Don’t Believe the Hype: “Avatar” Stinks
Mark Goldberg
Don’t Believe the Hype: “Avatar” Stinks (Long, Boring, Unoriginal,
Uber-Left)
By Debbie Schlussel
If you want a Cliff’s Notes (or, I guess, Debbie’s Notes) version of my
review of “Avatar,” refer back to my review of the just as awful (but
about half as long) “The Battle For Terra,” (which was released in May).
The story, plot, etc. of the two movies are exactly the same.
Despite the out-of-control hype over “Avatar,” the movie is silly, long,
boring, and heavy-handed. And did I mention, sleep-inducing? I’ve
heard other movie critics and reports say that the 3D animation in this
movie is “the most visually stimulating movie I’ve ever seen,” “the best
3D ever,” “Oscar material,” “will change cinema forever,” “a Hollywood
colossus,” and even that it “caused motion sickness.”
Don’t believe the hype. This bloated, highly overrated movie is none of
these . . . with the exception of the “Oscar material” claims, since we
know that the contemporary Academy Awards famously award far-left tripe
like this. Did James Cameron really spend years of his life on this
rotten stew?
Clocking in at nearly three hours, “Avatar” is an incredible waste of
time. It’s essentially a remake of “Dances With Wolves” and every other
movie where we evil Americans terrorize the indigenous natives, kill
them, take their land, and are just all around imperialistically wicked
and inhumane. Oh, and we’re destroying the environment, clearing
precious giant trees and natural landscapes and killing rare animals and
their habitats, in order to invade and harvest valuable substances under
the ground. Sound familiar? Yup, just like a million diatribes from
Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and every other far-left outlet about
how we invaded Iraq for oil.
Yes, “Avatar” is cinema for the hate America crowd.
And, like “Dances With Wolves,” there is, of course, the standard stock
White male and/or human character who “becomes one of them” and
sympathizes with their plight, begging the evil humans–or evil
Americans, take your pick–to stop the invasion, destruction, and
wholesale theft. It’s been in a million movies you’ve seen, including
this summer’s far superior if equally heavy-handed and manipulative,
“District 9″ (read my review).
The story: Sam Worthington (who was fantastic in “Terminator: Salvation”
– read my review) plays Jake Sully, a paraplegic U.S. Marine, who was
injured while at war. His twin brother, who died under other
circumstances, was a scientist and part of a government project
developing “avatars” for interaction with the native race of the planet
Pandora (wow, what an original planet name). The U.S. has invaded
Pandora to harvest a valuable mineral beneath the earth. It is using the
avatars–beings comprised of the mixed genetic material of their human
operators and the alien race on Pandorum–to communicate with the natives
and try to get them to cooperate and sympathize with the human goals.
Each avatar is controlled by the mind of the human possessing its DNA,
while the human is “sleeping” inside a computer-equipped pod.
Jake is recruited because he has the same DNA as his deceased twin and,
like his brother, resembles his avatar and can connect with it. The
scientists are headed up by Susan “Sigourney” Weaver who plays her
typical indignant, bitchy liberal self. Weaver is mad that the military
people don’t want to understand and interact with the natives and
instead want to harvest minerals instead of keeping the ancient trees
that interact like computers with the other beings on the planet. But
Jake is secretly working for the Marine General who wants to ship in,
destroy the trees and the natives, and ship out, so we can save the
dying earth, where “they’ve destroyed the mother” (meaning, Mother Earth).
Ultimately, though, Jake falls in love with one of the most prominent
natives, the chief’s daughter, and learns to fly his flying dragon. He
begins to oppose the Marine General. But it is too late. The soldiers
are ordered in to start destroying Pandora’s nature and people.
Sound exciting to you? Trust me, I’m making it even more interesting
than it is. I could barely stay awake. And the 3D isn’t as great as
people are saying, either. Smurf-like natives made to look like
overgrown American Indians, complete with warpaint, mohawks, and long
ponytails (that have computer like tendrils in them, which can
communicate with nature–ridiculous). Does that sound like
earth-shattering stuff to you? They looked like Jar Jar Binks with
arrowheads. Sure, it was cool to see floating mountains and different
animals and plants in bright colors. But ten minutes of that was enough.
I didn’t need a full-course meal of three hours of America-hatred to go
with it.
And I laughed a lot . . . at times that were supposed to be serious. To
me, this joke of a movie was ridiculous in its absurdity and overt
hating on Western civilization.
My father used to say that one can judge the strength of capitalism and
democracy by the level of creativity and originality in that creativity
in a society. “Avatar” is yet another loud, garish example from
Hollywood that capitalism and democracy in America aren’t strong at all.
It’s neither original nor creative.
It’s just a long bore. And a waste of your ten bucks. Not to mention
three hours you’ll never get back.
Why drive to the movies, pay for tickets, and spend hours in a dark
room, when you can just as easily read Noam Chomsky or the speeches of
Hugo Chavez in the comfort of your own home and couch?
Same difference.
“Avatar” is an intelligence test. If you fell for it, you failed.
SPORTfighter
whod have thought cameron would have made a movie wher progress and
science were bad? well ther WAS terminator...even titanic seemed to be
saying that.
fuck...since frankenstein almost every fucking movie says sciene is
bad.
just saw i am legend again.same shit.
i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science is a
good thing.
actually none, i can think of none.
Greendistantstar
Aw, FFS.....
The message in Avatar isn't that science is bad; it's that *abuse* of technology is bad and bad
people do bad things.
The political spin put on this by Schlussel and acolyte Mr Goldberg (who has likely not seen the
movie) is stunning.
Of course, I fully expect claims of "But *Camerson* is the one with the political message, not me!"
to be made, but really, that's just uber-projection.
There's plenty of movies that send the 'Science is good message' especially when science saves the
world eg Armageddon. How many of these are *good* movies is another question. Most of these movies
actually *elevate* the USA, where only the smart American scientists work out the way/s to save the
world, while the rest of us look on in hope - think 'Independence Day'.
If Ms Schlussel thinks Avatar is a 'hate America' movie she really has some big issues to deal with,
but what else can you expect from the ever-foaming mouths of the extreme right?
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Mark Goldberg
> The message in Avatar isn't that science is bad; it's that *abuse* of
> technology is bad and bad people do bad things.
>
> The political spin put on this by Schlussel and acolyte Mr Goldberg (who
> has likely not seen the movie) is stunning.
Uh huh, the bullshit pretension you display is what is stunning
Here's a liberal movie reviewers assessment...
--------------------
> The Story
>
> What many critics can agree on is that where the films falls short is in its story.
" 'Avatar' is the latest high-tech entertainment to lecture us that
technology is wrong," Ty Burr said in the Boston Globe.
"Human civilization, too. The movie's cultural politics are childishly
two-dimensional,
at times insulting (especially if you know anyone in the armed forces).
Squint at 'Avatar' the wrong way and it starts to look like a training
film for jihad � not, I'm guessing, what Cameron had in mind.
In terms of plot, then, this is 'Dances With Wolves.' Seriously: It's
the same movie, re-imagined as a speculative-anthropological freak-out."
---------------------
> If Ms Schlussel thinks Avatar is a 'hate America' movie she really has
> some big issues to deal with, but what else can you expect from the
> ever-foaming mouths of the extreme right?
No Delly's... it's you with the perverse pretensions over a movie
reviewers assessment. She has focused not on the glorified 3D techniques
but the snoring boring pretentious story about the abuse of technology
as a capitalist attack upon the world of the innocent.
That is called an abuse of common sense... as you likewise displayed
It's a movie review.... and your silly inability to assess the facile
story line, the one that has been used and abused for 20 yrs now thru
dozens of films with glitz and special effects, is where she has merit
and weight, and you are a lightweight.....
Mark
Greendistantstar
> Greendistantstar wrote:
>
>> The message in Avatar isn't that science is bad; it's that *abuse* of
>> technology is bad and bad people do bad things.
>>
>> The political spin put on this by Schlussel and acolyte Mr Goldberg (who
>> has likely not seen the movie) is stunning.
>
> Uh huh, the bullshit pretension you display
clipped
Have you seem the movie, Mark?
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Wannabe
news:58WdnbGtivSPhLHW...@westnet.com.au...
>>
> If Ms Schlussel thinks Avatar is a 'hate America' movie she really has some big issues to deal with,
> but what else can you expect from the ever-foaming mouths of the extreme right?
>
> GDS
>
>
You are such a visionary. Debbie Schlussel is of Polish Jewish
descent. You correctly nailed her as a mouth-foaming Jew of the
extreme right, in line with our mouth-foaming Jew, Mark Goldberg, of
RMA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Schlussel
Debbie Schlussel (born April 9, 1969) is an American (Detroit,
Michigan) attorney, film critic, political commentator, and a blogger
who focuses particularly on Islam and American Muslims. Her writing
frequently targets the largely Muslim population of Detroit suburb,
Dearborn, Michigan, which she refers to as "Dearbornistan". Her
columns are often provocative and controversial, specifically those
detailing what she considers the unsavory elements of Islam and
objectionable activities of American Muslims, illegal immigrants and
liberal & faux-”conservative” politicians.
