So... who has actually seen Alexander, and what did you think of it? MarkUK? Segovius?
nope, I don't watch films as a rule, the last one I saw was the Incredibles, and the previous one was finding nemo. Oh yeah, I also watched Smokey and the Bandit when it was on TV a few months ago.
I just exercise my right not to see people beating the crap out of each other, needless nudity, violence and debauchery. But I don't need to protest or deny others the right to see this, it just isn't my choice.
I am not sure about this tolerance you describe. It seems quite 'safe' and 'western' to me (that's not meant as a criticism).
Some things should not be tolerated. Should we tolerate people with infectious diseases running around ? Should we tolerate fund...er...I mean bigots who might want to change our way of life or end it all together ? No.
Should we tolerate someone resurrecting the Nazi party with the same aims and principles ? No.
It seems to me that the argument is really about the nature of intolerance and just exactly what form our intolerance should take. Essentially it is about where you draw the line and on what basis.
well, a diference between you and me as far as I see it, is that I do not wish to overthrow western society with armed resistance
for all its ills, greed, deceit and corruptions, which I despise and wish to play no part of, I cannot divorce myself completely from it - to replace it with what?
can I give up my job to divorce myself from playing a part in capatalism? Can I stop paying rent to my landlord because I know he spends the money in pursuit of more greed? Can I lose my PC because it allows me to participate in the sins of the internet. Can I lose XP because I contribute to billions of wasted dollars in Gatsey's pocket and shareholders. Can I stop desiring a dual processor dual core G5, because I don't really need it. Can I give up my car, because I contribute to the US gasoline puppet regimes of Saudi or oil companies resistance of environmentally friendly fuel?
I can't do it, so any desire I wish to wipe the slate clean and start again with something else is rather hypocritical and self harming.
what would I replace it with? hourly reading of scriptures I know are false, prayers to sun-god's, jesus's, allah's or buddah's i know are mythology, walking to the brook for a drink, collecting wood to keep warm in winter.
I know society is all wrong, but It is the mechanism that defines my life and the benefits are better than the ills, so I must strive to redefine the boundaries from within the constraints of the walls that bound me. Only education and tolerance are the mechanisms that appeal to me, and all I have for guidance is common sense, rational thought and hopefully good judgement. I can refer to the works of Science or Scripture for guidance, but I cannot justify destroying it all, to redefine it in my own image, not least because I might be wrong.
so what does this Islamist bank do with the money when they make a few billion in profits?
What does the Islamist bank do when you cannot repay the loan and the agreed fee when your business fails?
At the moment, im failing to see any major operational difference between a western bank and an islamist one, excect that the Islamist one charges interest, but doesn't refer to it as such.
That's a rather rough way to describe a remarkable night.
Possibly. Wasn't trying to be "rough"...(and certainly not racist)...just calling it the way I saw. It may have not really unfolded that way...but most (by now) know that the Oscars aren't exactly a shining example of "clean" voting...it is generally rigged in someway to fit someone's goals. That year...maybe...it was rigged to send some subtle (or not so subtle) social message about race. I don't know. I could be totally wrong too.
Possibly. Wasn't trying to be "rough"...(and certainly not racist)...just calling it the way I saw. It may have not really unfolded that way...but most (by now) know that the Oscars aren't exactly a shining example of "clean" voting...it is generally rigged in someway to fit someone's goals. That year...maybe...it was rigged to send some subtle (or not so subtle) social message about race. I don't know. I could be totally wrong too.
Just for future reference, "calling it the way you see it" and "just making an observation" never excuses anything. And I don't think "most" understand how Oscar winners are supposedly rigged. That's not exactly common knowledge. People understand that big studios campaign on behalf of their nominees, and perhaps that taints the process. But I have seen no other evidence to suggest anything but the fact that if a comparatively shitty movie or performance wins an award, it's because at least a plurality of Academy members voted for it.
For a good example of a portrayal of somebody mentally disabled, watch DiCaprio (I know...) in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?", a far superior performance to the complete bullshit that was "I am Sam".
Indeed. Don't forget Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot.
I haven't seen 'Alexander' yet cause of the spear time i have but i wanna see it to make up my own opinion instead of what folks want me to believe.
I also have something against big media-exposure of "How great a certain movie is" cause that reminds me of folks who like to tell you that "they are to be trusted cause they care about you"..
That always makes me suspicious.As is the same with those "must see"movies you get bombarded with trough the media.
I didn't go to "TROY" for example cause i thought it was a ripoff of "Gladiator" but then more with a different time-story and personalities.I saw it later on DVD and thought it was what i expected. Just another big MGM-style Cleopatra/BenHur-look a-like movie but then in modern-times with B-actor Brett Pitt.
