text:
Movie News
Moriarty's Humble GLADIATOR Review
Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here.
I'd just like to start by saying Knowles is a damnable cheat. I could have started my review weeks ago after seeing GLADIATOR for the first time, but I didn't. I told Dreamworks that I would wait until after the Metreon event to write something about seeing the film, and I decided to literally wait. I didn't make notes. I didn't pencil in an outline. All I did was talk to close friends about the film, sort of honing my thoughts. I was determined to wait until the moment I was actually in Microsoft SF to start the piece, but then I found out that Harry was writing his story on his laptop so he could just bring the finished review on disc with him to the store.
Damn. Guess that means I should start early, too. After all, I'm not going to be the hard-working busy bee while Harry's buzzing around meeting all of you. I had too much fun taking with the fans who came to the screening last night. It was particularly strange to meet Todd, the IRON GIANT fetishist from TALK BACK. Here's where I would normally say, "He's so much more normal than you'd expect," but he's not. Like most of us associated with the site and most of you who read it, he's a full-blown film geek, a grand and glorious freak. And he bought dinner after at a bitchin' restaurant and jazz club called The Black Cat.
But I digress.
For tke past couple of weeks now, I've been wrestling with my opinion of Ridley Scott's breathtaking new film. It's all a matter of degrees, you see. Is it better or worse than BLADE RUNNER, the film by which all other Ridley Scott films must be measured? I think the films make incredible bookends to each other, and they definitely secure Scott's place as one of the greatest visual fantasists of all time. GLADIATOR is going to do something that BLADE RUNNER never managed, though. It's going to be a mainstream phenomenon.
This is a film that is an epic in the truest and most exciting sense of the word. There's a massive story being told here, and it takes the time needed to tell the story right. Scott and his screenwriter, David Franzoni and John Logan, weave the tale confidently from the first frame on. We start with a dream of home, images of a idyllic time and place, and when we cut to the face of the man having the dream, Maximus (Russell Crowe), it is jarring, harsh, and beautiful. The weariness on his face and the sadness of his eyes all speak volumes, and when we see him walk away from the quiet of this private moment, rejoining his troops as they mass for war against the hordes of Germania, we get a sense of exactly why that dream of home is so important. It's the only thing that would keep a man sane under such brutal conditions.
And what of that war? Do the battle scenes live up to the hype? Well, I know you'll be hearing comparisons to things like BRAVEHEART and SPARTACUS and BEN HUR, but forget all of that. Scott has done for this historical period what Spielberg did for WWII… he has raised the bar, set a new standard. There's something far more impressive than the realism of the scenes, though, and that's the emotional purity. We get a sense of what it's like to be in battle, of how hard it is to maintain that energy, and we see the wear and tear on the men wrapped up in the fight. As the Germania battle scene wears on, it slows down, and there's weight to it. Maximus is not some superhero, able to do anything without fatigue. He's more of a hero because it does affect him. It does add up. He continues anyway because that is all he can do, and it becomes so much more affecting and impressive as a result. It's the same with the gladiator scenes themselves later in thhe film. Each of them is distinct, different, and thrilling. They all have their own rhythms, and they all build to powerful climaxes. There is gore, and some of it is shocking, extreme, but none of it is done for cheap effect. Instead, Scott seems to be making a comment about what entertains us. I guarantee that shots of people being cut in half or heads being crushed or arms being hacked off will be greeted by lusty cheers at each showing of the film. They were last night. This raises the debate about what inherent entertainment value these images carry, and it's a valid one. For me, the gore isn't the kick, or the kills themselves. It's the fact that Maximus keeps surviving impossible odds. It's the primal thrill of survival itself that gives the film its greatest charge.
The performances in this film are all sterling, with Richard Harris doing some of the best work of his long career here as thhe aging Caesar, on par with his phenomenal turn as English Bob in UNFORGIVEN. Oliver Reed couldn't have asked for a finer swan song, and he makes a strong impression as Proximo, the man who trains the fallen Maximus to be a great gladiator. Connie Nielsen is both beautiful and deeply moving as Lucilla, daughter to Marcus Aureleius and sister to Commodus, played magnificently by Joaquin Phoenix.
In fact, I'd like to make special mention of Phoenix. It has been a hard road for him as a performer, constantly living in the shadow of his brilliant brother, and despite some nice work in films like TO DIE FOR and PARENTHOOD, he's never really clicked with a strong screen presence. Well, forget all that. He stakes a claim here as a major talent to be reckoned with, and a big part of that is how he takes a villain that could have been your typical smarmy bad guy if played by most other actors and transforms him into a complex character worthy of your sympathy as well as your hatred. He is fascinating, and there's an early scene between him and Harris that is just awe-inspiring. It's simply dialogue about the distance between a father and a son, but it is wrenching and real, and it sets the tone for everything after.
Of course, the main performer in the film is Russell Crowe, and the film's success falls squarely on his shoulders. If he wasn't the baddest motherfucker walking the earth in every single scene, then we wouldn't believe anything else we were seeing. If we didn't believe that he loved his wife and child with every fiber of his being, then it wouldn't matter to us if he avenged them or not. He rises to every challenge the script throws at him, and he tosses off at least a half-dozen lines that will be absolute classics. "On my sign, unleash hell." "I will show them something they have never seen." "I will have my revenge, in this life or the next." There's such poise, such power behind each delivery, that there's never any question… Maximus will triumph, and it will be glorious.
I love this film. I love it with every bit of geek strength I can muster. I predict that on the morning of Monday, May 8, Russell Crowe will be the biggest movie star on thie planet. I sincerely hope this is the beginning of a new winning streak for Ridley Scott. And I congratulate Dreamworks for having the guts to make this film everything it could be. This is one of those films that justifies the work we do here on the page. This is one of the greats. Get ready, everyone, because this summer, it's all about honor and strength. The X-who? THE PERFECT what? Forget about them all. This is one GLADIATOR that will be undefeated by summer's end.
Now that I've said that, I get to run out and join the event that's already in progress. I'll be back on routine this coming week with some great stuff coming in the RUMBLINGS. Until then…
"Moriarty" out.
Readers Talkbackcomments powered by Disqus
+ Expand All
Feb. 25, 2000, 7:03 p.m. CST
Wow! Great review! Thank you!
by canman11
Feb. 25, 2000, 7:15 p.m. CST
I'd like to 2nd those thoughts
by Everett Robert
great review...one of the best I've read from you Prof. Now I have to ask, can you do something like this around the country...do geek test screenings and the sort...i mean I live in Kansas and would gladly drive to Kansas City, Whicita, or even St. Louis or Oklahoma City to attend a geek festivity like this
Feb. 25, 2000, 7:32 p.m. CST
Moriarty's Vastly Superior Review
by Martin Bishop
Great review with stand alone commentary, I really enjoyed it. Kepp up the great work Moriarty
Feb. 25, 2000, 7:36 p.m. CST
Thanks for the review
by Ionesco
Great review Moriarty. You are the voice of reason that tempers Harry's overenthusiasm. If you both like a film, I can usually bank on the fact that I will like it. You always keep me reading. Even on a Friday night when I could be XXXX-ing my wife.
Feb. 25, 2000, 7:38 p.m. CST
Hey Moriarty
by StarBarella
Great review, as always! My only question is when are you and Harry gonna bring a great preview to the geeks up here in Toronto? San Francisco is long commute for some of us...
Feb. 25, 2000, 9:24 p.m. CST
Moriarty, you got to meet Todd?!
by All Thumbs
Strangely, that's almost cooler than meeting you guys and Harry. ; ) I feel redundant saying in yet another Talk Back how cool this movie sounds...but, hell, might as well. This movie sounds so cool! It's also nice to see Pheonix in another strong role. The young man is very talented and sadly reminds us how talented a duo he and his brother would have been in Hollywood; the Baldwin brothers with better acting skills. (Though Alec has had many good moments.)
Feb. 25, 2000, 9:46 p.m. CST
Todd is a real person?
by Gossamer
Interesting... I thought he was an artificial intelligence routine that had gotten stuck on the words "Iron Giant". Christ, that's kind of creepy knowing he's really walking around somewhere.... As far as Gladiator goes, I'm pretty much happy to watch Russel Crowe run around half-naked and kill people any day. It's nice to know that there's a quality movie wrapped around that.
Feb. 25, 2000, 9:52 p.m. CST
I knew it!
by Psyberia
Todd really IS a freak! My friend owes me twenty bucks.
Feb. 25, 2000, 10:02 p.m. CST
DMFC, nice to see you've stopped trying to be funny
by Mr.Grumpy
Feb. 25, 2000, 10:06 p.m. CST
DMFC, nice to see you've stopped trying to be funny
by Mr.Grumpy
I apologize for the premature post, I'm drunk as shit. DMFC, its kinda sad that you've stooped to trying to find friend's off a friggin movie site board on the internet. What a friggin waste of a life! BigLarz is in NY, huh? Guess I know where to send that A-bomb. Just kiddin' Harry, don't ban me, please? Anyway, DMFC is a joke as is BigLarz (both not funny). Gladiator will rock. I wish I was a gladiator facing DMFC, he'd wish his daddy pulled out early when I was done with him. Nice to see CrackaFarmBoy learned his role and shut his piehole. BigLarz, kill yourself, end this sad little movie once and for all. Suck it, as the girl I brought home will be doing shortly.
Feb. 25, 2000, 10:17 p.m. CST
Harry is a true geek, yet he still has flaws
by Disillusioned
You know, I give a heaping load of credit to Harry. His enthusiasm, as mentioned by other talk backs, is infectious. But sometimes this enthusiasm clouds Harry's judgement about a picture, and he wants to like the movie so bad before he sees it that it rubs off on the review no matter how good the film is. I hate to dredge up Godzilla REVIEW 1, but that would be a fine example. Only Moriarty's review makes me believe this will be a good movie. What the hell happened to Hallenback?
Feb. 25, 2000, 10:29 p.m. CST
To quote my favorite band Propaghandi...
by Mr.Grumpy
"This might be sarcasm". I wasn't serious with that Warrior. But seriously, I respect you and your style, so don't piss me off again. I guarantee you'll regret it. Suck it ban boy.
