|
Post by geode on Feb 10, 2019 15:06:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 10, 2019 9:03:08 GMT
I notice no Catholics have answered this thread. In view of our recent conversations I am wondering what kls thinks about If one must be free from sin to receive communion nobody would be able to receive it. Female priests-I'm fine with that, probably even necessary. . Celibacy-Not sure of the point of that. Probably a bad thing actually. It seems as if Cardinal Mueller might be saying that those who have divorced and remarried are in a state of sin where they cannot receive communion? "....Mueller repeats basic Catholic teaching that Catholics must be free from sin before receiving Communion. He mentions divorced and remarried faithful, in a clear reference to Francis' opening to letting these Catholics receive Communion on a case-by-case basis after a process of accompaniment and discernment with their pastors."
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 9, 2019 19:55:17 GMT
Zachariah (1971) the first electric Western. With Country Joe and the Fish.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 9, 2019 12:59:20 GMT
What do the Catholics here think about this manifesto? It doesn't name Pope Francis but is perceived to be a criticism of him. I am not Catholic, but in reading this summary I think I side with the Pope in terms of most of the issues listed here. VATICAN CITY (AP) -- The Vatican's former doctrine chief has penned a "manifesto of faith" to remind Catholics of basic tenets of belief amid what he says is "growing confusion" in the church today. Cardinal Gerhard Mueller didn't name Pope Francis in his four-page manifesto, released late Friday. But the document was nevertheless a clear manifestation of conservative criticism of Francis' emphasis on mercy and accompaniment versus a focus on repeating Catholic morals and doctrine during the previous two papacies. Mueller wrote that a pastor's failure to teach Catholic truths was the greatest deception - "It is the fraud of the anti-Christ." Catholic Manifesto
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 9, 2019 12:43:50 GMT
In your opinion from which county on balance come the most interesting films? Usually the term "International Cinema" will exclude the U.S. and usually the U.K. and Canada because of the English language thing, but perhaps not so much Australia. Anyway, My question is wide open. The U.S. releases a lot of movies, so they will have a lot of winners....but also a lot of trash, so percentage wise they might not be best. The last few years I have found that Japanese cinema interests me most in terms of the percentage of movies I find interesting coming from one country. Very difficult to answer this as there's no way quantify such a subjective thing.
I say that different cinema industries have been relatively better or worse in different time periods. If you classify films as per decades then I will say the 1920s belonged to Germany.
You had The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) by Robert Wiene which set the stage for German Expressionism. That was followed by F.W. Murnau's epic Nosferatu (1922). His other movie Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) has been praised by many as being the greatest film of the silent era. Then you had the genius Fritz Lang with his incredible classics like Metropolis (1927) and M (1931). Not to forget his other masterpieces such as The Testament of Dr.Mabuse series and Destiny (1921). You had Austrian director G. W. Pabst had fair amount of success in Germany with movies such as Pandora's Box (1929). The thing is that Germany set a very high standard in the 20s. Film industries around the world gained from them. Those movies were path-breaking and the film making was inspirational.
You can make case for Japan in the 50s and early 60s with incredible directors such as Ozu, Mizoguchi, Kurosawa, Ichikawa, Kobayashi, Imamura, Naruse, Teshigahara and Shindo to name a few. You have a very high quality right there. In terms of greatness, you can't better that kind of list in any specific period of 10 years. Those are very diverse and very innovative directors.
My personal belief is that the best of movies of past were better than the best of movies of today. Although it may be true that the overall average of movies may not have fallen. I am willing to accept if anyone differs with me. As I said it is a subjective opinion and people are bound to have different views. But my view is that the qualities of the best and the top tier movies have declined now. I don't find many Luis Bunuels or Ingmar Bergmans in our era.
I agree that any preference will be very sibjective. I suppose one could set boundaries in an attempt to be quantitative, such as using ratings at IMDb or Rotten Tomatoes but these are a summation of individual opinions. I agree that different decades will see different countries in greater or lessor dominance. Germany certainly had directors that were pushing boundaries in the 1920s. I also agree that our current era does is not producing as much in the top tier. I actually created a top films list and graphed them by year. This produced sort of a bell curve that peaked at 1949 and tailed off from that year in either direction. But my question really was about the present, or the past few years.
|
|
|
So...
Feb 9, 2019 7:09:59 GMT
Post by geode on Feb 9, 2019 7:09:59 GMT
This is much nicer than the other So... thread. Well, it's not that nice. But still nicer ....
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 9, 2019 5:10:48 GMT
I am pretty sure the film isn't peachy, or peachy keen, but is it preachy like the book? I dunno if it’s preachy like the book but I did not find the movie preachy I see.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 16:32:13 GMT
John Lennon
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 16:30:37 GMT
There's an Amicus thread in the Horror forum. I think I started that one so someone else should take up the baton. There's also Tigon, but it has a much smaller output. Then there's Tyburn, which is even smaller (but Hammer founder Anthony Hinds and Freddie Francis did a couple of Hammerish films for it in the mid 70s). Times a'wastin....
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 12:52:24 GMT
Did anybody else read "Animal Ranch: The Great American Fable" by Jack Newfield?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 12:46:42 GMT
I'm sorry that she has left us.
|
|
|
So...