Movies i do appreciate and who i think are one of a kind:
Not to be crude, but even those are shiite, IMNSHADO ("in my not so humble and drunk opinion")
The only thing worth watching that came from Hollywood this year:
"Eternal Sunshine . . . etc"
American movies have just simply gotten terrible . . . they need to create uneccessarily terrible tragedy in order to pretend that profundity has been achieved (House of Sand and Fog) or they simply miss real tragedy when teh potential is there (Mystic River)
or worse
They have to "uplift" . . . . nothing worse than 'uplifting'
except for maybe "heartwarming"
of course when those idea are actually achieved, rather than sort of just pointed to with a sign that says. "you are being 'uplifted' now," (like anything 'serious' with Tom Hanks in it) then it is another story . . . . like Amelie, which was, surprisingly genuinly uplifting and heartwarming without becoming mawkish . . . well.... maybe just a little . . .
Maybe there's something in the fundie factor theory after all....
There definitely is a fundie factor into this whole thing. Heck, A LOT of Americans watched "The Passion of The Christ" because it showed THEIR GOD as someone superior to others. Y'know the mantra; we cry and have heart-attacks when 'Our Lord' is beaten in a fake movie, but we don't give a cows ass if our people kill others somewhere outside of our borders.
It worked pretty well for Mel Gibson. He played the Fundie factor, and made a fortune. He just played it in the 'correct form', as I have heard a collague of mine - otherwise a fundie - say to me the other day.
There definitely is a fundie factor into this whole thing. Heck, A LOT of Americans watched "The Passion of The Christ" because it showed THEIR GOD as someone superior to others. Y'know the mantra; we cry and have heart-attacks when 'Our Lord' is beaten in a fake movie, but we don't give a cows ass if our people kill others somewhere outside of our borders.
It worked pretty well for Mel Gibson. He played the Fundie factor, and made a fortune. He just played it in the 'correct form', as I have heard a collague of mine - otherwise a fundie - say to me the other day.
Hmmm...let's see here:
IMDB...5.5 stars out of 10.
Yahoo! Movies...average review..."C" (out of "A")...with a few "F" and "D" grades.
Rotten Tomatoes..."Rotten"...14%!
Yes...it must be the international "fundie" conspiracy to rid the world of bad Oliver Stone movies.
Poor. poor Oliver. Spent a bundle on a bad film that is an assault on anyones morals. No one sees it. Too bad.
What? because he makes a film that offends people, they have to see it? Please. Welcome to the real world. Some people still have morals at least.
He acts like thats a bad thing. I guess he wouldn't be happe until the world becomes sodom and gomorrah.
Last I checked, the term fundamental had to do with foundational, as in stable, solid and secure. Terms these days. What? like trying to live a good and moral life is wrong? some people.
It is interesting that in the prison system, people are counseled to avoid these types of things because it promotes a "bad" lifestyle and can lead to more crime. Outside of the bars, in our world, we are constantly confronted with this trash and told the good is bad and bad is good. This is not progress, people.
Have you ever thought; Why do we tell kids not to say and do certain things, but we do them as adults? Is it truly more adult, or is it actually just less self-control? too bad that some have thought of this and came to the wrong conclusion; they tell the kids to go ahead and say and do those things. Tragic. Just like Alexander the movie.
I just get the impression that it was a bad film regardless of any controversy. I've seen way too many films that supposedly were great films rejected by the mainstream, only to find they just sucked anyway.
Why? because I don't agree with your opinions? Isn't this a DISCUSSION board?
I love how people don't talk like adults about things. Instead, it is a game of who cn make fun of who. Wow! It's just like Oprah! [bracing for Oprah, Donahue, Geraldo, Williams, Springer-like reply]
I love how people don't talk like adults about things
(begin sarcasm/semantic filter)
In my experience talking like adults usually involves guns, knives, cudgels and blunt objects of many sorts. Heck, if you look at the people that govern us (all governments) adult talk often leads war. The problem with most people is that they want to continue talking like adults when that intent will be met with blunt force trauma on the speaker. So, it is often best to just walk away, let tempers cool and then test the waters to make sure that speech would not cause induced migraines. Object lessons: 1) It's often best left alone, espcially when the topic is worthless i.e. a horrible film 2) Do not chide adults as if they were children to behave as adults, use adult sarcasm instead.
If you can't refrain from either, then just whip out your phallus next to theirs and let's end it in a proper pissing contest.
Comments
Originally posted by BuonRotto
So... who has actually seen Alexander, and what did you think of it? MarkUK? Segovius?
nope, I don't watch films as a rule, the last one I saw was the Incredibles, and the previous one was finding nemo. Oh yeah, I also watched Smokey and the Bandit when it was on TV a few months ago.