Schlussel was born in 1969 to a family of Polish Jewish descent. Her
father, H.L. Schlussel, was also the son of immigrants. An
ophthalmologist who also served in the United States Army, he has been
a major influence in his daughter's life. She became active in
politics at an early age, joining the National Teenage Republicans and
being named the 1987 Outstanding Teenage Republican. She was a Jack
Kemp delegate at the 1988 Republican National Convention and has
worked on numerous political campaigns
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee criticized her work in
its 2002 Hate Crime report, citing Schlussel's criticism of Darrell
Issa after he met with Hezbollah in Syria.
During and following the captivity of American journalist Jill
Carroll, Schlussel attacked Carroll, alleging that Carroll hated
Israel and America, and implying that she sympathized with her
captors. When objection was raised, she attacked her critics as well,
deriding them as "blind worshippers of Jill Carroll" in need of
"LASIK."
Schlussel's claim that WNBA player Anna DeForge is a bad role model
because she is a lesbian drew criticism from player Kayte Christensen
in an Arizona Republic column.
Schlussel has been cited by progressive media watchdog Media Matters
seven times regarding accusations of Schlussel spreading misinformation
[. Schlussel has responded by calling Media Matters "nazi-
collaborators".
Greendistantstar
> "Greendistantstar" <Greendis...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:58WdnbGtivSPhLHW...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> If Ms Schlussel thinks Avatar is a 'hate America' movie she really has some big issues to deal with,
>> but what else can you expect from the ever-foaming mouths of the extreme right?
>>
>> GDS
>>
>>
>
>
>
> You are such a visionary. Debbie Schlussel is of Polish Jewish
> descent.
I've no interest in her religious beliefs or her ancestry.
> You correctly nailed her as a mouth-foaming Jew of the
> extreme right,
I did NOT identify her as Jewish; see above.
> in line with our mouth-foaming Jew, Mark Goldberg, of RMA.
Again, I leave it to others to correlate religious belief with statements made.
More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon someone else's review seems to me
to be intellectually stunted. Such behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters;
left wing nutters do it too.
GDS
"Lets roll!"
Mark Goldberg
Yes... some people will find it just so terrible too not sing the
praises of this movie. But then here's a liberal reviewers take:
THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING
MOVIE REVIEW
Avatar
Out of body experience: It�s easy to get lost in the visually
spectacular world of director James Cameron�s �Avatar�
By Ty Burr, Globe Staff | December 17, 2009
Here is a glass of Kool-Aid - would you like to drink it? It�s made up
of equal parts expectation and hype: the long-awaited return, after 12
years, of a gifted filmmaker to the epic narrative form that�s his true
strength; the breakthrough technology to make visionary fantasy worlds
seem more vivid than our humdrum reality. The glass holds the promise
that our entertainment industry always makes and almost never keeps -
the promise of the Brand New Thing, the pop artifact that changes
everything.
Here is a movie called �Avatar.�� If you drink the Kool-Aid (it�s for
sale on every channel and in every magazine), the film may indeed look
like the Brand New Thing. If you don�t, �Avatar�� may instead appear to
be a long, tactile, visually revelatory, dramatically simple-minded 3-D
science-fiction adventure made up of live-action sequences and
photo-realistic digital images. (Instead of �computer animation,�� by
the way, journalists have been instructed by studio publicists to use
the phrase �the Next Generation of Special Effects.�� Mmm, mixed berry!)
James Cameron�s gamble, in other words, has paid off in ways both
problematic and successful beyond measure. The 60 percent of �Avatar��
that comes from the computer - either in wholly invented images or by
wrapping human bodies in imaginary digitized forms - is bewitchingly,
tantalizingly realistic. The film creates a planet called Pandora, a
race of tall, blue cat-people called the Na�Vi, and gives them both a
dazzlingly colorful rainforest reality - part Rousseau, part George
Lucas on inhalants.
The roughly 40 percent of the film that is live action - those scenes
involving human colonizers from Earth amid their predatory mining and
military hardware - is, oddly, less convincing. �Avatar�� focuses on a
scientific team that has cloned Na�Vi bodies for human hosts to patch
into as they (the humans) lie in high-tech tanning beds back at the
base. With these biotech sock-puppets, head wonk Dr. Grace Augustine
(Sigourney Weaver, juicily riffing on both Ellen Ripley and Dian Fossey)
hopes to �win the hearts and minds�� of the indigenous population. If
she doesn�t, the corporate suits and military men (represented,
respectively, by Giovanni Ribisi and Stephen Lang, both of whom would
twirl their mustaches if they had them) will happily force the issue.
What Grace isn�t expecting is that her newest team member, a paraplegic
ex-Marine named Jake Sully (Australian actor Sam Worthington), will go
native once he has found his avatar legs. In his long new blue body,
Jake enthusiastically joins the Na�Vi as a sort of junior probationary
member, quickly acquiring their jungle skills, the ability to tame and
ride the local Pandoran horses and pterodactyls, and the respect and
love of Neytiri, played by a fierce, inventive Zoe Saldana underneath
all the pixels. From the way the local flying-jellyfish tree spirits
alight on Jake in flocks, it�s clear that our hero is the Chosen One.
Then the earthlings come back with their bulldozers and cannons, and
Jake has to choose sides. Hmmm, which will it be? The Na�Vi with their
interconnected biosphere, their massive Tree of Souls, their literal
genetic bond with the flora and fauna that surrounds them? Or the
snarling humans addicted to hardware, despoilage, extinction, and big,
snorting machines? Yes, �Avatar�� is the latest high-tech entertainment
to lecture us that technology is wrong. Human civilization, too. The
movie�s cultural politics are childishly two-dimensional, at times
insulting (especially if you know anyone in the armed forces). Squint at
�Avatar�� the wrong way and it starts to look like a training film for
jihad - not, I�m guessing, what Cameron had in mind.
In terms of plot, then, this is �Dances With Wolves.�� Seriously: It�s
the same movie, re-imagined as a speculative-anthropological freak-out.
Because Cameron is a visionary and a perfectionist, though, it�s
possible to get lost in his created world, and this is where �Avatar��
thoroughly lives up to its hype. I could go on about the depth of field
in the rapturous 3-D landscapes, how cleanly each individual leaf and
insect is realized, how fully visualized the critters, but words start
to fail. �Avatar�� is an entertainment to be not just seen but absorbed
on a molecular level; it�s as close to a full-body experience as we�ll
get until they invent the holo-suits. Cameron aims for sheer wonderment,
and he delivers.
(A side note: At the film�s initial screening for Boston-area press, the
3-D visuals were noticeably off, causing image-doubling that made for a
poor viewing experience. A hastily scheduled rescreening, overseen by a
Fox technician flown in from the West Coast, resulted in a vastly
improved �Avatar,�� although reflective surfaces in the live-action
scenes are still hard for the eye to resolve. A projector setting was at
issue, apparently, and you�d better hope the kid who sells you popcorn
knows which button to push at your local theater, because the Fox guy
has since gone home.)
What is clear is that Cameron remains a natural-born filmmaker, even
when he gets obsessed by world-building at the expense of plot and
dialogue. You feel you can almost reach in and touch Pandora, not
because of the 3-D but because the director has imagined the planet�s
dangers and beauties well beyond the borders of the screen. Other
elements show the King of the World starting to repeat himself: The
clomping exoskeleton from �Aliens�� gets a redo here, as does that
film�s butch Latina Marine, now played (very engagingly) by Michelle
Rodriguez. Worthington is solid and bland as both the human and Na�Vi
Jakes, but since the hero is in effect our avatar, that vagueness makes
a kind of sense. (It�s up to Weaver, Saldana, and Rodriguez to provide
the gumption - but Cameron has always loved powerful women.)
The director has said he has been carrying this story around since he
was a teenager dreaming it up in his bedroom, and that makes sense, too.
At night the jungles of Pandora bioluminesce like black-light posters,
and there are times you may feel you�ve landed on the Disco Planet. The
character Neytiri is a classic teenboy daydream - the wild woman
conquered - and what�s the whole avatar business but a way to imagine
oneself out of a small, impotent body and into something stronger,
truer, realer.
At the same time, �Avatar�� is merely the latest white man�s romance,
and it hits every stop in the playbook: The broken hero who finds
renewal by leaving his decadent people, who joins a tribe of noble
savages and becomes purified, who leads his new children to victory
(because they can�t lead themselves) and becomes a legend in the doing.
Tarzan has been here, and Herman Melville, and so has Kevin Costner. As
a cultural clich�, it reflects profound disgust with the society of men
and a yearning for authenticity - for a connection deeper than anything
our fallen modern world can provide.
Is Cameron aware of the traps of this fantasy? More than it might seem.
�Avatar�� is, after all, a movie where the hero dreams himself into a
strong blue body and wakes, crestfallen, to find himself back in his own
skin. The movie knows that Jake Sully is like Pinocchio, a human
marionette aching to be a real alien, and at times it takes the measure
of the distance between the two. Not for nothing is the standard Na�Vi
greeting �I see you.�� Not for nothing is the scene in which Neytiri
finally says those words to the human Jake the most emotionally powerful
moment in the film.
