|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 342 responses total. |
nharmon
|
|
response 42 of 342:
| 
Jan 15 03:54 UTC 2006 |
Well, the implication seemed to be that "American style shooting" was to
lob as many bullets in some direction with the hope that one would find
its mark. However a look at the military weapons and tactics of the day
(as seen in use during the Spanish-American war which supposedly occured
the year before the movie takes place) contradicts that. Not that it
really matters anyway. A movie can't expect to go anywhere without
criticising something American, even if it is false.
As for things not being realistic, come on. Its a movie. A movie based
on a comic book no less. Or are we also going on about how you can't get
bitten by a spider and then leap from building to building?
|
aruba
|
|
response 43 of 342:
|
Jan 15 17:35 UTC 2006 |
I saw "Good Night and Good Luck" last night. I thought it was good, but it
didn't blow me away. It gave me the feeling of being a small part of a
larger story. And it was very, very smoky. The idea of a newscaster
lighting up a cigarette just before the camera start to roll, and holding it
up by his ear, seems bizarre to me.
|
scott
|
|
response 44 of 342:
|
Jan 15 18:29 UTC 2006 |
Re 42: Well, I can buy into a small number of "it's necessary for the movie"
types of thinsg, like getting super-powers. But what was interesting about
LoEG was that just about everything was a silly excuse to set up a car chase
or whatever.
|
krj
|
|
response 45 of 342:
|
Jan 15 21:19 UTC 2006 |
DUMA -- A story about a South African boy and his cheetah. Cheetah cubs
are cute and cuddly, but they grow up into an animal that becomes a bit
of an issue to keep as a pet. The movie is about the journey to
return Duma, the cheetah, to his home territory.
We liked it a lot, but I will concede that the British reviewers
who found it excessively sentimental have a point.
Spectacular visuals, a few plot holes.
Overall we were very happy to see it. This makes three good
movies about wild animals in 2005, following MARCH OF THE PENGUINS
and GRIZZLY MAN.
According to Roger Ebert, the distributor has been trying to figure
out how to market this movie for many months. It's playing at the
Michigan Theater in Ann Arbor at the moment, and Ebert says it has
also just opened in Chicago. I wouldn't expect it to have a long
multiplex run; catch it when the opportunity presents, or wait for a
DVD. It should be an excellent film for families.
|
richard
|
|
response 46 of 342:
|
Jan 15 22:10 UTC 2006 |
[b]The idea of a newscaster
lighting up a cigarette just before the camera start to roll, and
holding it up by his ear, seems bizarre to me. [/b]
Thats just the way it was back then, Murrow really did smoke through
all his broadcasts. George Clooney's father worked in the newsroom
with Murrow, and he had a lot of other firsthand memories to work by,
and he portrayed Murrow very accurately according to most reviews
|
aruba
|
|
response 47 of 342:
|
Jan 16 00:57 UTC 2006 |
George Clooney's father was a local newscaster in Cincinnati, and did
influence George's feeling for the news. But he didn't work with Murrow, as
far as I've been able to determine.
|
remmers
|
|
response 48 of 342:
|
Jan 16 14:14 UTC 2006 |
Hey, I'm old enough to remember Murrow's broadcasts from the 50s
firsthand. He really did the cigarette thing.
On the whole, I thought the rendering in "Good Night and Good Luck" was
amazingly accurate.
|
naftee
|
|
response 49 of 342:
|
Jan 16 21:10 UTC 2006 |
i'm not old enough for that :(
|
remmers
|
|
response 50 of 342:
|
Jan 17 13:00 UTC 2006 |
And by the way, Murrow's smoking habit finally did him in. Lung cancer,
1965.
|
scholar
|
|
response 51 of 342:
|
Jan 17 13:55 UTC 2006 |
How do you know the lung cancer was from smoking?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 52 of 342:
|
Jan 17 17:08 UTC 2006 |
There is a high statistical correlation. That doesn't constitute *knowing*,
but is a data point for the correlation.
|
tod
|
|
response 53 of 342:
|
Jan 17 17:15 UTC 2006 |
In less scientific terms: a scientific wild assed guess (SWAG).
|
mcnally
|
|
response 54 of 342:
|
Jan 17 17:21 UTC 2006 |
re #51: When it comes right down to it, nobody on Grex really even
KNOWS that Murrow is dead, if total certainty is what you require..
