Things I Hate

[Kamandi]

I'm a lapsed Catholic. The controversy around the time of DaVinci Code amused/puzzled me. As a married man I never understood why people would find the idea so offensive that Jesus might have had a wife. According to the gospels he was a Rabbi so it would be expected.

 

[crows]

I'm a lapsed Catholic. The controversy around the time of DaVinci Code amused/puzzled me. As a married man I never understood why people would find the idea so offensive that Jesus might have had a wife. According to the gospels he was a Rabbi so it would be expected.

I never got it either. I mean what did made me wonder is how the church likes to keep a lot of stuff secret, maybe he was married maybe he wasn't but they will never let us know.

Who knows one of his descendants might be one of you guys for all we know.

 

[Kamandi]

As interesting as the idea might be I don't want to derail the thread over it. Anything religion is a fast track to upsetting the mods so I'm just going to let this one go.

 

[Frank]

Yeah, damn them for thinking he sucked. Maybe if he wasn't such a ****ty artist, he wouldn't have been inclined to blame the rest of the world for it.

Are you comparing Polanski's crimes to Hitlers?

I know you're not, but a little perspective might be warranted. Polanski was convicted of unlawful sexual contact with a 13 year old girl. If history is correct, Thomas Jefferson began his sexual relationship with Sally Hemings when she was 14. Does this change your opinion of the Declaration of Independence?

Are you comparing the Declaration to anything Polanski ever did?

Actually, I threw in what I felt was a better example in my previous reply. Even Paterno's legacy is overshadowed though he didn't physically take part in those crimes. Sports, arts and entertainment are important but aren't as vital or immediate to people's lives as say writs of law.

Of course the behavior of the Founding Fathers inevitably affects the way I look at their contributions. The Declaration of Independence was a necessity of government and would have been written by someone else had Jefferson not been around though of course it wouldn't have been the same. The man was deeply flawed but at the very least the document had real historical impact. The fact that so many of these guys owned slaves certainly does make much of the philosophy behind "all men are created equal" ring particularly hollow. It would take another set of deeply flawed men to amend that issue. Their accomplishments granted benefits that were real and binding despite their personal defects and depravities.

If you truly believe any of Polanski's films are so universally important that glossing over his refusal to accept punishment for a horrendous crime is necessary, then by all means. I just said I'd pass.

 

[devilof76]

Paterno used the power of that school (a large part of which was his) to obscure the crimes, and by extension used the patrons, students, players, and fans to shelter Sandusky from persecution. His legacy was spoiled because it was complicit.

Slavery was an inherited institution which financially supported the colonies. Without that foundation, they would not have been able to resist, defeat, or survive their declaration against Britain. Jefferson was opposed to slavery, and said as much in his original draft of the document. His conflict lay in how to destroy the institution without destroying the nascent country (and the solution nearly did). The fact that the Founders owned slaves does not detract in the least from their political accomplishments, particularly since the philosophy inherent in those accomplishments is what ended it. You can't arrive at abolition without individual rights.

Finally, I am not glossing over Polanski's crimes. The man is garbage. His films are not, and for the same reasons that his work does not absolve his transgressions, his transgressions do not detract from the value of his art. If you cannot separate one from the other, then by all means, don't. But don't imply that appreciation is tantamount to sanction.

 

[Frank]

Paterno used the power of that school (a large part of which was his) to obscure the crimes, and by extension used the patrons, students, players, and fans to shelter Sandusky from persecution. His legacy was spoiled because it was complicit.

Of course. You see how much he has paid for his complicity and coverup. How much more so for the actual perpetrator of the original crime! It's amazing how much more tolerance we have for this stuff in the entertainment industry than in virtually any other sector.

Slavery was an inherited institution which financially supported the colonies. Without that foundation, they would not have been able to resist, defeat, or survive their declaration against Britain. Jefferson was opposed to slavery, and said as much in his original draft of the document. His conflict lay in how to destroy the institution without destroying the nascent country (and the solution nearly did). The fact that the Founders owned slaves does not detract in the least from their political accomplishments, particularly since the philosophy inherent in those accomplishments is what ended it. You can't arrive at abolition without individual rights.

