[quote]OBoile wrote:
What perspective is this exactly? I guess I haven’t gained it yet because I too still go to a move and just enjoy it for its entertainment value.[/quote]
That means you already have the perspective that I speak of, ya know, real life.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
What perspective is this exactly? I guess I haven’t gained it yet because I too still go to a move and just enjoy it for its entertainment value.[/quote]
That means you already have the perspective that I speak of, ya know, real life.[/quote]
My apologies… I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
But I’m still a bit confused. I remember (while in school) going to see Star Trek: Insurrection after my last final exam one term. In that movie (and yes, I’m a bit of a math geek - I saw a star trek movie) the good guys aid an indigenous population that is about to be forcefully removed for their planet’s resources. Humans are in on the conspiracy to remove them, so clearly the USA is at fault somehow. Plus you could say that the good guys (Picard and the enterprise crew) turn on their own. But surprisingly, I didn’t feel like the movie was some sort of propoganda at the time. Was my time in school a failure because I never became a political nut job?
P.S. Star Trek: Insurrection was a pretty crappy movie. I don’t recommend it unless you are just finising up exams… then everything not school related seems great.
[quote]OBoile wrote:
P.S. Star Trek: Insurrection was a pretty crappy movie. I don’t recommend it unless you are just finising up exams… then everything not school related seems great.[/quote]
Any movie with Worf and hot MILFS gets four stars in my book.
saw it last night, first time seeing a true 3d movie, must say it was pretty sweet
great story really in depth
[quote]Bujo wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
P.S. Star Trek: Insurrection was a pretty crappy movie. I don’t recommend it unless you are just finising up exams… then everything not school related seems great.[/quote]
Any movie with Worf and hot MILFS gets four stars in my book.[/quote]
x2 to that.
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Well, I hear Hollywood is allowing one singular Right Winged director to produce a “relatively” true story about Terror stricken Conservative Republican Ex-Marines.
Plot:
We start off following Scott Howard as he drives to work as CEO of a large conglomerate while he drives his Hummer 6 (three times bigger than a Hummer which requires 3 stops for gas on the way to work). Oh, did I mention his brother Josh Howard clears Amazon rain forests in order to make Republican themed office stationary with cute elephants on them but with George Bush’s head?
Their pleasant happy world is shaken to the ground when evil BROWN SKINNED NON-CHRISTIAN people invade their gated community.
Well, that won’t stop Scott who kills all of the BROWN SKINNED NON-CHRISTIAN people (who no doubt hated America) with his privately owned AK-47 that he learned how to shoot at a church revival meeting/gun range!!!
The movie ends with President Obama handing out free guns to every white man and woman in the country as an eagle flies overhead carrying a bright red, white and blue flag in its beak into the sunset.
I tell you, you ain’t seen SOLD OUT until you see this!!![/quote]
Its always good to see you can inject race into everything, it says so much about you.[/quote]
You can’t be fucking serious. So you skipped right over the posts acting like the movie was racist against whites because the bad guys were white yet focus on my post in response to that bullshit and then claim I am the one who injected race into this?
Is this some sort of mental problem with guys like you? Something prevents you from seeing anyone else using race until a black man does it?
Between them and your own ridiculous rhetoric, anyone could easily make jokes all damn day long.
Acting like the movie is racist against whites makes just as much sense as acting like it was against the entire American military.[/quote]
The posts before about the military and what not where what I had heard about the movie before I saw it. Now I took the advice of the people on this board, I went and watched it and wrote this nice little review for everyone. I picked out the propaganda messages that where in the movie, but in my review did I ever mention race was the propaganda? No, so then you are injecting race into something that isn’t there.
Could you please find one post in this entire thread where I said it was anti-white? I looked through from page 1-9 and I never mentioned it once, the only person who did is HH. And what do you mean “guys like me”? If it would make you feel better I could make a post quoting HH’s post and say the movie isn’t anti white.[/quote]
I made a fucking joke based on every retarded conspiracy theorists’ posts in this thread. It was NOT just based on what you wrote, even though some of it was. Get it now? So again, are you claiming you still missed the race related posts in this thread until I alone wrote a fucking joke in response to it?
