MovieChat Forums > lukaskm > Replies
lukaskm's Replies
I'm not a Trump fan. I'm not fond of either party. All I mean to say is when you do a historical figure in a movie--unless you're doing Hitler or Stalin--you need to look at all sides of the equation in what the history books and documents say if you want to do a great job--neither deifying or demonizing the person of interest. A film director could make the same mistake with a movie on Joe Biden too. Authenticity is tricky.
This is very well written. Could you show me the documentaries and links?
NukeDude,
As always with these stories, the media articles are very vague and use words like "highly credible" and "thorough investigation" with no links to access the details of the investigation, when the women "came out" and how they "came out" and thus it undercuts justice and the quest for truth.
I don't know Tim Ballard personally; I'm not saying he is perfect or has done everything right but I do know that it's a common plot of the FBI and CIA to either dig up the dirt or use the art of artifice to discredit and destroy people on their hit-list simply because they question the system or raise awareness to unpopular subjects. Look up Operation Mockingbird and Cointelpro. They have the power to infiltrate spies into news broadcasts to weave a narrative and infiltrate organizations to set people up so the government has a reason to persecute them. They did this back in the 50's 60's and 70's with the Nation of Islam, Civil Rights Movement, American Communist Party, Black Panthers and Vietnam War Protestors and we somehow think they wouldn't do that now...
Also, look up the documentary "The New American Century" (Massimo Maccuzzo) about the Iraq War. There's a brief story mentioned about a woman who supposedly worked in a Iraqi hospital during the revolution when Saddam Hussein came to power and gave an emotional testimony to alleged cruelty of soldiers that barged into the facility. It turned out she was a CIA asset, paid to play a part on TV.
It's called spiritual wickedness in the high places.
Maybe the house they rented wouldn't allow pets.
Nicole C. Mullen had an abusive first marriage before she became a famous contemporary singer. But she never gives his name when mentioning him in her interviews out of respect for him and his new family's privacy. She said on the Cece Winans YouTube blog "He was troubled and damaged and had a hard childhood and took his frustrations out on me physically and emotionally. But after we divorced, he finally got the help he needed. So there was enough love left in my heart--not to stay in the relationship--but to forgive him--because I didn't believe he deserved to be punished forever for our failed marriage. It's been thirty years. He's dead now and I still don't give his name for the sake of his family."
Now THAT'S an honorable woman for you!
I totally agree with Enigmaticocean.
Have you ever watched the 1995 version? It ends exactly how you would have done it, had you been the director.
Totally agree. Just another disgruntled, proud s--t feminazi wacko looking for attention. If you don't believe me, look up Mediaman's review of her autobiography on Goodreads. Isn't it odd how when all these actresses' careers hit the skids, they come out with these tell-all books and interviews airing their dirty laundry and playing the victim blaming men for all their issues? It's like they can't function being outside the spotlight, so they do whatever it takes to get back into the spotlight--like the MeToo movement and the Depp vs. Heard case. It doesn't matter if the attention they get from the public is good or bad, as long as they are getting noticed. The attention serves as a temporary high but will never fulfill the longings of the soul.
If you're so victimized and oppressed, why do you wait five, ten to twenty years before coming out about your SOB stories instead of going to the police right away?
I think about those women who worked in the massage parlor with Ravi Zacharias the founder of the RZIM mission field, accepted favors from him for money and then waited until he died before stabbing his family in the back and taking down his foundation by playing the victim--now we're supposed to suddenly boycott and disregard all the good his foundation has done over the years because of what a few attractive women say on social media?
As far as Harvey Weinstein and Ravi Zacharias are concerned, I'm not saying they're saints or that they did everything right but heck, I really don't know what I'd do if I were a wealthy successful billionaire businessman and had tons of beautiful women in my face trying to get my attention about this and that. I'm not saying I would fall but most men would and to say you wouldn't be tempted in that situation would be EXTREMELY DISHONEST. You have to understand the human condition--we crave attention and validation from others and wealth and power just brings it out more.
Bottom line: I don't have a dog in these fights.
I read all the way to the end of this thread and most of you make great points. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. That's why whenever I hear people open up about their marriage gone wrong, I try not to sympathize too much or take sides because there is always another side and it's human nature to pass the buck off entirely to the other party instead of saying "It was my fault, or partly my fault" because that's means laying down your pride, which most humans are unwilling or incapable of doing.
Totally agree. I used to enjoy her interviews and the film but in retrospection, why does she keep his last name if he was such an a***ole to her? It's like she enjoys being his ex-wife. I wonder if it all boils down to $$ and fame.
Also, the media chooses which stories get massive coverage and which ones don't in order to keep the ratings high and their wise enough to realize everyone loves a good SOB story about a victim. Like you said, there are always two sides of the story.
If you watch the deleted scenes, they did the ending scene with Mina simply killing Dracula, then going back to Jonathan and friends. Then they lift the body of the Texas oil baron and carry it over the cross while they choir sings. I think this would have been a much better way to end the film because it emphasizes Mina's gratitude towards her husband, Van Helsing and friends and the reoccurring message that the spiritual forces of good will always triumph over evil.
AnagramYYZ, I like your analysis. Great job.
Curiouser,
I know I'm late to the party here but I wrote a short epilogue that explains what I believe happened to Jackie. In the story, Helen is married to a farmer named George Weatherstaff and has three children. The eldest, Friedrich hears from the grapevine he is not his father's child. He confronts his Aunt Margaret and she tells him everything. He visits Jackie and her daughter Emily (his half-sister who was conceived at the same time, unbeknownst to him) to share a sweet moment with them by offering them a choice of his acrylic and watercolor paintings. George Wilcox was ordered by the court to make just compensation to Jackie for killing her husband when he got out of jail by sending her a hefty paycheck, once a year. After George dies in WWI, his widow Dolly still honors the pledge.
https://www.fanfiction.net/s/14278547/1/His-Father-s-Son-Epilogue-to-Howard-s-End#google_vignette
The ending is so dumb. I definitely agree. I love everything else about this movie but the eleventh-hour conversion scene at the end turns me off--we're supposed to completely disregard all his victims since he's been "cured by wuv?" Can you imagine if there was a movie about Ted Bundy with an eleventh-hour conversion ending? How would most audiences react to that? So why do we react differently if it's a mythological creature?
