MovieChat Forums > TheMan18 > Replies
TheMan18's Replies
And there were rumours or even almost proven facts that this wasn't his first and only offense as such of that nature. Although it was his most known example of it as such.
" It’s also not necessary to bring up his crime every time his movies are discussed 🤷🏻♂️"
And online today especially, many still do it without giving it a second thought OR deciding to separate the proverbial "art from artist" and there is no one UNIVERSAL answer to say who is RIGHT here in THAT sense alone.
And I and many others see it as more than just a crime in a legal sense but an act of horror-laden immorality that has no statute of limitation.
"this practice of not naming him is bizarre and overblown"
People (including myself) can simply be put off, sensitive, disturbed and frustrated over this matter around him so its a little easier that way as his name might conjure up such situation, and in my case, its also because I DID discuss him around this matter a few years ago, hence, you know, giving it a rest and all.
And our world in general is often very uneven and unfair its hard to tell who gets what, what "treatment" and all, most of us, hype or no hype, wish such things didn't happen in the first place.
And that's mostly just me, my 50 cents if you like.
"Probably mainly because, I never saw Oskar Schindler (someone that actually did exist) as the hero portrayed in the film. To me he was another Nazi phony."
Maybe one of the messages of "Schindler's List" (1993) was that many if not all people including perhaps some Nazis too are not either all good or all "bad" and "all evil" but rather are a complex set of individuals with a mixture of light and dark sides, virtues and vices and some may even do heroic things at one point whilst some or other wrongs at another. Could it be the case?
"There, that wasn’t so hard, was it?"
It wasn't "so hard" for me either, but I was making another sort of metaphorical point with that statement, and we also know who he is as for one with this movie, even younger audiences who may not have known him well for his say past work, not to mention, personal life etc, have become familiar with him, and I for one was more keen on what we think of this movie overall, first and foremost.
"The Devil is male."
In this movie its definitely a female Devil though. Whatever that means.
Well... I will leave it up to you to decide and of course watch the movie, of course, it being a surreal film by legendary Spanish late filmmaker Luis Bunuel (I always tend to pronounce his name as "Louie Boonel"), it may not offer as such "answers" to these questions, maybe it will be left up to the audiences to decide.
And the Devil in this movie is apparently a WOMAN (really!), maybe almost like Cristabella from "The Devil's Advocate" (1997) but not a man like Al Pacino's character from that movie (in that film, however, Devil WAS bad and wrong, but he also saw humanity in a sinful way, almost like a supernatural version of the John Doe killer in "Se7en" (1995) among other things.)
I will have to watch this movie again to come to the conclusion as I have seen it long time ago. Even though I own most of, and maybe it as well, Bunuel's films on DVDs.
2 Terre Firma - DO YOU believe its true? And if you doubt it, which means it could be it, or maybe not, but are not totally sure, why do you call Sharon Stone an "idiot" for having such a belief?
And also, FOLKS, I am NOT saying its a "good" or a "bad" thing but... When this news apparently first came out, sources actually started to seriously, you know, debate what might happen and what's expected and to come of it. Like, they didn't just say this is this and that is that, news, full stop. Nor did they say "yay, good news" or "oh no, maybe it isn't..." and again, one single universally satisfying answer to it all? But then in REAL LIFE, it doesn't exist and won't come, hence...
But really, how could she get to this state where 10 years after 2000 and whatnot, and after establishing a successful acting career and fame, that she actually had to get into literal trouble with THE LAW? Like, how come? Why and how did it come to [i]this[/i]? Could it at all have been avoided? Was it out of Lindsay Lohan's hands once the law discovered what she was up to?
Haha, no worries mate. And, and not to come up on you or your posts etc at all of course, but, hehe, I do too. :)
Would films like "Funny Games" (1997) by Michael Haneke count? What about Gaspar Noe's films like "I Stand Alone" (1998) and his most disturbing flick "Irreversible" (2002)? Various controversial shockers like "Salo or the 120 Days of Sodom" (1975), "Men Behind the Sun" (1988) and, although its often over the top and exaggerated so not too terribly "realistic" but still, "A Serbian Film" (2010)?
Movies like "Arlington Road" (1999) had no happy ending. From Hollywood, that is.
Well, say, 50 thousand a year or especially 100,000 per year, dollars in America, pounds in Great Britain?
Also, out of sheer curiosity, what is the difference between nihilism, indifference and pessimism? Especially since nihilism contains its fair share of the last two, or is it just a more philosophical term that means the last two former words?
And what about stuff like moral relativity or even ethical relativism? Ambiguity? Etc?
Depends on how you look at it. [nm]
Haha, lol, when I saw "18" in the title I thought the thread would somehow be about me, lol. :)
"When his views would have been common for the period?"
Well... Even if they "were", I am sure there were some moral standards even back then even for those things. But today especially they are sensitive issues and resonate strongly with many people personally.
"I prefer optimism over nihilism." Me too.
True, and also...
How many and how gritty and harsh are such facts anyway, and I don't plan on "denying" anything?
And wasn't it (and I hope this doesn't make it political) Ronald Reagan, former President of the USA and actor (he was in "The Killers" (1964) among others) who said something about "Facts are stupid things" but what did he mean?
Also, besides the fact that some people are more informed and more empathic and even empathetic, but no offense to anyone, and ignorance and stupidity sadly do exist and are possible, but it may all not be black and white simple either, but I was wondering...
Why do some people get affected and care too much and others less so etc, cheers thanks.
ALSO, can there be, in theory but especially in practice, ways OTHER than law and "policies" to sort out SOME problems, like, I don't know, some basic human way, not to impose, "troll upon" etc your original post beancrisp?
i). Other, err, Walter?