On the Nature of Things | Forum

Typhoon wrote:I've never quite understood the interest in the opinions of actors and actresses outside of their craft.

After all, they are paid, the few successful ones very well, to perform the works of others.

Probably the most common example of sciolism.

This seems to be more of a Western phenomenon.

noddy wrote:the celebrity thing is much stronger in america than the rest of the anglosphere which has much more boring politics with barely a celebrity to be found, just technocrats.

its truly a unique thing - any party that put on a merkin type song and dance show would be utterly lost over here.

I had it suggested this was because of the high levels of multiculture and the low standards of english in the large immigrant groups this meant that being a recognised face was more important than anything else.

as for spoilt brats who live off drugs and compliments being unreliable humans, well.....

The director of a film reviled by the American people highlighted rejecting science as an explanation for why the movie bombed. In an interview with The Frame on Thursday, Mother! Director Darren Aronofsky responded to the movie’s highly unusual F-grade Cinemascore this way: “... You have other people who basically believe in the power of a iPhone that they can communicate to 35 million people in a blink of an eye, yet they don't believe in science in other ways.”

He continued, “It has as many people believe in it as believe in gravity. And it scares me and it's time to start screaming. So I wanted to howl. And this was my howl. And some people are not going to want to listen to it. That's cool.”

The movie website Dark Horizons noted that the Jennifer Lawerence film “has earned the dubious honor of being one of only nineteen films in history to receive an F-grade CinemaScore – a marker more of failed expectation than a bash of its quality.”

Trying to express how Americans reacted so negatively to Mother!, the director seemed to indicate that they weren’t supposed to like it:

What's interesting about that is, like, how if you walk out of this movie are you not going to give it an "F?" It's a punch. It's a total punch. And I realize that we were excited by that. We wanted to make a punk movie and come at you. And the reason I wanted to come is because I was very sad and I had a lot of anguish and I wanted to express it.

Filmmaking is such a hard journey. People are constantly saying no to you. And to wake up every morning and get out of bed and to face all those no’s, you have to be willing to really believe in something.

I said, Look, this isn’t going to be a popularity contest. We’re basically holding up a mirror to what’s going on. All of us are doing this. But that final chapter hasn’t been written and, hopefully, things can change. And, to go back, the fact that it’s going down right now and things are really falling apart in a way that is really scary.

If only Americans would stop rejecting science and learn to love a movie that features a mob eating a baby.

Mr. Perfect wrote:If you don't go to my movie you are an enemy of science.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/sc ... ience-flop

The director of a film reviled by the American people highlighted rejecting science as an explanation for why the movie bombed. In an interview with The Frame on Thursday, Mother! Director Darren Aronofsky responded to the movie’s highly unusual F-grade Cinemascore this way: “... You have other people who basically believe in the power of a iPhone that they can communicate to 35 million people in a blink of an eye, yet they don't believe in science in other ways.”

He continued, “It has as many people believe in it as believe in gravity. And it scares me and it's time to start screaming. So I wanted to howl. And this was my howl. And some people are not going to want to listen to it. That's cool.”

The movie website Dark Horizons noted that the Jennifer Lawerence film “has earned the dubious honor of being one of only nineteen films in history to receive an F-grade CinemaScore – a marker more of failed expectation than a bash of its quality.”

As we've been saying, many in Hollyweird are in it for the ideology.

Trying to express how Americans reacted so negatively to Mother!, the director seemed to indicate that they weren’t supposed to like it:

What's interesting about that is, like, how if you walk out of this movie are you not going to give it an "F?" It's a punch. It's a total punch. And I realize that we were excited by that. We wanted to make a punk movie and come at you. And the reason I wanted to come is because I was very sad and I had a lot of anguish and I wanted to express it.

Filmmaking is such a hard journey. People are constantly saying no to you. And to wake up every morning and get out of bed and to face all those no’s, you have to be willing to really believe in something.

I said, Look, this isn’t going to be a popularity contest. We’re basically holding up a mirror to what’s going on. All of us are doing this. But that final chapter hasn’t been written and, hopefully, things can change. And, to go back, the fact that it’s going down right now and things are really falling apart in a way that is really scary.

If only Americans would stop rejecting science and learn to love a movie that features a mob eating a baby.

noddy wrote:

Mr. Perfect wrote:If you don't go to my movie you are an enemy of science.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/sc ... ience-flop

The director of a film reviled by the American people highlighted rejecting science as an explanation for why the movie bombed. In an interview with The Frame on Thursday, Mother! Director Darren Aronofsky responded to the movie’s highly unusual F-grade Cinemascore this way: “... You have other people who basically believe in the power of a iPhone that they can communicate to 35 million people in a blink of an eye, yet they don't believe in science in other ways.”

He continued, “It has as many people believe in it as believe in gravity. And it scares me and it's time to start screaming. So I wanted to howl. And this was my howl. And some people are not going to want to listen to it. That's cool.”