Feb. 25, 2000, 10:52 p.m. CST
Does no one else find this extremely sexist?
by Ms.Foster
Gladiators. Young white males beating each other to achieve a higher status in society. This behavior is relected on this talk-back, with men (who I assume to be young and white) threatening each other over e-mails sent in cyberspace. Does no one else find that modern movies continue to encourage mysogonistic behavior in males, all the while reducing womyn to little more than playthings? Thank you, but I'll wait till Girl Interrupted comes out on video. You boys have fun at Gladiator, just try not to rape anyone in your testosterone induced frenzy when you're driving home from the theatre.
Feb. 25, 2000, 11 p.m. CST
I don't know what's more pathetic...
by All Thumbs
Guys who come to repeatedly come to AICN to diss Harry or someone like Fanboy Halocaust who actually takes the time to come here ONCE, register for Talk Back just to use how much sex a person gets as a measure of their coolness. He isn't the first person here to do it, but it's a lame attempt at an insult, in my opinion. ANYONE can get sex at any time regardless of their coolness levels. Even those Trekkies have their bump buddies. And being a virgin isn't an insult, it's a testament to how picky a person is and how they don't just lay down with the first skanky thing that walks in front of them. I've also found that the more someone advertises they're "getting some" later on tonight, the less likely it's true.
Feb. 25, 2000, 11:11 p.m. CST
"Skanky" All Thumbs?
by Ms.Foster
It never ceases to amaze me how a woman who practices the same behavior as her male counter-part can be labelled a "slut" or "skanky" while the male is considered to be a "stud". All Thumbs, for someone who appears to be attempting to generate sympathy in the talkback community, I suggest you learn not to be so offensive in your posts, and try to view the world from more than one angle. Not to say I agree with that Holocaust fellow, but two wrongs definitely do not make a right. (2 lefts on the other hand...lol!)
Feb. 25, 2000, 11:12 p.m. CST
I Hate Fanboys and other thoughts.
by danhelm
Thank you, Fanboy Holocaust, for that insightful post. As someone with no life, please enlighten me on your very active social life, as well as your ability to have sex at least once a night with a different partner. Please, I want to be a nilistic, popular, self-centered guy with a "life" too!....While I share this poster's disdain for the worst of the fanboys, I am also partially a fanboy myself. Yes, I'm interested in upcoming movies, and care about what my favorite actors and directors are doing, in the same way other people are into politics, sports, or music; there's nothing wrong with any of these things. I doubt most of the vistors of this site are much more than casual fans, the "occasional otaku" as another web site put it. Whenever I hear "get a life", its usually from the self-satisfied, shallow people who think getting drunk with a lot of people and screwing women you don't know is a "life". People who think reading the paper is a chore, people who have litttle more than a shallow interest in ANYTHING.....okay, that felt good.
Feb. 26, 2000, 12:20 a.m. CST
I want to meet Todd!
by Ambrose Chappell
Great review, Moriarty. This movie sounds awesome. Can you guys please have your next AICN test screening in Seattle? Please?
Feb. 26, 2000, 12:29 a.m. CST
This film sounds amazing
by brokentusk
This movie is going to be excellent - or at least that's what the stones say... P.S I'm going to go see American Beauty today - cause it just opened in South Africa. The Beach and The Whole Nine Yards opened in USA what, about 2/3 weeks ago right? Well how the hell did they get to South Africa so quickly, we got them a week ago. Something strange is going on, and I bet it has something to do with that strange light that I see in the distance...
Feb. 26, 2000, 12:54 a.m. CST
IT Justitifies what YOU DO??
by Seaweed
How in the world does Dreamworks making a good movie in any way justify what you do on this site? You are really not part of the process in any way. Actually, you go against it. I'm sure DW and Doug Wick Prods. would much rather you weren't "Justified" in any way. You had absolutely nothing to do with the movie and the movie was not made so you can write abou t it on this website....
Feb. 26, 2000, 2:29 a.m. CST
"would you like to hang out with DMFC?"
by Lazarus Long
It's a good thing I have my catheter inserted or I may have pissed in my pants. What was funnier, DMFC asking Todd to hang out with him, or referring to himself in the third person. Thank God he didn't say "...with -The- DMFC" or I might have laughed up a lung. If one "hangs out" with DMFC, does one have to become a member of DMFC, or do you become a member of DMFCFC (DanMaunzFanClunFanClub)? I'm really confused. The real question is, whatever happened to Frank Horrigan, the third member of the Unholy Trinity of TalkBack, who reared his head once and then never returned, after DMFC and BigLarz threw rants about not knowing who the hell he was. I'm glad I'm 400 miles south of the Bay Area where the DMPosse can't sic themselves on my ass. Be afraid...be VERY afraid....
Feb. 26, 2000, 2:37 a.m. CST
An IRON GIANT Gladiator
by Todd
This film was great to say the least and every time I would see one of those wonderful gladiators all decked out in their armor I felt a strange rush as if at any moment the camera might cut to a shot of an IRON GIANT Gladiator. This is strange because I knew intellectually that was not possible. However, because of the association I make whenever I see one dressed in any type of metallic outfit, my girlfriend included, my mind jumps to images of THE IRON GIANT uncontrollably. Therefore, when watching a film like Gladiator I felt a strange uneasiness as my mind ping pongs between remembered moments of true tenderness and compassion seen in THE IRON GIANT to moments of indescribable carnage and gore seen in Gladiator. I suppose this is why I felt like killing small kittens after watching the movie.
Feb. 26, 2000, 8:35 a.m. CST
Cool review, and you actually met Todd???
by Jonte
I would like to bring up a point that was mentioned in the review. "I guarantee that shots of people being cut in half or heads being crushed or arms being hacked off will be greeted by lusty cheers at each showing of the film. They were last night..." To me, that's disgusting!! I've been irritated so many times, when a filmmaker has tried to show something really shocking, that the half of the audience laughs or applaud. For example: the "boulder" (coming out of the castlewalls) sequences in Jeanne d'Arc. Yeah, thats funny, people getting crushed by giant rocks!! A couple of years ago: Donnie Brasco, the restaurant-scene where they kill(?) the owner. Cheers and laughs! I could go on. Maybe I'm not geeky enough to understand the subtle comedy in these scenes. Or does the director _intend_ to play these scenes for laughs?
Feb. 26, 2000, 9:22 a.m. CST
Violence in Film
by The Pardoner
I think that a large portion of the laughter at movie violence is a sort of giddy removal from reality. In a movie, you're only getting hit by two sense at once, albeit in huge amount. If you brought even ONE more into it, people would be vomiting in the aisles and on each other. Quentin lived on this principle in Pulp Fiction - imagine being able to smell the slowly festering, drying, blone-filled blood in the back of the car as Vince and Jules are scooping Marvin's brains up with dish towels. However, in Reservoir Dogs, he did something sickeningly glorious with a similar scene. If you look and listen very carefully, you can *feel* Mr. Orange's blood drying, getting thick and sticky, pasting him to the floor. You can hear it crackle when he slumps after shooting Mr. Blonde. Adding that third dimension, I felt sick. The ear scene was nothing. This is the kind of violence that makes me remember getting a couple of getting my baby teeth knocked out by a hockey puck, of slipping and shoving a Swiss Army knife-blade through my thumb, of REAL violence. People laugh at these scenes almost in relief - they don't taste it, or smell or, or feel it, have their knees buckle in shock, and they won't have to.
Feb. 26, 2000, 9:25 a.m. CST
Sigh, blasted typos.
by The Pardoner
Apologies for all the dropped plurals, and forgetting to erase things I was retyping. In the aftershocks of all these campus parties, you'd think I'd start living by my own mantra. =P -- Radix malorum est cupiditas --
Feb. 26, 2000, 9:49 a.m. CST
What the Hell is Todd like?
by Neck Hair Eater
I was wondering if he talks only about the iron giant in real life like he does in these talkback. The guy writes well but can he hold a conversation???
Feb. 26, 2000, 10:28 a.m. CST
Two wrongs?
by All Thumbs
Ms. Foster, you misunderstand. I believe that skanky is a term that can be used for both the male and the female sex. And my comments were not meant to generate sympathy, far from it, but to tell of the kind of person who really sickens me: someone who gets their kicks and gets his/her confidence by telling other people how uncool (geeky, stupid, pathetic, etc.) other people are. I totally agree that a man can fall under the same judgement as a woman and can be called a "slut", but I don't really like calling peoeple sluts or making fun of them for being virgins. THAT is wrong.
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:01 a.m. CST
Ms. Foster
by Monkey Lord
Interesting that you assume that they are "young" and "white"... Afterall, young white people ARE the only people on the internet, and they ARE the only people prone to violence. :) Oh, and ALL men are the way they are because nature wants you to recieve the best quality sperm possible... "Best", of course, meaning "most likely to survive long enough to reproduce before he dies." For us to do this, however, we must destroy our buddies. :) Ah, Darwin! Ah Humanity!
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:16 a.m. CST
Is Ms.Foster the person she claims to be?
by All Thumbs
Rereading Ms.Foster's comments I realize that are too blatant in their feminist approach. This means Ms.Foster is either A) a man or boy who is using that username as a way to make fun of feminists and Jodie Foster B) actually an extreme feminist or C) just a person who went nuts after months of talk about "titties" and the "Reindeer Games" post was the last straw. (BTW, I may post a lot today for I am working on a project for school and this is a wonderful distraction, so be prepared.)***On the subject of "Gladiator" and if Ms.Foster is really serious, I want to know if she/he saw the movie before going off about white boys battling it out in it. This should be interesting...
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:28 a.m. CST
Meeting Todd must kinda be like ...
by user id indeed!
hmm...who knows what that'd be like?Pretty durned interesting,I'd say.It's always a little odd to meet somebody who you know only from the internet.Ya get this little idea of what he/she looks like,then suddenly you meet him/her and he/she/it's nothing like you'd expect.This has been an Insightful Moment with User ID Indeed!