The acting, costumes, sets, photography, editing, effects, music, screenwriting is overall outstanding. As for the ending...well...I can always flip it after Jonathan cuts Dracula's throat coming out of the box...
I strongly disagree. Usually a show falls apart after six or seven seasons but I felt Touched by an Angel kept it's high quality to the very end for nine seasons and that is no small feat. Sure, it had it's stale moments and stinker episodes (what show doesn't) but all the main characters were well written, and the storylines were fresh and original for the most part. To me, jump the shark is not a random episode you dislike; it's when the show does something unrealistic or out of place with the overall feel of the show to get the ratings up or adding characters to keep the show alive that aren't all that interesting. I didn't feel that way at all.
I actually like the Gloria character because she has a very distinct personality. She's odd, quirky and talks like a computer geek like Eugene in Adventures in Odyssey. She can rattle off statistics and facts but can't truly understand them unless she experiences them for herself. In "Holy of Hollies" she said "I can tell you all the parts of a rose but I can't tell you why it's beautiful unless I find out for myself." She starts off a bit clumsy and awkward but that's because she is a newly created angel with a lot to learn and "Chutzpah" "Heaven's Portal" and "Two Sides of Every Angel" serve as great character development for her. (Although I understand why the second episode doesn't sit well with some people due to the teen rave scene it didn't bother me that much.)
As for endings where the people are too stubborn and hard-hearted to repent...well? Have you ever seen these?
1. Into the Fire
2. Legacy
3. Minute by Minute
I watched this last year from beginning to end and I think the reason you don't see any debunkers here or on YouTube is because if they actually saw the whole thing, they wouldn't have much left to say.
What I like about this documentary is that it doesn't jump on any random conspiracy theory or assign blame to any particularly individual--it just addresses what we know, what we don't know and the flaws of the official explanation of Pentagon/NIST/FEMA. It treats the event like a Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot story and is a great example of how to conduct a proper investigation without any preconceived notions or bias. Regardless of what's true or not, it is the greatest alternative take on 9/11 and that will forever make it important for dialogue.
To me the beginning of the end was when Landon cut the Edwards family out in the beginning of Season 4. I understand if they had to leave because of internal management conflicts but I can't believe they couldn't have found a better way to provide an exit story than the way they did. POOF! They've moved to California with no explanation and no episode to show them leaving and the Ingalls helping them pack--and we're suddenly supposed to hate John Jr.'s guts when he was previously written as a flawed but sympathetic and likeable character.
Season 4 is still a good solid season overall, but I agree with most of you that Season 5 was when things really started taking a nosedive in terms of the quality of screenwriting. Storylines were repeated (Author Author is a knockoff of Journey in the Spring and Mortal Misson is a knockoff for Plague and Quarantine) as a result of running out of new ideas and it got to the point where just about any silly thing was a plot--fairy godsister, werewolf, orangutans, feminist strike, prejudice against fat people, lake monster, college reunion in pioneer culture etc.)
The biggest thing that bothered me was the idea of two blind people marrying and taking care of a sighted child--and this was briefly mentioned as a concern in "The Wedding" episode. I'm sure we all would have loved to have seen an episode of how Mary and Adam would overcome this obstacle and find a way but Landon said "Nah! I'm too lazy to do that. I'll kill their child off so I don't have to come up with a well thought out storyline about that."
However, I wouldn't say it jumped the shark until "To See the Light" when Adam got his vision back from getting hit in the head (very unrealistic) and they started adding new kids to keep the show alive that weren't all that interesting--Nancy, Jenny, James, Cassandra.
By Season 8, it was time to pull the plug, for sure.
I listened to an interview with her that was taken about fifteen years ago where she talked about the infamous episode "May We Make Them Proud." She said there's a false story going around that she asked to be written out of the show so she could spend more time with her family--her family was on the set at the time. She was cut out due to the fickleness of studio politics.
Merlin Olsen was a household name NFL athlete for the LA Rams so naturally he got several cinemas offers and his star status was a way of boosting the tv ratings when he got chosen for the part of Jonathan Garvey. Around Season 6, the ratings were waning, and Landon was desperate to do something big and dramatic to get the audience back so the network wouldn't cancel LHOTP so May We Make Them Proud was written. Because it did so badly with the general reception of the public, it was not shown for reruns.
Merlin Olsen was going to play a celibate priest in Father Murphy and his managers, and the NBC network lords believed it would hurt his public image to play a single guy in one show and a family guy in another show at the same time so they demanded Landon kill Alice Garvey (Hersha Parady) off so he could be single in both shows.
So when you watch one of your favorite series and suddenly major characters disappear or get written out or killed off, just keep in mind the narrative is not naturally flowing this way--there's probably some bullshit going on behind the scenes with management.
Hersha Parady had such a great sense of humor about all this. "I'm a feisty, strong willed, robustly built woman so in real life, I could very easily have broken that window and jumped out. At least they had me go out with a roar instead of a whimper!"
Honestly, in view of the culture and how much I had to lose, I would have to just get over my feelings and find something to be grateful for within it. If I fancied someone, that would land me in jail and cause my family to cut off their ties with me, I would have to just break it off with that person and get over it. My family are the last people in the world I would want to burn bridges with.