• Announcements

    • SFLUFAN

      D1P 2017 Charity Campaign for The Life You Can Save: $740 (as of 07 January)   12/12/2016

      I've decided to extend our charity campaign for The Life You Can Save organizations for the entirety of 2017 so feel free to contribute at any time!  Periodically through the year, I'll have game giveaways for those who have donated to the campaign as a "thank you" for supporting this worthy endeavor!
    • Jason

      Missing icons.   12/27/2016

      Unfortunately, we lost a bunch of user icons due to the data loss a few days ago—but we didn't intentionally remove any so if yours is gone please feel free to just set it back.   -Jason

GoldenTongue

Member
  • Content count

    2,396
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

GoldenTongue last won the day on November 20 2016

GoldenTongue had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

522

About GoldenTongue

  • Rank
    Bacon King
  • Birthday February 22

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    NYC
  • Xbox Live
    Bastilaluvchild
  • PSN ID
    Bastilaluvchild
  • Steam ID
    bastilaluvchild

Recent Profile Visitors

19,376 profile views
  1. Yeah...I'll go ahead and call complete and total bullshit on this. Please, pray tell, how TPM and/or AotC excel to the point that you would consider them to be stronger than TFA. Seriously - this statement merits more mockery than has been offered up in this thread. And (for others) citing box office revenues alone (absent any other context) as some barometer of quality is fanboy foolishness which should be ban-worthy ( @SFLUFAN). There are great movies and heaps of garbage alike which make a significant amount of money, just as there are masterpieces and turds which do not. As for the OP - meh. Character development is a bit of a weakness in ROGUE ONE, no doubt about it. The movie makes use of a number of different contrivances to bring the group together that did, to me, feel contrived. And there are instances in which characters' actions and choices seem to be governed more by narrative compulsions than any type of recognizable character trait. But by the same token, the article is a bit myopic in its efforts to constrain what "Star Wars" is, and/or is not. It isn't just the characters, or the ships, or the technology...it is all of these things, which over time have formed a sizeable mythos. RO is a story about the events which led up to the introduction(s) of ANH: it's a complete oneoff showing characters who exist specifically to die. And while that should never be a justification or rationale for failure to develop the core ensemble, the article (to me) fails to recognize the "WHY" of ROGUE ONE in its effort to criticize Disney and its handling of the IP. And while it's easy enough to criticize the flaws in RO's character development, I'd say it's also myopic to set aside those other elements of the mythos that the movie shared with us: the look at life under the Empire, seeing the shades of grey that make up life in the Resistance. And at the risk of turning this into a RO vs ANH discussion, I thoroughly enjoyed seeing a Star Wars movie whose moral compass was more nuanced than GOOD vs EVIL. Beyond that, I don't really know how Disney could be handling this much better. They are expanding the universe with the new trilogy, while slowly branching out in different directions with the Legends films. And they're branching out slowly, and with deliberation, starting with selections that can serve as a bridge between old fans and new. I think they "get" Star Wars more than Lucas does/did, in many ways.
  2. So thinking a little more, I really want to believe that when I honestly do not remember if the camera angles in the scene preclude such a possibility, but I'm going to hypothesize that they did, for the sake of playing with a fun question - On the one hand, there is ample evidence to suggest the former, from the Padre himself, to the Japanese, etc. That would be consistent with what we see in the closing scene(s), along with internal logic established within the film. But, OTOH (assuming my hypothetical above is true), the latter feels like a more thematically appropriate eventuality, given the manner in which faith/belief is questioned and tested, the way in which silence (from peers, from the mentor, from God) takes on an almost tangible form, and (in certain regards) the behavior which follows afterward. I'm really tempted to ask the natural question as to whether was correct, although that's really something for another thread on another board. But with that said, I'd say the question as to whether was correct in terms of Rodrigues' arc is fair game.
  3. Let's constrain the Papist pablum to the movie, shall we?
  4. Possibly a stretch, since depending on how you qualify the denial, there was anywhere between three, and fifty or so. ;p
  5. Very well-put. In terms of the traditional mandate of "show, don't tell," I would absolutely put SILENCE on a short list of absolute greats in terms of how those issues, and the conflicting elements/nature of each, are embraced and examined. And while the examination and deliberation dances awfully close (if not crossing the line completely) in the direction of directorial self-gratification on occasion, it's hard to argue against its necessity in how Rodrigues' torment is put on display and left to percolate before us. The implicit (later explicit) questions being considered, how they inform Rodrigues' (and others') identity, how they evolve/devolve - seeing them develop so fully is painful. Seeing them left largely unanswered (or answered in such a traumatic manner from Rodrigues' POV) is genuinely troubling. Which is probably why I had such an issue with the movie's final 15 or so minutes, and the closing shot in particular - while it's a little misrepresentative to consider that any kind of a "happy" ending, it suggests an eventuality which, for me, is not consistent with Rodrigues' whole arc.
