Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   Go Down

Author Topic: The New World  (Read 28769 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SoNowThen

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +6
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: The New World
« Reply #90 on: December 18, 2005, 06:39:50 AM »
0
I don't find it interesting in any way. Don't you think it's a little odd that Malick is doing a Disney Story? Not that his version will suck like Disney's, but from the trailer it seriously looks like a live action version of the cartoon.

In which case, the brilliant young man (in my scenario) has a fantastic point.
Logged
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Respect: +367
Re: The New World
« Reply #91 on: December 18, 2005, 07:07:49 AM »
0
holy shit you think the story of the first permanent English settlement in America is first and foremost a disney movie????

fuck. that's all i have to say to that. FUCK.
Logged

Gamblour.

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +8
Re: The New World
« Reply #92 on: December 18, 2005, 08:09:06 AM »
0
yeah to say or be convinced that the colonization and discovery of a new race of people and then the eventually rape and genocide of those people, a noble kind defeated by greed and Christianity.....yeah, that's naive. you need some original Zinn in your life.
Logged
WWPTAD?

SoNowThen

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +6
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: The New World
« Reply #93 on: December 18, 2005, 08:57:52 AM »
0
 :violin:

oooh oooh sorry guys soooooo sorry I don't love your precious new world story

It's been Disneyed to death, and by the looks of the trailer, will be again. Poor noble savages, destroyed by whitey and his corporations, where's Michael Moore? Maybe he can do the making-of...
Logged
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Gamblour.

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +8
Re: The New World
« Reply #94 on: December 18, 2005, 10:07:16 AM »
0
you know, you're right, I'm wrong. I TOTALLY missed the singing dancing raccoon in the trailer. Malick, you are a genius.
Logged
WWPTAD?

SoNowThen

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +6
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: The New World
« Reply #95 on: December 18, 2005, 10:15:43 AM »
0
Hahaha, you guys are proof that PC-ism still lives on. Read less between the lines, and just answer my initial question: does anyone think the trailer made the film look like a huge waste of time? Should I take your flaming of anything negative I say in this thread to mean that everyone saw this preview and got really excited for anything besides the fact that it had Malick's name on it?

Three years later and we're still railing against the fact that I write in a smarmy, racist, condescending, sexist, right-wing, reactionary, bigoted tone? Cos of course it is all those things to not be interested in a pocahontas movie...

note: my sarcasm made a whole lot more sense when there was a post from hedwig above... which is now gone... so I guess just concentrate on the top part...
Logged
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

hedwig

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Lazy bones ain't got no time to waste away
  • Respect: 0
Re: The New World
« Reply #96 on: December 18, 2005, 10:20:52 AM »
0
SoNowThen, you are rivalling pyramid machine with your mind-numbing stupidity in this thread.

Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 08:57:52 AM
It's been Disneyed to death, and by the looks of the trailer, will be again. Poor noble savages, destroyed by whitey and his corporations, where's Michael Moore? Maybe he can do the making-of...

what a ridiculous paradox. first you complain that the story's been "Disney'd to death," then you give that smarmy, condescending, racist description of the story as "poor noble savages destroyed by whitey" which makes it sound like you're AGAINST a film that truly depicts how ruthlessly whitey treated the native americans -- well then you should LIKE the Disney version, because it's a sugar-coated piece of shit!

i deleted my post because i wanted to add this: by deyning the story's historical significance, you're exposing that you were born yesterday. by denying the importance of this story because you think it exaggerates the suffering of Native Americans, you're just exposing that you're a racist moron.
Logged

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Respect: +367
Re: The New World
« Reply #97 on: December 18, 2005, 10:23:30 AM »
0
Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 10:15:43 AM
does anyone think the trailer made the film look like a huge waste of time?
since that's just asking for our opinion, the answer is no. your claim that it shows a disney story is ridiculous, gamblour proved this.

so this is just about a trailer and not the huge rant you went on based on it? about how u don't give a fuck about native american history, or the history of the american continent in general? ok then. there's a simple rebuttal to that.. it's a fucking trailer. it showed everything malick's films have always shown, voice overs and a lot of languid shots. what more is there to say about it? surely not a long winded racist rant.
Logged

SoNowThen

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +6
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: The New World
« Reply #98 on: December 18, 2005, 10:28:58 AM »
0
From Hedwig's thing:

2 important considerations:

1. Does a "historically significant" story justify being made into a movie, and does cinema suit the telling of such a story?
2. Has anybody seen the movie? If not, how can we say how it portrays the "suffering of the native americans"?

