Favourite movie scenes

[Walker]

thanks for reply to me Sir, I assume you are a conservative.

I'm a liberal (though "Classical 70's sort - as i was in the 70's) - my party left me (Dems - via Political Correctness/Identity Politics 30 yrs to present day - left me).

so since then been "partiless" - though self identify Socially (though not econimically0 - with Libertarians -and would register as one if my state recognized third parties like Libs/Greens (I like the Greens too - but Libs moreso - becuase though both of them value Social Liberalism, the Libertarians seem to value the US Constitiution (Enlightenment concepts/ideals more).
Democrats USED to value that same said Univeral Humanism (melting post- ones character over skin/race........................a long fucking time ago - 40 yrs or so ------but not since then, and so how my party left me).

i'll never be a Republican, they only affirm Corporatist ("big government via private bohemoths just as big") monoploy rule over liberty ecoonomically and Christian rule over non-christians (I'm an Atheist) socially.

Taliban rules sucks here as it does in Afghanistan.

After giving it some thought, would you agree that in allowing folks to understand, descriptions of self-concept and identity should not include any version of, “to be?”

??? don't understand your post - can you clarify.

i value discussion over invective

Rewriting your above quoted words to eliminate the words am, are, is, was, were, be, and been, would explain it better than explanation.

Scientists often do it, for precision. In this case, the precision applies to defining self-concept.

It may seem like just a detail to gloss over.

[gaffo]

After giving it some thought, would you agree that in allowing folks to understand, descriptions of self-concept and identity should not include any version of, “to be?”

??? don't understand your post - can you clarify.

i value discussion over invective

Rewriting your above quoted words to eliminate the words am, are, is, was, were, be, and been, would explain it better than explanation.

Scientists often do it, for precision. In this case, the precision applies to defining self-concept.

It may seem like just a detail to gloss over.

??

[Walker]

The Grapes of Wrath
Tom says goodbye to his Ma.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERif97cdMII

The ideology of socialism and communism appeals to the impoverished who know the immediacy of real problems, who live in need in the land of plenty, where so much is wasted.

However, the saying, from each according to his ability and to each according to his need, is obviously quaint and was always unrealistic, because ability is more rare than needs, which are as endless as problems.

Putting ability at the base of the food-chain pyramid makes the social structure top heavy and unstable with need.

Acting tip: Don’t blink during close-ups when speaking from the heart.

[Walker]

??? don't understand your post - can you clarify.

i value discussion over invective

Rewriting your above quoted words to eliminate the words am, are, is, was, were, be, and been, would explain it better than explanation.

Scientists often do it, for precision. In this case, the precision applies to defining self-concept.

It may seem like just a detail to gloss over.

??

I think when you start describing yourself, rather than declaring an identity of labels, you may find that you are a conservative.



The best way to describe yourself is by not using the 7 crutch words listed above.

[Walker]

I appreciate your reply to me and you seem to have a mind and concepts worthy for me to learn from and for mutual discussion, respect, and growth.

But the above seems to me to be a non-sequitor( - my brain was not made to allow me to read nor spell too well - a live long structural weakness of my mind sadly - you can figure it out (I have a very large vocabularity - just can't spell all the works i know over all these decades and never will be able to - just sayin).

you quote what i say - which to paraphrase - is "do you care about the actor's talent and the a good director (so a good movie) - or do you care about the actor's(and director i suppose too............fuck if you fixate enough you can obsess over the Gaffors' political orientation!) political views".

without addresssing my inquary - you sort of affirmed the latter - which i think is irrelivent.


thanks for reply anyway - you have a mind and so welcome your replies to me.

Despite what you or I think of an actor’s opinions outside of acting, since they’re testifying before Congress, and they’re not testifying about acting, then someone cares, whether or not they should. The question is, why?

ok,

i think no one should care what they have to say outside of thier expertise (acting).

of some think those actor's views are important - then it is their folly and right (as it is for the actors to air thier views).

I just ignore their political views (I value political experts myself - conservative/liberal (folks like Gergin/Frum/etc...."talking heads (from "Think tanks" - not rant radio ilk) its outside of their expertise.

"separate the wheat from the chaff" - and so know that the actors are no nothings concerning their political views, but seeing the same said in movies you have seen and like their acting therein, grant them their talent and IGNORE the REST!

like i do!

2 cents.

Well, anyone not living in the United States, whose impressions of life in the United States are shaped by entertainment during their formative years, is actually viewing reality presented through the mind filters of these actual folks, and others such as Weinstein not present at the festive gala.

They make the entertainment. Well, stage entertainment in this case except for the speaker. But the principle is the same.

This is not a scene from a movie. These are actual movie folks, in real life, like anyone except they have a broadcast voice that speaks to literally, hundreds if not thousands.

Since there is nothing rational about the situation, mob sounds about right.

Uncensored
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II9vsLNopQc

[QuantumT]

Bigous Dickous (Again from Life of Brian)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPGb4STRfKw

[Walker]

City of God

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPpj1KEhwpo

[Walker]

Bigous Dickous (Again from Life of Brian)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPGb4STRfKw

“Now who can argue with that.”

