The acting in the movie is very good. There is a believable sadness in Dan Aykroyd's character which is perfectly balanced by the complete joyfulness of Vada, the main character played by Anna Chlumsky. Macaulay Culkin is in it. And he shared with Chlumsky an award from MTV in 1991 for the best kiss scene for this movie. The second love interest of Vada is played by Griffin Dunne who you may know from An American Werewolf in London. And there is a surprisingly good performance by the legendary Jamie Lee Curtis considering that her character is basically there just to be a love interest to Aykroyd's character, which stirs some drama in the film.
that she never had any experience with business, which lead to her failures in this endeavour. But she did have plenty of experience with all thing that could be learned in the school and beyond. A lot of teachers, such a Mrs. Dantonwood just hated her and her wit, that would always put them to shame. Mrs. Dantonwood was a maths teacher that could not analyse any of the equations that she would give to the students. She would simply tell them to use some equation because she herself remembered it to be the right one to use. Sheiny, on other hand could prove all of those equations. She was well versed in how maths worked. She was fascinated with numbers and figures. And when she was asked by Mrs. Dantonwood occasionally, Sheiny always was able to entertain the class with her explanation of any given equation or maths problem. She was not only good in understanding it, but also good in communicating it.
The answer seems very obvious to a lot of people. Of course! Otherwise he may die. How can you sit there and do nothing when a life is in danger? But this point of view is flawed. First of all we don't know if the person will collapse with the bridge. Bridges are built with extreme tolerances. And perhaps one person crossing it will not cause that much of a problem. From the other side, how sure are you that the person doesn't speak English, or doesn't understand the danger? What if the intention of the person is to collapse with the bridge and die with it? What if it's an act of premeditated suicide? How dare you stop a person from that? And even if we know that the person is not about to suicide and we know that bridge is going to collapse exactly as the person would cross. And both are undeniable facts. Are you yourself flawless and know exactly about every danger that happens around you and act accordingly?
In a pure Freedom / Power debate, Paternalism of all kinds is Power and therefor unjust. Therefor even parents that are trying to protect their kids from danger, are exercising unjust power. Given, of course, that those kids didn't want the protection in that particular situation.
Mendel: You can't possibly, in your age, know every danger that's out there. How can somebody sane allow you to just wonder about?
I propose gamified Acute Stress Resistance training. Which is a fancy word for arguing for fun. If we come together, knowing that there could be some stress from some ideas, and we play a game of arguing. Perhaps we could get used to the gut punch and stay calm in its presence. Some people do martial arts for that. They claim it helps being calm under stress. But martial arts training costs money and could be a little dangerous. While talking is not.
People accuse me of many bad things for making a movie where kids go against their parents into dangerous situations. Apparently they never seen Super 8. One criticism I hear often about Super 8 is that the kids in this film are way too brave! No wonder Steven Spielberg is attached to this project. He made and produced a fair share of anti-ageism films in his career.
If you look at 1941 today it feels like a Michael Bay movie. Explosions are everywhere. Gun shots fired at the sky for no reason ( which was the comedic punchline of the film ). Chase scenes crash through paint factories to add color to the spectacle. A fight scene happens in the middle of a huge dance number involving one bazillion extras. Everything is huge and you feel like it's way too huge.
It could be argued that one of the safest places for a person to be in is in a solitary confinement cell in a maximum security prison. Think about it. Nobody could get to you, because they have to go through a lot of heavily armed guards and various very hard contraptions like, heavy steel doors, thick concrete walls and more. And since it is a solitary confinement cell, nothing will happen to you from the inside because you are essentially alone in the room. Nobody else is there to harm you. But would you willingly put yourself there to escape the dangers of the world?
I worked on Moria's Race mostly alone ( with an exception of an early talk with a person I credited for story, who didn't even help me write the movie. And another person who voiced the characters of Dani an Moria for me ). I worked so much that I barely had time to sleep, or eat. My day was broken down into two halves: first I work for money at a normal job. Then I come home, eat as quickly as possible. And work on Moria's Race till I go to sleep. Allowing myself only 6 hours everyday. So forget gaming. Forget watching movies. Forget cooking. I had to rely on stuff that can be prepared in seconds because otherwise I loose too much time. Forget meaningful relationships. All of them take time. And so on and so forth...
