well you took the hit by actually sitting through that crap--I'd rather suck all the snot out of an elephant.
Speaking of elephants--they DO live in real matriarchal groups. But then again, they have genitalia and use them presumably. Odd in barfie how one can have a "matriarchy" with no actual biological sex. Perhaps to normalize lab grown babies. Just as production of commodity is hidden, so is production of the actual populace. A bougie dream.
Yeah, I had to take lots of breaks lol. I would watch about 20 minutes of it, go off for another 15 and then start it again. Ooh, good point about the lab grown babies. I hadn’t thought of that!!
I salute your bravery. I caught a clip of this dross wherein Barbie appears in some kinda pink cowgirl outfit and gets lectured to about how she has disgraced her gender (and I am shamelessly using the G word in the old way which is frankly the only way that makes sense) by reversing the feminist movement a couple of decades.
But what seemed hilariously ironic to me is that the very ones lecturing her – who were of course girls – looked just as stereotypical as Barbie, if in a different way i.e. embodying Hollywood’s notion of the smart sassy (but always photogenic) college student. And this was drowning in the requisite postmodernist jibber jabber.
That was enough for me.
The “other big film” of ’23 was “Oppenheimer” – billed as “The Competition” to “Barbie”. Of course “Op” was “a serious” film with a “very serious” actor Benedict Cumberbatch. (Can’t help wondering what nicknames he was given at school!) John Steppling has described BC as “execrable” and goes into more detail on his first lecture. BC is a “prestige” actor i.e., like Meryl Streep, BC is The Arty Actor who will deliver whatever he is required to deliver and with all the required technical fireworks. BUT – and this is my point – I wouldn’t be surprised if “Op” turns out to be just as bad as “Barbie”. Possibly worse with “The Prestigious Factor”.
And it's a sign of how much attention I am paying that I got the actor completely wrong! It wasn't Cumberbatch but Cillian Murphy who was in "Op". Is he a "prestige" actor? He's more of the strong silent macho type cf. "Peaky Blinders". And though I am aware that it may be pulpy trashy stuff, I still think that the CM movie "28 Days Later" is the most efficent zombie effort ever in that it covers all the zombie memes (initial desolation, snazzy young zombie dodging team, lone parent with daughter in improvised hideaway, army based "community" that turns out to be utterly evil etc.) in under 2 hours. Watch "28 DL" and you can skip the entire "Walking Dead" franchise.
I haven't but will take note. You just pipped me there because I remembered that there's a good take on 28DL from one Christian Thorne who is so into Adorno that he's working on his own translation of "Negative Dialectics" which you can find on the very site I link to here:
well you took the hit by actually sitting through that crap--I'd rather suck all the snot out of an elephant.
Speaking of elephants--they DO live in real matriarchal groups. But then again, they have genitalia and use them presumably. Odd in barfie how one can have a "matriarchy" with no actual biological sex. Perhaps to normalize lab grown babies. Just as production of commodity is hidden, so is production of the actual populace. A bougie dream.
Yeah, I had to take lots of breaks lol. I would watch about 20 minutes of it, go off for another 15 and then start it again. Ooh, good point about the lab grown babies. I hadn’t thought of that!!
I salute your bravery. I caught a clip of this dross wherein Barbie appears in some kinda pink cowgirl outfit and gets lectured to about how she has disgraced her gender (and I am shamelessly using the G word in the old way which is frankly the only way that makes sense) by reversing the feminist movement a couple of decades.
But what seemed hilariously ironic to me is that the very ones lecturing her – who were of course girls – looked just as stereotypical as Barbie, if in a different way i.e. embodying Hollywood’s notion of the smart sassy (but always photogenic) college student. And this was drowning in the requisite postmodernist jibber jabber.
That was enough for me.
The “other big film” of ’23 was “Oppenheimer” – billed as “The Competition” to “Barbie”. Of course “Op” was “a serious” film with a “very serious” actor Benedict Cumberbatch. (Can’t help wondering what nicknames he was given at school!) John Steppling has described BC as “execrable” and goes into more detail on his first lecture. BC is a “prestige” actor i.e., like Meryl Streep, BC is The Arty Actor who will deliver whatever he is required to deliver and with all the required technical fireworks. BUT – and this is my point – I wouldn’t be surprised if “Op” turns out to be just as bad as “Barbie”. Possibly worse with “The Prestigious Factor”.
And it's a sign of how much attention I am paying that I got the actor completely wrong! It wasn't Cumberbatch but Cillian Murphy who was in "Op". Is he a "prestige" actor? He's more of the strong silent macho type cf. "Peaky Blinders". And though I am aware that it may be pulpy trashy stuff, I still think that the CM movie "28 Days Later" is the most efficent zombie effort ever in that it covers all the zombie memes (initial desolation, snazzy young zombie dodging team, lone parent with daughter in improvised hideaway, army based "community" that turns out to be utterly evil etc.) in under 2 hours. Watch "28 DL" and you can skip the entire "Walking Dead" franchise.
The zombie craze is an interesting phenomenon that merits more attention. Have you read The Dialectic of Fear by Franco Moretti? It’s quite good
I haven't but will take note. You just pipped me there because I remembered that there's a good take on 28DL from one Christian Thorne who is so into Adorno that he's working on his own translation of "Negative Dialectics" which you can find on the very site I link to here:
https://sites.williams.edu/cthorne/articles/the-running-of-the-dead-part-1/