Economic considerations do not trump moral obligations. They still needed major financing from France and lost a quarter of the slave population anyway. Every minute of every hour of that institution was a bloody smear across the marble white intentions of the framers. In many cases, they admitted their crisis of conscience but it doesn't exempt them from hypocrisy. The fact remains that slaves continued to be traded like animals in this country. Ultimately it happened the way it happened and those who got caught by history owning slaves are on the wrong side of it for many, many people.

Finally, I am not glossing over Polanski's crimes. The man is garbage. His films are not, and for the same reasons that his work does not absolve his transgressions, his transgressions do not detract from the value of his art. If you cannot separate one from the other, then by all means, don't. But don't imply that appreciation is tantamount to sanction.

I don't care if someone like Jerry Sandusky comes up with the next Citizen Kane. At a certain point, the artist's integrity or lack thereof will take their work out of consideration. Chalk it up to the power of hypocrisy. To me, his work is utter garbage because it mocks the justice due for raping a child. Great artistry demands great honesty. Those who refuse to shed light on themselves and their own situation are con-artists. Experts in diversion and fleeting fancies, the truth will elude them in everything they do.

Maybe it was the cutesy heart smiley that compelled me.

 

[CelticPredator]

I'm glad I have the power in my little old mind of mine to separate the man, from his works.

 

[devilof76]

I don't care if someone like Jerry Sandusky comes up with the next Citizen Kane. At a certain point, the artist's integrity or lack thereof will take their work out of consideration. Chalk it up to the power of hypocrisy. To me, his work is utter garbage because it mocks the justice due for raping a child. Great artistry demands great honesty. Those who refuse to shed light on themselves and their own situation are con-artists. Experts in diversion and fleeting fancies, the truth will elude them in everything they do.

Maybe it was the cutesy heart smiley that compelled me.

You're conflating the value of the work exonerating the artist's character, and the vices of the artist implicating their work.

Did Paterno's complicity make him less of a football coach? No. Did his complicity make him morally less of a man? Yes. Does being a fan of U Penn football sanction either his or Sandusky's actions? No.

Polanski was scum for what he did. It doesn't change the quality of his work. Finding value in what he created does not get him off the hook.

I love The Ninth Gate. I despise Roman Polanski. There have been a lot of rotten people who made great art. What of it?

As for slavery, there may come a time when humanity's moral awareness grasps the evil of socialistic elements of governance. Presently, our society is rife with it, and one of the major impediments to excising the disease is the number of people whose lives depend on it. Are you willing to risk civil war, mass impoverishment, starvation, and the death of men, women and children to claim the moral high ground? Is there blood on your marble for not actively resisting a status quo which has in one form or another enslaved billions (and slaughtered hundreds of millions) since 1917? Nevermind the lives and fortunes taken in its name prior, and those yet to be lost.

Or, would you prefer to seek a bloodless alternative, and stay the executions as long as possible?

 

[devilof76]

D'oh.

It was Penn State, right? Stupid football...

 

[Kamandi]

There have been a lot of rotten people who made great art. What of it?

Leonardo Da Vinci was a grave robber. That's how he obtained cadavers for anatomical research. It used to be a surprisingly common practice for early doctors and surgeons.

 

[ZaCHw117]

Unforgivable, and has absolutely nothing to do with the artistic value of the film.

This is one of the few cases were the value of the artist as a person destroys everything they touch. Same thing goes for that freak who directed Powder.

Hitler was an artist too and those works can never nor should they ever emerge from the shadow he cast on history.

Are you comparing Hitler's mediocre art to Polanski's films?

Not at all. Polanski is Hitler!!!!!111

LOL. But if Michealangelo was found to be a child molester it would certainly cast a pall on all his works. Hitler is an extreme example, but it's pretty amazing after all the child sex scandals we've had over the past few years that Mr. Polanski is a respected filmaker.

Perhaps a better example would have been Sandusky. Do you think anybody cares about his mastery of the game now?

and to think that if that stupid academy of art had Accepted Hitler as a student he would have just become some dumb artist instead...

They are really the ones to blame.