  6. Saw it last night, shortly before getting on a plane back to NYC. Some various thoughts, in no particular order - - Absolutely gorgeously shot movie. - There's a thematically soupy blend of an abundance of close, lingering shots, mixed with some wonderfully silent emoting, along with the absence of a musical score, which together function brilliantly to bring the movie's title to bear in an incredibly potent manner. - Garfield seemingly gives everything he has, but I really feel as though he just doesn't have quite the gravitas that his role warranted, although my niggling may be due in part to some of the film's other issues. His performance is solidly workmanlike for most of the movie, but his limitations are shown fairly prominently once . - I would assume that this was very much a passion project for Scorcese; it has the feel of putting some deeply personal questions on display. And perhaps I'm totally off-base, but the movie very much feels like the product of someone who is unable to avoid injecting those deeply personal doubts/beliefs/questions into every take. And while (given the subject matter) that makes for something which is ripe for commentary/thought/deconstruction, I think that it may have compromised certain scenes, if only because there were a number of moments which didn't have as much of an impact as it feels as though there should have been. Take the opening - what Neeson bears witness to is awful. But the actual composition of the scene didn't result (for me) in the sense of horror which (I believe) Ferreira must have felt. Aside from that, I really feel as though the runtime could have been trimmed by 20-30 minutes without compromising much, and while much of the pacing and mise en scene was undoubtedly very deliberate, I don't think it supported the motif that Marty was striving for. - Having read few opinion articles last night at the airport, I'm at a bit of a loss to understand how well the movie's been received from some various Christian sources. There were a couple blogs/articles in particular that really made me wonder how closely they were watching, as the "affirmation of faith" that they laud so strongly is only one interpretation of the thematic throughline, and not one which (imo) Scorcese would endorse with much enthusiasm. - I haven't watched any Kurosawa in what's probably been five or more years (so take this with a bit of a grain of salt), but I don't think the movie aped Kurosawa all that much...although yeah, the Inquisitor's performance definitely struck a chord or two. Reading through those bullet points, I'm definitely over-dwelling on the film's flaws. It really is something impressive, asking some significant questions about the nature of faith, without trying too hard to validate one belief set/perception over another. It really does engage the viewer at times in how Rodrigues' faith-as-an-identity is challenged by various events and people: seeing core tenets of his faith juxtaposed (as it were) by the (reported) failings of earlier Japanese Christians in their ignorance of the gospel makes for some really heady stuff. And yep, my theater had a few laughs at inappropriate times (Kichijiro) which, to me, is a fairly telling commentary regarding the beliefs/doubts which underpin the film. I will say that the final reveal felt like a bit of a copout - I would hesitate to call this a masterpiece based upon the first viewing, although I really feel like I need to watch it again, as much as I'd rather not. I'm totally with @sblfilms on that point. If nothing else, something which engages me this much, and makes me spend as much time thinking about what boils down to three or four questions, is doing something right.
  7. Generally speaking, I'd agree with you - I don't generally choose (or not) to watch shows based upon characters' looks. With that said, there is a short list of actresses for whom anything in which they appear is must-see for me. I'd DVR a commercial for Folger's coffee if I knew that Natalie Dormer were starring...to name one example.
  8. Aren't like 75% of sexual assaults committed by those the victim knows or loves? Assuming that isn't far off, which is more troubling - that being raped by someone who isn't a stranger isn't worth worrying about, OR, that only 25% or so of rapes are worth worrying about?
  9. No. Fucking. Way. The British version was a veritable clinic in the comedy of pain and discomfort. And the Christmas special was an absolute crush to the feels. The US version had its moments of greatness, but (partly because of its length) was nearly as consistently strong as the British version, and I'll argue that it never reached the highs or lows of the British, despite having the benefit of 10-20x more epsiodes (or more) to work with.
  10. What did I copy and paste? I am by no means an expert, although I have read quite a bit on the subject, between my own interests (having several family members who struggle with mental illness), and those of my girlfriend (master's degree in clinical psychology). Tell you what - find evidence that my post is a copy/paste, and not my own writing, and I'll PayPal $10,000 to the email address of your choice. And I stand by what I said. No way in hell does someone who works in the field display such unparalleled ignorance and callousness.