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:33 a.m. CST
<I hope this gets posted at the top...>
by Saulot
T'anks, Moriarty! You know, I wasn't really all hyped up about Gladiator before your review. The Super Bowl commerical didn't really get me excited, and I was wondering what all you fanboys(yeah, I know that word's been used a lot on this post) found in it. But now, well, I'm pumped! Russel Crowe is a vastly underrated actor, and I just hope that this is the summer movie of 2000, and not a lame-o Will Smithish action-comedy. Rock on!--Saulot--
Feb. 26, 2000, 1:18 p.m. CST
No, I have NOT seen Gladiator, nor do I plan to.
by Ms.Foster
However, from the little I've heard, and seen, I'm sure that this movie will glorify violence between males while portraying shrieking females encouraging this behavior. Violence is never romantic, it is disgusting. Regarding my comments about the majority of this community being young white males, it is a given fact that the overwhelming majority of people who participate in forum discussion groups are white males in the 18-35 demographic. Ignorant people will think this statistic is politically incorrect, despite its validity. What IS politically incorrect is the societal conditions which cause statistics like this to exist. I could elaborate, but I'll point anyone interested in these view points to the works of Gloria Steinham.
Feb. 26, 2000, 2:50 p.m. CST
A few things...
by BobBarker
1. I hate that slut/stud double-standard too, and am more likely to respect a girl who's maybe a bit of a "tramp", and feels no shame about *liking* sex than a girl who buckles under the peer pressure. 2. No one who uses the word "Womyn" will ever be taken seriously by anyone. 3. Violence is funny. Humor stems from your personal sense of wrongness, in that laughter starts off as a mechanism of fear. You're a baby. You play Peek-A-Boo...your mother hides her face. Holy shit, mom's gone. Then she shows her face. You laugh. Laughter has been shown to be a sign to tell the rest of the "herd" that "Hey, everyone, false alarm, everything's ok." So when you feel a particular connection to someone in a movie and they are hurt...it's not cool. But, if you don't give a fuck about the character, then hey, the more blood the better. Deconstruct any joke, and you'll realize it's funny because it's "wrong." Also, in the movies we'll laugh at violence of a greater degree than normal as it's unreal, and gives us no true reason for alarm. Hence: "Hey, everyone, false alarm." Good observation about the third sense, too. No sense mentally affects you more than smell, and that's lacking in film. If ever such technology is brought to bear directors will have to be extraordinarily careful.
Feb. 26, 2000, 3:15 p.m. CST
It just got interesting.
by All Thumbs
I love a good debate, especially when it involves movies.***I don't understand, Ms.Foster, how you can condemn a movie as sexist before you have seen it. I find it to be a worse crime than calling a movie bad before you see it. If you watched the movie and were able to break it down by using feminist criticism and analysis, I could respect your opinions regarding "Gladiator" more. Personally, I feel all human beings crave violence at some time and feel watching it on the movie screen is a far better release for this vice than actually being violent. Also, it is hard to criticize violence in an historical epic because it only catalogues violence that was very much real for that time.***One last thing, I still have my doubts as to how sincere Ms.Foster is because of the flagrant usage of "womyn", references to Gloria Steinham (there are far more and even some better feminist points of view to use, especially regarding film) and the fact he/she called our "societal conditions" politically incorrect. Societal conditions can be called wrong, right, sad or other descriptions, but politically incorrect is hardly the right phrase to use. Politically incorrect makes the reader think that society already holds an equal amount of people in the world as an ideal, which it does not. Plus, I kind of like being one of the only females on here. I think it burns our presence into the minds of the mostly 18-35 year old white males on here more. Huh, guys?
Feb. 26, 2000, 3:18 p.m. CST
I'm there.
by 60091
After reading the two reviews of this film...AND the droning (no duh) babble of the oh so annoying 'feminists', I am looking forward to seeing this movie.
Feb. 26, 2000, 3:19 p.m. CST
Re: Movie violence
by Ms.Foster
You claim that violence is funny if you are not emotially tied to the victim. Well, I hate to break it to you, but everyone who dies in the real world is attached to someone or another. Of course, as long as its not YOU its perfectly acceptable. I'm sure the children involved in Columbine would love that opinion of yours. Regarding the word "womyn", it was obviously invented as an alternative to the word "woman", which phonetically speaking places a woman below her male counter-part. The word woman really doesn't offend me, it is so imbedded into my culture I rarely question it. However, on occassion when I feel the need to alienate myself from men, I switch to the more user-friendly version. Whether or not you agree is fine, I just wish you wouldn't mock my beliefs and show a little respect.
Feb. 26, 2000, 3:29 p.m. CST
Why people laugh at some violence...
by All Thumbs
It's actually a way to release the tension of watching something so extreme. It's a perfectly normal human response. Of course, if you're watching movie violence in a really bad horror movie and the blood resembles ketchup too much, then it's just a humour reaction. And remember, there is a HUGE difference between movie violence and real violence. Movie violence, even the most "realistic-looking" usually looks nothing like the real thing.
Feb. 26, 2000, 4:34 p.m. CST
My head hurts.
by user id indeed!
All those aerosol fumes are taking their toll.I get kind of annoyed when people say something and the rest of the board is dedicated to the flaming/skewering/disembowlment of said person.Maybe we should have seperate boards for that so there can be more on-topic discussions...?????This has been another Insightful Moment with User ID Indeed!
Feb. 26, 2000, 8:53 p.m. CST
Dear Ms. Foster,
by The Pardoner
Firstly, don't claim to know things that you obviously don't. At least learn to lie effectively (there's a handy little book for this - The Bluffer's Guide to Philosophy - it's served me well). The word "woman" is not "phonetically below" the word "man", nor is it *morphologically* (this was the word you ought to have used in order to bullshit more effectively) inferior. I'd love to hear why you assigned social signifiance to an preffix. Do you have some other instances in English where the wo- prefix denotes inferiority? Or is your beef with affixes in general? [note: I wish to hell this BBS supported paragraphs] What a crying bloody shame that you're being mocked. I'd love to support you. I don't think anyone should be ridiculed for holding beliefs on things with which they are almost completely unfamiliar, and touting them as cultural truths. Kudos. Do you find history offensive? If you're interested in sanitizing it, I'd be glad to help - I never much cared for the whole modernist scene. A last note: since I fall proudly into that wonderful 18-35 white male slot, I'll refrain from raping anyone after I see Gladiator, if and only if you promise to actually learn something about that nebulous thing called "human nature". It's tricky to get a handle on, but everyone can pick up a bit now and then, as long as they don't repress it to maintain their feeble, little, self-pitying worldview. I'd reccomend a few things to get you started, but I bet they're already on your "Books to Burn" list. And if you take Gloria Steinham seriously, I doubt you'd be able to get anything from them anyway. Ah well... --- Radix malorum est cupiditas ---
Feb. 26, 2000, 10:09 p.m. CST
Being but a runt of a linguist...
by The Pardoner
... with less than a completed 100-level course to my name, I apologize for not knowing of this particular convention. However, the question I am interested in is whether this prefix arose for the *purpose* of degradation, or whether this is simply a convention adopted much later for whatever purpose. Attaching meaning to sounds is a not a terribly logical process, particularly when dealing with a morpheme which, to my knowledge has only one use, making it impossible to draw any sort of general conclusion. Oh, and re: "BBS", you'll find my posts littered with quaint (case in point) idiom and grammar, a habit which can probably be traced to reading "Noddy" books as a child. Nice to know someone in here actually knows something. Why do all these people object to you? =P --- Radix malorum est cupiditas ---
Feb. 26, 2000, 10:14 p.m. CST
DMFC :"I'm one of this site's most famous members, and the tb co
by Niiiice
I seriously hope you were joking. Does having your infantile posts that are almost always off-subject being derided by so many others on this site make you "famous"? No. Perhaps "proliferated." Anyway, I don't recall anyone being particularly "crushed" when even those really positive contributers faded from the "scene." Ranting fools pop up on this site every day, your difference is that you decided to keep it up, but there's hundreds of DMFC's waiting in the wings...
Feb. 26, 2000, 10:27 p.m. CST
Oh, and...
by The Pardoner
... why is it that one would assume that "man" is not derived from "woman". If I remember correctly, deletion does occur in some languages, though infrequently (if at all) in English. Still, for most rules there are a exceptions. If you trace this convention all the way back to the roots of Western, Christian culture, you get to Genesis. However, precious few people realise what the story of Adam's Rib actually means. Reading a good (read: non-secular, non-religious, and ACCURATE) translation of the first few verses of Genesis (a great one to refer to on this is Harold Bloom's "The Book of J"), something quite odd emerges. When the writer describes Yahweh creating man, she (yes, SHE) creates the sense the Yahweh is almost playing with the clay haphasardly. Further, this oddly-formed lump must have "the breath of life" blown into its nostrils in order to become animate. In contrast, when she writes of the creation of woman, she makes the scene more like a construction; purposeful. While Adam was made of clay, woman's roots are in life, and indeed, she needs no further assistance to reach her potential, as she is created WITH life. The amusing thing is that the entire culture of male precedence (since dominance is a word more sinned with than sinning) is based on a terribly weak misreading of this story. The point of this little digression is to show that which is second is not necessarily inferior, particularly when it comes to women. And yes, I personally think women are better than men. If I didn't believe this, then I would be at the mercy of an inferior but gorgeous creature, and we can't have that, now can we? --- Radix malorum est cupiditas ---
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:05 p.m. CST
by Ms.Foster
Now, regarding that rude individual The Pardoner, if you dissect the word "woman" into its lowest common denomonators, you may find little offensive about the word. A similar argument can be made for the term "nigger". However, in a historical context the word "woman" has been used in context of a subset of man. Examples? Take the word "mankind" refering to all homosaphiens. Here we see a case of womyn falling under the general set of "man". Furthermore, take the general expression "Oh, man!". A similar argument can be made. Now, there is a very fine line to be made between the classes of intelligent and intellectual. An intelligent person may think for themself, while an intellectual retains what they read, and regurgitate it when appropriate to sound smart. I'm afraid it is unavoidable that you fall under that latter category Pardoner. I'm perfectly aware the works of Steinham do not specifically address the medium of motion pictures, I merely recommended her writings as a general overview of modern feminism. Judging by the number of replies I have received thusfar, it appears a number of people on this site are deep-down insecure about the shifting sands of hatred on which their lives have been based. Which is fine; change can be a truly terrifying experience. However, I believe with all my heart that to reach your full potential one must learn to cast aside any preconceived notions and learn to think with their hearts.
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:13 p.m. CST
Anyone else think Ms.Foster is a lesbian?
by Mr.Grumpy
Man, whatta load of crap she fed us, huh talk-back? Niiice, you were right-on about her man, I mean myn (or whatevers P.C.) DMFC continues to reveal the pussy that he is, while BigLarz continues to hide (oh, political debate? This is much different than talking about Daredevil!) I don't care. All women are good for is cleaning, cooking, and of course... suck it!