You know how Indian movies have sudden music parts in them. Making everything a kind of half action half musical. This genre of film is called "masala" based on a spice which is a mixture of many spices. Masala films are film where a lot of genres are mixed into one. And this is the most popular genre in India. RRR is also a Masala film. It has action, obviously. But it also has song and dance scenes. It has a romantic comedy subplot. It has melodramatic scenes in it. But while in many other movies the different genres make very little sense together, RRR's writing makes everything work even for the western audience.
One layer of meaning that is offered by the direct reading of the movie suggests that Beau has some kind of testicular disease which makes it very dangerous for him to have sex. As his mother explains to him that his father and his grand-father and so on had all died during their first sexual intercourse, that just so happened to produce a baby.
They ( and by they I mean, one particular researcher Lt. Gilbert S. Daniels, who wrote a paper about it ) saw a problem with their approach. By combining the measurements and constructing a perfect average pilot, he found that non of the pilots were in fact average. And every single one of them was different in one way to another. Article about this. & Video about this from Matt Parker.
Inspired in large ( not only ) by the Free Software Foundation and because of that by Richard Stallman, I became a fighter for freedom. This needed some sort of definition of the goal at hand. What is "freedom"? What is the hypothetical perfect world that I am trying to achieve here? You know, you kind of require at least some understanding of your goal, so you would know if you are getting closer or farther away in relation to it. I found two primary definitions of "freedom". One could be derived from the other. The first definition is probably the one a lot of people are familiar with: The ability to do whatever you want. Some play with the words a little to make it sounds a bit less simplistic. Such as: Not having any intervention is one's actions. Or something along the lines of that. People rarely like it when somebody else controls them. And want to decide everything themselves. And so you could argue that it is the perfect definition of freedom. But it slowly becomes illogical. What if you action, one you don't want to be intervened, is in itself an intervention into somebody's else action? Well here you have an action that is at moment defined as freedom, but it is something, when fighting for freedom you want to stop. This is how you get to the second, slightly more nuanced definition of freedom: Control over one's self ( body and mind ) and things belonging to one's self. And contrary to freedom, Power is: Control over somebody else and things belonging to somebody else. "Power" in this case could be used interchangeably with "Oppression" and "Rape". In which case Rape is the most physical manifestation of Power. Therefor fighting for freedom is fighting against any form of Power including fighting against Rape. Here, though, we get back to the original conundrum. You can't have a society without any for of freedom-enforcement. The so called "law-enforcement" in most parts of the world. The legal structure is therefor managed and sustained with a sole purpose of using the minimal required power to reduce power to the minimum possible state. And therefor every discussion of necessity of a certain law should therefor always be in relation of whether it increases or reduces overall power in the entire system. Granting freedoms as a result. With this I differentiate between 3 types of laws. Only one type of which I support. The two other types of laws I fight to remove from existence because they are unjust. The first type I call "Freedom Laws" which are laws like Freedom of Speech and the Right to Privacy. Also in them a law making Rape specifically illegal. Those laws I support since they limit powers of one type or the other, insuring Freedom. Then there are laws I despise because they are about maintaining of power. Those laws include thing like illegality of criticisms of the state. Or exceptions from law for certain powerful figures. Or more mundane things like copyright. Which is a law maintaining power of one party over another. The third type of laws is tricky and requires some thinking to understand. Often when presented with righteousness of some kind people tend to shove it down other people's throats in a very forceful way. And often they try to establish power structures to optimize that. Let's say somebody found that a certain type of food is dangerous. One way, the freedom way, to go about doing something about it, would be to tell people to be cautious about this type of food. Other way will be to outright ban it and persecute everybody who attempts at eating this food. Which, if you follow my reasoning is a reduction of freedom. Though for a seemingly "justifiable" reason. This type of power is called "paternalism". It is any reduction of freedom of a person, for that person's own good. At least based on the perspective of the one in power. Coming back to the original principle, of freedom being control over one's self, it is absolutely clear that eating that bad food, or making anything that is objectively bad for that person in particular is that person's right. A person should be able to cut his own arm off if he wants to. Therefor I am against all and any paternalism laws. Including, unjust by this metric, ageism laws, like "age of consent" laws. That are the butt of this discussion. Although you can see that I strongly differentiate voluntary participation in potentially harmful activities with involuntary participation. Rape laws are mostly a good thing. And I am against any and all real Rape.