Yeah, damn them for thinking he sucked. Maybe if he wasn't such a ****ty artist, he wouldn't have been inclined to blame the rest of the world for it.



Are you comparing Polanski's crimes to Hitlers?

I know you're not, but a little perspective might be warranted. Polanski was convicted of unlawful sexual contact with a 13 year old girl. If history is correct, Thomas Jefferson began his sexual relationship with Sally Hemings when she was 14. Does this change your opinion of the Declaration of Independence?

how old was Mary when she married Joseph? had baby Jesus?

Edgar Allan Poe married his 13 year old cousin,

(Jeez, come to think of it History is full of pedobears apparently)

Mary didn't do **** with Joseph. Joseph got ****ed over.

It is true she was a virgin with baby Jesus, but they were husband and wife....

(Besides Jesus had brothers and sisters that they don't want you to know about)

I'm a lapsed Catholic. The controversy around the time of DaVinci Code amused/puzzled me. As a married man I never understood why people would find the idea so offensive that Jesus might have had a wife. According to the gospels he was a Rabbi so it would be expected.

I never got it either. I mean what did made me wonder is how the church likes to keep a lot of stuff secret, maybe he was married maybe he wasn't but they will never let us know.

Who knows one of his descendants might be one of you guys for all we know.

As interesting as the idea might be I don't want to derail the thread over it. Anything religion is a fast track to upsetting the mods so I'm just going to let this one go.

Are you comparing the Declaration to anything Polanski ever did?

Actually, I threw in what I felt was a better example in my previous reply. Even Paterno's legacy is overshadowed though he didn't physically take part in those crimes. Sports, arts and entertainment are important but aren't as vital or immediate to people's lives as say writs of law.

Of course the behavior of the Founding Fathers inevitably affects the way I look at their contributions. The Declaration of Independence was a necessity of government and would have been written by someone else had Jefferson not been around though of course it wouldn't have been the same. The man was deeply flawed but at the very least the document had real historical impact. The fact that so many of these guys owned slaves certainly does make much of the philosophy behind "all men are created equal" ring particularly hollow. It would take another set of deeply flawed men to amend that issue. Their accomplishments granted benefits that were real and binding despite their personal defects and depravities.

If you truly believe any of Polanski's films are so universally important that glossing over his refusal to accept punishment for a horrendous crime is necessary, then by all means. I just said I'd pass.

Paterno used the power of that school (a large part of which was his) to obscure the crimes, and by extension used the patrons, students, players, and fans to shelter Sandusky from persecution. His legacy was spoiled because it was complicit.

Slavery was an inherited institution which financially supported the colonies. Without that foundation, they would not have been able to resist, defeat, or survive their declaration against Britain. Jefferson was opposed to slavery, and said as much in his original draft of the document. His conflict lay in how to destroy the institution without destroying the nascent country (and the solution nearly did). The fact that the Founders owned slaves does not detract in the least from their political accomplishments, particularly since the philosophy inherent in those accomplishments is what ended it. You can't arrive at abolition without individual rights.

Finally, I am not glossing over Polanski's crimes. The man is garbage. His films are not, and for the same reasons that his work does not absolve his transgressions, his transgressions do not detract from the value of his art. If you cannot separate one from the other, then by all means, don't. But don't imply that appreciation is tantamount to sanction.

Of course. You see how much he has paid for his complicity and coverup. How much more so for the actual perpetrator of the original crime! It's amazing how much more tolerance we have for this stuff in the entertainment industry than in virtually any other sector.



Economic considerations do not trump moral obligations. They still needed major financing from France and lost a quarter of the slave population anyway. Every minute of every hour of that institution was a bloody smear across the marble white intentions of the framers. In many cases, they admitted their crisis of conscience but it doesn't exempt them from hypocrisy. The fact remains that slaves continued to be traded like animals in this country. Ultimately it happened the way it happened and those who got caught by history owning slaves are on the wrong side of it for many, many people.



I don't care if someone like Jerry Sandusky comes up with the next Citizen Kane. At a certain point, the artist's integrity or lack thereof will take their work out of consideration. Chalk it up to the power of hypocrisy. To me, his work is utter garbage because it mocks the justice due for raping a child. Great artistry demands great honesty. Those who refuse to shed light on themselves and their own situation are con-artists. Experts in diversion and fleeting fancies, the truth will elude them in everything they do.