Feb. 26, 2000, 11:30 p.m. CST
Get back on topic kids!
by BigLarz
C'mon, is the deranged ramblings of some femanazi worth diverging into an analysis of the English language? Gladiator is gonna rock, I don't care how Politically Incorrect that is, but its true. I'm in a pissy mood, my neighbors across the hall are annoying me. Does Steinham refer to Gloria Steinham? NOFX refers to her in one of her songs I think. Whatever, it doesn't matter. DMFC is smarter than most of you put together (don't take offense, Mr.Grumpy is negative intelligence). Finish off your weekend strong boys and gals! (or gals and boys for Foster)
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:01 a.m. CST
Russell Crowe
by Chippette
I'm not sure what all this feminism talk is about. This is my first time posting so I'm not sure if I'm allowed to talk about Russel Crowe, but I'm sorry if I'm not. Russel is sooooooo hot! This is my first time posting so I'm not sure how this works. I heard he was up for Wolverine in the X-Men movie, that would've been cool. But then he couldn't have filmed Gladiator, right? I don't care, I'll watch whatever he's in. Mr.Grumpy sounds like a jerk. (I'm sorry if you're a nice guy but you always sound so mean. Guess that's why they call you Mr.Grumpy, huh? : ) ) Anyway, that's my two cents. I've gotta get to bed, talk to you later! ; )
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:24 a.m. CST
Well, shit, Mr. Grumpy, BigLarz...
by Loki Trickster
No real intelligent response to Foster...so let's call her a lesbian and pretend that makes her stupid! Do I follow what you're doing? Those incredible rhetorical skills of yours have just floored me. -Loki
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:38 a.m. CST
DMFC is a new sort of personality on AICN...
by Loki Trickster
A megalomaniac who seems to think he's the most popular person on the lot...when only BigLarz (who seems to be DMFC under a new name) can actually stand him and his pitiful grandstanding. Really. I'm not kidding with you DMFC. This is not some pitiful attempt on my behalf to get the attention of a talkback baron...this is my trying to clue you in that you really aren't popular or well liked. At best you are tolerated. However, kudos to The Pardoner for being one of the most polite and humble talkbacker in recent memory...and shame on you Ms.Foster for calling him "rude" and resorting to name-calling. Oh, and while we're at it, kudos to Disturbed for the erudite description of why we laugh at violence. Personally, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent and well-adjusted adult, and I'm capable of watching "A Clockwork Orange" for example, laughing, and still feeling nothing but sympathy for REAL people who get killed. The dead at Columbine aren't funny; Marvin shot in the backseat in "Pulp Fiction" is. Violence in film isn't necessarily evil...just superfluous violence is. -Loki
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:24 a.m. CST
Goddamn...it just doesn't get through to him...
by Loki Trickster
I don't really care if you and BigLarz are actually the same person DMFC...it really makes no difference...whether you are or not, you're both incredibly obnoxious. Do any of you remember the Simpson's episode with Rodney Dangerfield (one of the few episodes it literally pains me to watch)...well, that's exactly what you're like DMFC...you're stupidly, painfully, obnoxiously unfunny, and it actually hurts to see the level to which you try to bring the conversation down to. -Loki
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:51 a.m. CST
Well, well, Loki Trikster
by Architeuthis dux
So, here you are! I see you've gotten yourself in-over, once again. Doing the deed, ehh? Serving up a prompt lesson to the ole delusional poster? Carefull, for you just may drown, as you haven't what it takes to defend yourself.Case in point: Lola Rennt or some such bullocks? I have added you to my list of conquests, wench, after our previous tryst. If a failure to respond is as good as bending over, sir, then you have surely dropped the soap.
Feb. 27, 2000, 3:40 a.m. CST
Ahhh...Archi...I seem to remember winning that argument...
by Loki Trickster
of course, that's debatable...but I remember you claiming that Star Wars, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, the Indiana Jones movies, etc. as being bad movies, and you decried any attempt to make a non-realistic movie, and that a movie obviously uses "illegal drug money" because the film had a low budget...and then you tried to claim that Runaway Bride was a good movie...I think that basically elimantes any creedence you might have. Actually, you know who you remind me of? English Bob, from "Unforgiven"...with a penchant for pretentious stuffy talk, with very little connection to reality. But still...ultimately a lightweight, compared to the obnoxious megalomaniac that is DMFC. Keep trying though...maybe some day you'll be able to troll like him. -Loki
Feb. 27, 2000, 6:31 a.m. CST
I feel special.
by The Pardoner
Feb. 27, 2000, 6:54 a.m. CST
I feel special.
by The Pardoner
Ms. Foster, This is the second time you've tried to pigeonhole me - do I get a badge? Or better yet, an explanation of why you continually do this when people attack your opinions. What a curious intellectual defense you have... Please read my posts with the vague titles, "Being but a runt of a linguist..." and "Oh, and...". How is it, Oh ageless sage, that you know what the wo- prefix means? How is it that your mind, so pristinely clear of preconceptions (or any conceptions for that matter), fixates on the idea that this is prefix carries a negative connotation? I would argue that it carries a POSITIVE one. But, such allocations are arbitrary. Modern feminism is a bad joke - regardless of whether or not you believe this, just look at what it did to the Queen's University English department. I read bits of Steinham (I believe.. my memory fails me) and her precursors in a section of a Philosophy class, and couldn't find one meaningful argument that wasn't contradicted somewhere else. Did they want women to be treated equally or distinctly, did they place the onus for their perceived oppression on the evil men, or the women who didn't rise up in glorious revolution... it was laughable. Frankly, I find our entire culture hysterically (and isn't this an ironic word to use, hmm?) funny. The four girls who live next to me have no problem indulging themselves with chick-flicks now and then, and crying openly when they miss their boyfriends, but they absolutely refuse to take any shit from them. What use is feminism to these wonderful creatures? They don't need it; in fact, they transcend it. Like myself, they don't even give such things a moment's thought outside of forums like these. Feminism is superfluous in a culture of acceptance, which, I'm happy to say, is what I live in now (Oh, Canada). And since changing the world is for people who need to and have the time, I'm just fine with the present arrangement. Oh, and I'm aware that my national anthem contains the the notion that "True, patriot love" should be commanded into the hearts of its sons. This was a cleverly musical way to get little boys hot to trot on the topic of trench warfare - do you also object to men dying in droves for you? Or would you rather we sent our women out to fight instead? I personally have a huge problem with this - I adore women in general (with a few non-noteworthy exceptions), and I'd rather it be my hairy, cretinous male comrades getting gutted by bullets.
Feb. 27, 2000, 8:30 a.m. CST
Male Bashing
by Buckeye
Feminist male bashing makes me sick. Oh sure, men are the great destroyers! We rape and pillage! Men are the root of all evil! And of all men, white men are the worst of all. I'm sure some will think of this as a cop-out of sorts but men have always been what we were intended to be. We've always served the roles that evolution required us to serve. We were warriors because the human race needed us to be to survive and flourish. The world (and the U.S. in particular) is what it is today because of us. Men have fought and died to make the world a better place for our families. Destroyers? Why not say "defenders" or "providers"? Sure atrocities have been committed throughout history. Society itself evolves over time. What may have been acceptable behavior in the past may not be acceptable today? It's easy to look back on historical events and point fingers and place blame but how were these events viewed by society at that time. Men have always fought and worked to make the world a better place for their families and what thanks did we get? A shorter life span and now a bunch of feminists stereotyping us all as a bunch of violent knuckle-dragging rapists. The roles of both men and women are changing. Our current society doesn't really have as much of a need for "warriors" as it did in the past. Women no longer need a man to provide for them or for protection. Hell, thanks to modern technology we don't even have to be present for reproduction any more. Men will always be competitive and always ready to play the role that evolution and society have dictated for us. There will always be men who will be prone to crime or violence but men haven't cornered the market on antisocial behavior, there are some evil women out there as well. I was really offended by Ms. Foster's "try not to rape anyone on your way out of the theatre" remark. I guess it's acceptable for some segments of society to engage in that kind of generalization. Perceiving yourself as a victim must give you the right to victimize. On behalf of all the men (white, black, or whatever) who have fought and worked and died to make the world a better place (incuding the fathers and brothers of feminists) I'd just like to say, "Hey, don't mention it."
Feb. 27, 2000, 9:09 a.m. CST
Granted, soldiers are brave.
by Ms.Foster
But why are they forced to be in a position where they are risking their lives for some abstract ideal? Look at any war, and you will find a group of men with their tremendous egos who would rather throw away the lives of their countrymen than compromise their own, specific agendas. I take offense to those who have accused me of being a lesbian and such, not because there is anything wrong with that lifestyle, but it shows that while you people can claim to be "pigeon-holed", you can throw out the stereo-types with equal fervor. Getting back to the topic at hand, if, when Gladiator comes out, and I read reviews praising the movie for the way it depicts women, and shows the true horrors of the barbaric male institution of gladiators, then I will gladly try out the movie and apologize to everyone on this site. I am big enough to do so. However, from what I am hearing at this point this seems to be far from the case, which is why I plan on avoiding this movie like the ebola virus.
Feb. 27, 2000, 9:48 a.m. CST
by alcester
i wish Scott would direct the next STAR WARS movie.
Feb. 27, 2000, 9:57 a.m. CST
Ms. Foster, I pity you.
by The Pardoner
I'm not being sarcastic, or slanderous. I really do. If you refuse to see a movie, or experience art in general, simply because it has not received the Feminist Stamp of Inoffensiveness, that will desprive you of some of the greatest treasures in the world. The incomparable novel "Wuthering Heights" is a perfect example. I've seen some gals get in a real snit over this book, refusing to read it for what it is. That's modernism for you, I suppose. And, for the record, I am the only one who objected to being pigeon-holed (twice mind you), and I have NEVER made comments about anyone's sexuality, nor have I identified any person with a group with which they had not already and specifically allied themselves. I have but one final question (for now =) - do you think it impossible that good can come of barbarity? If not, then how exactly are you - who you are, where you are, what you are?