I think Cameron loves the fantasy more, though - enough to sail close to
the edge of the ridiculous in the final moments of �Avatar.�� Enough to
spend 15 years and hundreds of millions of dollars building a beautiful
someplace that doesn�t exist and into which we can blissfully,
forgetfully project ourselves. Here�s your Kool-Aid, he says. Drink deep.
Ty Burr can be reached at tb...@globe.com. For more on movies, go to
www.boston.com/movienation.
� Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
Greendistantstar
> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>
>
> Yes... some people will find it just so terrible too not sing the
> praises of this movie. But then here's a liberal reviewers take:
clipped
Rather than give us other people's reviews, why not give us *your* review of Avatar?
I mean, you *have* seen it, right?
Really Mark, seeing Avatar as some sort of anti-American propaganda is just too silly for words.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Mark Goldberg
> More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon
> someone else's review seems to me to be intellectually stunted. Such
> behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters; left
> wing nutters do it too.
>
> GDS
>
> "Lets roll!"
Peter... do you remember when I assessed Obama 14 months ago, by giving
the entire books, that his mentors published showing him to be clearly
not what he was advertising himself to be. You poo pooed that and said
he, obama was going to do great things, and in fact, he is now
considered an abject failure as is his presidency, and worse?
But telling people, that a movie that's being hyped as the greatest most
fantastic thing in movie history by a professional movie reviewer, who
has a rep as a very good reviewer of story line was exactly the point...
for those force fed for months the silly bit about this glorious
glorious glorious cinematic storied adventure, her assessment, as was
the boston globe's quite similar story assessment shows that this is no
'nutter' review, and is a caution not to be so eager to be swayed. That
makes me want to wait for really good movies....
I'm partial this holiday season to 'We're no Angels' the 1956 version,
with Humphrey Bogart, Aldo Ray, and I forget the guy with the british
accent... anyway, wonderful acting, wonderful story line, swell holiday
fare.
Intellectually stunted is the evil cowardly gutless imbecile you just
talked too about not reviewing a movie for others to assess based upon a
review by a professional movie reviewer who doesn't review moview
needing the studios approval, as the majority of reviewers are prone to be.
Anyway, it's a bogus complaint, by you, but you should speak to idiots
like wannabe... they're more your crowd.
Mark
Mark Goldberg
Have you read those books by obamas mentor's, or considered your
assessment that he'd be a fine president, doing really good things... ??
Mark
Wannabe
>
>
> More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon someone else's review seems to me
> to be intellectually stunted.
>
You again correctely nailed our mouth-foaming Mark Goldberg as
intellectually stunted.
>
>
> Such behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters;
> left wing nutters do it too.
>
I agree such behaviours are not unique to right wing nutters, but
99.9% of them are Jewish right wing nutters like Debbie Schlussel and
Mark Goldberg.
Mark Goldberg
> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes... some people will find it just so terrible too not sing the
>> praises of this movie. But then here's a liberal reviewers take:
>
> clipped
>
> Rather than give us other people's reviews, why not give us *your*
> review of Avatar?
Send me the 10 bucks and I'll see it. I'm going to rent 'we're no
angel's, with Bogart, Ray and what the heck's his name.... oh yeah,
peter ustinov, basil rathbone, Leo G Carrol ... remember Topper?
Great dec holiday movie.
The point of the review what the story which is a failure from many
peoples viewpoint.... and for you to blowhard about accolytes and right
wingers is the utter bs of someone who can't allow critiques.
The movie is being pushed so much it's everywhere being sold.
And it will flop financially and artistically but be peddled for it's
special effects... but here's two other 'liberal' movie reviewers...
> In Entertainment Weekly, Owen Gleiberman summed up both the complaints about the film and
the reasons why so many will want to check it out. "Cameron has the
effects-driven visual
awe part down, but this time he gives the heart short shrift," he
says. "The result is less
a movie for the ages than a quintessential movie of its time: dazzling
and immersive,
a ravishing techno-dream for the senses, but one that's likely to
leave audiences simultaneously
amazed and unmoved. Then again, for a great many moviegoers these
days, that may be enough.
> We'll give Slate's Dana Stevens the final words:
"I'm not saying 'Avatar' is a timeless masterpiece,
nor do I want to see James Cameron re-crowned King of the World at the
next Oscars,"
Stevens wrote. "The movie is too long, the score by James Horner is
hopelessly bombastic,
and the battle royale of the third act relies too heavily on 'into the
valley of death rode the six hundred' clich�.
But if you believe special-effects blockbusters have the right to
exist at all,
if you respect the genre that brought us 'Star Wars' and 'Raiders of the
Lost Ark'
and yes, 'Titanic,' then 'Avatar' is something that needs to be seen.
Lord knows it's something to see."
There... there's you thunderous applause by liberal reviewers.
Of course, telling folks where they might not waste ten bucks is sort of
a civic duty especially when they're sold the bit by the hackneyed anti
capitalism anti technology anti wester civ bore that others will all
tell quite close to Schlussel's review.
Of course, you can send me ten, and I'll waste three hours.
But then I insist you read those books, just parts- just get a good
whiff of the mentors of Obama, scurrilous men, who'd I would advise
delousing after reading what they have to say.
Oh, and it was Ayers who finished the great obamas book, and they both
lied about that one too.
But then, that's another movie, and a much longer, and much more boring
one to boot.
Mark
Greendistantstar
> Greendistantstar wrote:
>
>> More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon
>> someone else's review seems to me to be intellectually stunted. Such
>> behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters; left
>> wing nutters do it too.
>>
>> GDS
>>
>> "Lets roll!"
>
> Peter... do you remember when I assessed Obama 14 months ago, by giving
> the entire books, that his mentors published showing him to be clearly
> not what he was advertising himself to be. You poo pooed that and said
> he, obama was going to do great things, and in fact, he is now
> considered an abject failure as is his presidency, and worse?
Ah, no, Obama is only judged as an abject failure by those such as you who decided prior to him
doing anything that he would be an abject failure. That isn't prescience, it's something else
beginning with 'pre'. You have pre-judged prior to the event; that enough of a clue?
> But telling people, that a movie that's being hyped as the greatest most
> fantastic thing in movie history by a professional movie reviewer, who
> has a rep as a very good reviewer of story line was exactly the point...
> for those force fed for months the silly bit about this glorious
> glorious glorious cinematic storied adventure, her assessment, as was
> the boston globe's quite similar story assessment shows that this is no
> 'nutter' review, and is a caution not to be so eager to be swayed. That
> makes me want to wait for really good movies....
>
> I'm partial this holiday season to 'We're no Angels' the 1956 version,
> with Humphrey Bogart, Aldo Ray, and I forget the guy with the british
> accent... anyway, wonderful acting, wonderful story line, swell holiday
> fare.
>
> Intellectually stunted is the evil cowardly gutless imbecile you just
> talked too about not reviewing a movie for others to assess based upon a
> review by a professional movie reviewer who doesn't review moview
> needing the studios approval, as the majority of reviewers are prone to be.
>
> Anyway, it's a bogus complaint, by you, but you should speak to idiots
> like wannabe... they're more your crowd.
> Mark
Leaving all your usual ad hominem aside, you haven't seen Avatar, and thus you have judged it prior
to actually experiencing it, and based your conclusions upon the views of others.
You have asked me to compare your pre-judging of Obama with your pre-judging of what you consider a
politically motivated movie you haven't seen.
Yes, there is parity there, but perhaps not the parity you intended to reveal.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Mark Goldberg
> �Avatar� is an intelligence test. If you fell for it, you failed.
Go waste the ten bucks and then the 10 for popcorn... or follow my
suggestion and rent the 1956 'We're no Angels'
As a matter of fact the irony is dandy in this somewhat dated but
timeless story.
The business guy, is scurrilous, the three escaped convicts turn out to
be angels to the innocent daughter of the bungling shop owner who the
criminals wind up helping since he too stupid to steal from. The sets
are stylish, the dialogue will have you smiling and rooting for the
murderers, as you should. The snake will be your hero in the end...
yeah, really, a snake.
And a much nicer creature than some of what crawls around rma these days
:^))
Compliments of the Season... and we're getting ten inches of snow tonight!!
'Chestnut's roasting on an open fire- jack frost nipping at your nose.....'
Oh yeah.
Greendistantstar
You haven't. Thank you.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Greendistantstar
> Greendistantstar wrote:
>> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>>> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes... some people will find it just so terrible too not sing the
>>> praises of this movie. But then here's a liberal reviewers take:
>>
>> clipped
>>
>> Rather than give us other people's reviews, why not give us *your*
>> review of Avatar?
>
> Send me the 10 bucks and I'll see it.
LOL!
Mate, I don't care if you see it or you don't, all I'm saying is that you can't claim to know a
movie a priori and hope be taken seriously. You can quote every review that's ever going to be
written about it, but that's not equivalent to seeing it yourself.
See Avatar and *then* give us your review. You'll likely see it just the way Ms Schlussel does, but
at least then you'll know WTF you're talking about.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Mark Goldberg
The point of a movie review is too see if it's worth seeing today or on
tv. That was the point of the reviews I read. I also dislike the cloying
fakery of the story line, selling dances with wolves like a tired whore
which of course is what your inability to accept the critique is ...
tired streetwalking.
