This past weekend, I saw 2012, the apocalyptic disaster flick modernizing the story of Noah's flood. In watching this film, it's important to note that almost all purveyors of art fancy themselves members of the enlightened class, meaning they relish in championing an agenda. In general, I can ignore the underlying theme if its palpability doesn't diminish from the overall product. But, I can't imagine any movie so accurately portrays the mindset of the Hollywood elite as does this despondent picture. I'll go through a brief outline by highlighting the leftist diktats (in bold) that pervade the film.
Tons of spoilers follow, but believe me, you don't want to see this movie anyway.
The picture's main premise is global warming on steroids, as large solar flares are found to be heating the Earth's crust to an unstable level. An Indian physicist, working in conjunction with America's chief geologist Adrian Helmsley, a black guy, makes the discovery. The black American scientist relays this information to his dubious boss, a white man who subsequently represents the moral failings of pragmatic government frugality, and then the black President. A global consortium of nations resolves to save humanity by appropriating funds from rich donors who are offered seats in exchange for their donations. Of course, this private fundraising effort is later criticized by Adrian, the moral compass of the movie, for unfairly limiting occupants to the rich.
After establishing John Cusack, his ex-wife, and their children, the dismantling of Earth's crust begins. I generally love disaster films, but that usually doesn't imply watching billions of people die. This extreme seismic activity that eventually destroys almost all of Earth's landmass is an allusion to the Mayan's 2012 calendar prediction popular amongst the "woo" sect. In a nod to the noble savage meme, several characters mention the foresight of the Mayans and, in doing so, belittle Western technology as practically equivalent to antiquated superstition.
The movie continues in China, where the Chinese have been building ships to save humanity. Cusack is joined by a Russian billionaire who later dies in a horrifically violent manner, justified due to these reprehensible character traits: having a hot young blond as his trophy girlfriend and being a rich capitalist. In between, we get Mr. Miyagi Eastern mystic wisdom while the Vatican disintegrates, killing a bunch of Catholics. (Coincidentally, no Muslim monuments were eviscerated in the film.)
While in China boarding the arks, the black American scientist delivers a "We are the World" speech that inspires all of humanity. At the end of the film, with the natural disasters having extirpated almost all of civilization, one continent stands alone as the new birthplace of humanity: Africa. Yes, the only continent to survive a worldwide flood was Africa (South Africa to be specific!). So with the entirety of civilization destroyed, humanity can now progress into a new dawn free of the restrictions imposed by all those pesky conservative institutions.
44 comments:
Thanks for your public service of watching the film so I don't have to.
The political Left is getting pretty good at portraying things as so bad that we need massive and pervasive changes. This movie helps their cause.
as with the movie "taken", hollywood needs to learn no one CARES about a broken family--watching that poor schlep cusack struggle to save his ex whore was just cringeworthy
it was a pure propaganda about the moral obligations of MEN in the modern american family: the ex husband/dad who was a "jerk" because he paid attention to WRITING A BOOK THAT GOT PUBLISHED MAKING HIM FAMOUS, the hot ex wife and the new man she's banging, and of course, the stupid fucking kids no one ever cares about. the number of times the ex and the new fuck waited to save each other was hilarious--my husband couldn't stop yelling "yeh right, i'd have flown away the second he got off the damn plane"
in reality, those two men would have not only killed each other, but the survivor would have collected several other women along the way and if ex wife whore didn't like it she could burn up with the earth's crust
movies have lost touch with reality to such an alarming extent they are barely watchable
OneSTDV,
I saw 2012, and that it was pretty good. Then again, I don`t watch movies for the express purpose of trying to divine larger meanings from them, so go figure.
So, since we`re discussing movies, here`s one I`d like to get your cview on: Repo Men, starring Jude Law and Forrest Whittaker.
Now, my question to you is, why must Law be the hero and Whittaker the sidekick - especially if the story is one that all people can relate to. Moreover, correct me if Im wrong, but Whittaker is an Oscar winner, and Law isn`t I don`t think. I could be mistaken on that, I`ll look it up after i get finished writing this.