Blazing Saddles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNC3OciAF3w

[QuantumT]

The Three Amigos: Lip Balm?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHVpJGXZ21o

[Walker]

Broken Vows

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3iITYEnGv0

[gaffo]

The Grapes of Wrath
Tom says goodbye to his Ma.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERif97cdMII

The ideology of socialism and communism appeals to the impoverished who know the immediacy of real problems,

which they do - you seen to affirm their understanding of such (so you have both a mind and a heart - and not a 1-percenter - or even a wannabee 1-percenter.

per your affirmation that all have a perspective worth understanding (and affirmation of the "dregs" as worth something - views that others can learn from) - is good.

IMO, just from the above observation by you "impoverished who know the immediacy of real problems" - means you are worth discussing things with (you are able to "wear another's shoes" - and not get all "high an mighty mr perfect.

I loathe Trump and think his mentality is the worst of humanity and disshonours the office of the Presidency and America (and it think all that voted for him need to take a personal "good look at themselves" as to why.

I have two friends that have been so for 15-20 yrs now - that voted for the clown - i do not assume their character is less than i thought/knew it was prior to last election (I just know they were fools and voted for a thug for their own reasons - with blinders - they are still my friends (I dropped talking Trump with them - no point - they are cultists now (History will be the longterm judge of all of us (them an me)).

who live in need in the land of plenty, where so much is wasted.

However, the saying, from each according to his ability and to each according to his need, is obviously quaint and was always unrealistic, because ability is more rare than needs, which are as endless as problems.

Putting ability at the base of the food-chain pyramid makes the social structure top heavy and unstable with need.

Acting tip: Don’t blink during close-ups when speaking from the heart.

I understand and agree - its a nice platitude - akin to "the meek shall inherit the earth".................................but back in the real world.

as Jesus said in one of the Gospels - "there will always be the poor".

sad truth - not so much a nice platitude though.

--------------

of course the moral quest is by what means can men make the numbers of the poor as low as possible in the most just way.

- excellent question.

i offer no answer, i don't know (as a former 70's democrat - i champion Assimiilation of immigrants into 17th century Enlightenment idleals (no - not all cultures are the same - European Enlightenment was/is better) - but i also champion regulation of global corporations (fk wallstreat/ fk ISP ATT./Comcast - assholes - breakl the asshole UP!!!!!!!!!!!!! - which the old 70's Dems would do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - but "Sellout" (YA we love Citizens' United!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "NEW" Democrats (thanks Clinton!) will never do.

carry on and thanks for reply.

america is lost - global corps have "regulatory capture" (Obama was the last chance and he cave (shared my mindset, but lack the balls to return to the 1970's economically).

[gaffo]

Rewriting your above quoted words to eliminate the words am, are, is, was, were, be, and been, would explain it better than explanation.

Scientists often do it, for precision. In this case, the precision applies to defining self-concept.

It may seem like just a detail to gloss over.

??

I think when you start describing yourself, rather than declaring an identity of labels, you may find that you are a conservative.



The best way to describe yourself is by not using the 7 crutch words listed above.

I'm a Universal/Secular Humanist - believe in the brotherhood of man (on the lowest level - the "Soul" level - where it matters for me at least).

I shit on "identity" - that is just a code word for PC shit - i.e Tribalism. (the opposite of Universal/Secular Humanism).

My question to you (I don't care about your politics - just your level of humanism).

are you a tribalist?

of so why?

if not so why not?

[gaffo]

Well, anyone not living in the United States, whose impressions of life in the United States are shaped by entertainment during their formative years, is actually viewing reality presented through the mind filters of these actual folks, and others such as Weinstein not present at the festive gala.

and thus come in "good parenting from wise parents in say Indonesia "now "Jonny" just know that what rich actor americans are full of shit, just heed me and my spouse and your wise uncle and the wise neighor accross the steet".

you get my meaning.

"it starts at home" - good env at home (in Argentina/East Timor/ South Af/ Mars etc...................


I'm calling foul (maybe even a Snowflake - you don't want that do you?).

and so stop the hysteria and assume parents are wiser than the nitwits in Hollywood.

ok?

[gaffo]

City of God

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPpj1KEhwpo

good movie - have a copy from 10 yrs ago - thanks Netflix and FabDVD - good enough (at least 8 to bother to copy).

not as good at other South American movies (I ignore genre personally - only note quality of work)

as Nine Queens (never bothered the see the american remake with brad pit - R. Darren starred in the the original and he and it (said Argintine movie) - was tops), Central Station, House of Sand - were better than City of God.

I'd say City of God (an - is on par with "Intimate stories".........(and The Secret in their Eyes - on par - had Recardo Darren in also (good actor (excellent in fact IMO - check him out if you have the time))...and lesser than the above works.

IMO

[Walker]

Thanks for those titles and suggestions, gaffo.

What did you think of Slumdog Millionaire?