MovieChat Forums > warrior-poet
warrior-poet (1369)
Posts
I Liked It! It caught me by surprise.
"Stinger"
Hezbollah pagers explode across Lebanon, causing nearly 3,000 casualties, 9 dead
S01E05 Remember It
The End of Race Politics (Coleman Hughes)
Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth)
Andrew Bustamante
A Step Up
"Peeing in morse code"
Just one question...
View all posts >
Replies
Heh. Very true. We had no idea what was about to unfold regarding superhero movies after the first Iron Man. I also enjoyed the first Captain America and then Winter Soldier, but many of the later offerings felt like overly bloated cartoons suffering from CGI that overshadowed story. Incidentally, the original superman comic where he could only "leap over buildings with a single bound" was inspired by John Carter's ability to leap around on Barsoom due to the lower gravity as described in the books.
I agree they could have let the story breath a bit more. I'm not sure that would have helped ticket sales, given the nature of today's superhero-dominated market, so what Stanton did in that regard may or may not have been the right move. The bottom line for its financial failure in my mind, though, is that they just spent way too damn much making it. The same product could have been made for half or less of what was spent, but it wasn't handled very efficiently. And with all the other factors against it (e.g., low-appeal subject content, lackluster lead actor, studio mismarketing, etc.), it didn't really have a chance.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Agreed. The studio botched its release. I don't think they knew what to do with it.
I researched this quite a bit back shortly after its release and discovered also that it did in fact make pretty good money from ticket sales in theaters, but the production process went massively over budget, so it resulted in a financial flop despite getting a respectable amount of ticket sales. It was reported at the time that Andrew Stanton directed it using the same methodology as his previous Pixar animated movies (most of which I liked), resulting in nearly every scene being reshot, sets being rebuilt from the ground up, etc. meaning the entire movie was built and shot twice, essentially, ballooning the budget to much more than it started at.
I also didn't find that Taylor Kitsch, who I quite liked in Friday Night Lights, had enough personality for the character. He just didn't quite pull it off for me like some other actors could have. My view is that was a secondary factor, but that was my impression.
Despite that, I very much enjoyed it, and loved it in 3D. I'm not even sure I can count how many times I've pulled my 3D Blu-Ray out to rewatch it on my 80" screen (that and Tron: Legacy). For me it invoked that feeling of those Saturday morning serials of yesteryear quite adequately. I didn't mind the changes to the story, pulling elements from later books in the series like the Thern and incorporating them into the origin story. In fact, I liked that they did that, and had no problem with Mars being breathable (possibly terraforming).
I can see, though how this subject didn't have a very wide appeal. People breathing on Mars? They hand-waved it with brief exposition, but old-fashioned subject matter of a man in a loincloth jumping around on Mars probably did hurt the ticket sales a bit. In fact, Mars movies in that era in general just never seemed to do well in theaters, even another movie I quite enjoyed "Mars Needs Moms".
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
While this isn’t an exhaustive study by any means, and little more than layman armchair postulating, that statistic, along with my own personal experiences dealing with urban communities, makes it clear to me that the issue can’t be genetically driven, and is much more about cultural conditioning. This exercise also generated a statistic that’s even more mind-boggling. I mean, 0.0012% of the total population is committing more than half of all homicides in the U.S. That’s an interesting statistic. And it’s probably even less than that since some portion of those crimes will have been committed by the same people.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-43
Also, this is interesting:
http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/sampson/files/2005_ajph.pdf
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Fair point, but to clarify I was assuming first-world civilizations (I should have specified that my thoughts fell within a framework of "all, or most, other conditions being equal"), those comparable to the U.S., specifically concerning murders committed by actual citizens with a lineage in the country, as opposed to immigrants or illegals, which has become a worldwide problem. The African and South American regions are "developing" or third-world, which in my view is a separate thread of discussion (and for which socioeconomic conditions may or may not be more of an influence), invalidating first-world comparisons.
My statement you quoted spawned in part from the fact that Hispanic crime, at least as it's reported by the statistics available to us, isn’t nearly as unusually high in the U.S. like it is in black urban communities (and even then, strictly just in those urban communities), as described in my previous post. So why is violent crime so bad in areas of South America when despite having the same poverty level as blacks in the U.S. Hispanic violent crime rates aren’t anywhere near as bad? Well, it’s a third-world region fraught with drug cartels, rampantly corrupt and weak law enforcement, and yes widespread poverty. It’s difficult to compare the U.S. to it, but what this discrepancy does lead us away from is race being a factor (at least regarding Hispanics in Southern America in poverty as compared to Hispanics in poverty in the U.S.) as opposed to a natural corelative byproduct.