I just exercise my right not to see people beating the crap out of each other, needless nudity, violence and debauchery. But I don't need to protest or deny others the right to see this, it just isn't my choice.
Have to say, it was funny, well done and performed, and contains the line.
"Jesus - For Christ's sake grow up and put some fucking clothes on"
I would have swore I saw Mrs Segovius in there too
But to be honest, if it wasn't for the swearing and religious overtones, it would have been a bit crap.
Originally posted by segovius
I am not sure about this tolerance you describe. It seems quite 'safe' and 'western' to me (that's not meant as a criticism).
Some things should not be tolerated. Should we tolerate people with infectious diseases running around ? Should we tolerate fund...er...I mean bigots who might want to change our way of life or end it all together ? No.
Should we tolerate someone resurrecting the Nazi party with the same aims and principles ? No.
It seems to me that the argument is really about the nature of intolerance and just exactly what form our intolerance should take. Essentially it is about where you draw the line and on what basis.
well, a diference between you and me as far as I see it, is that I do not wish to overthrow western society with armed resistance
for all its ills, greed, deceit and corruptions, which I despise and wish to play no part of, I cannot divorce myself completely from it - to replace it with what?
can I give up my job to divorce myself from playing a part in capatalism? Can I stop paying rent to my landlord because I know he spends the money in pursuit of more greed? Can I lose my PC because it allows me to participate in the sins of the internet. Can I lose XP because I contribute to billions of wasted dollars in Gatsey's pocket and shareholders. Can I stop desiring a dual processor dual core G5, because I don't really need it. Can I give up my car, because I contribute to the US gasoline puppet regimes of Saudi or oil companies resistance of environmentally friendly fuel?
I can't do it, so any desire I wish to wipe the slate clean and start again with something else is rather hypocritical and self harming.
what would I replace it with? hourly reading of scriptures I know are false, prayers to sun-god's, jesus's, allah's or buddah's i know are mythology, walking to the brook for a drink, collecting wood to keep warm in winter.
I know society is all wrong, but It is the mechanism that defines my life and the benefits are better than the ills, so I must strive to redefine the boundaries from within the constraints of the walls that bound me. Only education and tolerance are the mechanisms that appeal to me, and all I have for guidance is common sense, rational thought and hopefully good judgement. I can refer to the works of Science or Scripture for guidance, but I cannot justify destroying it all, to redefine it in my own image, not least because I might be wrong.
What does the Islamist bank do when you cannot repay the loan and the agreed fee when your business fails?
At the moment, im failing to see any major operational difference between a western bank and an islamist one, excect that the Islamist one charges interest, but doesn't refer to it as such.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
That's a rather rough way to describe a remarkable night.
Possibly. Wasn't trying to be "rough"...(and certainly not racist)...just calling it the way I saw. It may have not really unfolded that way...but most (by now) know that the Oscars aren't exactly a shining example of "clean" voting...it is generally rigged in someway to fit someone's goals. That year...maybe...it was rigged to send some subtle (or not so subtle) social message about race. I don't know. I could be totally wrong too.
Originally posted by segovius
The Oscars aren't really a true award anymore anyway are they ? Everyone knows it's political.
Yeah, I know. My point precisely.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Possibly. Wasn't trying to be "rough"...(and certainly not racist)...just calling it the way I saw. It may have not really unfolded that way...but most (by now) know that the Oscars aren't exactly a shining example of "clean" voting...it is generally rigged in someway to fit someone's goals. That year...maybe...it was rigged to send some subtle (or not so subtle) social message about race. I don't know. I could be totally wrong too.
Just for future reference, "calling it the way you see it" and "just making an observation" never excuses anything. And I don't think "most" understand how Oscar winners are supposedly rigged. That's not exactly common knowledge. People understand that big studios campaign on behalf of their nominees, and perhaps that taints the process. But I have seen no other evidence to suggest anything but the fact that if a comparatively shitty movie or performance wins an award, it's because at least a plurality of Academy members voted for it.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Just for future reference, "calling it the way you see it" and "just making an observation" never excuses anything.
I'm not trying to excuse anything I've said. I stand behind...I use those phrases only to describe why I have said them.
Originally posted by tonton
For a good example of a portrayal of somebody mentally disabled, watch DiCaprio (I know...) in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?", a far superior performance to the complete bullshit that was "I am Sam".
Indeed. Don't forget Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot.
I also have something against big media-exposure of "How great a certain movie is" cause that reminds me of folks who like to tell you that "they are to be trusted cause they care about you"..