Feb. 27, 2000, 10 a.m. CST
Oh, and props to Buckeye for an insightful rant. =)
by The Pardoner
Feb. 27, 2000, 10:57 a.m. CST
Loki Trickster
by Architeuthis dux
Loki Trickster. You were in foreign territory the moment you admitted your ambiguity regarding my sarcasm. Yet, you went on to defend your opinions in the face of all uncertainness. Fair, I suppose. But, that is neither here, nor there, as you have brought another round to this nonsense. You realize not, what your association will do for me. Still I must contend, for all involved: danmaunzfanclub is not me nor i him. That being said, your penchant for mundane media references, and your innate need of idolatry, will,im sure, most publicly expose the chasm in your ego, although it is one I will be sure to levee you opportunity to fill.Thanks again digital friends.
Feb. 27, 2000, 11:35 a.m. CST
Save your pity for someone that needs it buddy-boy
by Ms.Foster
Of course, since I made a decision on my own which you find silly, that gives you the right to look down on me in your pseudo-sympathy. If a MAN decided that he didn't want to see a movie, that would be fine. When a womyn makes that same choice though, it is customary to treat them like an invalid that can't even feed themselves. I realize this site is composed of what a lot of society deems "geeks"; it was with that thinking in mind where I chose to start posting on this site. I thought you of all people would have open minds so that you could analyze the shackles historical society has thrown around the necks of yourselves and your brethren. However, I am saddened to realize this is not the case. These debates have been very trying for me, as I feel as if I am talking to a wall. I do not think I will continue to visit this website. I will continue to pray for all of you. Goodbye.
Feb. 27, 2000, 11:55 a.m. CST
This is hilarious...
by All Thumbs
We snagged Ms.Foster's bait, fanboys and girls. Like I've said above, I still have my serious doubts taht Ms.Foster was non other than a disgruntled fanboy/girl posing as a an extreme feminist just to gain attention and stir up some contraversy while giving feminism a bad name. Don't use his/her poor excuse for rhetoric as an example of feminism. That's just ridiculous, like criticizing a movie as sexist without seeing it.***And don't tell me that Canada is the epitome of an accepting culture. Take a closer look at some of your laws.
Feb. 27, 2000, 11:59 a.m. CST
Oh dear...
by The Pardoner
Once again Ms. Foster, you are either intentionally twisting what I say, or are simply incapable of understanding. I prefer the latter, turning to that lovely proverb, "Never attribute to malice what can more easily be explained by stupidity." You did not make the decision to avoid this movie "like the ebola virus" on your own. Here is what you said, context and all: "Getting back to the topic at hand, if, when Gladiator comes out, and I read reviews praising the movie for the way it depicts women, and shows the true horrors of the barbaric male institution of gladiators, then I will gladly try out the movie and apologize to everyone on this site." That is not making a decision on your own. It is not even an attempt to assess the *quality* of a film through reviewers, to find out whether it's worth your money to see. Your whole "decision" abut this movie rests on whether or not its portrayal of gender politics fits your constricted guidelines for acceptability. And you're not even willing to assess that for yourself. I am ridiculing you not for being female, but for being a simpleton who thinks that spouting overused metaphors will gain her some leverage in a debate. I adore women. How many times must I say this before you acknowledge it? Not only do I adore them, but I think that, on the whole, they're better than men; more reasonable, more emotionally aware, and certainly more pleasant to look at [wink]. There's one in particular who I'd trade my life for, inch by inch. Prayer is vain, but indulge yourself if you must; prayer helps those who pray to acknowledge their sins against themselves, but noone else is listening. If you don't read this message, and never return, I hope it's for the best. Maybe, one day, you'll come to terms with what being human means, and start to wonder if the entire world might not be out to get you, after all.
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:05 p.m. CST
All Thumbs =)
by The Pardoner
If this person is a fraud, then I congratulate them for perfectly capturing the stupidity of the majority of so-called feminists. I don't find this too likely. =) Perhaps I've just been lucky to live in South-Eastern Ontario, but I've never (and I mean never) seen even a flash of intolerance from someone who wasn't a monstrous idiot, and well know for it, or simply trying to incite a riot of rhetoric in a philosophy class [looks in the mirror]. I haven't had the opportunity to study much more than theories of law... which ones are you referring to? Still, it's a bit silly to judge a culture by its antiquated laws - there's one on the books in a Northern English town requiring Scotsmen to be shot on sight. =)
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:05 p.m. CST
Saving the world
by oneiromancer
Proposition: you don't have to like this movie Proposition 2: you don't have to see this movie Question: why should you care if other people do like this movie and want to see it? Why convert people? Instead of trying to save the world from itself, we would be better off to adopt a position of heroic apathy. Sure there are some things worth standing up for, but a forum for a movie you don't have to see probably isn't one of them.
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:10 p.m. CST
by BobBarker
Ms. Foster, I in no way attacked you blah blah blah. I'll attack you now though: You're so entrenched in your own BS that you should be in fear of drowning. Rhetoric, fallacy, misconception, bullshit. Again and again. As to the "womyn" thing I simply stated a fact: No one who uses it will be taken seriously. (not to mention the fact that it's only a phonetic replacement for "women" not "woman.") You don't know what you're talking about. A derivation in no way makes a word inferior. How insane is that? Ridiculous (which is derived from ridicule, incidentally...which in turn is proof that words lose their true meaning and aren't worth worrying about anyway. When was the last time you called something "ridiculous" and really meant "it deserves to be ridiculed!"***Everyone who responds to DMFC is a sucker. He posts these messages touting his own greatness because he thinks it's funny to do, and thinks it's funny when you take the bait and flip out on him. I kinda think it's funny too.***Violence is funny. Fight Club was one of my favorite comedies of the year.
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:16 p.m. CST
I think, Ms.Foster, that you're taking this a bit too seriously.
by Loki Trickster
I mean, you're speaking as if you're some sort of condescending online proto-feminist geek Karl Marx calling for the revolt of the geek proletariat. You think we're treating you like a child because you don't want to see this movie...and you accuse of us being sexist for doing it...and I think that most people on this site are treating you the way we treat anyone who refuses to see a movie for what we consider irrational or ill-based notions: a steady daily dose of mild abuse with appeals to reason. And yet you continue to insult us and ask us to "analyze the shackles historical society has thrown around the necks of ourselves and our breathren"...I think you're going a bit overboard. The "shackles" that you seem to be talking about are the shackles of sexism, and I think most of the people who have been engaging you in the rational critical debate (except for those who just calling you a dike or a feminazi) have a much more enlightened respect for women/womyn than you give them credit for. We don't go to movies because we want to see women subjegated; we go for entertainment, and most intelligent people can separate the stupid and violent in a movie and realize that it's "wrong", even though they also may exclaim "cool" when it's up on the screen. (Sidenote: "Spartacus", a gladiator movie, also has an incredibly touching romance between Spartacus and a slave woman...which is handled both with respect for women's place in ancient Rome and with respect to modern feminism; she is neither a pawn or a puppet). I think a lot of people on this site DO have open minds...and I believe that the reason YOU haven't seen it is because you've been so incredibly dogmatic and condescending that you've completely missed those who agree with what you're saying in principle, but disagree with how you're going about it. -Loki
Feb. 27, 2000, 12:19 p.m. CST
If you guys really hate DMFC that much, there is a way to get ri
by Niiiice
I'm sure that DMFC is smarter than he makes himself seem in his posts. It seems like they're constructed just to get a rise out of the other talkbackers, and it never fails to. How many times, scrolling down talkback, have you seen posts addressed to DMFC? That's exactly what he wants. It's a parasitic relationship. By feeding off the worst in all of us, he gets responses for himself, thus validating his existence on AICN and prompting further posts. I honestly don't think he cares whether he gets flamed or not, because its essential to him staying here. It's like a spoiled child who will eventually shut up when you ignore him. Personally, I don't care because there's always an "out" guy on AICN, and there's a new one every two months or so, and DMFC IS good for a condescending chuckle or two. It's up to all of you.
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:33 p.m. CST
Hey, Niiiice
by Malchizedik
Hold on a sec, man. your type always uses the crutch of imagined elitism to devalue others. I know that you'll flame me mentally or here in public for dredging this up, but when you have posted, its always been in a condescending way to bust on other talk backers. Which doesn't do anything but make you appear insecure and common. The first time you reacted to my first post was to flame me for remembering a post on N.Y. Eve. It was actually, if I now remember correctly,about Lickerish who wrote this crazy sarcastic story implicating jesus with raping and the Alamo Drafthouse party. She has kind of always written perverted rants like that, though they generally make some sort of sense. (Architeuthis Dux, you're not the only one who remembers talk backers character arcs) And when i brought it up, we were in a ' Verhoeven's Jesus Movie' thread. You ridiculed me for remembering this and referencing it, under the guise of having better things to do on Millenium eve, which as we all know, lasts for 24 hours,and only exists because a great number of people agree that it does. If you were just having a little fun, that's cool, but when you attempt to aggrandize your stature in this way, without admitting the size of the window, it discredits your credibility.
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:33 p.m. CST
DMFC is the reason I bought a computer!
by BigLarz
What better use for this big box than reading DMFC's carefully constructed, thought-provoking comments which educate AS WELL AS entertain. You people who threaten to ignore him in the future are merely biting the hand that feeds you. You lousy bunch of ingrates, it would serve you right if we packed our bags and moved over to punkrock.net. Getting back on topic: Ms.Foster, are you hot? You sound kind of sexy. You should talk to my girlfriend about violence. Last night she kicked my ass for coming home drunk. She's tough when she wants to be. Check ya'll later.
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:39 p.m. CST
Damn Ms.Foster....
by Jojo01
Feb. 27, 2000, 1:39 p.m. CST
Damn Ms.Foster....
by Jojo01
Feb. 27, 2000, 2 p.m. CST
Sometimes I feel like i'm the only real person on earth.
by McKenzieFrenzy
I mean, when I read all of these carfully writen attacks on variouse people, and their equally vhemnant responses, I get the sneaking suspicion that manny of the protagonists involved in said argument are actualy the one organism. So you can see my concern that perhaps this whole site is a conspiricy created to draw me into a meandering world of nonsense and bulshit keeping me from reaching my full potential in life as shelf stacker at K-Mart.