My point - that for every flick you can think of like 2012 (who`s top star wasn`t Black, but John Cusack), I can think up easily half a dozen flicks where Black folks are either Noble Negroes, sidekicks or merely just extras. In fact, the only headline Black Male Actor I can think of either than Denzel Washington, is Will Smith (who`s I Am Legend was excellent, he deserved an Oscar for that. It`s on par with Hanks` Cast Away, which HE won an Oscar for). There are a slew of other Black Actors who are damn good and never get the chance to really shine. Whittaker is one, but so is Morris Chestnut, Courtney Vance, Wesley Snipes (to date, the only Black superhero, Blade. Spawn portrayed by Michael Jai White was OK, but not really in the same league). None of these actors gets to headline flicks like Repo Men or even 2012.
Just wanted to interject that balance in there.
Holla back :)
The Obsidian
@ Obsidian:
Three comments in a row! Can you please stop spamming my blog?
As for your comment here: Is that the only part of the post you read? This wasn't confined to just race. That was just one of many obvious choices, unlike a movie like Freedom Writers where the anti-HBD theme is more central to the plot.
As for the other stuff you said: OK. Again, I thought I already told you I'm no longer responding to you.
OneSTDV,
Yes, I read your whole post - in a nutshell, you're railing against White Liberals, in this case those of the Hollywood variety, and of course, you're railing against Black folks.
I am not spamming. I am commenting on the posts you have presented, on topic. If you don't want me to post here, I can dig it, as you seem to like a much "easier" room. You have that right. But please define things correctly. I am not spamming.
Now then, I am not surprised in the least that you would fall dead silent when I brought out the Repo Men example. Cognitive Dissonance will do that.
;)
O.
I don`t watch movies for the express purpose of trying to divine larger meanings from them, so go figure.
Except, when I try to divine larger meanings from movies that I watch:
Now, my question to you is, why must Law be the hero and Whittaker the sidekick - especially if the story is one that all people can relate to.
Just wanted to interject that balance in there.
I'm not really interested in balance, I want the world to focus on me and my opinions.
I'm starving for attention, and don't really get outside that often.
I've adopted an online persona as an expert on "Game", but I'm basically just another run of the mill loser who's trying to carve out a niche in an already crowded field of other internet losers.
If I really was important in the game of life, I'd spend more time devoted to my job and hobbies, but my job isn't that important, and I don't have any meaningful hobbies.
Hi Bag Lady,
You really do get around, don't you? ;)
You know they say, that he - or she - who resorts to namecalling first, has admitted that they have lost the argument.
Right?
O.
@ Obsidian:
You show up 4 times on the "Recent Comments" and one of your comments isn't even registering.
From now on, you should limit your comments so that you only show up ONCE on the "Recent Comments" list.
This does NOT apply to anyone else.
As for Repo Men, I'm not really seeing your point. The choice of a white leading actor (who BTW happens to be an A-list star) is indicative of what exactly?
The choice of a black President and a black scientist, considering the demographics of the country, potential audience, and actual cohort of scientists, surely represents a conscious choice. If this just happened every once in awhile, then I'd have no problem. But it happens so often, it's absurd and indicative of a larger social meme.
And finally, now you know why so many people refuse to engage with you:
in a nutshell, you're railing against White Liberals, in this case those of the Hollywood variety, and of course, you're railing against Black folks.
How am I railing against blacks with this post?!? It's against white liberals who promulgate their liberal tripe. The only tenuous connection this has to do with black people is HBD, as in blacks' relative lower share of scientists.
But goddamn, that was one point amongst a much longer list. Are you going to claim this post was also anti-Asian because I derided the "East Asian mysticism" present? Of course not.
Again, this is why I never respond to you. And from now on, do not show up more than once on the Recent Comments list or I will start deleting your comments.
OneSTDV,
My point is very simple. But I'll make it even simpler for you since you seem to have a hard time following.