And of course, obama is now considered a failure as a president, as a
writer, as a thinker, as an administrator. Which is what I assessed not
by demanding anything but perhaps someone might read his mentors hideous
thinking... which of course you refused instead claiming wonderful
things about the man.
You were incorrect, I was closer to correct, but then, we've got years
of bad movies and even worse presidents so there's no bragging necessary
by anyone.
Mark
Mark Goldberg
>
> Ah, no, Obama is only judged as an abject failure by those such as you
> who decided prior to him doing anything that he would be an abject
> failure. That isn't prescience, it's something else beginning with
> 'pre'. You have pre-judged prior to the event; that enough of a clue?
>
No that is utterly false. And you can look that up yourself. You are
wrong, incorrect and making a false statement there. Period.
> Leaving all your usual ad hominem aside, you haven't seen Avatar, and
> thus you have judged it prior to actually experiencing it, and based
> your conclusions upon the views of others.
Yes... in fact, I'll read five or more reviews of any movie before I
waste 15 bucks for a seat, treats and my time. And it's considered being
a smart shopper unless it's people like yourself who 'ad hominem' about
people being accolytes and other smarmy bs because they actually study
something before they eat the meal.
>
> You have asked me to compare your pre-judging of Obama with your
> pre-judging of what you consider a politically motivated movie you
> haven't seen.
>
> Yes, there is parity there, but perhaps not the parity you intended to
> reveal.
Indeed... and in fact... reviewing movies is not nearly as important as
reviewing politics. But you're incorrect about me thinking his movie
politically motivated. I don't it was politically motivated.
I think he used that as a tool. Like the way tits are used instead of
looking a bit more in depth analysis and clarity.
His story clearly doesn't interest me. I like adventure story's, and
Bridge on the River Kwai is more my style.
Star Wars I loved but it didn't offend me at all. Except looking at
Jabba the hut chaining up the lovely princess laya.
That made me mad
Mark
herbzet
Is this entirely a surprise? Didn't "Titanic" suck big-time?
--
hz
Appledog
cats and dogs.
> just saw i am legend again.same shit.
> i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science is a
> good thing.
> actually none, i can think of none.
cats and dogs.
And.. um...
oh yeah. The Tuxedo.
-
Appledog
> Greendistantstar wrote:
> > The message in Avatar isn't that science is bad; it's that *abuse* of
> > technology is bad and bad people do bad things.
>
> > The political spin put on this by Schlussel and acolyte Mr Goldberg (who
> > has likely not seen the movie) is stunning.
>
> Uh huh, the bullshit pretension you display is what is stunning
As soon as I saw you had posted yet another giant cut and paste I
rolled my eyes and thought to myself, "what the fuck is wrong with
this idiot?"
it's fine and dandy if you want to post your opinion, but clipping
news articles and posting them without comment and then defending them
to the death is really fucking stupid.
Go ahead and flame me - trust me, we will all enjoy it. Your
disassociation with reality is, at times, comedic.
-
Appledog
Of course he hasn't. I knew that as soon as he posted the review slash
propaganda he did. He just posted it because of the political agenda
it shoved down everyone's throats.
-
Greendistantstar
> Greendistantstar wrote:
>
>>
>> Ah, no, Obama is only judged as an abject failure by those such as you
>> who decided prior to him doing anything that he would be an abject
>> failure. That isn't prescience, it's something else beginning with
>> 'pre'. You have pre-judged prior to the event; that enough of a clue?
>>
>
> No that is utterly false. And you can look that up yourself. You are
> wrong, incorrect and making a false statement there. Period.
Not at all, and proven by your own words, Mark.
>> Leaving all your usual ad hominem aside, you haven't seen Avatar, and
>> thus you have judged it prior to actually experiencing it, and based
>> your conclusions upon the views of others.
>
> Yes... in fact, I'll read five or more reviews of any movie before I
> waste 15 bucks for a seat, treats and my time.
Not exactly Mr Spontaneous, are you?
> And it's considered being
> a smart shopper unless it's people like yourself who 'ad hominem' about
> people being accolytes and other smarmy bs because they actually study
> something before they eat the meal.
It's one thing to read reviews to decide if you're going to see a movie or not.
It's quite another to make pronouncements about a movie you haven't seen.
For me, I'll decide what I want to see, and won't seek others' opinions to validate that decision.
>> You have asked me to compare your pre-judging of Obama with your
>> pre-judging of what you consider a politically motivated movie you
>> haven't seen.
>>
>> Yes, there is parity there, but perhaps not the parity you intended to
>> reveal.
>
> Indeed... and in fact... reviewing movies is not nearly as important as
> reviewing politics.
Quite, and you've been prejudiced in both assessments. 'Prejudiced' means just that, to pre-judge,
and the 'pre' requires a judgement *prior* to one's own experience.
> But you're incorrect about me thinking his movie
> politically motivated. I don't it was politically motivated.
You really can't say until you've seen it.
> I think he used that as a tool. Like the way tits are used instead of
> looking a bit more in depth analysis and clarity.
>
> His story clearly doesn't interest me.
It probably doesn't, but I do think the hallmark of a higher intelligence is at least attempting to
appreciate that which you don't like. For instance, I've tried to like classical music for years,
but try as I might, I can't. That doesn't mean I think it's crap; my ears just don't get it. But
it's worthwhile stepping out of one's comfort zone and experiencing something you think you won't
like. Sometimes you get pleasantly surprised. Men make this suggestion to women all the time, BTW ;>)
> I like adventure story's, and
> Bridge on the River Kwai is more my style.
>
> Star Wars I loved but it didn't offend me at all. Except looking at
> Jabba the hut chaining up the lovely princess laya.
>
> That made me mad
Don't see any SAW movies, m'kay?
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Herbert Cannon
>> Such behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters;
>> left wing nutters do it too.
>>
>
> I agree such behaviours are not unique to right wing nutters, but
> 99.9% of them are Jewish right wing nutters like Debbie Schlussel and
> Mark Goldberg.
More utter cark from the inventor of the cark factory.
Herbert Cannon
>
> Really Mark, seeing Avatar as some sort of anti-American propaganda is
> just too silly for words.
>
kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
America as bad. I sometime think they read too much Noam Chomsky. They
especially like to portray the CIA ( or some like organization- like say the
android in " Aliens") as evil genuises hiding behind the bush plotting to
poison every third worlder's soup. This is hilarious if you consider what
the real CIA is like.
However, it has an effect. If you dont believe me pick up " Guests of the
Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden and read it sometime.
Australia, itself, has operated as the marshal of the pacific and been
criticized for it. Any good and powerful country will be.
Herbert Cannon
were great and then it was boring with the same old boring non plots.
Greendistantstar
>> Really Mark, seeing Avatar as some sort of anti-American propaganda is
>> just too silly for words.
>>
> Well not really when you consider the people who ran down to Venezuela to
> kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
> Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
> America as bad.
US foreign policy has been arrogant and uninformed for decades, and it's little wonder that gets bad
press. But Hollywood more often that not portrays the US as the saviour of the world, much to the
chagrin of the rest of the world. OTOH every time some bad shit goes down somewhere, someone sparks
up with "Where was the world when X atrocity/genocide happened?" and what they really mean is "Where
was the USA?" When you DO get involved, they whine. Go figure, eh?
>I sometime think they read too much Noam Chomsky.
Chomsky is required reading for undergrads the world over. Whether you or I agree with him is moot.
> They
> especially like to portray the CIA ( or some like organization- like say the
> android in " Aliens") as evil genuises hiding behind the bush plotting to
> poison every third worlder's soup. This is hilarious if you consider what
> the real CIA is like.
> However, it has an effect. If you dont believe me pick up " Guests of the
> Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden and read it sometime.
> Australia, itself, has operated as the marshal of the pacific and been
> criticized for it. Any good and powerful country will be.
Australia has been the USA's staunch ally through every war of the 20th century and the major ones
in the 21st century. For the most part, we see the world in much the same way the US does, not
surprising when we share similar values regarding freedom of expression, freedom of assembly etc.
But overall, the main, salient point is, don't criticize movies you haven't seen :>)
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Mark Goldberg
I actually enjoyed Titanic. Although a 'Night to Remember' had more of
the story for me... still, the old lady was a winner and her daughter
and the sets....
Mark
Mark Goldberg
> Compliments of the Season... and we're getting ten inches of snow tonight!!
>
> 'Chestnut's roasting on an open fire- jack frost nipping at your nose.....'
>
> Oh yeah.
Right back at ya' Mark...
ah yes, another holiday story from the wire services today
Kansas dad somehow lifts car off 6-year-old girl
Email this Story
Dec 18, 9:13 PM (ET)
OTTAWA, Kan. (AP) - A Kansas mother is praising a neighbor as "Superman"
after her 6-year-old daughter told her he somehow found the strength to
lift a car off her. The girl escaped with minor injuries after she and
neighbor Nick Harris said she was pinned under the vehicle.