  11. Being a patient doesn't count as working in mental health. And bullshit. No way in hell is someone who works in the field so demonstrably ignorant.
  12. Seriously? You've made the claims in this thread, that unions area scourge on the economy, that they destroy industries, that they don't accomplish what they set out to do, that they always wind up with distortionate power distribution. And in elaborating, you mistakenly try to use arguments which include sports, and the Hollywood studio structure. We'll set aside the various misunderstandings evinced in how you framed your examples. I just can't get over how poor a choice of examples you went with in attempting to support your flawed position. I'm very much a pragmatist when it comes to the shortcomings and abuses of the union dynamic: you don't need to sell me on the problems that exist with unions in various industries and fields. But with all that said... 1) Trying to use sports, or Hollywood, in ANY thread discussing the shortcomings of unions, only illustrates an ignorance of said systems. 2) Concentration of wealth is a 3+ decade problem which is not, in any respect, good for a society. And while there are a number of varying reasons for why it has occurred in the USA, one notable one has been the gradual erosion of the strength of the union. Directly, it signifies a growing disconnect between capital and labor. Indirectly, it is very symbolic of the increasing weakness of those who do not occupy an executive corner office.
  13. So you're not only a moron, but an asshole to boot. Good to know.
  14. It's funny. Working in management for a (union) contractor in NYC construction, with many union workers for friends, I've gotten to see and experience all of the benefits and drawbacks of the union dynamic, from improved pay and safety standards, to agonizingly frustrating jurisdictional arguments regarding work times/workplace responsibilities. I've seen the mobbed up no-shows, seen The Rat get paraded around non-union sites (always makes me smile), just as I've seen some horrifyingly unsafe practices on non-union sites. I've been saying for a while that the unions themselves are driving NYC toward non-union; between too many old-timers who don't recognize how the market has changed, coupled with advances on the digital side that result in the absence of a need for a strong central office to support a larger project, unions are finding it harder and harder (or choosing to do so) to market themselves as a better investment for owners and developers. With all that said...using professional sports, and the movie system, to illustrate a problem with the union structure...LOL. Probably the worst two fields/industries to try to use as an example. Why not go after any number of municipal unions who effectively waste taxpayer money? Airline unions whose inflexibility on retirement benefits have created problems for the major airlines? Why try to use sports and Hollywood...two arenas which are typically financially viable, and in which the union structure has done precisely what it is supposed to, for the net benefit of all?
  15. Seriously - English isn't your first language, is it? Please, please, please - tell me it isn't. You have completely misconstrued the central thrust of the article, to say nothing of Kab's rationale for posting it. Several notable quotes from said article - So, I'll ask again - are you ignorant of certain nuances of the English language, or are you just a selectively partisan imbecile? The USA's outright failures in treatment of returning veterans is well-documented. There are any number of statistics and studies which speak to the difficulty that far too many returning service personnel struggle with following combat, and that doesn't even include those who are diagnosed with (or awaiting consultation for diagnosis of) PTSD. Now, portions of the article may be correct, in that it may not be the FBI's responsibility to proffer treatment, but that doesn't absolve the Armed Forces of their culpability in properly tending to the welfare of returning veterans (although in fairness, they aren't solely to blame). Do you have ANY familiarity with PTSD? Of the effects that it can have on a person's psyche and their behavior? Are you aware that, for example, for decades, those actually suffering from PTSD were misdiagnosed with any number of other psychological disorders including, but not limited to, bipolar disorder, depression, schizophrenia, and/or oppositional defiant disorder? Are you aware that diagnostic and treatment modalities for PTSD are still very much an evolving field, with practitioners and researchers alike still waging constant battles for a more comprehensive spectrum to be recognized by the DSM, and that because of the DSM's failures in this regard, this remains a field in which large portions of clinicians are still unversed in promising treatments such as (for example) EMDR? So no, you cretinous buffoon, this isn't some partisan piece about TERRORISM. It's an indictment of the (alleged) failures of the US government in recognizing and treating the mental illness of someone who sought help, received nothing in return, and ultimately succumbed to his illness in a horrific fashion. And if you really don't believe that PTSD can have such an impact, then I'd recommend you educate yourself. The Body Keeps The Score is an excellent starting point.