« failures of conception: alexander kerensky's "no enemy to the left" ... our media: the enablers of our enemies and our betrayers ... vipers at our bosoms ... | Main | correction ... [egg on my face] ... it was eli wallach who got the good line, not clint eastwood »

January 26, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yidwithlid

John a Brilliant piece. I do however need to bicker with a few points...

First, missing the guy on a fast break should be punishable by death. Thats the ONLY way the NY Knick's asinine management could ever get out of the horrible salary cap situation they created.

Next Saddam did not have a sorry ass, in fact not one piece of him was sorry. And if newsmax is correct and he created this entire war just to save face --than quite frankly, his entire family deserved to die if only to protect the world from any chance of them polluting the Human Gene pool any further .

Finally, that 72 virgins thing is a koran typo. And I feel bad for those poor bastards that blow themselves up. They wake up in the after life and find themselves being Bitch-slapped by the likes of Richard Henry Lee, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. You see, it was supposed to say 72 VIRGINIANS. The Mohammad guy was a lousy speller (but I understand he is a tasty cookie)

Anyway other than those points..I think this is your best post yet.

Speak to you soon my friend

JewishOdysseus

Dittos, amigo! I, too, cd never understand this "Iraq was afraid of Iran BS..." Why? Didn't Saddam prosper to his greatest heights during the war against "the fire-worshippers?" Didn't he WIN, and emerge as the "Arab world's" leading hero? Cd Iran ever hope to effectively invade Iraq?

As the late great Jeane Kirkpatrick used to say: "To ask the question is to answer it."

West

A well thought out and exposited piece. You could have just cut to the chase, however, and questioned the probability that Saddam ever was truthful about anything he ever told anyone, much less a representative of the Great Satan. This guy was a psychopath who never let his left hand know what his right was doing, and to think that he would suddenly start talking the straight talk is just either an example of idiocy or hubris of the highest order. The best way to treat anything coming out of Saddam's mouth is to immediately discount the evidence lending support to what he said, and add credence to whatever counters his stated position.

Carolyn

John - as a total movie freak, I'd love to know what you finally discovered to be the 'warped message' of 'Day of the Condor'? I get what you said about it being divorced from reality, like the Matrix movies, neither of which work unless you FIRST buy into the 'evil capitalism, evil government' BS that poisons them. (Not to mention that the Matrix movies are even further poisoned by the S&M fixation of the weird producers, the Wachowski brothers - the eldest of whom just divorced his wife so he could marry his dominatrix.)

Anyway, would be interested in knowing what it was about the 'Condor' that ultimately was the 'ah ha - THIS is what was wrong with the whole damn plot' thing. (Personally, my take on 'Condor' was that it was a chic, sexy symbol of the post-Viet Nam of the leftists who'd finally triumphed in convincing the entire country that everything the government stood for - duty, honor, patriotism, etc. - was wrong. But then that's just my take.)

Mike M.

Aactually I just want to say something about 3 days of the condor. I hate to be so predestrian given that yours was a serious piece. But I saw the movie a few times over the years. Redford is being pursued by bad CIA types in Manhattan, and he kidnaps the beautiful Faye Dunaway at gunpoint in his escape. He forces her to drive to her apt in Bklyn Heights. They pull up outside her brownstone there and immediately find an open parking spot. In the history of Bklyn Heights. no one has ever just driven up and found a parking spot in front of their home. Pure fiction. Everyone I mentioned this too who like me lives and knows Brooklyn laughed their tushes off at this. Next to that Van Sydow not shooting the woman was reality. Nevertheless - good movie. And on a serious note your Saddam point made lots of sense.

dick johnson

1) in "the matrix" the reason that human beings were harnessed as energy was precisely because the battle between humanity and sentient machines destroyed the enviroment...there WAS no other energy, the whole surface is a toxic wasteland in the films, nothing to put pounds of gain on with, brah

2)"3 days of the Condor" is a subtle film, but i think essentially you misunderstand the professionalism of sydow's character...here is someone who operates with the utmost level of preternatural skill...he doesn't to go wild shooting up people in an elevator, (after all, he knows that in the instance of the ALHS, the CIA will clean up after him anyway, and they do)... he knows that eventually he will catch redford...and he does! the movie doesn't write it on the wall it blood because it doesn't need to, it shows you rather than tells you the answer to that question about sydow's character, which is the greatest strength of the medium

---I don't usually ever comment on people's blogs, it's usually a waste of time. Certainly, I'd be surprised if you or your subscribers appreciated being corrected. But as a student of film, a midwesterner, someone who has spent plenty of time on farms, and someone who keeps an eye on the geopolitical situation with no bias or partisanship; I'd ask you: If your understanding of those two films is as flawed as it is (and it is, rent either and you'll see that i'm right about both points)...what about the ends of the argument?

The comments to this entry are closed.