Something I’ve witnessed firsthand while working with KC Freedom Project is: remove a black criminal from their previous urban environmental influences, and their behavior, mindset, impulses, proclivities, goals, etc. all change drastically. This indicates that their genetics isn’t a contributing factor for criminal behavior. Their environment, the culture drilled into them as a child, is the problem, which naturally propagates generationally. There’s a clear distinction between being culturally “black” and physically black. They are two very different things. Of course, there will be a correlation because black or “gangsta” culture spreads, logically, between those of similar genetic background as they procreate and congregate, but it does so simply because they’re in social proximity, not due to genetic forces. So, while it’s correlation, it’s definitely not causation i.e., they don’t commit more murders because they have constituent genetic components that also produce dark skin. They commit more murders because that’s what they were conditioned environmentally to do, because that’s the culture they were raised in.
Looking into this further, though, I must amend my previous statement that you quoted regarding black gang culture being uniquely U.S. For example, in the United Kingdom 13% of murder suspects were black compared to 3% of the population (even more especially, London where 48% of murders were committed by the city's 3% black population). Outside of the black citizenry it gets complicated due to the high influx of non-native immigrants from third-world regions in recent years. There's also a cultural link between black populations in the U.S. and England, so I'd surmise without actually investigating that there's some cross-contamination, so to speak, although keep in mind that's just my uninformed speculation. Some of that has migrated to Australia as well, it looks like. So, I should probably expand my statement from the “U.S.” to “Western society”.
But let’s address my statement you quoted further as it specifically pertains to the black U.S. population, something that narrows down the 6% black male statistic more accurately. This will put it in a different light, and is what I was alluding to in that quote from my previous post. We can’t actually assign blame for the more than half of all murders committed by black males to all 6% of black males, and here’s why: The number of black individuals arrested for “murder and nonnegligent manslaughter” in 2019 according to the FBI database (we could do this for other years to see if it's roughly the same—also, there may be other stats out there that vary) was 4,078 (which was 51.3% of U.S. homicides). With an estimated black population of around 46.8 million in 2019, the percentage of the black population involved in these crimes is less than 1%. In fact, it’s 0.0087%. That means it wasn’t, of course, <i>all</i> black citizens who committed more than half of all U.S. murders (i.e., that 6% stat is misleading). In 2019 only 0.0087% of that 6% did. Which is an extremely small 0.0012% of the total 328.3 million U.S. population in 2019.
Don't completely dismiss the socioeconomic factor. It is there. However, it's far from the complete story, as they try to claim, and simple statistics bear this out. For example, let’s start by looking at U.S. demographics by race proportions. The Hispanic population in the United States is about 19.5%, the black population is 13.7%, and "white", a category I personally reject as legitimate (the reality is much more complex), stands at 60.9%, leaving 5.9% as “other” (e.g., Indigenous, Asian, Polynesian, etc.)
Here are those stats of population demographics in short order:
Hispanic: 19.5%
Black: 13.7%
White: 60.9%
Other: 5.9%
A ratio of 3:2:10:1.
More specifically for this topic, though, 6% of the population the vast majority of “blacks” that commit violent crimes, are black males, so if we were to shift the numbers and move black females to Other this becomes a ratio of:
Hispanic: 19.5%
Black (Males): 6%
White: 60.9%
Other (including Black Females): 13.6%
A ratio of 3:1:10:2.
Note: it’s actually much less than 1% of that 6%, but I won’t get into that aspect here other than to say it’s actually a much, much smaller percentage of individuals committing these crimes, not the entire 6% (which is around 20 million people).
And yet, there's the following regarding violent crimes committed:
Hispanic: 14%
Black: 53% (almost all of which are male)
White: 25%
Other: 8%
A ratio of 2:7:3:1.
Now let’s look at the poverty rates for these categories:
Hispanic: 16.6%
Black: 20.6%
White: 9.5%
Other: 15.8% (this is an average of all remaining demographics, within which Asians are on par with Whites poverty-wise, while Indigenous are 24.2%)
A ratio of 1.5:2:1:1.5.
All of these factors together produce a ratio of: 3 (Hispanic):23 (Black):1 (White):3 (Other)
♫ One of these things are not like the other ♫
Considering the poverty ratio for “whites” is about half of what it is for blacks, and a third less than the other groupings, it’s reasonable to conclude that it does to some extent worsen violent crime (although it probably feeds more into non-violent crime, with other components comprising the more violent variety, I didn’t endeavor to get those statistics). But the jaw-dropping disproportion of the above ratio clearly suggests that something much deeper than merely socioeconomic factors is at play here.