Feb. 27, 2000, 4:02 p.m. CST
Ahhh, TalkBack.
by Brundledan
Remember the old comic strip "Pogo" (one of the greatest strips of all time)? Remember how it would start a certain storyline with a certain group of characters, go on for a week or two, and then one or two of the characters would branch off from the original group to go do something entirely different - and the original storyline would be completely forgotten about? ...Words can't do the technique justice, but "Pogo" fans know exactly what I'm talking about. Anyway, I love TalkBack for exactly the same reason. What starts out as a review of "Gladiator" becomes an argument on male/female attitudes toward violence, which in turn evolves into a general discourse on the state of feminism. And what a cast of characters! The Pardoner, who's raced to the fore of the "reason" side of this argument. All Thumbs, who theorizes that Ms. Foster is actually a guy (and he might be right; there ARE such things as male feminists, frighteningly enough, though it would seem to be a bit of trouble to set up a dummy e-mail account ["email@example.com"] just for one TalkBack). And, of course, Ms. Foster herself, who is CLEARLY a lesbian ("not that there's anything wrong with that lifestyle", of course), raving about the "teachings" of Gloria Steinem and the hardships of "womyn" (which is not, and never will be, a word, no matter how hard they try to push it) in their struggle against the EEEEVIL male-dominated culture, which endures because of the inherent thuggish nature of men (we're all latent rapists, according to the eagle-eyed Ms. Foster). Her final words, "I'll pray for you", are puzzling - after all, isn't the whole concept of God a male conceit, driven into our heads by an historically patriarchal culture? Wouldn't any higher power be tolerantly "gender-neutral", Ms. Foster? Maybe I'm confused. At any rate, just throw in a megalomaniac like DMFC, a frustrated hypocrite like Fanboy Holocaust, and a guy like me who uses too damn many parentheses for his own good, and you've got a narrative that would do Walt Kelly proud. Talkback doesn't get much better than this.
Feb. 27, 2000, 4:13 p.m. CST
by user id indeed!
He...tee hee...I...BWA HA HA HA!HARRY MADE IT SO THAT "THE" WASN'T SPELLED RIGHT!!!GAAAAASP!AAAAAAAAHA HA HA HA!!!!I ..oh...g-Gawd... what... what I great little joke...I...he he...can't...control...my bowels...AAAAAAAAAA HA HA HAAAAAAA!OH DEAR GOD!!!I...I...whew....ok, I think I'm done.Whew!Man,Harry, you are just...great,man.
Feb. 27, 2000, 8:14 p.m. CST
by danhelm
Right on, Brundledan. Some people detest the way that the TalkBack posts meander away from the original article, but I kind of like it. All it took were a few hubristic, condesending fools to start a truly interesting discussion. Ms. Foster, Fanboy Holocaust, DanMaunzFanClub, etc. should be honored for their stupidity and arrogance. Kudos to Buckeye, Pardnor, Niiice, etc. for their posts. Idiot posts out the BEST in us; instead of the expected banter over a movie, we get a superior version of The McLaughlin Group. This proves that fanboys are not just a bunch of Star Wars freaks, but are normal people who just care more about movies than others (except Todd, who is a freak, and a entertaining one at that).
Feb. 27, 2000, 8:34 p.m. CST
Moriarty's Infinitly Superior Gladiator Review?
by DerekWW
Wasn't this post orginally titled Moriarty's Infinitly Superior Gladiator Review?
Feb. 27, 2000, 8:48 p.m. CST
by Bemistape
How bout my balls in your mouth?
Feb. 27, 2000, 9:19 p.m. CST
DMFC was funny once...
by Powerslave
I don't know how many of you remember a talkback awhile ago about 'Lord of the Rings.' It was all nice and respectful. You know, boring. Then DMFC shows up. He claims that Peter Benchley's "Beast" is a superior piece of literature to 'LOTR,' and how the movie version of 'Beast' would blow away 'LOTR.' He also threw in stuff about how Stephen King was a better writer than Tolkein. It was such an obvious troll. The outrage and uproar was incredible! So many people took it seriously, and there was DMFC stirring the pot. To me, it was one of the funniest things I've ever seen here; too bad DMFC has never again reached those deranged heights.****Ms. Foster (that's a joke, right?) are you really Michelle Landsberg? Readers of the Toronto Star will get that reference...
Feb. 27, 2000, 9:50 p.m. CST
Article Title
by KAmnell
I think Harry and Moriarty are trying to have a little fun with each other. I was at the Metreon when these two Gladiator reviews were posted. Harry tweaked the headline before posting Moriarty's review (or changed it shortly after Moriarty originally posted it). If the title keeps changing Moriarty is probably trying to give his review a pretentious name to tick Harry off, and Harry is probably trying to get Moriarty's goat by changing it. By the way, Moriarty and Harry, thanks again for hanging out with the fans. It was definitely interesting to meet you guys. I just wish I could have met Todd. He sounds like a very odd but cool character.
Feb. 27, 2000, 10:05 p.m. CST
Malchizidek, you're hard to hate
by Niiiice
Which irks me because it means I misjudged you from the start. As for my "type", that changes from time to time. Right now I'm in my objectified moderator phase. How long it will last before flame phase or bitter phase or yes, you got it, elitist phase is anyone's guess, but I hope I put it all behind me. Actually, I think those negative sides of my type only come out on X-Men boards. Sad to say, those comic-related talkbacks just seem to bring out the worst in everybody.
Feb. 27, 2000, 10:09 p.m. CST
Powerslave, could you have hit the nail any harder on the head?
by Mr.Grumpy
Its so refreshing to finally find someone with the same viewpoint as myself. I've been saying all along that DMFC is a shadow of his former self. I dubbed him a sell-out, which is why he infuriates me so much now. His fanboy buddy BigLarz always sucked, as he sucks now, so at least he's consistent (I guess). Actually, for a while I though BigLarz and Ms.Foster were the same person, but I was dissuaded of that notion after I realized Ms.Foster makes me laugh, something Larz has never done. Did I ever tell you guys how much I despise fan-boys? Just wait till the next X-Fags post or Lord of the Queers, I'll be going to town on those collective dorks. Suck it.
Feb. 27, 2000, 11:54 p.m. CST
Senor Grumpy
by Niiiice
Your mentioning the next X-fans board sent chills down my spine. I think we all know what to expect, which begs the question now...what can we do to prepare???
Feb. 28, 2000, midnight CST
Only YOU can prepare yourself...
by All Thumbs
...for the next X-men Talk Back. Niiice, my suggestion: bomb shelters. Lots of them.
Feb. 28, 2000, 2:10 a.m. CST
Bugger, I wish you'd show something in Manchester...
by reni
Well done kids, glad you enjoyed the film, only wish you'd show something over here...dammit.
Feb. 28, 2000, 6:39 a.m. CST
The Collective Ass Pt. 4 The Fall of the Feminist Ass
by RipReaver
And a rounder, applelike ass cries out above the hairy asses, and its voice begs for equality and acknowledgement; justification for equality in strength. But what happens, in the battle for respect, it falls flat on its face by being so offended it decides to give up before it even began. Two posts: done. So much for respect. So much for a talkback to end all talkbacks. The feminine ass whines, whimpers, lets out a small puthhhhhhhhhhh fart and dies. The feminist ass losses by conceding to its own argument. How ass-like of it. It is an ass to be fucked and nothing more apparently...
Feb. 28, 2000, 6:46 a.m. CST
Oh yeah, the movie in question
by RipReaver
GLADIATOR, frigging gladiator, as it chops the proverbial head off of all the cheese movies, as it dismembers ands maims the ms fosters of the world with an unrelenting grind of straightforward story of revenge induced carnage...FUCK YES. Swords hacking in ancient times, ridley scott. YES. nuff said. (theres no costume trim/wig debate with this movie)
Feb. 28, 2000, 7:02 a.m. CST
Laughing at violence (in movies)
by Jonte
This is the first time I've managed to write something that actually got a response. Yes! I agree with Dark Penguin, when he(?) writes that people should stop laughing at something as disturbing as "Saving Private Ryan". Yes, there is violence in movies that is funny, but some of you wrote that violence in movies is always funny, entertaining! Please note that I'm in no way is opposed to violence in movies, but as Dark Penguin said, show respect to the film-maker and don't laugh at those violent scenes. (And I hope that Besson for example, really didn't intend for people to laugh at the gory scenes in The Messenger. It sure felt that way, when the audience laughed at the screening I was at).
Feb. 28, 2000, 8:04 a.m. CST
I'm sorry but...
by saintarnold
as much as I like Ridley Scott and am dying to see Gladiator (absolutely CANNOT wait!)I just do not care for Blade Runner. It was dreadfully slow and had zero payoff. I felt like I wasted 2 hours watching a depressed guy with zero expression walk around a dirty futuristic town. What did I miss that all of you saw in that film?
Feb. 28, 2000, 8:09 a.m. CST
I curse you all
by Frank_dj_tanner
Why don't I live in San Fransisco! I have to wait till May to see this movie.
Feb. 28, 2000, 10:11 a.m. CST
Ms. Foster! What kind of a woman are you!
by twindaggerturkey
Don't you know that watching guys slaughter each other is one of the primo delights of women? Personally, though, I prefer to see good-looking Asian guys sticking each other with swords. I bet you're fake anyway.
Feb. 28, 2000, 11:19 a.m. CST
What the heck is the wack pack?
by Niiiice
I thought the whole AICN clique fad died before it got off the ground...
Feb. 28, 2000, 12:13 p.m. CST
Violence in movies...
by Loki Trickster
I was watching the "Boogie Nights" DVD the other night listening to P.T. Anderson's awesome commentary, and he related a story about a test audience of college students for the film, who, when William H. Macy's character goes in and shots his wife, cheered...and Anderson felt at that point that he'd done something really really wrong...but when Macy turns the gun on himself, "That really shut the fuckers up." This is just a minor anecdote about how fucked up American audiences are sometimes when it comes to violence, and how not all directors really are trying to titilate with the violence. For example, in my mind, Pulp Fiction is a perfect example of artistic violence to titilate. It's so stylized and darkly comic that you just HAVE to laugh...but at the same time it makes you realize that this really isn't something that you should be laughing at. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. -Loki
Feb. 28, 2000, 1:16 p.m. CST
by Mae, SHUT IT
I'm back and I'll never leave again. FOSTER, SHUT IT!!!!!!!
