John Flannery: “We need abortion because the U.S. is overpopulated and they’re a drain on limited resources…”
Haha, nope. I was ProfessorCocktopus on YouTube but that damn Google destroyed it
Long ass movies of the now:
Cloud Atlas - Saw it, flowed a lot better than I thought it would considering a lot of criticism I’ve heard towards it. I had no problem understanding it (apparently some people did). Nearly 3 hours long, but I will say it’s worth it. There are some parts that seem rather…rebellious in nature (not exactly in some anti-state kind of way, but in general).
Lincoln - Another 3 hour long movie. This is even more off putting because I don’t want to watch 3 hours of Lincoln, especially since of course it’ll be pro-Lincoln in some light (not saying he’s the best, but he had to do what he had to do type of thing).
I was really looking forward to seeing Cloud Atlas but too many people turned me away from it. And, of course, everyone is super excited about Lincoln, which I have no interest in seeing beyond Daniel-Day Lewis’ usual Oscar worthy performance.
He just did a response to the criticism:
Can someone summarize? I really dont feel like its worth the bandwidth. So far all I’ve gotten from this turd is that Ron Paul is “cranky and senile” and if you take issue with that characterization you are “butthurt” and he would rather not have you email him. While I cant help but assume that the arguments will not get much better from here, I am nagged by doubt but unwilling to wait for this idiot to get around to telling me what he thinks, squeezed in somewhere after the self-promotion. Why is it that people who produce free media are obsessed with blasting you with how awesome they are in the beginning of almost every video?
I agree, cloud Atlas was quite good. I’ve been vaguely thinking of starting a thread on it. The fact that so many totally different stories were interconnected without making being extremely confusing, and indeed being quite coherent, makes Cloud Atlas a remarkable achievement by that tolken alone.
I watched the video and from what I can gather, Adam’s first trying to point out how we shouldn’t be engaging in hero worship, which is fine, but somehow I still don’t feel taking cheap shots at a decent guy like Ron Paul on his farewell speech was the best way to make that point. Second, Adam mentioned how something has ‘changed’ about Ron Paul lately. He didn’t say what, but that he’ll state his theory in an upcoming video.
Wait, ADAM is saying we should be attached to characters?
Thanks for the summary. Ron Paul’s farewell address was masterful, perhaps an embodiment of the polar opposite of senility. No one should hero worshipping him but it would be a good thing if people listened when he spoke, and addressed the content of his speech, even if they were critical.
POTENTIAL SPOILER
Apparently the writer of the book felt it wouldn’t do good as a movie, that there’s too much going on. I think to people like ourselves (those who can see how webs of relationships connect, i.e. praxeology, market process, individual action, etc.) the movie will make complete sense. It’s not hard to see the archetypes of various characters appear in every story with a minor and major “kick” that influencs the next one (for example in San Fran in 1973, Luisa Rey listens to the Cloud Atlas Sextet would be the “minor”, while meeting Sixsmith being the “major”) as well as the birthmark the core protagonists have.
I will say at the moment I can’t find the connection between 1973 and 2012 (unless it has to do with Sixsmith’s letters). 1849, 1936, and 1973 all connect, as well as 2012, 2144, and 2321.
I watched Almost Famous last night again which takes place in 1973. I’m also applying to be an intern for a rock magazine. Connection!
Wheylous thats brutal
The 2012 story line was the one with the old man right? I think the connection there was the weakest of the lot. It was the most disconnected and the least relevant to the story as a whole, it’s only ultimate connection was simply to provide the clip that was eventually in the 2144. I agree that I didn’t see how any of the other timelines affected that one unless there was some blood connection between the 1936 timeline or nuclear power was alluded to.
Also I’m dismayed, looking at some of the reviews, that many perceived the film’s story as indeed being “confusing” when I thought that the story was indeed very clear. I agree that a praxeological and systematic understanding of human behavior helps us to understand things like that better. I also think that people around here might just be a little ahem more gifted in respect to certain intellectual capabilities, when compared to many of the people who went to see the movie.
@ Wheylous
Wow. That hit me hard.
The great product of the hard work of the glorious Federal Reserve:
I wasn’t sure whether to put this here or the Conspiracy thread. Either way, I lol’d at this Tweet:
#Twinkies, designed to #survive nuclear #war, vanish a month before the 2012 #Apocalypse? Well played, #Mayans … Well played.
— Truth is Treason.net (@Truth_isTreason) November 17, 2012
This person is obviously getting that from Family Guy.
A Critique of: ‘If It wasn’t for Ron Paul I wouldn’t have been a libertarian’