Your post today, as is the case with most of your posts, is your usual rants against White Liberals and "NAMs" by which you really mean, Black folks. In this case how they show up in Hollywood.
In the second paragraph of your post, you highlight the word "Black" *twice*. You do this to illustrate the ridiculous premise that there could be a world leading Global Warming expert who happens to be Black and of course, the notion of a Black President. However, in real life, we know that the latter is as ridiculous as you make it out to be.
My mentioning Repo Men was to highlight the fact that despite the fact that Forrest Whittaker is a bona fide Oscar winner and Jude Law is not, still he has to play second fiddle, because Jude Law is White. My point was that for every ridiculous Liberal premise you can think of in the movies, I can thin k up at leasrt half a dozen where the lead actors and actresses are White, and the Black ones are at best crude stereotypes.
Now, I can dig it if you can't handle your premise bneing challenged; part of what I'm beginning to understand about you and others like you, is that you don't really want to be challenged as much as you want a kind of exclusive treehouse of your own - hence your singling me out for comment moderation and no one else, even when you admit that my posts are substantive (and much of your other commenters are little more than incohate harangues). But I can dig it.
Hence today's post on my blog:
http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/dangerous-assumptions-why-we-cling-to-them/
Good day, sir.
GThe Obsidian
Could all black people please leave the internet? Thanks.
I've noticed a lot of conservative bloggers using the same type of tactics that militant Afro-centrics use. In the same way that some Blacks will try to find any racial angle in a movie to spin into an example of entrenched racism, it seems that conservatives are now trying to spin almost every movie into being an example of liberal propaganda. It gets tiresome either way, especially when the subject matter is a movie plainly designed for dumbasses.
Wow OneSTDV
You are very patient.
Some people can't take a polite hint.
Or a polite suggestion,
Or a polite request,
Or a polite direction,
Or a polite demand
Or anything as long as it is polite.
Maybe a little challenged by the whole polite society thing.
"conservatives are now trying to spin almost every movie into being an example of liberal propaganda"
I don't know if you've seen the movie or not, but I saw it in theaters and I felt pretty much the same way as OneSTDV. The Kumbayaaism is pretty heavy-handed, especially toward the end.
However, I would like to correct one thing that OneSTDV said. Global warming isn't the cause of the disaster in the movie. It's not man-caused at all.
You're an intelligent guy, excellent writing, obviously educated. But there's no mistaking the xenophobia here. Try if you will, rope-a-dope, bob and weave, but you sir have some issues with black people.
Spit it out, don't be ashamed of it. People will respect you more if you just say it.
It's important to note that we also have black people in Canada, not as many, to be sure. Perhaps it is our health care system which levels the playing field, money and talent not be criteria for receiving health care.
Nonetheless, how sad, how utterly tragic that your talent is wasted on thinly veiled racial slurs.
Blacks Are God. Of course they can be geologists.
I don't understand. They get in a ship in China and then find that South Africa is the only livable place?
No-ones claiming that Hollywood exists only for the purpose of glorifying Black people and Liberal ideology or such, since that would be a bit of a ludicrous assertation to make of a fairly diverse industry, though tendancies certainly exist in that direction, relative to the political landscape as a whole.
It's just funny that one film should have so much cliche propaganda in one place. It'd be as funny if it were some rightwing stuff and it were played completely po faced without any self awareness that it is ideological and cliched. It was just as much fun to laugh at ID4 for'ex - well, maybe not quite so much as more people are at least sort of in on the joke and the people who weren't weren't quite so pompous. Anyone that can't laugh at themselves is inevitably hilarious (though anyone who can do nothing but is inevitably pathetic).
I don't think it's against Black people to point out that the morally elevated Preacher Black man stereotype (and spinoffs) is an unintentionally hilarious cliche that would be laughed out of town if it were played by a White man but is often treated in an irony free way for a Black guy. I read a guy who was writing a fairly successful tabletop roleplaying game a few years back (massively nerd, yes) and he designed one of the signature characters of the game, meant to represent that active, prophetic religious type as a Black guy, basically because he felt that the test groups wouldn't accept the idea of a White preacher who wasn't a televangelist/snake oil salesman type, which I thought was fairly indicative of how Americans think about these things.