Feb. 28, 2000, 1:18 p.m. CST
Clarification on the "Wack Pack" issue...
by BigLarz
The term Wack Pack, in regards to Aicn, was coined by I believe DarthPsycotic a while ago. I wasn't sure who he was referring to, but lately it seems that DMFC, myself, and honorary member Todd (DMFC's words, not mine) are the current roster. Its just a stupid nickname, but it kinda makes me chuckle so whatever. I realize Mr.Grumpy is often associated with myself and DMFC due to his psychotic ramblings about us but I assure you he is NOT in the "wack pack". Anyway, I think its very pretentious for someone to complain that we're not "amusing" enough for you when you have yet to do a single thing to make me acknowledge your existence. We're not professional comedians you know (maybe Todd is, I'm not sure) so if we make you laugh, great. If we piss you off, that's also great. Here's a Preacher quote which I think pertains to my feelings on this: "Love me, loathe me, or masturbate screaming my name. Either way I don't give a shit." Something along those lines anyway. So why don't you get off your high-horse and make ME laugh joke boy... or at least do something more creative than complain that we're not as funny as you want us to be.
Feb. 28, 2000, 2:42 p.m. CST
You guy's crack me up...
by Skyway Moaters
All this talk about how great you are and fan clubs and what not. Reality check: You're posting to a forum that publishes movie reviews and rumours. SM {;-0
Feb. 28, 2000, 4:45 p.m. CST
blade runner comparisons
by coda
How can you guys compare blade runner and a gladaitor movie together? These two films are totally different. It just makes me a little buzzed when I read stuff like that. I like blade runner, don't get me wrong, but the film was really flawed. I've read and seen some stuff about Mr. Scott's new film and it looks like it will blow blade runner away. But don't compare the two.
Feb. 28, 2000, 10:57 p.m. CST
Niiiice, Morgoth, BigLarz: listen up
by Malchizedik
however ridiculous, the wack pack term was coined by a forgettable Tolkien fanatic on the LOTR Helm's Deep talk back where 'someone' announced he was getting married after leaving his computer for society. included were : regginal/IcebergSlim, darthpsychotic, dmfc, mrgrumpy, biglarz or brundledan(whichever), and Luckiestguyintheworld. The term went on to be used by darthpsychotic to refer to or incite any of these posters and their innately off topic posts
Feb. 29, 2000, 4:06 a.m. CST
by Jonte
Loki Trickster, my point exactly! Thank you.
Feb. 29, 2000, 7:20 a.m. CST
"brilliant" brother?
by Obscure Homage
I completely acknowledge the fact that River's premature death was a tragedy, but I think calling him brilliant is a tad bit excessive. He had his career defining role in My Own Private Idaho, but what happened after that? A cameo in Last Crusade, phoned in performances in Sneakers and I Love You To Death, followed by years of obscurity until his abrupt demise. Brilliance is a word that shouldn't be tossed around lightly. Maybe River could've been on that level if he lived to overcome the horrible drug affliction, but the sad truth is that his work took a nose dive in the short years before he died.
Feb. 29, 2000, 7:54 a.m. CST
by Rom-Spaceknight
This might be good.
Feb. 29, 2000, 12:58 p.m. CST
The Collective Ass Pt 6 As the Shit Flows...
by RipReaver
The Collective Ass takes talkback very seriously. The Collective Ass views the forum as some sort of social heirarchy. The Collective Ass is funny. All members of the Collective Ass would be very different people if they actually were in the same room as each other. Some in the Collective Ass look for attention. It could be argued the author/producer/editor/artist/ of The Collective Ass is doing it right now. Sarcasm and insulting and creatively crushing other members of your own Collective Ass is encouraged and respected, unless such slander is directed at oneself. Then, the accused must burn in the fires of hell, take a heated cattle-prod up the ass and die in eternal torment. Some of the Collective Ass even achieve "legendary" status. Some are banned, and banned again. One has even been banned four times. They return, they love the Collective Ass, the Collective Ass loves them. Some shun The Collective Ass, and grow increasingly frustrated; they are out of favor with the Collective Ass. Stories are written about them, songs are sung. The shit flows from The Collective Ass, as it always has been, and always shall be....Ripreaver does not necessarily share the views of the Collective Ass, nor does Ripreaver proclaim himself any better then any asshole in the Collective Ass. RipReaver however, will deliver the CA as deemed by his inferiors (hehe. that is all.
March 1, 2000, 12:06 a.m. CST
by wmilsten
cool, can't wait.
March 1, 2000, 2:20 a.m. CST
ms foster an imposter treat her bad and it
by Z
will cost her a section of the talk back roster is loster she (he /it) coldn't hack the flack of an all out talk back attack so they tossed her. O yeah and for all the linguists out there, check out the derivation of the words mankind, woman, man. the linguist professor at a university I attended a couple of years ago showed how the word's man and woman were derived from germanic (or maybe anglo saxon i can't recall) and how originally men were called ---man and women were called woman (can't remember the prefix for the mens, it's late and I'm tired but there is one, so there) and that the term man as in man kind was used to refer to the collective whole, like say hefolk, shefolk, with folk being the collective, hefolk gets chopped to folk and shefolk remains. so...the word woman did not originally imply in any way subservience. Also, every time I read womyn i mentally think it sounds like "woah-mine", maybe womyn folk could get together and think of a new and interesting term to describe the female half of the equation. Any ideas? how about snartlefoof, or dunglebleet, or canollio, or liyadoque. Shit get creative with it, have fun! womyn (for all your intentions) is just as derivative as women. I mean seriously, does one little vowel make you feel that much different and special? Why not try on a few more and through in some consonants to liven things up..Any body got any ideas?
Top Talkbacks
- First look at footage from Genndy Tartakovsky's POPEYE! -- 147 total posts 47 posts
- Rejoice! DEADPOOL: THE MOVIE comin' to you in February 2016!! -- 158 total posts 21 posts
- Guy Ritchie brings a mermaid onto land to play his Guinevere in KNIGHTS OF THE ROUNDTABLE: KING ARTHUR! -- 75 total posts 19 posts
- Josh Trank's FANTASTIC FOUR gets pushed back nearly two months, and knocks ASSASSIN'S CREED off the calendar! -- 108 total posts 17 posts
- Another New (And Rather Cool) INTERSTELLAR Poster!! -- 202 total posts 7 posts
- Muldoon Happily Gets Lost in THE MAZE RUNNER! -- 34 total posts 6 posts
- Here's A Video Of STAR WARS EPISODE VII's Millennium Falcon, Highlighting One Little Detail… -- 417 total posts 6 posts
- Copernicus is really pissed about the Stephen Hawking biopic THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING that he saw at TIFF -- 164 total posts 5 posts
- Timur Bekmambetov Finds His Ben-Hur For, Well, BEN-HUR!! -- 294 total posts 4 posts
- Fox, Home Of GOTHAM, Makes Pilot Commitment To Project Based On DC Comics' LUCIFER!! -- 112 total posts 3 posts


text:
Could a man hold sustained flight using sound?
View Single Post
Nov24-12, 10:03 PM
Could a man hold sustained flight using sound?
Hmm, I'd never thought about. There might be some clever way to do it, but I sure can't think of one. Sound waves are pressure waves. So you get a pressure that moves an object in some direction, but a millisecond or so later you get rarification (reduced pressure) that moves the object in the opposite direction, so it cancels out. If you were moving at the speed of sound then you could "surf" a pressure wave, but if you yourself are producing the sound then it will never catch up to speed-of-sound you.
That levitation seems to be like this. You have a standing wave, so there are static regions of pressure that are more dense than the object being levitated. Areas of air that are more dense than a human body are not going to happen.
If there is a lot of thrust coming out of his mouth, why doesn't it blow his head off? Even if it didn't, why doesn't he tumble end over end?
You might have more luck having this sound reduce something's mass. Uh, maybe the frequency is so high it disturbs the strong force in something's atoms. But that would be a lot more likely to cause some ungodly explosion.
I don't see any way to do it.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Pig and Miru KimErotica // Thursday, 26 May 2011
Miru Kim states 'Through the sensations of skin on skin, living bodies in the external world are formed, in relation to the self. When two bodies come in contact–each of them touching and being touched at the same time–the souls meet and interweave on the skin, and the subject and the object become one.' "The skin, a single tissue with localized concentrations, displays sensitivity. It shivers, expresses, breathes, listens, loves, and lets itself to be loved, receives, refuses, retreats, its hair stands on the end with horror, it is covered with fissures, rashes, and the wounds of the soul." -Michel Serres
Body and world mingle on the skin, as much as body and soul. The soul is inseparable from the body. It moves through the body like watered ink on mulberry paper. With the tip of the brush touching the surface, ink is applied and it spreads with water molecules through intricate fibers of the paper skin. When I put my two thumbs together and push them into my appendix region with force, my soul multiplies at that point, just like the inkblot applied with more pressure. The ink cannot be separated from the paper. Paper is the skin, and soul and body blend in the skin.


text:
5 key players who could throw us over fiscal cliff
GOP and Democratic lawmakers are staking out routes that could either force compromise or snap the economy's safety lines.
By Eric Pianin and Josh Boak
As the presidential election campaign grinds its way into November, Republican and Democratic lawmakers are busily hammering their own pitons into the fiscal cliff -- staking out routes that could either force compromise or snap the economy's safety lines.
The politics are as steep as the economic consequences. The $660 billion jumble of expiring tax breaks and automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect in early January threaten to shove the country back into recession—a downturn that may be gradual or unexpectedly sudden. The jockeying for position has only increased the uncertainty of what exactly will happen during the lame duck Congress after the Nov. 6 election.
The two parties' profound differences over economic and tax policy will be front and center tonight when Vice President Joe Biden and Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan meet in Danville, Ky., for a nationally televised debate. With the outcome of the race between President Obama and Republican Mitt Romney now very much in doubt, political leaders back in Washington have begun taking strong positions on spending, entitlements and tax reform in anticipation of a showdown after the election. Who does the negotiating matters almost as much as what the terms of the deal are—and plenty of lawmakers are vying to star in this particular drama.
"Given the size and complexity and the time requirements, you can't afford to make the circle too big or nothing is ever going to get done," said Jim Manley, the former press secretary for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. a key ally of Reid's, drilled into the cliff's ideological divide on Tuesday. To reduce the deficit, the Senate's third-ranking Democrat called for both higher tax rates on wealthy Americans and closing tax loopholes, dangling in return for Republicans the possibility of cutting Medicare expenses by "hundreds of billions of dollars."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., quickly rejected the offer as a "plan to hold the economy hostage to massive, job-killing tax hikes." Separately, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., is convening a bipartisan "gang" of eight Senate deficit hawks to broker a pact of their own.