If so, why the fuck can’t guys like you see this action from anyone else other than “black guys”?
You have issues if you left this movie upset about “propaganda”, whether that be based on race, religion or the fact that you simply WANT to believe that mercenaries now represent the US military.
People like you amaze me. You laugh at the very idea that we could be fucking up the world we live in/on as if our own over population alone won’t ever be a problem when it comes to our own survival. You turn logical debate into pure politics and then rant onward as if anyone really gives a shit.
Yes, we are laughing AT you, not with you.
Keep it up.[/quote]
Well said sir! Although, I must say I’m not really laughing. Don’t get me wrong… it would be funny if it weren’t both sad (that people can actually be this messed up in the head) or scary (that these people actually control the most powerful country on earth from time to time).
[/quote]
“these people” (some T-Nation posters) and the people voted into the white house are two different things.
Gotta love T-Nation. How this thread devolved into this monkeys throwing their own shit banter that is business as usual around here is beyond me. This movie fucking ruled and totally redefined film making in the same way that other movies of its caliber did in the past. Like any good movie it does draw parallels to our current situation and connects the fantasy to the reality.
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Well, I hear Hollywood is allowing one singular Right Winged director to produce a “relatively” true story about Terror stricken Conservative Republican Ex-Marines.
Plot:
We start off following Scott Howard as he drives to work as CEO of a large conglomerate while he drives his Hummer 6 (three times bigger than a Hummer which requires 3 stops for gas on the way to work). Oh, did I mention his brother Josh Howard clears Amazon rain forests in order to make Republican themed office stationary with cute elephants on them but with George Bush’s head?
Their pleasant happy world is shaken to the ground when evil BROWN SKINNED NON-CHRISTIAN people invade their gated community.
Well, that won’t stop Scott who kills all of the BROWN SKINNED NON-CHRISTIAN people (who no doubt hated America) with his privately owned AK-47 that he learned how to shoot at a church revival meeting/gun range!!!
The movie ends with President Obama handing out free guns to every white man and woman in the country as an eagle flies overhead carrying a bright red, white and blue flag in its beak into the sunset.
I tell you, you ain’t seen SOLD OUT until you see this!!![/quote]
Its always good to see you can inject race into everything, it says so much about you.[/quote]
You can’t be fucking serious. So you skipped right over the posts acting like the movie was racist against whites because the bad guys were white yet focus on my post in response to that bullshit and then claim I am the one who injected race into this?
Is this some sort of mental problem with guys like you? Something prevents you from seeing anyone else using race until a black man does it?
Between them and your own ridiculous rhetoric, anyone could easily make jokes all damn day long.
Acting like the movie is racist against whites makes just as much sense as acting like it was against the entire American military.[/quote]
The posts before about the military and what not where what I had heard about the movie before I saw it. Now I took the advice of the people on this board, I went and watched it and wrote this nice little review for everyone. I picked out the propaganda messages that where in the movie, but in my review did I ever mention race was the propaganda? No, so then you are injecting race into something that isn’t there.
Could you please find one post in this entire thread where I said it was anti-white? I looked through from page 1-9 and I never mentioned it once, the only person who did is HH. And what do you mean “guys like me”? If it would make you feel better I could make a post quoting HH’s post and say the movie isn’t anti white.[/quote]
Here’s another little tidbit to add to this: why is the survival of the Blue people an unquestioned good, but the the survival of those awful Earthlings bad? So all earthlings must die because savages living above a bunch of valuable rock (unobtainium) won’t move?
Who the fuck thinks of this? And most people here (not you John) applaud this?
“Go die because we ain’t movin’!! And don’t dare touch our tree!!”
I now completely agree with the decision to blast the savages. They want to condemn Earth to death because of rocks under their ‘sacred village/tree’. Fuck 'em. We’re supposed to die because they don’t want to move?
Now, if they know moving would kill them somehow, then of course they should fight. But then its survival of the fittest…and I prefer that Earth wins.
[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:
You aren’t allowed to enjoy ANYTHING anymore without going through it with a fine-toothed comb to pull out any political/social/environmental overtone, no matter how tenuous. You must not have gotten the memo.