Also we probably have to talk about the current AI situation in the world. And people loosing jobs to AI. This movie uses this to it's advantage. To make you side with the humans at first. But it flips sides between AI and humans in a plot dance, so you feel properly conflicted between the two ideas. To be honest, I believe the film is a bit too naive about how terrible AI can turn out to be. It's not The Terminator. The movie views the problem of AI as a kind of racism in a way. AI in this movie lives in Asia. And Americans are there to kill it.
There are some things in the movie that I might consider too cringe. Like the dancing scene. So if you have a cringe-phobia, I guess you have been warned. But in my opinion, the cringe adds to the viscerality that is required for a movie to elicit a strong emotional reaction. This movie, being somewhat a children's film, and having a small budget, could not create a lot of viscerality, so cringe was used a tool to combat some of the otherwise lesser moments.
The beginning and the end of the film ( together with how the main character looks ) reminds me a lot of Edgar Wright's movie Last Night In Soho. Which if you know even a little bit about Edgar Wright, is a bit of a horror musical. It is scary and tense, but it just likes to dance a little with a good song. Like in Last Night in Soho the main character of this movie makes her own clothing. And there is one instance in this movie where Brian Duffield thought that it's a good idea to do Micky Mousing ( a scene where she hammers nails ). Also funny how Kaitlyn Dever ( the actress that played the main character in this movie ) looks like a twin of Thomasin McKenzie ( who played the main character in Last Night In Soho ). I can tell you almost with 100% certainty, Brian Duffield is a very big fan of Edgar Wright.
At first I cringed seeing that she has an iPhone and uses a MacBook. But then the tense part of the movie started and I was very happy all of a sudden. The movie just goes over a lot of real life dangers with such spyware one by one. And with each introduction the tension grows more and more. Especially if you are somebody who understands this stuff. The film even more or less accurately portrays a cellphone triangulation which effects both iPhones and Dumb Phones equally. Which makes it a very bad idea to carry any sort of mobile phone ever.
This is a roller-coaster of empathy and emotions set in the world of psychopaths. The protagonist is a sad person. His love never manifests itself more than a kiss. But he goes into danger and bleeds to near death for her, to be a real human being and a real hero.
I knew in the back of my head that at the very least the drama of the movie would be good. I didn't see Luca as some kind of an action director. His movies tend to be very character based. The closest thing he did for action was his take on Suspiria in 2018. Because that was a horror movie about dancers. So the "action" are the dance scenes. Which are amazing. But then if you think about it, any movie about sport is automatically an action film. Yes it's not your typical blockbuster with shootings, explosions and car chases. But it is about physicality. About performance. And where skill and luck matter as they matter in action films too. And so to make a good sport movie require the same set of skills that are required to make a good contemporary action film.
The direction of the movie is obviously very good. Luca Guadagnino shoots his movies with very precise camera. Nothing too fancy. Everything serves emotional purpose. He likes people to do things that would be in their character, but not necessarily important to the story, like dance. Which makes his editing very intuition-based and less clarity based. Which reminds the style of Lars Von Trier but not quite there. If there would be a scale between chaotic documentary style and a very precise and calculated cinematic style, Lars would be way closer to documentary than Luca. Luca is more in control, but lets a lot of character and intuition through. Which is very interesting.
The movie also has a surprising amount of good music. There are two insane dance sequences. But one is just so good it got stuck in my mind. I almost forgot that Ryan Gosling can sing. But he is so good. He needs to record more music. He has one album that he recorded before that. There should be more.
In December of 2018 in Jerusalem's Cinemateque Cinema they made a single screening of the new film by a Danish director Lars Von Trier ( about which I told you a bit earlier in this article ). By this point I not only knew about him. I was kind of a big fan. I was in the middle of rewriting the script for The 8 Year Olds and was thinking about how should I show the murders so they would be painful. Of course I needed to pause my work, since there was an only screening of Lars Von Trier's movie. And I needed to experience it in the cinema.