Feb 8, 2019 12:44:22 GMT
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 12:44:22 GMT
No, no quoting. Not in here. Strictly forbidden.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 8, 2019 4:43:10 GMT
The review at blu-ray.com indicates that the purple lines may be scratches. "There are also still signs of age related wear and tear, including minor speckling and dirt, as well as some fairly noticeable, kind of purplish, vertical scratches that can be spotted in scenes like the big kitchen showdown between Page and Gordon late in the film." Yes the purple lines are the only major damage, near the end of the filmfor a short amount of time They clearly are scratches. The last screenshot here shows them: Leave it to Beaver review
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 7, 2019 11:06:21 GMT
I made it into the first epiosides of Season 6, which is on blu-ray. Funny thing is my Phillips player will not load them. Message claims "unknown disc" yet the player and discs are all Code A. I have had to use my Samsung player. Transfers are sharper than the DVDs from earlier seasons but have a flicker that comes and goes. Worst menu I have ever encountered with a major release.
To be honest I think this series "jumped the shark" after season 3. After that it basically has become just a sci-fi soap opera aimed at teenagers.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 7, 2019 10:51:16 GMT
I wonder how many here know the stories of Howard Hughes's eccentricity in later years. He was said to have grown long hair and fingernails and to have watched Ice Station Zebra repeatedly. Probably not a lot of younger people know. I've seen the movie with Tommy Lee Jones and thought it was very good. I also heard somewhere that Hughes was test-flying a Lockheed P-38 and it crashed, and it affected his mind for the rest of his life. The Tommy Lee Jones TV movie is indeed excellent. It has a construction regarding the passage of time that I have only seen successful a couple of times, where scenes separated by weeks, months, or even years are separated by a straight cut with no explanation. Another is "Tender Mercies"...
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 6, 2019 16:03:26 GMT
Star Trek - The Doomsday Machine. Great episode. Yes, it is. Much better than "Mantrap"...
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 6, 2019 16:00:24 GMT
Dr Terror's House Of Horror(1965) with Cushing and Lee--title has nothing to do with the movie--Suspense tale about 5 men on a train Actually, that's not a Hammer film. It's an Amicus film. Should somebody start an Amicus thread?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 6, 2019 14:15:48 GMT
Having been written by Orwell with the Soviet Union and Stalin in mind over 70 years ago it is not possible to make a current comparison that fits all of the content and characters. Trump may not be a dictator yet, but neither is Napoleon at the start of the book. He just has latent tendencies. Trump has not been forced from control like Mr. Jones. Sorry, I still disagree. Trump doesn't have dictatorial tendencies in my opinion. Otherwise, would the congress women wearing white yesterday still be alive today? Trump did not get to power by force. Neither did Mr.Jones. Maybe Trump will be forced to resign. A valid (in my opinion) comparison between Trump and Napoleon is that Trump has his own Squealers, in form of Breitbart, InfoWars, or other fake news factories. But in choosing Trump as Napoleon it makes it possible to find a counterpart figure(s) for Snowball. With my selection that becomes possible, and that was the question posed, so I still think my choice holds up better than what you are coming up with. Snowball and Napoleon were allies at first (like Stalin and Trotzki). If we insist on comparing Trump with Napoleon, we should look in the ranks of (former) allies to find him a "Snowball". I'm not familiar enough with American politics to know some Republicans who might be rivals for Trump. But anyway: Snowball wasn't really the good guy either. He too wanted special privileges for the pigs (like apples). And how do we know if the Cold War could have been averted if it had been Trotzki in power instead of Stalin? Maybe Benjamin should have run Animal Farm. With help from Mr.Pilkington, Mr.Whymper, and Clover or Muriel. Would it have worked? We'll never know. Putin is not Benjamin. But anyway: In hindsight, I believe that one of the smartest characters from Animal Farm was Mollie. Hedonistic and looking out for her interests and well-being. As Ebner-Eschenbach said: The biggest enemies of freedom are happy slaves. Doesn't make them stupid. Dictators don't always kill anybody that opposes them, even after grasping absolute authority. But to assume Trump has no dictatorial tendencies because congresswomen wearing white yesterday are still living hits me as rather ridiculous. But as I said any comparison will be a force fit so a choice will be subjective. I have chosen one pick that fits some aspects and not others. The same will be true for any choice you make. But here is a production that went the direction I did: Animal Farm staging link
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 5, 2019 16:28:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 5, 2019 14:21:28 GMT
I think it is easier to find a public figure to compare to Napoleon, that being Donald Trump. But with that parallel made the treatment of Snowball by Napoleon is similar to what Trump does to Obama or Hillary Clinton in blaming anything not going correctly upon one of them, or both of them. I disagree. Trump, while being a bad politician and probably the worst president in recent history, is not a ruthless dictator who has political opponents being executed or sent from the USA. I believe he is more like Mr.Jones, from a time when the Manor Farm was still prosperous (meaning before the events depicted in the book). The USA are not broke yet, but if Trump continues his blundering, I don't know for how long. If we were to compare Animal Farm to current places, we'd have to look at places which have dictatorships, like Turkey (Erdogan = Napoleon), or Belarus (does Lukaschenko have a Snowball?) But it's obvious that George Orwell wrote Animal Farm with Soviet Union in mind. Which state is like Soviet Union today? The correct answer, I believe, is: None. Having been written by Orwell with the Soviet Union and Stalin in mind over 70 years ago it is not possible to make a current comparison that fits all of the content and characters. Trump may not be a dictator yet, but neither is Napoleon at the start of the book. He just has latent tendencies. Trump has not been forced from control like Mr. Jones. But in choosing Trump as Napoleon it makes it possible to find a counterpart figure(s) for Snowball. With my selection that becomes possible, and that was the question posed, so I still think my choice holds up better than what you are coming up with.
|
|