I was going to go to Taco Bell last night, but I realized that the parent corporation was insulting the proud history of the Mexican civilization, implying that they not only eat tacos, but enjoy and have access to such extravagant tacos as a double-decker volcano taco. Reprehensible.
For the entire 3 hour duration of Avatar, I sat in my theatre seat with my buttocks firmly clinched and my brow furrowed in disgust as I jotted down exactly what was WRONG with the movie. After every point I emitted an audible “offended sigh”, of which I estimate there were about 370. I felt genuine pity for the other theatre occupants, who actually seemed to be “enjoying themselves”. They clearly weren’t as politically aware as me. The bothersome 3D renderings of this horrific world and its blue-skinned, far-left leaning inhabitants certainly interfered with my note-taking and general disgust.
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
I really failed you guys on getting down deep and over-analyzing the movie. I apologize for going and just enjoying a movie for it’s entertainment value. I really should’ve read through this thread more so I would’ve known to go and disect the movie for it’s anti-American, anti-white, anti-corporate, anti-civilization, anti-technology, anti-military, anti-cowboy, anti-everything else propaganda agenda it was obviously flaming around.[/quote]
[/quote]
Would you have enjoyed her movie?
"Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the best-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl’s techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest films in history.[1] Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[2] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day.[3]
Just got back from watching Avatar a second time, and WOW. I had as much fun watching it this afternoon as I did a week ago. The theater was packed, and this little old lady sitting next to me was so wrapped up in the movie. “Oohing” and “Aweing”, cheering the good guys, cursing the bad guys, and clapping as the credits rolled, she had me cracking up. I was sucked into Pandora for a second time, and again amazed at just how alive and vibrant this little fictional moon looked. I truly felt immersed in the film for over 2 and a half hours. I was pissed when the home tree fell, and thrilled when Michelle Rodriguez came zooming thru in her VTOL decked out in war paint. Even though I knew how her fight would end I was hoping she’d get one more missile fired off or one more strafing run. “You’re not the only ones with guns, bitch!”
This is a good, solid movie that definitely should be seen in the theater due to its incredible technical achievements.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Here’s another little tidbit to add to this: why is the survival of the Blue people an unquestioned good, but the the survival of those awful Earthlings bad? So all earthlings must die because savages living above a bunch of valuable rock (unobtainium) won’t move?
Who the fuck thinks of this? And most people here (not you John) applaud this?
“Go die because we ain’t movin’!! And don’t dare touch our tree!!”
I now completely agree with the decision to blast the savages. They want to condemn Earth to death because of rocks under their ‘sacred village/tree’. Fuck 'em. We’re supposed to die because they don’t want to move?
Now, if they know moving would kill them somehow, then of course they should fight. But then its survival of the fittest…and I prefer that Earth wins.
[/quote]
You’re grasping at straws. Nowhere was it mentioned that “unobtanium” was the salvation of the human race. Nor was it stated that the human race was facing extinction. Jake Sully said there was no green left on Earth. Mankind may have simply found a technological or synthetic means to sustain life. If extinction was a threat then I doubt the government would rely on mercenaries and a private corporation to save mankind. Try thinking before typing.
The moral is simple: Might doesn’t make right. And in this case the mighty got there asses handed to them.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:
You aren’t allowed to enjoy ANYTHING anymore without going through it with a fine-toothed comb to pull out any political/social/environmental overtone, no matter how tenuous. You must not have gotten the memo.
I was going to go to Taco Bell last night, but I realized that the parent corporation was insulting the proud history of the Mexican civilization, implying that they not only eat tacos, but enjoy and have access to such extravagant tacos as a double-decker volcano taco. Reprehensible.
For the entire 3 hour duration of Avatar, I sat in my theatre seat with my buttocks firmly clinched and my brow furrowed in disgust as I jotted down exactly what was WRONG with the movie. After every point I emitted an audible “offended sigh”, of which I estimate there were about 370. I felt genuine pity for the other theatre occupants, who actually seemed to be “enjoying themselves”. They clearly weren’t as politically aware as me. The bothersome 3D renderings of this horrific world and its blue-skinned, far-left leaning inhabitants certainly interfered with my note-taking and general disgust.