But one can take skepticism to unhealthy extremes.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 55 of 342:
|
Jan 17 17:25 UTC 2006 |
Re #53: ...or an informed hypothesis.
|
tod
|
|
response 56 of 342:
|
Jan 17 17:34 UTC 2006 |
re #55
Based on what theory?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 57 of 342:
|
Jan 17 18:08 UTC 2006 |
On the vast accumulation of data supporting the hypothesis of a the
relation between smoking and lung cancer.
|
tod
|
|
response 58 of 342:
|
Jan 17 18:19 UTC 2006 |
Isn't it possible Murrow got lung cancer from pollution at "on-site" reporting
gigs?
|
jadecat
|
|
response 59 of 342:
|
Jan 17 19:24 UTC 2006 |
Like my grandfather- was a cigar smoker and died of black lung...
(oh, did I mention he worked in a coal mine too? Now what was is that
caused the black lung?)
|
tod
|
|
response 60 of 342:
|
Jan 17 21:04 UTC 2006 |
His fireplace at home?
|
jadecat
|
|
response 61 of 342:
|
Jan 17 21:24 UTC 2006 |
Could be!
|
slynne
|
|
response 62 of 342:
|
Jan 17 22:04 UTC 2006 |
My grandfather worked in a coal mine too and he smoked but he died of
prostate cancer when he was 88
|
scholar
|
|
response 63 of 342:
|
Jan 17 22:52 UTC 2006 |
Re. 52: There's a 'high statistical correlation' that shows LUNG CANCER CAN
BE OBTAINED FROM THINGS OTHER THAN SMOKING.
Prof. Remmers's statement doesn't pass the most basic standard of TRUTH you
could find.
You can't even say THERE"S A HIGH PROBABILITY, THOUGH. Because when people
say something's true, they mean something other than there being a high
probability.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 64 of 342:
|
Jan 18 02:11 UTC 2006 |
That's what I said: "That doesn't constitute *knowing*, but is a data
point for the correlation.". Certainly there are other causes of lung
cancer.
What do we know here? He was a heavy smoker, and he died of lung cancer.
Any doctor would say that he was running a strong risk of lung cancer by
smoking. That does not mean that the smoking caused his lung cancer. If,
however, he had by chance been included in a well designed study of the
correlation between smoking and lung cancer, guess in which cell in a 2x2
Contingency test his case would fall?
|
kingjon
|
|
response 65 of 342:
|
Jan 18 02:28 UTC 2006 |
set drift = off
For my Interim class ("Developing a Christian Mind") I had to watch "The
Mission." It depicts the Jesuit missions among the Guarani people of South
America, especially the mission of San Carlos. The major theme seems to be
redemption, with the personal redemption of Mendoza, a slave trader (who later
becomes a monk), in the first part and the systemic redemption of the native
peoples and of the land in the second part. In the end, as part of a deal
between the Church, Spain, and Portugal, the Church removes its support and
protection from the missions as they are transferred into Portuguese control;
San Carlos, whose inhabitants refused to leave, is massacred by heavily-armed
troops as they are singing Mass (or one of the Offices; I couldn't tell). One
of those depressing films that still made me want to see it again and again.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 66 of 342:
|
Jan 18 02:37 UTC 2006 |
Missionaries have been responsible for the destruction of many indigenous
cultures. Missionaries are abominations. Anthropologists today attempt to
integrate such indigenous cultures into facilitated contact with the world
without displacing the essential of their cultures. This often requires
finding ways by which they can obtain better economic ustenance from their
native lands. There are a number of organizations that are assisting such
indigenous cultures, e.g.
http://www.ran.org/info_center/factsheets/s07.html
|