The lower tax rates enacted during the administration of former president George W. Bush are the main sticking points in negotiations. President Obama would only continue them for families earning less than $250,000, while Republican nominee Mitt Romney plans to reduce the rates further.
Cut through the posturing and much hangs with five key players during the weeks of the lame duck session—right before the government would clamber over the crest of the fiscal cliff in 2013.
House Speaker John Boehner – As one of the few leaders practically guaranteed to hold the same position after the election, the Ohio Republican favors extending all of the breaks for one year and any increase to the debt ceiling must be offset by spending cuts. Getting a lame duck deal would be "difficult," Boehner recently told Politico, and "frankly, I'm not sure it's the right thing to do -- have a lot of retiring members and defeated members voting on really big bills."
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner — Along with White House chief of staff Jack Lew, Geithner will be among the key negotiators if Obama gets reelected. He's called for laying a foundation in the closing weeks of 2012 to sidestep the cliff. He's already holding closed-door discussions with House Ways and Means Chairman David Camp, R-Mich., and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – The Nevada Democrat says he'll only agree to a deal that increases taxes on high-income Americans. "I do not believe that we are going to go over the fiscal cliff," Reid, who favors a long-term deal, told reporters last month.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – The Kentucky Republican wants all the Bush-era tax rates extended for a year as broader tax reform gets hashed out—and the sequester on spending rejiggered so that the military is spared $50 billion of cuts next year.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi -- Protecting Medicare—a $550 billion entitlement— is the top priority of the California Democrat, who opposes the Republican plan to segue it into a voucher-style program. "Does anyone have a question on the most important issue facing the American people?" Pelosi told reporters earlier this month. "The survival of Medicare. And if you don't think it's important just think of granny moving into the den on one of those adjustable beds when they have to leave the nursing home."
That's a frightening set of differences to overcome. Boehner pooh-poohs using lame duck compromise to avoid edging off the cliff. Tax hikes are necessary for Reid, yet McConnell abhors them. And Pelosi is committed to shielding Medicare—whose growth drives the deficit—from dramatic overhauls.
Geithner prefers to talk publicly about how the negotiations should proceed, instead of the actual state of play. "It would seem to be a remarkable thing for this country at this moment in history to say we can't solve the problem, we can't find principled compromise," he told Bloomberg TV in August. "And so we're going to put the country through wrenching trauma as a way to force political consensus. "
All of that enhances the sense of uncertainty as the clock ticks down.
"People want a deal, but nobody has the foggiest idea of what that deal would look like," said Steve Bell, a senior staffer with the Bipartisan Policy Center and former Republican Senate aide. "I just wonder after all the debate and after all the hard and fast positions they're going to take… whether they can come back and within 45 days reverse those decisions" in order to reach a compromise.
For Warner's group to be effective, it not only has to establish a consensus that's been elusive in the past but also design a compromise that passes muster with skeptical party leaders. Reid has little interest in ceding power to an ad hoc group of Democratic and Republican senators, and others view the newly constituted "Gang of Eight" as a distraction or sideshow.
"It doesn't have to be a sideshow, but in order for it to be the main attraction, they're going to have to agree on something and propose something," said William Galston, a former policy director for President Bill Clinton. "Up until now they haven't been able to. So they will be a sideshow if they're just a seminar group."
And if the Democrats insist on greater tax revenues, they'll meet an immovable Republican blockade in the House that considers all net tax increases as a drag on economic growth.
"I don't care what the electoral outcome is," said J.D. Foster, an economist with the conservative Heritage Foundation, "the House of Representatives is not going to vote for anything that raises taxes further."
Eric Pianin is the Washington editor at The Fiscal Times. Subscribe to The Fiscal Times' free newsletter.
More from The Fiscal Times
- Jim Rogers on the Coming Fiscal 'Catastrophe'
- Voters, Clueless about Fiscal Cliff, In for a Shock
- If Romney Wins, Will His Tax Plan Survive?
1. How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during your pathetic political career?
2. At what age do you retire from your pathetic 50 year political career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?
3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?
4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?
It is you, and your political co-conspirators Reed ans Pelosi who are the "greedy" ones. It is you and your fellow nutcases who have bankrupted America and stolen the American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers. And for what? Votes. That's right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers. You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
Breaking up big banks is an untested solution to the too big to fail problem that attempts to isolate and dismantle large, troubled institutions while protecting the rest of the economy.
|There's a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.
|There's a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.
[BRIEFING.COM] The stock market finished an upbeat week on a mixed note. The S&P 500 shed less than a point, ending the week higher by 1.3%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (+0.1%) cemented a 1.7% advance for the week. High-beta names underperformed, which weighed on the Nasdaq Composite (-0.3%) and the Russell 2000 (-1.3%).
Equity indices displayed strength in the early going with the S&P 500 tagging the 2,019 level during the opening 30 minutes of the action. However, ... More
More Market News
|There's a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'


text:
Frequently purchased together:
Better Sex Essentials® Liquid Lube 8 oz
One of our best-sellers! Keep sex slippery and sexy with Better Sex Essentials® Liquid Lubricant. It glides on beautifully, like liquid silk against your skin, and our glycerin-free formula is safer to use. Sex toy safe. 8 oz bottle.
Better Sex Essentials® Strawberry Flavored Lubricant
Better Sex Essentials® Strawberry Flavored Lubricant is specially formulated to enhance your body's own natural lubrication and add flavor for enhanced oral pleasure. Water-based & Non-Staining, Hypoallergenic & Non-Toxic, Latex Compatible, No artificial sweeteners. Ingredients: Purified Water (Aqua), Sodium Carboxy Methyl Cellulose, Glycerin, Methyl Paraben, Citric Acid, Flavor 4oz bottle.
Champagne Jelly Anal Plug
Pop this classy jelly plug in for gentle anal stimulation. 5" long, 1" wide. Store separately from other sex toys. Only use with water-based lubricant.
Screaming O Vibrating Couples Cock Ring
The Screaming O Vibrating Couple's Cock Ring has everything you need for over-the-top orgasms! It's made of a soft, flexible gel material that's easy to put on and easy to wear, and it has bumps and knobs built right in for sensational stimulation for you both. And if that wasn't enough, flip the easy on/off switch and enjoy 20-40 minutes of mind-bending vibrations that'll take you both to the moon! Try it once and you'll want more
Sizzle! Guide to Great Oral Sex
Oral sex is one of the most sensual of all love play, capable of producing sensations that far surpass the pleasures of intercourse alone. Learn how pleasing your lover orally allows you to share deeper intimacy, and experience new heightened pleasures. Watch as seven real loving couples explicitly demonstrate the delicacies of oral sex designed to take your love life to a whole new level. Run time: 66 mins.
Sizzle! The Better Sex® Guide To Anal Pleasures
Watch in detail as real couples explore the pleasure of anal erotic encounters. Couples who wish to leave no territory uncharted will find this program to be an incredible asset. You'll discover helpful tips to maximize pleasure, specially designed toys for erotic anal plan, and the best positions to maximize comfort and depth of penetration for beginners and experts alike. Join us as we examine the myths and misconceptions surrounding this often taboo topic. Jack Morin, Ph.D., the world's leading expert on anal eroticism and sexual health, hosts a frank and factual overview of this exotic, much misunderstood sexual practice. Armed with the facts and an open mind, enlightened couples can discover truly arousing, mutual anal pleasure. Run Time: 60 minutes
10 Ways to Go Longer and Stronger
From our brand new Live Better Love Better Video Series A healthy, happy life includes great sex! However, many men, especially those over 40, find that intimacy has become routine, or have lost interest in sex due to lack of desire. Desire is driven not only by chemicals and hormones in the body, but also by overall health and wellbeing. Reinvigorate your libido with this male-focused program that highlights exercise, diet tips, and tantalizing games helpful in raising testosterone levels, thereby increasing interest and desire in sex.
Four loving couples explicitly demonstrate intoxicating pleasures including fellatio and cunnilingus techniques, invigorating positions, prostate stimulation, penis pump use and benefits, the truth about supplements and much more. Designed for men, and created by leading sex educators, therapists and physicians, Go Stronger & Longer is designed to refuel erotic desire, empower you with techniques to satisfy your partner, and provide methods to improve overall sexual health and wellbeing. Discover how making love doesn't have to be routine, and how sexual performance is a matter of a healthy mind, body, and desire. 60 minutes & extras
This sex toy is compatible with water-based lubes; try the Better Sex Essentials® Gel Personal Lubricant . It is not recommended to be used with silicone lubes. After use, carefully wash the sex toy with mild soap and water or try the Better Sex Essentials® Toy Cleaner for even quicker cleanup. Store this sex toy separately from other sex toys.
Look for your confirmation email, which you should receive it in the next few minutes. The email will include your $10 instant coupon.
In order to activate your coupon you must click on the email. Clicking on the email will add you to our email list and validate your coupon.


text:
- Hall of Famers
- The Members
- Hall of Fame Weekend
- Rules for Election
- Membership Spokesman
- Museum
- Experience
- Exhibits
- Library
- Artifacts
- Awards
- Activities
- Plan Your Visit
- Entering the Hall
- Cooperstown
- Events
- Special Experiences
- Travel Packages
- News & Media
- Headlines
- Features
- Hall Directory
- Connections
- Education
- Public Programs
- School Programs
- Internship Program
Home ›
School Programs
The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum offers exciting experiences for students in grades K-12. Visit the Hall of Fame for a field trip, connect with us for a videoconference, or download our curriculum for use in your classroom! Choose from the list below to explore our educational opportunities and discover what experience is best for you!
Professional Development for Educators
Tell Us About Your Experience
The Hall of Fame encourages the incorporation of baseball curriculum in your classroom. Whether you participated in a field trip or videoconference, or used our lessons in your classroom, we want to hear about your experience! Please take a moment to fill out this brief survey and tell us about your experience.
Hall of Famer Search
This Day in Baseball History
On September 22, 1993, Nolan Ryan of the Texas Rangers makes his final major league appearance. Pitching against the Seattle Mariners, the 46-year-old Ryan allows a grand slam and leaves the game in the first inning with a torn ligament in his elbow.