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
I really failed you guys on getting down deep and over-analyzing the movie. I apologize for going and just enjoying a movie for it’s entertainment value. I really should’ve read through this thread more so I would’ve known to go and disect the movie for it’s anti-American, anti-white, anti-corporate, anti-civilization, anti-technology, anti-military, anti-cowboy, anti-everything else propaganda agenda it was obviously flaming around.[/quote]
[/quote]
Would you have enjoyed her movie?
"Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the best-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl’s techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest films in history.[1] Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[2] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day.[3]
[/quote]
lol You’re seriously going to compare the propaganda in Triumph of the Will with Dances with Smurfs?
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
What perspective is this exactly? I guess I haven’t gained it yet because I too still go to a move and just enjoy it for its entertainment value.[/quote]
That means you already have the perspective that I speak of, ya know, real life.[/quote]
My apologies… I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
But I’m still a bit confused. I remember (while in school) going to see Star Trek: Insurrection after my last final exam one term. In that movie (and yes, I’m a bit of a math geek - I saw a star trek movie) the good guys aid an indigenous population that is about to be forcefully removed for their planet’s resources. Humans are in on the conspiracy to remove them, so clearly the USA is at fault somehow. Plus you could say that the good guys (Picard and the enterprise crew) turn on their own. But surprisingly, I didn’t feel like the movie was some sort of propoganda at the time. Was my time in school a failure because I never became a political nut job?
P.S. Star Trek: Insurrection was a pretty crappy movie. I don’t recommend it unless you are just finising up exams… then everything not school related seems great.[/quote]
The old indigenous population vs. valuable resource chestnut is a very old & extremely popular science fiction/fantasy plot device. To start bitching about it now, is to start bitching about 60 years to late.
[quote]debraD wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:
You aren’t allowed to enjoy ANYTHING anymore without going through it with a fine-toothed comb to pull out any political/social/environmental overtone, no matter how tenuous. You must not have gotten the memo.
I was going to go to Taco Bell last night, but I realized that the parent corporation was insulting the proud history of the Mexican civilization, implying that they not only eat tacos, but enjoy and have access to such extravagant tacos as a double-decker volcano taco. Reprehensible.
For the entire 3 hour duration of Avatar, I sat in my theatre seat with my buttocks firmly clinched and my brow furrowed in disgust as I jotted down exactly what was WRONG with the movie. After every point I emitted an audible “offended sigh”, of which I estimate there were about 370. I felt genuine pity for the other theatre occupants, who actually seemed to be “enjoying themselves”. They clearly weren’t as politically aware as me. The bothersome 3D renderings of this horrific world and its blue-skinned, far-left leaning inhabitants certainly interfered with my note-taking and general disgust.
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
I really failed you guys on getting down deep and over-analyzing the movie. I apologize for going and just enjoying a movie for it’s entertainment value. I really should’ve read through this thread more so I would’ve known to go and disect the movie for it’s anti-American, anti-white, anti-corporate, anti-civilization, anti-technology, anti-military, anti-cowboy, anti-everything else propaganda agenda it was obviously flaming around.[/quote]
[/quote]
Would you have enjoyed her movie?
"Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the best-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl’s techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest films in history.[1] Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[2] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day.[3]
[/quote]
lol You’re seriously going to compare the propaganda in Triumph of the Will with Dances with Smurfs?
[/quote]
The point is that one can dazzle the audience while getting the message across. The audience is so mesmerized by the special effects that their natural scepticism is weakened.
I like the ‘dancing with smurfs’ bit. Shows you have a brain and aren’t so easily beguiled as most here.
[quote]Bujo wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Here’s another little tidbit to add to this: why is the survival of the Blue people an unquestioned good, but the the survival of those awful Earthlings bad? So all earthlings must die because savages living above a bunch of valuable rock (unobtainium) won’t move?
Who the fuck thinks of this? And most people here (not you John) applaud this?
“Go die because we ain’t movin’!! And don’t dare touch our tree!!”
I now completely agree with the decision to blast the savages. They want to condemn Earth to death because of rocks under their ‘sacred village/tree’. Fuck 'em. We’re supposed to die because they don’t want to move?
Now, if they know moving would kill them somehow, then of course they should fight. But then its survival of the fittest…and I prefer that Earth wins.