Maybe it was the cutesy heart smiley that compelled me.

You're conflating the value of the work exonerating the artist's character, and the vices of the artist implicating their work.

Did Paterno's complicity make him less of a football coach? No. Did his complicity make him morally less of a man? Yes. Does being a fan of U Penn football sanction either his or Sandusky's actions? No.

Polanski was scum for what he did. It doesn't change the quality of his work. Finding value in what he created does not get him off the hook.

I love The Ninth Gate. I despise Roman Polanski. There have been a lot of rotten people who made great art. What of it?

As for slavery, there may come a time when humanity's moral awareness grasps the evil of socialistic elements of governance. Presently, our society is rife with it, and one of the major impediments to excising the disease is the number of people whose lives depend on it. Are you willing to risk civil war, mass impoverishment, starvation, and the death of men, women and children to claim the moral high ground? Is there blood on your marble for not actively resisting a status quo which has in one form or another enslaved billions (and slaughtered hundreds of millions) since 1917? Nevermind the lives and fortunes taken in its name prior, and those yet to be lost.

Or, would you prefer to seek a bloodless alternative, and stay the executions as long as possible?

D'oh.

It was Penn State, right? Stupid football...

Leonardo Da Vinci was a grave robber. That's how he obtained cadavers for anatomical research. It used to be a surprisingly common practice for early doctors and surgeons.

 

[Skiman]

 

[crows]

Wilfred, Season 1 (U.S. Version): 10/10

The funniest show on TV ATM. Saw it was up on Netflix and had to watch the first season again.

YES, WE GET IT, You like Wilfred

 

[ZaCHw117]

YES, WE GET IT, You like Wilfred

 

[crows]

I knew of the show but since you like it so much I am going to check it out. I didn't know if it was good or not

 

[CelticPredator]

You will hate it, because it's too good.

 

[crows]

You will hate it, because it's too good.

Oh God I hope so, That would give me something to argue with you and Zach!

 

[Frank]

You're conflating the value of the work exonerating the artist's character, and the vices of the artist implicating their work.

In some cases I don't think they can be separated.

Did Paterno's complicity make him less of a football coach?

You bet. Part of being a couch is also being a trusted authority figure.

Polanski was scum for what he did. It doesn't change the quality of his work. Finding value in what he created does not get him off the hook.

I love The Ninth Gate. I despise Roman Polanski. There have been a lot of rotten people who made great art. What of it?

If you really think his movies are that good that you can enjoy them without thinking about how much of a scumbag the guy is behind the camera, then heart smiley away. Every film he puts out since he committed the crime is just a slap in the face to me. Whatever technical merit it has is completely obscured by the message of the man's life and what he stands for. To me that can and will necessarily affect the overall artistic value.

As for slavery, there may come a time when humanity's moral awareness grasps the evil of socialistic elements of governance. Presently, our society is rife with it, and one of the major impediments to excising the disease is the number of people whose lives depend on it. Are you willing to risk civil war, mass impoverishment, starvation, and the death of men, women and children to claim the moral high ground? Is there blood on your marble for not actively resisting a status quo which has in one form or another enslaved billions (and slaughtered hundreds of millions) since 1917? Nevermind the lives and fortunes taken in its name prior, and those yet to be lost.

Or, would you prefer to seek a bloodless alternative, and stay the executions as long as possible?

There's a good reason for being harsh on these guys. We need to remember so it never happens again. I'm not sure what you want to hear, but I'm not going to pretend it reflects well on them either.

There are plenty of issues I know I fall short on and if I deserve criticism instead of praise so be it. You just can't get me for owning slaves. That can be important to remember too lol.

Ha ha, fair enough.

 

[Kamandi]

I hate guys who can't pull up their f'king pants

Sent from my SPH-D710

 

[The Ween]

I will definately hate this if it happens:

Ang Lee has been linked to directing Sony's "Cleopatra," with Angelina Jolie attached to star, but is still awaiting a script before deciding if that will be his next venture.