The reason for this propaganda: Middle Class Blacks in every commercial, everywhere, all the time, when they are about 5% of the total population, and this idiocy, is how SWPL yuppies view the world.
SWPL Yuppies who make these movies above all HATE AND FEAR ordinary White people who are a MORTAL THREAT to their position. Meanwhile by believing in things obviously not so (i.e. most Blacks are educated, highly intelligent, middle and upper class scientists and leaders) they signal their SWPL status and "moral superiority."
This causes cognitive dissonance among the ordinary White people who watch this who see both themselves as being evil, or stupid, or useless (or all three) and Blacks portrayed as something they are not. When ordinary White people know from direct experience that most Blacks are barely literate, have poor impulse control, are ghetto-urban core, and are not good at the things (abstract thinking, self-control) that are requirements for success in modern society.
More likely, they are like Michael Vick without the athletic success, or variations of rappers.
The choice of uber-schlub John Cusak as a guy who cannot even hold onto his hot wife who has a newer, better, and hotter husband, and Africa as the future of the world is of course telling. Ordinary White guys: you have no future! Your wives can do better and the future is Black, because "everyone knows Blacks are engineers, scientists, and so on."
What a farce, and insight into the SWPL mind.
Obsidian: White audiences are likely to be less embracing of Black leads, simply because AA + Socialism leads them down to minority or soon to be minority status. Expect White Audiences to DEMAND a masculine White lead, and subordinate roles AT BEST for Blacks. Of course Blacks have Tyler Perry movies. But no White person is inclined to see them.
This unwillingness to embrace Black leads is a function of Whites being pressed economically, socially, culturally, and politically. See Serbians in the 1990s.
It sounds like 2012 is almost as bad as Avatar. Also, the fact that they showed the Vatican getting destroyed, but not Muslim holy sites was deliberate. It turns out the filmmakers recognized that Muslims have the tendency to riot and kill people over perceived insults to their religion (http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-roland-emmerich-fatwa.html).
***Jacko said...
You're an intelligent guy, excellent writing, obviously educated. But there's no mistaking the xenophobia here. Try if you will, rope-a-dope, bob and weave, but you sir have some issues with black people...It's important to note that we also have black people in Canada, not as many, to be sure. ***
It seems Jacko that you Canadians have some issues too.
"International research has consistently revealed that, along with age and gender, race is one of the strongest correlates of criminal activity (Tonry, 1995; Walker et al., 1996; Hawkins, 1996). However, due to an informal ban on the release of race-based crime statistics in Canada, very little is known about the nature of the race-crime relationship in this country (see Roberts, 2002; Wortley, 1999; Yeager, 1996). Nonetheless, the sparse Canadian data that is available does suggest that some racial groups (i.e., Aboriginals and Blacks) are over-represented in both arrest and prison statistics, while others (i.e., Asians and South Asians) appear to be significantly under-represented. (1) For example, although Aboriginals represent only 3.9 percent of the Canadian population, they represent 14.5 percent of those held in federal penitentiaries (see Wortley, 1999). Similarly, while black people make up only 2 percent of the Canadian population, they represent over 6 percent of our federal prison population. Overall, the federal incarceration rate for aboriginal (185 per 100,000) and black Canadians (146 per 100,000) is many times higher than the rate for Whites (42 per 100,000) and Asians (16 per 100,000)."
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-35782/Hidden-intersections-research-on-race.html
I used to love movies when I was younger. But, the day that James Bond got a female boss was the beginning of the end.
In general, I don't care if there's an underlying message unless it's just too much to ignore. This movie was one of them, like Freedom Writers and The Day the Earth stood still (the latter probably even worse than 2012).
I actually didn't think much of the Cusack storyline. At the end, he does reconcile with the wife of his children.