[/quote]
You’re grasping at straws. Nowhere was it mentioned that “unobtanium” was the salvation of the human race. Nor was it stated that the human race was facing extinction. Jake Sully said there was no green left on Earth. Mankind may have simply found a technological or synthetic means to sustain life. If extinction was a threat then I doubt the government would rely on mercenaries and a private corporation to save mankind. Try thinking before typing.
The moral is simple: Might doesn’t make right. And in this case the mighty got there asses handed to them.[/quote]
Guess you missed the prattle about the ‘dying world’ at the end.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Here’s another little tidbit to add to this: why is the survival of the Blue people an unquestioned good, but the the survival of those awful Earthlings bad? So all earthlings must die because savages living above a bunch of valuable rock (unobtainium) won’t move?
[/quote]
I wasn’t aware that is was even required for earths survival. It seemed like the new diamond of the 22nd century to me.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Bujo wrote:
You’re grasping at straws. Nowhere was it mentioned that “unobtanium” was the salvation of the human race. Nor was it stated that the human race was facing extinction. Jake Sully said there was no green left on Earth. Mankind may have simply found a technological or synthetic means to sustain life. If extinction was a threat then I doubt the government would rely on mercenaries and a private corporation to save mankind. Try thinking before typing.
The moral is simple: Might doesn’t make right. And in this case the mighty got there asses handed to them.[/quote]
Guess you missed the prattle about the ‘dying world’ at the end.
[/quote]
Reading comprehension is not your forte. I thought my post was rather straight forward, but maybe you should have someone explain it to you before replying.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[quote]Bujo wrote:
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Here’s another little tidbit to add to this: why is the survival of the Blue people an unquestioned good, but the the survival of those awful Earthlings bad? So all earthlings must die because savages living above a bunch of valuable rock (unobtainium) won’t move?
Who the fuck thinks of this? And most people here (not you John) applaud this?
“Go die because we ain’t movin’!! And don’t dare touch our tree!!”
I now completely agree with the decision to blast the savages. They want to condemn Earth to death because of rocks under their ‘sacred village/tree’. Fuck 'em. We’re supposed to die because they don’t want to move?
Now, if they know moving would kill them somehow, then of course they should fight. But then its survival of the fittest…and I prefer that Earth wins.
[/quote]
You’re grasping at straws. Nowhere was it mentioned that “unobtanium” was the salvation of the human race. Nor was it stated that the human race was facing extinction. Jake Sully said there was no green left on Earth. Mankind may have simply found a technological or synthetic means to sustain life. If extinction was a threat then I doubt the government would rely on mercenaries and a private corporation to save mankind. Try thinking before typing.
The moral is simple: Might doesn’t make right. And in this case the mighty got there asses handed to them.[/quote]
Guess you missed the prattle about the ‘dying world’ at the end.
[/quote]
I don’t recall this either…BUT if that was the case,who’s at fault for that?
My girl and I went to the 3:25 afternoon showing on IMAX 3D and the place was sold out. Think it’s been out for 2 1/2 weeks now so thought that was impressive. From the previews I thought it was either gonna be awsome or awful, no inbetween. After the first 20 minutes I thought it was gonna be awful. After an hour I thought it was pretty good, and by the time the final fight scene rolled around I got bummed 'cause I realized I was gonna have to leave the the theatre [and Pandora]. The story’s been told a 100 different times a 100 different ways, but it still held up. From the previews I thought the aliens looked kinda hokey, but seeing them on the big screen changes that. They look REAL, like you could reach out and touch 'em. Visually speaking, this is the most impressive movie of all time, and it’s not even close. We’ve already made plans to see it again before it hits the shelves. It’s amazing.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
SPOILER************
The last few posts just reminded me of something:
They never explained what the wanted mineral actually did…unless I missed it. Was it for fuel or something? Or was it strictly for monetary value? OR was this intended for us to make our own assumptions?[/quote]
They only mention the monetary value of it however that would actually make it a more interesting situation, if the mineral was needed to save the human race, do the ends justify the means?
Also, the scientist does talk about the irony of the fact that understanding the networking capabilities of the planets flora and fauna would be of greater monetary value.