"He really is Superman," Kristen Hough, the child's mother, said Friday
of Harris, the man she said saved her daughter, Ashlyn.
Harris, 32, said he doesn't know how he managed to lift the Mercury
sedan off the child. The 5-foot-7, 185-pound Harris said he tried later
that day to lift other cars and couldn't.
"But somehow, adrenaline, hand of God, whatever you want to call it, I
don't know how I did it," he said.
Harris was dropping off his 8-year-old daughter at school last week when
he saw a driver backing her car out of a driveway and over the child,
Harris said.
"I didn't even think. I ran over there as fast as I could, grabbed the
rear end of the car and lifted and pushed as hard as I could to get the
tire off the child," he said.
He realized the little girl was Ashlyn, a friend of his daughter's.
Harris carried the screaming first-grader to the sidewalk and was going
to get his phone to call 911, but Ashlyn said she wanted him to stay
with her.
He told people nearby to get the child's mother, who lives a block away.
There were no witnesses to confirm what happened. But Ottawa police Lt.
Adam Weingartner said, "I don't have anything to dispute it."
Hough said Ashlyn told her Harris lifted the car off her, Weingartner said.
Weingartner, the first officer at the scene, said Harris "was amped up
pretty good. The first words out of his mouth were, 'I lifted the car
off the girl.'"
He said it appeared Ashlyn wasn't pinned under the car long enough to be
seriously hurt, Weingartner said.
Hough said her daughter was released from the hospital that afternoon
with a concussion and some scrapes.
"She is my little walking miracle right now," Hough said. "He truly is a
superhero in the family's eyes."
Harris also visited Ashlyn later that day and was greeted with a big hug.
"I don't consider myself a hero at all," Harris said. "To me, it was
payment enough when she gave me that huge hug and said, 'Thanks,
Superman.'"
Mark Goldberg
> But overall, the main, salient point is, don't criticize movies you
> haven't seen :>)
No... the main point is don't call people acolytes simply because they
read movie reviews before drinking the kool-aid.
This movie was sold like cocaine, and I mean big time and it's being
peddled as the best thing going... now
reading reviews- I read about 7, and found Schlussel's the most to the
point, but no different than most in the point I found most important
for me as to whether the movie met basic criteria... it seems to be a
failure, rather than merely not reaching heights, hence the caveat to
others with this glitzy packaged movie.
The main point, is to stop and think before flapping the lips
mark
Herbert Cannon
> Herbert Cannon wrote:
>>> Really Mark, seeing Avatar as some sort of anti-American propaganda is
>>> just too silly for words.
>>>
>> Well not really when you consider the people who ran down to Venezuela to
>> kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
>> Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
>> America as bad.
>
> US foreign policy has been arrogant and uninformed for decades, and it's
> little wonder that gets bad press.
Truly. You would have to consider who it gets bad press from and what they
would have done besides sit on their butts.
I would have to disagree with you. You have to consider that the US went
from a country that did not want any part of perserving the European
colonial empires ( WW II ) to one thrust on the world stage.
It was US foreign policy to provide a nuclear shield to Europe and contain
the Soviets. That drove most of the US's foreign policy for the most part of
the last century. I was part of that " bad and uninformed foreign policy."
Not to mention rebuilding Japan and the Marshall plan. Would it have been
better to allow the Soviets to overrun Europe as foreign policy? Mistakes
were made in containing the Soviets. However, they were mistakes made in
trying to keep the Soviet from consuming ever more of the world. Considering
what happened to those countries under Soviet control, it does not seem such
a bad policy to me. Condering Russia is now a country run by the KGB and
organized crime, it looks good. Considering what Venzeula looks like now, it
still does not look so uniformed and arrogant to me during that period.
You would have to be specific as to the mistakes before we could even began
to debate what is what.
Sorry, unlike Obama, I do not apologize for the US. I have seen more of the
bad side and have no illusions about what exists.
But Hollywood more often that not portrays the US as the saviour of the
world, much to the
> chagrin of the rest of the world. OTOH every time some bad shit goes down
> somewhere, someone sparks up with "Where was the world when X
> atrocity/genocide happened?" and what they really mean is "Where was the
> USA?" When you DO get involved, they whine. Go figure, eh?
>
>>I sometime think they read too much Noam Chomsky.
>
> Chomsky is required reading for undergrads the world over. Whether you or
> I agree with him is moot.
Ask yourself why Chomsky lives where he does and not somewhere else. Face
it. Chomsky would have been silenced or shot in most of the other countries
of the world. Same can be said for many Hollywood denizens. I have no
respect for people who try to pull down, the very freedoms they enjoy,
around their own ears for the nebulous " greater good." They think they will
conitinue to manage with impunity and become surprised when that does not
happen. Lenin pegged them well when he called them "useful idiots." Meaning
he intended to destroy their very way of life.
>
>> They especially like to portray the CIA ( or some like organization- like
>> say the android in " Aliens") as evil genuises hiding behind the bush
>> plotting to poison every third worlder's soup. This is hilarious if you
>> consider what the real CIA is like.
>> However, it has an effect. If you dont believe me pick up " Guests of
>> the Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden and read it sometime.
>> Australia, itself, has operated as the marshal of the pacific and been
>> criticized for it. Any good and powerful country will be.
>
> Australia has been the USA's staunch ally through every war of the 20th
> century and the major ones in the 21st century. For the most part, we see
> the world in much the same way the US does, not surprising when we share
> similar values regarding freedom of expression, freedom of assembly etc.
And I do not hear Australians weeping and wailing about their countries
intervention in other places in the world. I suspect they are now the
tougher and better breed of the world.
>
> But overall, the main, salient point is, don't criticize movies you
> haven't seen :>)
>
Why not? It does not take any genius to figure out the plots. I dont see a
lot of movies because I am critical of them of a friend of mine has told me
about them.
Merry Xmas and Happy Holidays to you!!.
Greendistantstar
> Greendistantstar wrote:
>
>> But overall, the main, salient point is, don't criticize movies you
>> haven't seen :>)
>
> No... the main point is don't call people acolytes simply because they
> read movie reviews before drinking the kool-aid.
No, you criticized and made judgements about a movie you haven't seen.
> This movie was sold like cocaine, and I mean big time and it's being
> peddled as the best thing going... now
>
> reading reviews- I read about 7, and found Schlussel's the most to the
> point, but no different than most in the point I found most important
> for me as to whether the movie met basic criteria... it seems to be a
> failure, rather than merely not reaching heights, hence the caveat to
> others with this glitzy packaged movie.
You posted a right-wing loony review and supported the sentiments therein, yet you haven't seen the
movie. Now you can try very hard to turn that around as some sort of attack on me, but really, it's
very clear what's what.
> The main point, is to stop and think before flapping the lips.
Give it a go, it might work for you.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Herbert Cannon
> Mark Goldberg wrote:
>> Greendistantstar wrote:
>>
>>> But overall, the main, salient point is, don't criticize movies you
>>> haven't seen :>)
>>
>> No... the main point is don't call people acolytes simply because they
>> read movie reviews before drinking the kool-aid.
>
> No, you criticized and made judgements about a movie you haven't seen.
>
I know exactly what that moron of propaganda will try to do and I am very
critical of a man like that. He plays to the ingorant anyway. I would rather
read a book. Even Chomsky.
Herbert Cannon
>>I sometime think they read too much Noam Chomsky.
>
> Chomsky is required reading for undergrads the world over. Whether you or
> I agree with him is moot.
Yes but the real question is - What else is required reading that counters
Chomsky?
Greendistantstar
clipped
> Whoa there Hoss. I dont intend to see any of Michael Moore's movies because
> I know exactly what that moron of propaganda will try to do
No you don't *exactly* what he will do. You have an idea, and a very incomplete one, at least
compared to someone who *has* seen Moore's movies. It's just logic and no little common sense.
Reading a restaurant review is very different to actually going to the restaurant and deciding for
yourself what the meals taste like.
> and I am very
> critical of a man like that.
You would likely find your criticisms better founded if you saw what he does. You'd have better
support for whatever arguments against his work you have. Doing that won't leave you open to looking
silly if someone asks you to precisely describe the scenes in his movies that you dislike so much,
and you can't even offer up one. I liked some of Moore's early TV stuff, but after that he just
became a pompous ass, and I can tell you *exactly* why.
> He plays to the ingorant anyway. I would rather
> read a book. Even Chomsky.
Chomsky is hugely influential and intelligent, whether we agree with him or not.
Moore is just huge.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Greendistantstar
'Counters' is probably not the right word, but I get your point.
Chomsky is primarily a linguist, but you're talking about his political views; two very different
streams of reading.
His linguistic works are very thought-provoking and I find a lot to agree with. His political views
I don't agree with at all. A Libertarian Socialist who supports anarcho-syndicalism, go figure...
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Herbert Cannon
The old black and white " Ship of Fools" was good. It had several messages
in it.
trav...@aol.com
He's a jew, what do you expect?
Trav
trav...@aol.com
wrote:
> Wannabe wrote:
> > "Greendistantstar" <Greendistants...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:58WdnbGtivSPhLHW...@westnet.com.au...