To P:

Yes, I'm obviously going on the trailer, which I made fun of for a solid minute, even saying to a friend "this looks like a bad version of the start of TRL", then heard Malick's name and had my draw drop at how disappointed and surprised I was.

If you say it's racist to not be interested in this story, then I guess you can call me racist. With rare exceptions I've never enjoyed films in this type of context. It could turn out to be amazing, and not a good poor indians getting slaughtered by all bad (except maybe one) white guys, cartoon-style simple conflict movie... but I'm not holding my breath.
Logged
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

SoNowThen

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +6
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: The New World
« Reply #99 on: December 18, 2005, 10:33:32 AM »
0
perhaps it's also worth pointing out that no one took exception to the whole Irish-as-drunks comment, but went nanners on the injun thing
Logged
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Respect: +367
Re: The New World
« Reply #100 on: December 18, 2005, 10:50:25 AM »
0
Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 10:28:58 AM
Yes, I'm obviously going on the trailer, which I made fun of for a solid minute, even saying to a friend "this looks like a bad version of the start of TRL", then heard Malick's name and had my draw drop at how disappointed and surprised I was.
if your drawers are dropping you should think of purchasing a smaller size.

Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 10:28:58 AM
It could turn out to be amazing, and not a good poor indians getting slaughtered by all bad (except maybe one) white guys, cartoon-style simple conflict movie... but I'm not holding my breath.
maybe u don't like malick. that's your problem. case solved as far as i'm concerned.

oh and about the irish thing, yeah so u continue to be a stereotyping jerk who thinks it's progressive to not care about the past. case solved as far as i'm concerned.
Logged

Pozer

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 2240
  • Respect: +34
Re: The New World
« Reply #101 on: December 18, 2005, 10:50:47 AM »
0
Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 04:19:23 AM
I am the only one who thinks that the trailer for this makes it look like the biggest piece of shit, hokey, crap-flinging, joke-version of the first 20 minutes of Thin Red Line???

Why do seemingly smart directors keep casting Colin Farrell? This guy's as Irish as drunkenness and a huge head -- he just doesn't fit as anything else but a useless Irish twat. I wanna believe that Malick is still untouchable, but you just gotta laugh when someone asks what your new movie is (especially when your new movie comes out on average every 5 - 10 years) and you say "the pocahontas story"... "no, really, what's your new movie", "seriously, it's the whole Indian thing -- you know, them old Indians, the ones we can't call Indians anymore"... "(laughing) oh you kidder, you, no really, you must have picked something interesting, right?", "no, I swear, we got this huge budget so we could make the white guy - native chick love story".... (looks at him sideways, like he just shat on the table) "um... whatever, man..."
Worst-post-ever.  The stupidity of your words in your follow up posts as well makes you a useless... whatever you are twat.
Logged

hedwig

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Lazy bones ain't got no time to waste away
  • Respect: 0
Re: The New World
« Reply #102 on: December 18, 2005, 10:52:13 AM »
0
Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 10:28:58 AM
From Hedwig's thing:

2 important considerations:

1. Does a "historically significant" story justify being made into a movie, and does cinema suit the telling of such a story?

yes of course. the story must be told, i don't see why cinema is an inappropriate means of telling it. as with any artform, it's up to the artist to utilize it as a powerful storytelling medium, which cinema can certainly be.

Quote from: SoNowThen on December 18, 2005, 10:28:58 AM
2. Has anybody seen the movie? If not, how can we say how it portrays the "suffering of the native americans"?

well you haven't seen it either so shut the fuck up. i was responding to the way you trivialized the suffering of native americans, which you're continuing to do.

and please, this isn't "SoNowThen's Hate Speech thread," this is a thread about the movie. what a pathetic hijacking. in the future take that trash where it belongs.
Logged

Gamblour.

  • over-achiever
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
  • Respect: +8
Re: The New World
« Reply #103 on: December 18, 2005, 11:10:32 AM »
0
Actually, my thread was more about subtle, subconscious manifestations of racism. his is a little overt and as subtle as a lynching. but I'll let him post in my thread, because I don't discriminate.
Logged
WWPTAD?

MacGuffin

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Respect: +293
Re: The New World
« Reply #104 on: December 18, 2005, 01:20:47 PM »
0
SoNowThen can Malick my balls.
Logged
“Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.” - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   Go Up