|
Post by mightyjack on May 23, 2004 21:12:56 GMT -5
That didn't bother me at all, Don. I still think it was a great motion picture.
At the end, when the girl -the catalyst that set him off- says what she says. It was like a door opening... He had his time, he had his youth and he can't go back. (and she suddenly becomes real. Not an object to obtain. But a just a girl. She was what woke him up at the start of his crisis, and again at the end when he finds peace with himself and his life)
And even if the part with the Military guy bothered me, it's minor*. Not enough to spoil the film as a whole (*EDIT: meaning, I'm more interested in the character study and philosophic questions it asks)
It's a movie that really got to me, impacted me deep down. I couldn't stop thinking about it long after it was over. So I have to give it its due.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on May 23, 2004 22:48:55 GMT -5
I'm just glad that for the rest of my experience on this board, whenever there is a religious or political debate that has me hanging by a thread, I have the ultimate trump card.
Mike agrees with me.
Awww yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Ator on May 23, 2004 23:23:58 GMT -5
I'm just glad that for the rest of my experience on this board, whenever there is a religious or political debate that has me hanging by a thread, I have the ultimate trump card. Mike agrees with me. Awww yeah. LMAO, me too!
|
|
|
Post by mightyjack on May 24, 2004 1:16:07 GMT -5
I find that I often agree with myself.
But another thing. has anyone seen Plan 9 recently. It's been a loooong time, did it really have that much narration?
More than Yucca Flats or Creeping Terror?
Or Rocket Attack USA or Dead Talk Back or... Come to think of it. Some of my biggest laughs came from them mocking the narration in these movies.
Did Plan 9 have more? Just curious.
|
|
|
Post by losingmydignity on May 24, 2004 1:35:09 GMT -5
Plan 9: There is quite enough narration in it, but only slightly more, if memory serves me left, than Yucca Flats and some of the others. Maybe he was confusing it with Glen or Glenda?
Politics: I was surprised about this. I wonder if Mike's right winging tendency is a recent conversion (alot of people with such leanings tipped more that way after 9/11) I mean, he said he reads townhall.com and I have too. There was a guy at my work, very conservative, who would bring me print outs from that site and if you read it and believe everything (and I do think a lot of it is true) you too will soon be suppourting Bush. (I do as far as the war on terror goes)
American Beauty: Thank goodness someone else saw through that lame claptrap. But how can he like that junk called Fellowship of the Ring?
|
|
|
Post by vanhagar3000 on May 24, 2004 7:05:18 GMT -5
It does have too much narration that there would be long dead periods in riffing. Trust me, I tried riffing it and it didn't work that well.
|
|
|
Post by Skyroniter on May 24, 2004 20:09:45 GMT -5
Great work to all involved in the Mike Nelson interview. If only I could be half as articulate and witty as Mike Nelson.
Can anyone get an interview with the elusive Jim Mallon?
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on May 24, 2004 20:46:59 GMT -5
He's as elusive as Robert Denby.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on May 24, 2004 23:14:14 GMT -5
phantom, don't you go looking for Robert Denby.
If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times. Stay away from Robert Denby!
|
|
donmac
Moderator Emeritus
Beedee Beedee Beedee This Sucks!
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by donmac on May 25, 2004 17:14:57 GMT -5
As for politics and religion, he puts up a good point, a no religion rule has brought nazism and communism, which I think we can all agree is far worse than George W. Bush. I agreed with 100% of the things Mike said on this. Actually, this was an area I strongly disagreed with Mike. Because it is a simple-minded argument at best that, for it to work, one has to apply some historic white-out to ignore the horrors due to the Christian religion over time, such as numerous Inquisitions (the Spanish being the most well-known), the Crusades, close to 2000 years of acceptance of slavery as "ordained by God", Anti-Semitism, the genocidal massacre of "heathen" American Indians, etc., etc. There is a lot of good due to the Christian view (now called the Judeo-Christian view in a modern swing towards more tolerance), but the bad should not be ignored. And then to go on and basically equate "non-religious" with Communism and Nazism is just plain wrong and sounds like something straight out of one of those dated '50s shorts MST mocked so well. (I myself am a non-religious person and I don't ascribe to either of those oppressive systems.) And doesn't Mike know that Stalinist Communism has quite correctly been likened to being a religion? And that Nazism could be too? They aren't really non-religious in practice. I'm not trying to be anti-religious, not at all! But the presence of religion doesn't automatically make things good, and the absence of religion doesn't automatically make things bad. And I think the ideals of America have little-to-nothing to do with religion, but started with this nation beginning during the enlightened Age of Reason (with the formation of the ideals of this government of the people contributed mainly by the decided non-Christian Thomas Jefferson) as the world was starting to change away from monarchies to other forms of government. Then it was freedom of speech and peaceful changes of a stable government as public views on things evolved which lead us to where we are now. But I know people who have the same simplistic view of history Mike has and they're still my friends and family. (I just know to avoid talking the subject with them, or we end up in a pointless argument that doesn't end.) So I can take Mike's beliefs as something that's just a part of him and still like the man and enjoy his work. (And I ask that you who may disagree with me to take my beliefs as something that's a just part of me )
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on May 25, 2004 19:25:41 GMT -5
Actually, I think Mike said that "secular humanism" was what led to the rise of atrocities such as Nazism and Communism. Secular humanism is definitely a religion. It is a counter-religion to other faiths (usually Christianity), and proponents find their ethics based not on a divine code, but on what "works for society". This is a slippery slope, because someone like Stalin or Hitler can come along and decide what they think works best for society. If they're convincing enough, who can argue?