OT:
For some reason, there's been a problem with comments showing up on the "Recent Comments" list and sometimes the numbering is off (i.e. the main page says this post has 17 comments when it has 21).
Your comments all get posted anyway. So I guess it really doesn't matter. Just letting you know.
I truly detest movies with a message, even if it's a message I agree with. Nothing ruins art like ideology. I don't go looking for these things, but they do "pop" out at me. Avatar really pushed the noble savage theme along with the evil corporate goons theme. It was like a rehash of Battlefield Earth with the roles of humans and psychlos reversed.
Yes, I called movies, "art."
-Killer Bee
I truly detest movies with a message, even if it's a message I agree with. Nothing ruins art like ideology. I don't go looking for these things, but they do "pop" out at me. Avatar really pushed the noble savage theme along with the evil corporate goons theme. It was like a rehash of Battlefield Earth with the roles of humans and psychlos reversed.
Yes, I called movies, "art."
-Killer Bee
@Obsidian
Jude Law is an attractive thin white guy, while Forest Whittaker is a fat unattractive black guy. So course Jude Law is going to be the hero in Repomen. The real question is why they did not consider an attractive thin black guy like Will Smith as the hero in the movie if they felt it was so necessary to have a black character in the first place? Also an Oscar does not mean that an actor or actress will always get the best parts in movies, or even be in good movies. Ben Kingsley is a good example, with him staring as secondary characters in awful movies like Thunderbirds and Blood Rayne. Lastly Obsidian, leave Onestdv alone.
The reason US blacks are always presented "irrationally well" in Hollywood is partly a result of the fact that US blacks spend a hugely disproportionate amount on many forms of entertainment.
According to what I've read, blacks account for about 30-35% of box office receipts here in the US even though they're only 12% of the population.
This also goes for fast food restaurants, and easy consumer goods like soda, chips etc. There's a reason that soft drink commercials love hip-hop themes, jive-talking dolls/mascots and "initiatives" like 365Black from McDonald's.
www.365black.com
Off topic, but this guy needs Roissy.
http://www.amplifyyourvoice.org/u/dandaman6007/2010/3/18/I-didnt-invent-patriarchy-but#comments
Excerpt:
I did not invent patriarchy, sexism, or discrimination, but in some ways I benefit from those systems. I am a 17-year old straight, white, American male. Labels like this, while limiting and sometimes negative, are also very important to understand because of the implications they have. Even though I do not think a person should be immediately judged based on gender, race, sexual orientation, etc, we are not all the same and we are not always treated the same. Some of us naturally have advantages in society simply because of the labels and stereotypes that people have in their minds. ...
" I did not grow up in a place where friends were regularly injured or killed in gang violence; partly because I grew up in the white part of town. Young African Americans are more at risk for HIV and STIs than are white youth and one quarter of African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos live below the poverty level. In some ways, I am lucky to be white because the world I live in is set up to protect me from these things. No one person or group is responsible for racism, but it is all of our responsibility to achieve justice. This isn’t just because it is an altruistic thing to do and I want to help everyone who faces more hardship then me, but because I don’t want to live in a world where such injustices exist. It benefits everyone to fight racism, because I am making the world safer and more just for future generations.
Some more examples of how I benefit from being a straight white male…"
What do you guys think?
Will he wise up in a few years?
...when he has to compete for a job?
...ever?
Or will he end up rivaling a beta of the month?
Is he just a typical indoctrinated conformist?
Camlost said...
The reason US blacks are always presented "irrationally well" in Hollywood is partly a result of the fact that US blacks spend a hugely disproportionate amount on many forms of entertainment.
According to what I've read, blacks account for about 30-35% of box office receipts here in the US
Black consumer dollars does not explain why they are portrayed "irrationally well". Whites easily represent many more consumer dollars than blacks. Even for products that are blacks disproportionally customers for like soda and McDonalds, whites significantly outspend them.