>
> >> If Ms Schlussel thinks Avatar is a 'hate America' movie she really has some big issues to deal with,
> >> but what else can you expect from the ever-foaming mouths of the extreme right?
>
> >> GDS
>
> > You are such a visionary. Debbie Schlussel is of Polish Jewish
> > descent.
>
> I've no interest in her religious beliefs or her ancestry.
>
> > You correctly nailed her as a mouth-foaming Jew of the
> > extreme right,
>
> I did NOT identify her as Jewish; see above.
>
> > in line with our mouth-foaming Jew, Mark Goldberg, of RMA.
>
> Again, I leave it to others to correlate religious belief with statements made.
>
> More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon someone else's review seems to me
> to be intellectually stunted. Such behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters;
> left wing nutters do it too.
>
>
> "Lets roll!"
I did unfortunately see Battle for Terra and was like wtf they did a
remake of Battle for Terra when I saw Avatar's characters.
No interest in seeing the movie, personally. Tired of formula
plotlines.
Trav
trav...@aol.com
> "Greendistantstar" <Greendistants...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>
>
>
>
> > More importantly, criticizing a movie one has not seen based upon someone else's review seems to me
> > to be intellectually stunted.
>
> intellectually stunted.
>
>
>
> > Such behaviours are not the sole province of the right wing nutters;
> > left wing nutters do it too.
>
> 99.9% of them are Jewish right wing nutters like Debbie Schlussel and
> Mark Goldberg.
Let's see, which studio produced avatar? 20th Century Fox...founded
by a jew, run by jews.
They seem to occupy the most rabid positions on either side of the
spectrum. If it isn't a jew studio shitting all over everything white
while elevating everything nonwhite, it's a rabid jew on the other
side who wants all out thermonuclear global war against historical
enemies of jews.
Trav
trav...@aol.com
> > Really Mark, seeing Avatar as some sort of anti-American propaganda is
> > just too silly for words.
>
> Well not really when you consider the people who ran down to Venezuela to
> kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
> Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
> America as bad.
Um, you ARE aware of the dominant ethnicity in Hollywood studios at
the executive level and above, right?
I mean, use your fuckin brain.
Trav
Jerry B. Altzman
> He's a jew, what do you expect?
I used to have higher standards for him.
Alas, he failed. I've learned to lump him in with Howard Stern -- same
histrionics, same communal shame.
> Trav
//jbaltz
--
jerry b. altzman jba...@altzman.com www.jbaltz.com
thank you for contributing to the heat death of the universe.
gemjack
<billam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science is a
>good thing.
>actually none, i can think of none.
Star Trek? Back to the Future?
-gj
Jerry B. Altzman
_Buckaroo Bonzai_.
Science! Rock'n'roll! Martial arts! Rastafarians with big pink boxes!
> -gj
//jbaltz
--
jerry b. altzman jba...@altzman.com www.jbaltz.com
what's that watermelon doing there?
Stanley Moore
"Jerry B. Altzman" <jba...@altzman.com> wrote in message
news:vK2dnSQYQvD...@giganews.com...
> on 12/19/2009 11:52 PM gemjack said the following:
>> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:48:53 -0800 (PST), SPORTfighter
>> <billam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science is a
>>> good thing.
>>> actually none, i can think of none.
>> Star Trek? Back to the Future?
>
> _Buckaroo Bonzai_.
> Science! Rock'n'roll! Martial arts! Rastafarians with big pink boxes!
>
Hohn Lithgow once again playing a maniac. I really loved that foms and watch
it whenever it comes on the cable. Take care
--
Stanley L. Moore
"The belief in a supernatural
source of evil is not necessary;
men alone are quite capable
of every wickedness."
Joseph Conrad
Fraser Johnston
"Herbert Cannon" <hcan...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:du7Xm.5702$eH1....@newsfe16.iad...
Penthouse.
Fraser
Herbert Cannon
> Herbert Cannon wrote:
> clipped
>
>> Whoa there Hoss. I dont intend to see any of Michael Moore's movies
>> because I know exactly what that moron of propaganda will try to do
>
> No you don't *exactly* what he will do. You have an idea, and a very
> incomplete one, at least compared to someone who *has* seen Moore's
> movies. It's just logic and no little common sense.
> Reading a restaurant review is very different to actually going to the
> restaurant and deciding for yourself what the meals taste like.
OK but my general idea of what he will do is correct. I have been to
resturants where the critics said the meals are pretty good and found them
lousy. I really dont think a resturant critic is the same as a resturant
critic though.
>
>> and I am very critical of a man like that.
>
> You would likely find your criticisms better founded if you saw what he
> does.
Sorry I have no intention of giving him any monetary support to allow him to
continue to produce brainwashing epics.
You'd have better
> support for whatever arguments against his work you have. Doing that won't
> leave you open to looking silly if someone asks you to precisely describe
> the scenes in his movies that you dislike so much, and you can't even
> offer up one.
I have no intention of arguing with anyone about that jerk. He is a jerk and
I am not going to waste my time arguing about him. I find him disgusting and
despicable. End of story.
I liked some of Moore's early TV stuff, but after that he just
> became a pompous ass, and I can tell you *exactly* why.
>
>> He plays to the ingorant anyway. I would rather read a book. Even
>> Chomsky.
>
> Chomsky is hugely influential and intelligent,
Unfortunately he does not influence me. As to intelligent, well it was two
Nobel prize winning economist who helped bring about the current financial
debacle.
whether we agree with him or not.
>
> Moore is just huge.
Agreed.
>>
> "Let's roll!"
Herbert Cannon
>> Yes but the real question is - What else is required reading that
>> counters
>> Chomsky?
>
> Penthouse.
>
Herbert Cannon
>
> Well not really when you consider the people who ran down to Venezuela to
> kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
> Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
> America as bad.
Um, you ARE aware of the dominant ethnicity in Hollywood studios at
the executive level and above, right?
UM Dude, I know some white liberals, who are non jewish, and are just as bad
as any liberal jewish person.
I mean, use your fuckin brain.
Ditto.
Sam the Bam
> whod have thought cameron would have made a movie
> where progress and science were bad? well there WAS
> terminator...even titanic seemed to be saying that.
> fuck...since frankenstein almost every fucking movie says
> sciene is bad.
> i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message
> science is a good thing.
> actually none, i can think of none.
Science gave us the industrial revolution, which
created wealth to support colossal population
expansion, short circuiting evolution... so now
we have billions of Hals, surviving and spawning...
Science is good, but too much of a good thing
is not a good thing...
Sam
william
> On Dec 18, SPORTfighter <billamaho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > whod have thought cameron would have made a movie
> > where progress and science were bad? well there WAS
> > terminator...even titanic seemed to be saying that.
> > fuck...since frankenstein almost every fucking movie says
> > sciene is bad.
> > i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message
> > science is a good thing.
> > actually none, i can think of none.
>
William
www.williamahearn.com
Androcles
"william" <wlah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5848987f-a343-4497...@t42g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
William
www.williamahearn.com
===============================================
Why are you posting this fictional shit to sci.physics, fuckwit?
Sam the Bam
> whod have thought cameron would have made a movie wher
> even titanic seemed to be saying that.
> fuck...since frankenstein almost every fucking movie says
> sciene is bad.
> i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science
> is a good thing.
PS Do you think cage fighting is science?
It's hard to picture Tito Ortiz or Rampage Jackson
as scientists...
Sam
william
> Why are you posting this fictional shit to sci.physics, fuckwit?
Because the original poster cross-posted to rec.arts.movies.current-
films. Can't you fucking read you hyena dick sucking self-important
jerkwad.
William
www.williamahearn.com
pboud
Androcles
William
www.williamahearn.com
Yes, I can read, you stupid cunt. I asked why YOU, the copy-cat cretin,
are posting fictional shit to sci.physics. Thank you for your explanation,
fuckwit.
*plonk*
Do not reply to this generic message, it was automatically generated;
you have been kill-filed, either for being boringly stupid, repetitive,
unfunny, ineducable, repeatedly posting politics, religion or off-topic
subjects to a sci. newsgroup, attempting cheapskate free advertising
for profit, because you are a troll, because you responded to George
Hammond the complete fruit cake, simply insane or any combination
or permutation of the aforementioned reasons; any reply will go unread.
Boringly stupid is the most common cause of kill-filing, but because
this message is generic the other reasons have been included. You are
left to decide which is most applicable to you.
There is no appeal, I have despotic power over whom I will electronically
admit into my home and you do not qualify as a reasonable person I would
wish to converse with or even poke fun at. Some weirdoes are not kill-
filed, they amuse me and I retain them for their entertainment value
as I would any chicken with two heads, either one of which enables the
dumb bird to scratch dirt, step back, look down, step forward to the
same spot and repeat the process eternally.
This should not trouble you, many of those plonked find it a blessing
that they are not required to think and can persist in their bigotry
or crackpot theories without challenge.
You have the right to free speech, I have the right not to listen. The
kill-file will be cleared annually with spring cleaning or whenever I
purchase a new computer or hard drive.
I'm fully aware that you may be so stupid as to reply, but the purpose
of this message is to encourage others to kill-file fuckwits like you.