The movie website Dark Horizons noted that the Jennifer Lawerence film “has earned the dubious honor of being one of only nineteen films in history to receive an F-grade CinemaScore – a marker more of failed expectation than a bash of its quality.”

As we've been saying, many in Hollyweird are in it for the ideology.

Trying to express how Americans reacted so negatively to Mother!, the director seemed to indicate that they weren’t supposed to like it:

What's interesting about that is, like, how if you walk out of this movie are you not going to give it an "F?" It's a punch. It's a total punch. And I realize that we were excited by that. We wanted to make a punk movie and come at you. And the reason I wanted to come is because I was very sad and I had a lot of anguish and I wanted to express it.

Filmmaking is such a hard journey. People are constantly saying no to you. And to wake up every morning and get out of bed and to face all those no’s, you have to be willing to really believe in something.

I said, Look, this isn’t going to be a popularity contest. We’re basically holding up a mirror to what’s going on. All of us are doing this. But that final chapter hasn’t been written and, hopefully, things can change. And, to go back, the fact that it’s going down right now and things are really falling apart in a way that is really scary.

If only Americans would stop rejecting science and learn to love a movie that features a mob eating a baby.

how does this add up ?

he was demonised by all the critiics and the audiences and noone cares about his opinion

Id agree their was an issue if this arthouse floggery resonated with the general public but it doesnt, they ignore it because its boring and not entertaining.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: . . .

But all this nuttery we're heaping on this Brookyln Cab Driver should be aimed at the executives financing this.

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: I don't know how it is showing internationally, but one of the strangest things surrounding the movie is that it wasn't arthouse floggery.

This got a mass release in popular theater chains by Paramount pictures. I assume that is the world over. But what should've been relegated to the arthouses and small indies instead got major motion picture backing.

It's not that kind of money maker- for good or ill is another matter- but its viability next to...the last franchise t-shirt movie is non-existent, and they spent hundreds of millions on marketing and the film itself as if it were a blockbuster.

So a group of executives thought it more prudent to get a message to the mass audience than to make a profit on this movie.

Was the goal to harass people and get them talking and maybe pick up a few bucks? Maybe, I could see that.

But all this nuttery we're heaping on this Brookyln Cab Driver should be aimed at the executives financing this.

noddy wrote:

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: I don't know how it is showing internationally, but one of the strangest things surrounding the movie is that it wasn't arthouse floggery.

This got a mass release in popular theater chains by Paramount pictures. I assume that is the world over. But what should've been relegated to the arthouses and small indies instead got major motion picture backing.

It's not that kind of money maker- for good or ill is another matter- but its viability next to...the last franchise t-shirt movie is non-existent, and they spent hundreds of millions on marketing and the film itself as if it were a blockbuster.

So a group of executives thought it more prudent to get a message to the mass audience than to make a profit on this movie.

Was the goal to harass people and get them talking and maybe pick up a few bucks? Maybe, I could see that.

But all this nuttery we're heaping on this Brookyln Cab Driver should be aimed at the executives financing this.

they do seem to pick occaisional arthouse floggeries and push them at the mainstream from time to time - the cook the thief, prosperos books, others that escape my addled memory.

their seems to be a threshold of director recognition and visual splendour they decide that the chardonnay sippin ladies will buy into it - i doubt the executives themselves can tell which of these will work from within the haze of their cocaine binges.

But it was the betrayal a young Hefner suffered at the hands of his first wife that marked his formative years and one that he went on to describe as "the most devastating moment" of his life.

He married Mildred Williams in 1949 in the belief the pair had 'saved themselves' for one another.

The couple had met at college in the mid 40s.

Little did Chicago-born Hefner know that his beloved Milly had slept with another man while her beau served in the US military during the Second World War.

Explaining his heartbreak, he said: "I think the relationship was probably held together by two years of foreplay.

"That wasn't unusual for our time. In fact, most of my immediate friends didn't have sex until they married. Milly and I had it just before.

"I had literally saved myself for my wife, but after we had sex she told me that she'd had an affair. That was the most devastating moment in my life.

"My wife was more sexually experienced than I was. After that, I always felt in a sense that the other guy was in bed with us, too."

Mr. Perfect wrote:Hugh Hefner is roasting in a hot place tonight.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4565862/h ... d-playboy/

But it was the betrayal a young Hefner suffered at the hands of his first wife that marked his formative years and one that he went on to describe as "the most devastating moment" of his life.

He married Mildred Williams in 1949 in the belief the pair had 'saved themselves' for one another.

The couple had met at college in the mid 40s.

Little did Chicago-born Hefner know that his beloved Milly had slept with another man while her beau served in the US military during the Second World War.

Explaining his heartbreak, he said: "I think the relationship was probably held together by two years of foreplay.

"That wasn't unusual for our time. In fact, most of my immediate friends didn't have sex until they married. Milly and I had it just before.

"I had literally saved myself for my wife, but after we had sex she told me that she'd had an affair. That was the most devastating moment in my life.

"My wife was more sexually experienced than I was. After that, I always felt in a sense that the other guy was in bed with us, too."