! is my favorite because I like the price, the minimal time required, and the brightness of the color. Manic Panic has the same brightness but takes more time and more money, however for people who live in rainy climates or are deeply concerned by the possibility of color bleeding, I recommend it over Splat! Punky Color, I don't really recommend based on my experience with it.

Post 115: Counterpoint - Mulan

So, as some of you may know, I have a series dedicated to finding the plot holes in things. In this post, I am going to be doing the opposite. I am going to try and fill the plot hole in.

The plot hole I am going to be working with today? Mulan. 

Recently, I stumbled across a post on a blog that was dedicated to the 7 biggest movie plot holes. Mulan was listed, because Mulan was sent home for not being able to keep up with the other men. It was pointed out that her father would not have done any better, he could barely walk without his cane and therefore definitely wouldn't have been able to run with them. 

Definitely seems like a big plot hole, so let's see if we can't fill it in. 

The best explanation I can come up with other than 'its just a movie, don't over think it' is seniority. Her father had a suit of armor just sitting in a closet. So, he had obviously been to war before. Mulan, or "Ping", was a new recruit who had never seen battle or been trained for battle. 

So, my guess is that her father would not have gone through the same kind of training. He would have more likely been recruited as an officer or general. Perhaps, he would even be responsible for some of the training. 

If he was of a higher rank, he would most likely not have needed to face the same tests - therefore, it wouldn't have mattered that he couldn't run, because they wouldn't make him run. 

I think this point is further supported in that none of the other people Mulan is training with are older. They are almost all relatively young men. So, my guess is that older men, were sent somewhere else to train.

Or did not need the same training as their younger counterparts. 

Either way, he would have been in danger because he would be leaving the safety of his own home to go out to where the battle was being fought. And since he handed his cane away, it might have implied he was the type to push himself too far and end up getting himself hurt just by not properly taking care of himself. So, Mulan's actions still made sense as a way of protecting her father. 

In conclusion, I say it was not a plot hole. Just something that went unexplained.