I hope you find this explanation is satisfactory but even if you don't,
damnly my frank, I don't give a dear. Have a nice day and fuck off.
william
>
> Yes, I can read, you stupid cunt. I asked why YOU, the copy-cat cretin,
> are posting fictional shit to sci.physics. Thank you for your explanation,
> fuckwit.
> *plonk*
>
pissed on your face and now you try and twist it so it looks like you
had a clue. What a lame ass. Your kill file is a joke, just like you.
William
www.williamahearn.com
Greendistantstar
Seconded; sounds like our kinda guy.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Ace0f_5pades
movie.
3D is worth it too!
The greatest movie I've seen in a long time...
My Number 1
hey John Cameron, have you ever heard of a Painting titled "Ko
Matariki"
that tree, the connections... I can draw a few parallels
JunoExpress
>
> > whod have thought cameron would have made a movie
> > i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message
> > science is a good thing.
> > actually none, i can think of none.
>
>
> Science is good, but too much of a good thing
> is not a good thing...
>
> Sam
it's not the amount:it's how it is used.
M
RichA
Then go back to the time before 1700 when everyone ended up scarred by
smallpox, no teeth by 18, and death at age 35.
Tom
Kinda like life in Canada now, eh, Rich?
Man, you get stupider by the day.
Tom
LIBERATOR
Virginia Newbon using another alias and excising herself as a
spectacle to herself, so she has a sense of worth to herself.
Virginia, if you knew anything of what you pose yourself as knowing,
then why did you lose GM, Chrysler, General Growth Properties, Nortel,
Lehman Brothers, Bank Of America, WaMu, Merril Lynch (or does that
count as BofA), do I need to list more for you start to recognize the
truth - that you're delusional and self-enchanted in tribute to the
falsities?
Are you this deceived by yourself? Can you snap out of the self-
grandeur before it's too late?
You are losing bigtime and you're going to end up in jail becuase of
the financial failures of buying public officials.
Yet here you are babbling about science and giving guidelines on how
it should be applied & utilized, you're mad person and it's quite
entertaining.
If you knew anything whatsoever about any science, the losses I listed
would not have occurred. You are delusional that you believe you know
anything about anything.
Continue on toddler, it's quite entertaining!
Greendistantstar
Take your meds, Mark.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
LIBERATOR
wrote:
Virginia are you using GreenDistantStar too and believing it to be a
different person than yourself?
I do not take any medication, I am not in need of any medication but
as you project this and you are a loser that lost GM, Chrysler, BofA,
WaMu, Lehman Brothers, Nortel, AIG, CIT Group, and more yet you insist
there is no problem within you, it is clearly you that needs
medication.
Why don't you debate me on this?
What are you hiding from?
You respond with one-liners and think this sufficed rebuking me. That
again is a sign that you are on drugs perhaps not medicated ones.
MGM Mirage and your Vegas properties are now in the red - do you want
to debate this instead of attempting to pop me with one-liners to mock
me because you are furious that you are in deep deep trouble that your
empire is faltering severely?
C'mon, show some mettle.
Greendistantstar
So Sam and I are Virginia? Sam, we need to talk...
> I do not take any medication,
Obviously...
> I am not in need of any medication
You most certainly are.
> but as you project this and you are a loser that lost GM, Chrysler, BofA,
> WaMu, Lehman Brothers, Nortel, AIG, CIT Group, and more yet you insist
> there is no problem within you, it is clearly you that needs
> medication.
Uh, I'm not your ex-girlfriend from many years ago, and neither her nor I could do such a thing.
> Why don't you debate me on this?
Sure.
> What are you hiding from?
>
> You respond with one-liners and think this sufficed rebuking me. That
> again is a sign that you are on drugs perhaps not medicated ones.
>
> MGM Mirage and your Vegas properties are now in the red - do you want
> to debate this instead of attempting to pop me with one-liners to mock
> me because you are furious that you are in deep deep trouble that your
> empire is faltering severely?
>
> C'mon, show some mettle.
OK then. Please provide a little proof of your claims.
First you might like to explain why my location is Australia.
Then tell us all how I managed to buy the MGM Mirage, all these Vegas properties, and also caused
the Global Financial Crisis.
Please be precise.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
herbzet
"trav...@aol.cominyrface" wrote:
>
> On Dec 18, 11:22 pm, Appledog <oliver.rich...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 19, 10:45 am, Mark Goldberg <msgoldb...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Greendistantstar wrote:
> > > > The message in Avatar isn't that science is bad; it's that *abuse* of
> > > > technology is bad and bad people do bad things.
> >
> > > > The political spin put on this by Schlussel and acolyte Mr Goldberg (who
> > > > has likely not seen the movie) is stunning.
> >
> > > Uh huh, the bullshit pretension you display is what is stunning
> >
> > As soon as I saw you had posted yet another giant cut and paste I
> > rolled my eyes and thought to myself, "what the fuck is wrong with
> > this idiot?"
> >
> > it's fine and dandy if you want to post your opinion, but clipping
> > news articles and posting them without comment and then defending them
> > to the death is really fucking stupid.
> >
> > Go ahead and flame me - trust me, we will all enjoy it. Your
> > disassociation with reality is, at times, comedic.
> >
>
> He's a jew, what do you expect?
Which makes it even more amazing how they run the world!
--
hz
James L. Hankins
"Sam the Bam" <samth...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:34d7f389-8ce1-4b24...@k32g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Well, the movie was horrible. Sam Worthington is one of those actors with
no charisma or screen presence at all. The buzz seems to be that he is "The
Next Big Thing" but it's amazing to me how this can be so. He conveys no
emotion and it likes he's not even on the screen at all. The guy is the
equivalent of Christopher Lambert or Christian Hayden or Thomas Jane. Just
a truly terrible actor with no screen presence, but for some reason he gets
these good roles (he was forgetful in the latest Terminator movie, too). I
do not understand it at all. Why can't the people who make movies see this?
I will say that the 3-D effects are stunning. I took my son to see Cloudy
with a Chance of Meatballs in 3-D, expecting to see the gimmicky 3-D I
remember as a kid, but the effects are awesome. But even the effects could
not save this lame-ass movie. Thin, implausible story, hackneyed dialogue
and cornball melodrama that just makes you wince.
The only bright spot (other than the effects) was Sigourney Weaver who did
manage to breathe some life into her character, but she could not carry this
miserable script and story by herself. I just completely disengage from the
computer generated characters and action scenes. Even with the technology,
it still looks fake and I just don't care what happens. Cameron obviously
had to compromise a lot to appeal to the masses and it looks like he
succeeded, but unless you are taking kids I'd go see something else.
Sam the Bam
> >Because the original poster cross-posted to
> >rec.arts.movies.current- films. Can't you fucking read you
> >hyena dick sucking self-important jerkwad.
> >William
> >www.williamahearn.com
>
> Here is your honorary "RMA-membership card"... You'll fit right in.
Just like his mom... everybody in the neighborhood
fits in to her...
Sam
Greendistantstar
Sam has placed an inverted triangle upon the correct!
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Sam the Bam
> > Science gave us the industrial revolution, which
> > created wealth to support colossal population
> > expansion, short circuiting evolution... so now
> > we have billions of Hals, surviving and spawning...
>
> > Science is good, but too much of a good thing
> > is not a good thing...
>
> ended up scarred by smallpox, no teeth by 18, and death at age 35.
But they were more spiritual, and more environmental,
than we are today.
Sam
Sam the Bam
> LIBERATOR wrote:
> >>>Virginia Newbon using another alias and excising herself
> >>>as a spectacle to herself, so she has a sense of worth to herself.
>
> > different person than yourself?
>
> So Sam and I are Virginia? Sam, we need to talk...
No, you're Dawn, I'm Virginia... now would you
PLEASE try to get that straight, once and for all?
Sam
Sam the Bam
> On Dec 21, Sam the Bam <samtheb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Science is good, but too much of a good thing
> > is not a good thing...
>
> spectacle to herself, so she has a sense of worth to herself.
What happened to Dawn?
> Continue on toddler, it's quite entertaining!
I've reported you to the Illuminati and Cho's TKD.
Virginia
er I mean Sam
Sam the Bam
> "Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea." A pro-nuke doomsday movie.
>
> Why are you posting this fictional shit to sci.physics, fuckwit?
well, people post Einstein's theory to sci.physics,
don't they?
Sam
Sam the Bam
> >>> Because the original poster cross-posted to
> >>> rec.arts.movies.current- films. Can't you fucking read you
> >>> hyena dick sucking self-important jerkwad.
> >> Here is your honorary "RMA-membership card"... You'll fit right in.
>
> > Just like his mom... everybody in the neighborhood
> > fits in to her...
>
> Sam has placed an inverted triangle upon the correct!
not so fast... we have to see how many rounds
he can go with Trav...
Sam
bubba
>
> - Show quoted text -
i WILL BE SENDING YOU SOME MANMADE SNOW STORMS
Greendistantstar
> On Dec 21, Greendistantstar <Greendistants...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> LIBERATOR wrote:
>>>>> Virginia Newbon using another alias and excising herself
>>>>> as a spectacle to herself, so she has a sense of worth to herself.