There's a reason they try to frame this by comparing "whites" to "blacks" while leaving Hispanics out completely. If this were purely socioeconomic, why isn't the Hispanic violent crime rate anywhere nearly as high as with blacks, especially since their rates of poverty are similar? Or look at Indigenous, who have the highest poverty rate. Why aren’t their violent crime rates so high?
My experiences performing videography for the KC Freedom Project indicate to me that “race”, a term I also reject due to its drastic oversimplification, isn’t the causative factor, especially compared to other countries or historically. Black violent crime (specifically black males) this extraordinarily high is purely a modern U.S. phenomenon. Statistically, race as a cause doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.
So, what drives this?
Culture. It’s an evolution of human behavior (“gangsta culture” if we want to put a loose name to it) comprised of a complex myriad of pressures over many decades both within and upon that segment of the population that gets propagated via social exposure from parent to child and from peer to peer. And until a concerted effort from parties, both outside and within, is made to curtail this trend, it’s going to continue to perpetuate in perpetuity. So, while I do think socioeconomic pressures do amplify crime to a certain degree across all segments of any demographic, it’s a small factor compared to the true nature of the cultural forces driving black on black crime.
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
https://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Blue-Bluray-Combo-Blu-ray/dp/B07L5DTDLG?crid=2QPUIF9U18STS&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.2BtANEUtGVnwAvzaa3kk9ifbkxzwtyTRho3lWEO2L-Pa4Wbj4rFJrDuHpr4kzDagRb-xM9-3cEd5dQSjRnF5iDqExx-eto2QF5d-_n3r8hJOovsZ1bnq8bTzfRx1BKVUBCqaAiymx8rTkn5ZGFjvE7UqE_5aCh1cjW3geunTKwDEisZX_z0obLr3yAnwq1gUaygJnLpwUNmsvPRRxHA2j-TR8pwK1XsXICyiDla5gXY.Iejka-PV85FoSGQcqXOB5FJK_WcmHrovooCMcjefUoQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=perfect+blue+blu-ray&qid=1733117587&sprefix=perfect+blue+ublu-ray%2Caps%2C94&sr=8-1
Includes the original SD version.
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Agreed. Reasonable people reserved judgment until more information was known. Anyone who jumped to conclusions is a non-thinker who shouldn't be able to vote. I just moved from Independence, MO where this took place, because the crime has grown rampant the past several years due to very stupid "liberal/not-actually-liberal" policies (seriously, it dropped to an F in just a few years, partly because it's now overrun by homeless, but most of the crime is coming in from Kansas City and slowly expanding outward), and the footage was released on local news prior to going national. This was absolutely a justified shoot.
The blame of the baby's death is on the mom for charging with a huge (I mean it's quite large) knife at the officer. The bodycam footage is quite clear. He had to protect himself. I suspect the cop who fired will spend the rest of his life in therapy, with many sleepless nights. They went there in the first place for a domestic violence call to help her! She may have been hopped up on drugs, given her demeanor in the footage, leading to her violent mindset and action. The baby was a victim of her bad choices.
https://www.kmbc.com/article/independence-police-release-body-cam-footage-shooting-killed-woman-infant/63035796
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
That's an entirely different discussion, and one not imminently pertinent to whichever movie the question pertains to, albeit a quite interesting line of speculative conjecture in my opinion. But "it's a kind of magic" applies very specifically to "Highlander" only since it's an in-universe tidbit of information provided to us, leaving us to ponder how immortality functions in other stories.
You touched on one possible theory that could apply to mutants like Deadpool in your OP. Clearly, life for them is not beholden to the constraints of a mortal human. I mean, Deadpool can be torn or blown to bits and still somehow reconstitute himself. So, whatever is happening must have its origins at a cellular or even molecular level. Even while "dead', minus a beating heart, functioning oxygen-fed brain, etc. each individual constituent cell or molecule is somehow empowered to reconstitute back into a prescribed structure, or back into the state it was in before being damaged. Ultimately, I suppose it's all still "magic", but there's probably a variety of creative ways to use pseudo-science to render it a bit more "plausible" within the context of a sci-fi/fantasy universe.
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
To directly quote the movie itself: "It's a kind of magic". 'Nuff said.
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Was about to say the same. Guess some people don't pay attention to clearly stated exposition.
_________________________________________
Never believe or disbelieve. Always question. Rebuke bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
View all replies >