I agree with Mike that the removal, or at least the dismissal in public and political spectrums, of Judeo-Christian values is bad for society.
And I agree with Forrest that the atrocities usually attributed to the church in history are not really attributable to the church, but rather to a political entity misusing the Bible and church authority to achieve political ends.
In actuality, Jefferson's comment about "separation of church and state" was not meant in the way most people understand it today. Most people assume that he meant church is bad for state. He meant quite the opposite: that when the state gets involved in the church, it's bad for the church. All of the atrocities Don mentioned bear that out. (The comment is not in the constitution, by the way. It was in a private letter TJ wrote to a friend.)
|
|
|
Post by Ator on May 25, 2004 18:11:52 GMT -5
It's too bad that people have to turn their eyes away from Christianity because of the atrocities of history. It wasn't God's fault, nor was it Jesus' fault. It was the crazy idiots who did it under God's name. Hate the sin, not the sinner.
|
|
yousonuva
Moderator Emeritus
I'm not insane but I am King of the Universe
Posts: 14,309
|
Post by yousonuva on May 25, 2004 23:29:33 GMT -5
It makes my head spin to see people trying to describe religion....as their own. As if there is only one right religion...their own. Religion is nothing but a myriad of conformed beliefs and ideas and laws set by one group of people. Christianty is one and it never has been nor never will be perfect (same with any and all other religions. the reason I'm not religious). Mike's comments about a society without religion would, for me, be closer to utopia than we've ever been because the one thing all sets of religions (or any intimate ideas where one takes to heart the things another says or does rather than keep a grounded and factual argument for solving problems) apart is inconclusive theories which usually lead to hatred (I think of the law with every action an opposite reaction as in I love my idea soo much, you're idea is not mine I hate your idea soo much, let's war!).
And Forrest? Getting rid of religion is getting rid of common human morals? No way brother. The laws man has made for himself have nothing to do with old stories. To me it is common sense and our gift of conscienceness that give us the knowledge that things like killing each other and stealing are wrong because we put ourselves into those positions (with our mind) to know we don't want it happening to us or our loved ones.
The one thing I scratch my head about the unknown is the intelligence we have that we seem to have recieved from earth itself. I believe earth is an intelligent lifeform (I don't know if it's a conscience one but it definately is alivem itself). And balance (like Miagi said) is everything as far as I know anyway. I thought of all these things myself rather than have a book tell me what's wrong or right. I believe if something put us here (which I don't) it is to learn for ourselves and determine what is right and wrong from our own eyes. Religion was helpful in ways but almost as contradicting it was harmful (ties into my balance theory). You can't say humans would have been worse without it though because you just don't know. Anything could have happened (and maybe it did in an alternate universe, who knows). You can't say it would have been worse as you've not seen it. I do believe however that religion is primative (you can call it a stepping stone if you want) and I hope man moves onto higher learning. For my theory I think the next step is a collective conscienceness. I look at mob mentality and collected ideas and see an infant intelligence. But that's just a belief not a fact.
Ooh I didn't want to get into this so much but I had to even this argument out a little. Anyway, what Don said (and what I said earlier), the less I know of Mike's idealologies the more I like him.
|
|
|
Post by mightyjack on May 26, 2004 4:41:02 GMT -5
I need my beleif in God in order to instil meaning in my life. That's the bottom line, if I'm honest with myself, that's it. Otherwise, whats the point to it all. We die, that's it, we're done? And as each generation passses more and more of "me" is lost, forgotten, until I'm nothing but a name on a tombstone. 100 years from now no one will care who I am or what I did. All this work I put into my music or an MST site will mean nothing to anyone... so what's the point, whats the purpose -"Sound and fury signifying nothing"- lasting impact? None - Flag on the moon... Oh, sorry. Unless there's an afterlife. A God with a plan -that I can't understand as of yet- then whats the reason for being, for slogging through all this misery. My beleif in God tho hasn't made me a better person I don't think. "People bug me" a wise man with puffy hair once said. I can relate, I get very impatient and upet and can be a "Not very nice" person in return. BTW, My wife thinks I'm too cynical and she always points out how kind and gentle I am with animals. How I've nursed hurt an abandoned ones back to health, and that's proof that I'm not a total SOB. lol maybe she's right.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on May 26, 2004 5:18:13 GMT -5
yousonuva, thanks for throwing in with us. I'm not going to enter into a debate here, nor will I try to convince you of the existence of God.
But there's one thing I think you need to acknowledge: What you described in your post is a religion. You have created (adopted) a faith system that you hold as more true than other faith systems. Even your statement that "the one thing all sets of religions... apart (sic) is inconclusive theories which usually lead to hatred" is an inconclusive theory that you choose to believe.
You can be skeptical of religion. But don't deceive yourself that in believing none of them you don't believe in something. Or that in believing none of them, you're somehow smarter than the rest of us. That's the exact attitude you were speaking out against.#nosmileys#nosmileys#nosmileys
|
|