And yet, the majority of whites, Christians and/or men are are portrayed "irrationally bad". If consumer spending dollars isn't the reason, what could it be...?
Hollywood liberals believe the reason for black underperformance is "stereotype threat", so they think if they can change the stereotypes then they can turn Jayquans into a genius.
Slightly OT, but another annoying HBD-ignorant (since I consider innate gender differences to be HBD) Hollywood meme is having sexy petite women beat up cock-diesel baddies. That irks me more than the omnipresent racial-diversity rainbow.
Whiskey,
SWPLs are not the same thing as Yuppies.
Slightly OT, but another annoying HBD-ignorant (since I consider innate gender differences to be HBD) Hollywood meme is having sexy petite women beat up cock-diesel baddies. That irks me more than the omnipresent racial-diversity rainbow.
I heartily concur with Grok that female action heroines are a far more annoying cinematic pandemic than the "black nuclear scientist" meme because black actors (in almost any role) are more believable on screen.
Good films should be able to get the audience to (at least mostly) suspend their sense of disbelief and naturally lose themselves in the movie's own universe. Black entertainers get this job done for movie producers because black actors are so talented that they can make even the most implausible role engaging.
For example, I can actually accept Morgan Freemen is a nuclear physics professor because he is so smooth on screen, the reality of black IQ scores not withstanding.
Unfortunately, ass kicking female action heroines are only rarely memorable because the directors keep making totally unbelievable scenes where the 5'4" bikini model knocks out with a single punch the 6'4" Ivan Drago look-alike.
The only female action heroes who are memorable are the ones who start out feminine and then have to fight back despite the film making clear they are physically more vulnerable than a male star would be (e.g. Ripley in Alien and Sarah Connor in the original Terminator).
If the director can turn the female action heroe's inherent vulnerability into a thematic hook, then the movie can be very compelling.
But if they portray the woman as physically equal or superior to muscle bound men, then you end up with a GIJane bore.
"Slightly OT, but another annoying HBD-ignorant (since I consider innate gender differences to be HBD) Hollywood meme is having sexy petite women beat up cock-diesel baddies."
But those 2 minutes training montage where they're sweating and grimacing and they want to give up but they just won't makes it so believable!!
This is the first movie that come to mind when you said it. It's not exaclty what we're talking about it, but it's a decent example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPnrmg7DYyA
Also note, the disaster movies appeal to women far more then men.
Thus, uber-schlub Cusack, who is a loser vs. the hot new husband, and everything destroyed (rather than the male hero save the day). A woman's fantasy -- two guys fight over her.
Seriously, just by casting, and general plotline (women HATE the idea of Western Civilization though don't really want to live like a Bushman) you can see if a movie is made for women or men.
Also, women view Black men as more desirable (short term anyway) and more testosterone driven aggressive, muscular, violent, dangerous, and so on. This is why the Kardashians are such reality TV (women dominated audience) superstars -- their Black baby daddys make them more not less desirable. Hardly any White guy finds them desirable in the meantime.
So a movie that is heavily made for women will have lots of "noble Black guys" of high IQ and the voice of reason. Denzel Washington and Will Smith play to this in female oriented movies too (Hancock).
If a Black guy is the pal, partner, or friend (Die Hard 3, Cop Out, Unbreakable, Lethal Weapon) then the movie is aimed squarely at guys.
@one
I actually didn't think much of the Cusack storyline. At the end, he does reconcile with the wife of his children.
I assume you mean his ex, not his daughter in law. :)
I really detest this theme in pop culture. It trains guys to see flippant divorce as a woman's right. Someone who wants to devastate your family and destroy its wealth on a whim is evil, pure and simple. There are of course legitimate reasons for divorce, but if something like that occurred then getting back together later should be out of the question.
Can I just say: I love your blog? I myself am an asian and thought belief in HBD was very rare. It's nice to see it well articulated.