>>> Virginia are you using GreenDistantStar too and believing it to be a
>>> different person than yourself?
>> So Sam and I are Virginia? Sam, we need to talk...
>
> No, you're Dawn, I'm Virginia...
OK...me Dawn...you Virginia. Gotcha.
> now would you PLEASE try to get that straight, once and for all?
What was the question again?
GDS
"Let's...umm..."
LIBERATOR
You insist you're not her?
IF you're not her, then Chos are your puppetmasters, and that is a
problem you can't seem to get over, peppercorn brain.
Fraser Johnston
> On Dec 18, SPORTfighter <billamaho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> whod have thought cameron would have made a movie wher
>> even titanic seemed to be saying that.
>> fuck...since frankenstein almost every fucking movie says
>> sciene is bad.
>> i can think of maybe 2 movies where there is a message science
>> is a good thing.
>
> It's hard to picture Tito Ortiz or Rampage Jackson
> as scientists...
Pretty sure Tito has a college degree. Rich Franklin is a maths
teacher. They aren't all dummies. In fact the strategic aspect of the
game means you have to be fairly bright to be a champion.
Fraser
James L. Hankins
"Fraser Johnston" <fra...@cjmanagement.com.au> wrote in message
news:7pb60b...@mid.individual.net...
> Pretty sure Tito has a college degree. Rich Franklin is a maths teacher.
> They aren't all dummies. In fact the strategic aspect of the game means
> you have to be fairly bright to be a champion.
>
> Fraser
I wouldn't necessarily go that far. A fighter will go a long way (if not
all the way) by simply listening to his corner and doing what they say.
Much easier said than done.
u...@invalid.net
James L. Hankins <jhan...@cox.net> wrote:
> Well, the movie was horrible. Sam Worthington is one of those actors with
> no charisma or screen presence at all. The buzz seems to be that he is "The
> Next Big Thing" but it's amazing to me how this can be so. He conveys no
> emotion and it likes he's not even on the screen at all. The guy is the
> equivalent of Christopher Lambert or Christian Hayden or Thomas Jane. Just
> a truly terrible actor with no screen presence, but for some reason he gets
> these good roles (he was forgetful in the latest Terminator movie, too). I
> do not understand it at all. Why can't the people who make movies see this?
>
> I will say that the 3-D effects are stunning. I took my son to see Cloudy
> with a Chance of Meatballs in 3-D, expecting to see the gimmicky 3-D I
> remember as a kid, but the effects are awesome. But even the effects could
> not save this lame-ass movie. Thin, implausible story, hackneyed dialogue
> and cornball melodrama that just makes you wince.
>
> The only bright spot (other than the effects) was Sigourney Weaver who did
> manage to breathe some life into her character, but she could not carry this
> miserable script and story by herself. I just completely disengage from the
> computer generated characters and action scenes. Even with the technology,
> it still looks fake and I just don't care what happens. Cameron obviously
> had to compromise a lot to appeal to the masses and it looks like he
> succeeded, but unless you are taking kids I'd go see something else.
I haven't seen it yet, but nothing in the trailers or what anyone
who has seen it has said, makes me want to. Hard to believe he
paid half a billion dollars to make it. Wonder if he'll even
break even. I agree about Worthington too. Seems about average
to me.
u...@invalid.net
Fraser Johnston <fra...@cjmanagement.com.au> wrote:
How do you think dogs catch Frisbees? The practical application
of geometry can be intuitive, even to animals.
trav...@aol.com
> on 12/19/2009 4:37 PM travis...@aol.cominyrface said the following:
>
> > He's a jew, what do you expect?
>
> Alas, he failed. I've learned to lump him in with Howard Stern -- same
> histrionics, same communal shame.
>
> > Trav
>
> //jbaltz
> --
> jerry b. altzman jba...@altzman.com www.jbaltz.com
> thank you for contributing to the heat death of the universe.
Are you the only sane one around? How are we to tell you apart?
Trav
trav...@aol.com
> > Well not really when you consider the people who ran down to Venezuela to
> > kiss Chavez's ass and praise him and what they continually spout out of
> > Hollywood. There is a strong tendency in Hollywood to try and portray
> > America as bad.
>
> Um, you ARE aware of the dominant ethnicity in Hollywood studios at
> the executive level and above, right?
>
> UM Dude, I know some white liberals, who are non jewish, and are just as bad
> as any liberal jewish person.
>
> I mean, use your fuckin brain.
>
> Ditto.
You didn't answer my question nor obey my command.
Trav
Jerry B. Altzman
> On Dec 19, 6:14 pm, "Jerry B. Altzman"<jba...@altzman.com> wrote:
>> I used to have higher standards for him.
>> Alas, he failed. I've learned to lump him in with Howard Stern -- same
>> histrionics, same communal shame.
Sigh.
The answer to your questions:
1) I sure as hell hope not. However, where everyone else is insane and I
am not, how do I know I've not got it backwards?
2) I have the same question, only multiplied by 100.
RichA
Speaking of...
RichA
God fearin' ignorant fodder for nature you mean.
trav...@aol.com
> The answer to your questions:
> 1) I sure as hell hope not. However, where everyone else is insane and I
> am not, how do I know I've not got it backwards?
> 2) I have the same question, only multiplied by 100.
Well, I will vouch for your sanity. Just don't want you to get caught
up in the backlash against the global domination types.
Trav
Herbert Cannon
"Jerry B. Altzman" <jba...@altzman.com> wrote in message
news:z7GdnZ8VJPn...@giganews.com...
> on 12/22/2009 10:59 AM trav...@aol.cominyrface said the following:
>> On Dec 19, 6:14 pm, "Jerry B. Altzman"<jba...@altzman.com> wrote:
>>> I used to have higher standards for him.
>>> Alas, he failed. I've learned to lump him in with Howard Stern -- same
>>> histrionics, same communal shame.
>> Are you the only sane one around? How are we to tell you apart?
>
> Sigh.
> The answer to your questions:
> 1) I sure as hell hope not. However, where everyone else is insane and I
> am not, how do I know I've not got it backwards?
> 2) I have the same question, only multiplied by 100.
Insanity is a rational adjustment to an irrational world. No wonder you are
not fitting in.
Herbert Cannon
<trav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:303e6d15-2806-4bc0...@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>> Sigh.
>> The answer to your questions:
>> 1) I sure as hell hope not. However, where everyone else is insane and I
>> am not, how do I know I've not got it backwards?
>> 2) I have the same question, only multiplied by 100.
>
> Well, I will vouch for your sanity.
Better you use the insanity plea.
Just don't want you to get caught
> up in the backlash against the global domination types.
Hey you are hurting my feelings again.
Fraser Johnston
<u...@invalid.net> wrote in message news:BtednW_jae1...@giganews.com...
I'm guessing you have never done bjj. It is like chess with your body at
higher levels.
Fraser
James L. Hankins
"Fraser Johnston" <ftr...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:7pvu5n...@mid.individual.net...
> I'm guessing you have never done bjj. It is like chess with your body at
> higher levels.
That's actually not a bad way to describe it (even though I've never done
bjj, strictly speaking, other than rough-housing with relatives on
occasion).
I was always impressed with the way Rickson Gracie (and probably the other
Gracie's as well) would get on the mat and, with a room of 20-30 students,
just take them on one at a time, rolling for hours. That kind of training
technique, done over a period of years, would probably allow a fighter to
develop a "feel" for how men move and react to situations that come up all
the time on the ground.
By the time someone who does that is ready to have a serious bout, I suspect
that the intution would just come naturally and the right moves would
follow. Flawless technique in this manner will carry the day almost all the
time.
Greendistantstar
> "Fraser Johnston" <ftr...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:7pvu5n...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>> I'm guessing you have never done bjj. It is like chess with your body at
>> higher levels.
>
>
> That's actually not a bad way to describe it (even though I've never done
> bjj, strictly speaking, other than rough-housing with relatives on
> occasion).
That's not even loosely speaking, but rasslin' around is always good fun.
> I was always impressed with the way Rickson Gracie (and probably the other
> Gracie's as well) would get on the mat and, with a room of 20-30 students,
> just take them on one at a time, rolling for hours.
> That kind of training
> technique, done over a period of years, would probably allow a fighter to
> develop a "feel" for how men move and react to situations that come up all
> the time on the ground.
Not exactly. Tapping 20 or 30 newbs is just doing demos for the students. The student isn't learning
much getting tapped quickly, at will, by the instructor, as good fun as that can be. Nor is it much
of a workout for the instructor to be honest, Gracie or not. Any good Bjj blackbelt will wow you on
the mat.
> By the time someone who does that is ready to have a serious bout, I suspect
> that the intution would just come naturally and the right moves would
> follow. Flawless technique in this manner will carry the day almost all the
> time.
What builds good fighters (and Bjj has its fair share) is the realistic training, the way it's
presented to the student and how the student trains in the delivery system.
Training in Bjj gives you a great sense of the dynamics of a str33t fight, yes, that is so.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Lode
>
> I'm guessing you have never done bjj. It is like chess with your body at
> higher levels.
It's like chess, only with choking ... =^)