If you see Dani's Race new update published without a goal. This probably means that I'm about to go to the street.
The entirety of the article is hammering down the same point over and over. And the point is: Stallman has strange sexual viewpoints, therefor he must be dangerous.
If we don't make schools mandatory, some kids will never go to school at all. But it's those who go and don't pay attention to the lesson anyway. At least they don't gonna feel like wasting time. But the most important is that if there will be a sense of danger. If the kids will be scared of the school, for lets say a gun emergency, they will not go there either. And therefor will not get shot.
Mr. Humbert: Sheiny, I worked in the business for a long time. There is no such thing as a bad scandal. Well... If the scandal brings with it a crime allegation, it could be dangerous. But if you are legally sound, and we are, there is nothing terrible in a scandal. Think of scandal as free advertisement.
If you show a kid an act of sex and show how dangerous it could be ( pregnancy and such ). This will lead them towards avoiding sex. Or being more cautious about it. While on the other hand, when it's illegal to show them sex, they grow up doing it without any caution. Because they are not familiar with the dangers that could occur.
Attention! If you don't have a lot of family and friends, this article might be dangerous for your to read. So please be careful.
There is a problem with all this. I set up an unlock page for Dani's Race 08-08-24 which should make Dani's Race 08-08-24 availble to download when Moria's Race on Madiator's Peertube gets 20 comments. The way it works is that the file is not yet online. And it will be automatically uploaded only when a script on my computer will check the API of peertube and see that indeed the video got 20 comments. Meaning, from tomorrow, for the next 2 weeks it will not be possible. So you only have today to unlock it. Frankly, if you can comments on the video ( for which you need any ActivityPub account ), you can comment more than ones. So please try to unlock it today.
Just before we start I want to remind you that on Saturday (05/10/2024) at 19:15 UTC a game of mine ( Dani's Race ) will be streamed by opensource_gaming. Please don't miss it!
On the other hand, they might just be worried about the Arabic immigrants. People in here are in constant post-9/11 state. So they are very pro-surveillance at times. I remember when the covid thing started and everybody were getting the first tests I wanted to do one. So I called the number that they advertised ( I had a phone still back then ). They told me that I was not recorded as being in a proximity to a person with covid. Therefor I don't need a test. I asked them, what did it mean. And they answered that the SIM company didn't see my SIM in a close enough range to a SIM of a person with covid. They just outright surveyed the hell out of people at first signs of probable danger. ( By the way, they didn't see my SIM near that person since I was always on an Airplane Mode. I was starting to enlighten myself already by that point. ) It's not even a surprise to me that people in here like surveillance as a kind of pointless attempt to stop Arab immigrants from attempting terror attacks.
While on the other hand European movies are more open about sexuality. Directors from Europe like Danish filmmakers Lars Von Trier and Nicolas Winding Refn, French Luc Besson, Maïmouna Doucouré and Gaspar Noé, Italian Luca Guadagnino and many others are notorious for near pornographic ( if not entirely pornographic ) depictions of sex or explorations of sexual taboos in films like Nymphomaniac, The Neon Demon, Léon: The Professional, Cuties, Love and Call Me By Your Name to name a few.
The guys were much more tired that he was. They were not in mortal danger. So their bodies got tired way earlier. But they looked at their phones to locate Tom using the web-page that James designed.
For the last week or so I was slowly making the shots from the sequence where Moria and Dani are driving a race-car on water. There is no religious symbolism in it. At least not that I'm aware of. Perhaps in the future, as there is now Dudeism, there will be Morism ( or Dolphinism ) Or something stupid along those lines. But I have nothing like this planned. Honest!
Mr. Hambleton: You've been in a very dangerous situation once, right? When you failed to be careful with technology.
A suicidal person that consents to being killed is low Paternalism, but not the lowest. Because there is at least some understanding of what the person is consenting to. The lowest would be consenting to something you know nothing about. High paternalism is complete lack of ability to consent to anything that others find remotely dangerous. But because consent and Freedom are so intertwined, those two scales run more or less parallel to each other.