That always makes me suspicious.As is the same with those "must see"movies you get bombarded with trough the media.
I didn't go to "TROY" for example cause i thought it was a ripoff of "Gladiator" but then more with a different time-story and personalities.I saw it later on DVD and thought it was what i expected. Just another big MGM-style Cleopatra/BenHur-look a-like movie but then in modern-times with B-actor Brett Pitt.
Movies i do appreciate and who i think are one of a kind:
J F K
The Green Mile
Usual Suspects
Black Hawk Dawn
to name just a few.
The only thing worth watching that came from Hollywood this year:
"Eternal Sunshine . . . etc"
American movies have just simply gotten terrible . . . they need to create uneccessarily terrible tragedy in order to pretend that profundity has been achieved (House of Sand and Fog) or they simply miss real tragedy when teh potential is there (Mystic River)
or worse
They have to "uplift" . . . . nothing worse than 'uplifting'
except for maybe "heartwarming"
of course when those idea are actually achieved, rather than sort of just pointed to with a sign that says. "you are being 'uplifted' now," (like anything 'serious' with Tom Hanks in it) then it is another story . . . . like Amelie, which was, surprisingly genuinly uplifting and heartwarming without becoming mawkish . . . well.... maybe just a little . . .
grumpf . . . .
Originally posted by segovius
Maybe there's something in the fundie factor theory after all....
There definitely is a fundie factor into this whole thing. Heck, A LOT of Americans watched "The Passion of The Christ" because it showed THEIR GOD as someone superior to others. Y'know the mantra; we cry and have heart-attacks when 'Our Lord' is beaten in a fake movie, but we don't give a cows ass if our people kill others somewhere outside of our borders.
It worked pretty well for Mel Gibson. He played the Fundie factor, and made a fortune. He just played it in the 'correct form', as I have heard a collague of mine - otherwise a fundie - say to me the other day.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
There definitely is a fundie factor into this whole thing. Heck, A LOT of Americans watched "The Passion of The Christ" because it showed THEIR GOD as someone superior to others. Y'know the mantra; we cry and have heart-attacks when 'Our Lord' is beaten in a fake movie, but we don't give a cows ass if our people kill others somewhere outside of our borders.
It worked pretty well for Mel Gibson. He played the Fundie factor, and made a fortune. He just played it in the 'correct form', as I have heard a collague of mine - otherwise a fundie - say to me the other day.
Hmmm...let's see here:
IMDB...5.5 stars out of 10.
Yahoo! Movies...average review..."C" (out of "A")...with a few "F" and "D" grades.
Rotten Tomatoes..."Rotten"...14%!
Yes...it must be the international "fundie" conspiracy to rid the world of bad Oliver Stone movies.
What? because he makes a film that offends people, they have to see it? Please. Welcome to the real world. Some people still have morals at least.
He acts like thats a bad thing. I guess he wouldn't be happe until the world becomes sodom and gomorrah.
Last I checked, the term fundamental had to do with foundational, as in stable, solid and secure. Terms these days. What? like trying to live a good and moral life is wrong? some people.
It is interesting that in the prison system, people are counseled to avoid these types of things because it promotes a "bad" lifestyle and can lead to more crime. Outside of the bars, in our world, we are constantly confronted with this trash and told the good is bad and bad is good. This is not progress, people.
Have you ever thought; Why do we tell kids not to say and do certain things, but we do them as adults? Is it truly more adult, or is it actually just less self-control? too bad that some have thought of this and came to the wrong conclusion; they tell the kids to go ahead and say and do those things. Tragic. Just like Alexander the movie.
Originally posted by pfflam
go away
Originally posted by pfflam
go away
8)
Why? because I don't agree with your opinions? Isn't this a DISCUSSION board?
I love how people don't talk like adults about things. Instead, it is a game of who cn make fun of who. Wow! It's just like Oprah! [bracing for Oprah, Donahue, Geraldo, Williams, Springer-like reply]
originally posted by 9secondko
I love how people don't talk like adults about things
(begin sarcasm/semantic filter)
In my experience talking like adults usually involves guns, knives, cudgels and blunt objects of many sorts. Heck, if you look at the people that govern us (all governments) adult talk often leads war. The problem with most people is that they want to continue talking like adults when that intent will be met with blunt force trauma on the speaker. So, it is often best to just walk away, let tempers cool and then test the waters to make sure that speech would not cause induced migraines. Object lessons: 1) It's often best left alone, espcially when the topic is worthless i.e. a horrible film 2) Do not chide adults as if they were children to behave as adults, use adult sarcasm instead.
If you can't refrain from either, then just whip out your phallus next to theirs and let's end it in a proper pissing contest.
(end sarcasm/semantic filter)