The pathetic white kid that Anonymous linked to is a depressing reminder that for every David Alexander who reads HBD blogs and gets bummed out about his race, there are a million white guys who are indoctrinated by schools and the media to believe that they are inherently evil, that everything they achieve is due to some nebulous "privilege", and that it is their moral duty to fight against their own race and sex. Reminds me of that Newsweek article that showed the various benefits of ethnic pride, then said it would be "horrifying to imagine kids being proud to be white".
What the average white boy in a public school goes through is the equivalent of force-feeding The Bell Curve to a bunch of inner-city black kids and then saying "see, this is why you fail." The only difference is that the black kids would turn on the TV and see black doctors, while the white guys will go their entire lives having their self-hatred reinforced by mainstream culture. It's sick.
"Can I just say: I love your blog? I myself am an asian and thought belief in HBD was very rare. It's nice to see it well articulated."
Commendations are always welcome :)
Thanks for reading. I had a similar feeling when I started reading Sailer.
mike,
I had a short exchange with the 17 year old:
"You credit patriarchy for the better situation you enjoy without blaming it for the problems that others suffer. So logically it would follow that if that system is so successful, then it should be expanded. Do other groups have a higher incidence of HIV because patriarchy protected you? Are other groups poorer because patriarchy affords you opportunity? I am not trying to be a jerk, I just don't get the connection. If your parents helped you with your homework and someone else's didn't, it is not like your parents did something to hurt that other kid. Sure having parents help you is an advantage but there is nothing malicious about it."
March 23, 2010 4:30 PM
Dan Jubelirer replied
"yes, perhaps I did not go far enough into connecting how my situation is related...
"white privilege" isn't the CAUSE of racial and class inequality, but for it is partly the responsibility of those in the who have privilege to change things for the better. There is certainly value in having the conversation about what the causes of sexism, rasism, and other forms of discrimination are, and I did not get into that here. Maybe in a future post."
I can't help but feel sorry for the brainwashed kid.
At least he admitted that patriarchy doesn't cause inequality. Maybe if he actually uses his brain for a few minutes he may start to question just a little why it is losers are losers, rather than just blame those who are just keeping to themselves and doing what works.
OK, Obsidian is black. Do I get that right?
I liked the airplane scenes.
Has anyone seen The Day After Tomorrow? That was one of the biggest liberal propaganda movies I have ever seen. I love it when the Americans illegally run into Mexico.
@ Kurt:
Never saw it. But this shouldn't come as a surprise: it was directed by the same guy who did 2012.
He also did Independence Day. Any obvious liberalism in there? I guess a Jewish (Jeff Goldblum) and a black guy (Will Smith) save the world? That might be about it.
Oh wait, blowing up the Capital building and the White House. Those weren't random choices surely. I remember the Whie House scene in particular being a big deal because of the cutting edge special effects.
1STDV said: "Oh wait, blowing up the Capital building and the White House. Those weren't random choices surely."
When I was in the theater (a huge one) to see Independence Day, everybody cheered when the capitol building and White House were blown to smitherenes.
-Killer Bee
"There are of course legitimate reasons for divorce, but if something like that occurred then getting back together later should be out of the question."
+1...the most annoying example of this. Was the end of armageddon when the wife decides to reunite with Chip (I think that was his name). Because now her guy is famous.
In reference to Independence Day, I believe this film to be the most politically incorrect ever made.
The reasons should be obvious to anyone who watches the movie, but one particular scene shows one of the downed alien spacecraft in Africa.
A Black person emerges from the jungle clutching a spear and raising as if he had somehow helped in bringing down the ship.
Also, the film follows the IQ distribution to a T - Jewish, white/ asian, mestizo, black.
The only Black in the film of any repute is Will Smith's character and he hardly a plausible character.
The pilots who bring down the ships are all white or Asian.
Anyways, a post is needed to point out the reality of ID4, but the most salient point one can make is the speech delivered by Bill Pullman's character.
This is one of the few films of the modern era that shows a powerful white chief executive who occupies the Oval Office, and it is his decisive leadership that unites the remnants of the worlds military.
Post a Comment