NipkowDisc
-
Posts
26,037 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NipkowDisc
-
-
In all honesty, I never really paid much attention to a film's musical soundtrack unless the movie WAS a musical, or there was something outstanding about who was in it(like "A Hard Day's Night" and "Help!" for instance).
It wasn't until my mid seventies toking days that me and some friends would turn on the late show(old horror films worked great) and sit in the next room and pay more attention to the music score than the dialogue. THEN is when I paid them more mind.
A few of my favorites:
THAT THING YOU DO( not sure of all the people involved, but many tunes done in perfect mid '60's vibe!)
OCEAN'S ELEVEN(2001) David Holmes' classy and snappy jazz score was FAR too overlooked. Best film score of that year!
ARLINGTON AVENUE--one of John Williams' best
IMMORTAL BELOVED--Can't really diss BEETHOVEN which is also why I'll go with your choice of :
A CLOCKWORK ORANGE--fine synthesized treatment of Beethoven et al , and back when WENDY CARLOS was still WALTER!
O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU?--lot of great stuff in there.
PORTRAIT OF JENNIE--if you like Debussy, you'll love this score!
Sepiatone
I think Williams best score is jaws. got 'em an oscar in '75. so many great scores to his credit like the towering inferno.
-
Film scores are my favorite music. My love for them began when I saw the film NORTH BY NORTHWEST, during its original theatrical release, then BEN-HUR, a few months later. As if those scores reached out from the screen and grabbed me! I've been obsessed with film scores, ever since. I am not such a fan of films that use classical music or pop tunes for their scores. In fact, I particularly hate films that are padded with pop tunes, in place of an original, orchestral score. NBNW remains in my top 10 all-time favorite scores. My favorite film score is Pino Donaggio's score to Brian De Palma's DRESSED TO KILL.
would you have any good cuts of ave caesar from quo vadis?
-
1
-
-
Lindsey Graham probably got Duke to do it.
that cutesy-utsey little toadie? I doan doubt it.
-
power and intensity.
-
I'll bet John Garfield invented 'cute'.
then again it coulda been Cagney.
-
I'll bet John Garfield invented 'cute'.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
I will confess that I have not read the bible as extensively as I should....
but your suggesting love and charity as license to do just about anything according to individual human prerogative.
just how would you invalidate attempts by some to justify bestiality or pedophilia???
some collective set of human standards based on secularism?
and suppose those advocates for bestiality and pedophilia have the same attitude torwards your opposition that you have towards the ten commandments?
they might not be too interested in hearing anything you have to say.
and that is why God is God is the much better and safer proposition than Man is God. too many unforeseen pitfalls.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
The Commandments are fine. They're basic rules. Christ did uphold them. None of them prohibit marriage based on what one is. And nobody with any spiritual wisdom thinks they are all of equal importance.
Everything you need to know to follow Christ back to God can be found in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Read those reports and think on what you've read.
I will confess that I have not read the bible as extensively as I should....
but your suggesting love and charity as license to do just about anything according to individual human prerogative.
just how would you invalidate attempts by some to justify bestiality or pedophilia???
some collective set of human standards based on secularism?
and suppose those advocates for bestiality and pedophilia have the same attitude torwards your opposition that you have towards the ten commandments?
they might not be too interested in hearing anything you have to say.
-
Welcome to Hard Times at two-thirty this afternoon and later on tonite There Was a Crooked Man.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Which bunch is that darkblue?
all them old bible guys.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Sin by others is not for you to judge. Christ is very clear about that. The only sin that concerns you, as a soul - as a child of God - is your own.
And anyway, marriage is not sin. If anything, it's a buffer against sin.
Spare me the Moses quotes and all the rules and regulations he and his bunch came up with.
Christ has given the highest law. Peace, charity, mercy, forgiveness. That's what's important - not you trying to prevent people from being married.
by what other means other the ten commandments would Jesus Christ have each and every one of us determine exactly what sin is???
individual prerogative?
basically what you're saying is, darkblue, forget the bible and use your own judgment.
but I thank you for your uh...your particular insight. most illuminating.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
You believe in the Bible - written by men, and do what you do.
I'll believe in the teachings and example of Christ, doing as he advises - after all, Christ is the real thing. He is God.
Peace, Charity, Mercy, Forgiveness. That's the higher law, that's what He has given.
You follow Moses, I'll follow Christ.
Jesus never advised us to do as we will irregardless of the ten commandments.
according to you by Jesus sin is allowable.
Jesus did forgive sin. he did not give it free rein...which seems to be what you are suggesting.
The truth is Jesus would ask us to renounce our sins...and if homosexuality is sin as is made clear in the old testament. then that is what is required.
the relationship between god and man is based on god's terms and not our own. according to you in the name of charity god would embrace sin???
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Mocking? How is allowing everybody to have a legal spouse mocking marriage? It's the "traditional" man-women insisters that are doing the mocking of other's marriages. Like they're so special only they should have the right to a spouse of their choice and homosexual people shouldn't.
If one really cares about religion in the truest sense - seeking to return to God, the Source of All Creation - forget being a Christian. Be a follower of Christ. He has given the path. Though it be enormously difficult to stay on it, and almost everyone falls from it - to varying distances from it - its tenets are simple to understand, just not to live. You may even be persecuted; made to suffer; killed for living by them.
The cornerstones for the following of Christ are: peace, charity, mercy, forgiveness. "Christians" who will not accept these principles are not really following Him. Denying marriage to those who want to be married is uncharitable. You can do that and wear a label that says "Christian", but don't be surprised if He says to you at some point "I know you not".
to my knowledge Jesus was very understanding torwards sinners...but he never overtly condoned sinful behavior. never.
for example, mary magdelene. she's pursued by a crowd who wants to stone her for adultery. Jesus intervenes. they inform Jesus of her sin. jesus asks her if is it true. she acknowledges to him that it is. what does Jesus say to the crowd? he says...
"then you have judged her rightly."
he picks up a stone and challenges the sinless among them to start pelting her. they disperse.
Jesus asks her where all her accusers, those who condemned her, have gone. he tells her that he will not comdemn her either.
then Jesus says..."Go...and sin no more."
Jesus never excused sin. he merely forgave it. forgiveness is not condoning sin.
question darkblue, how can anyone who believes that every word in both the old and new testaments are divinely inspired, ignore those words? there are many passages in the old testament that make it clear that homosexuality between men and women is completely unacceptable to God...
"For if a man lay with another man
or a woman lay with another woman.
It is an abomination unto the eyes of the Lord."
tell me how I'm supposed to get past that, darkblue. I am one who believes that nothing written in the bible can be discounted or disregarded. one either believes that every word in the bible is divine truth or you don't
I do.
God intended Adam and Eve to procreate.
two questions.
can two men knowing each other initiate the human reproductive process? No.
can two women knowing each other initiate the human reproductive process? No again.
there is an order in things. are we to ignore that order simply on the basis of flawed human prerogative?
I say no.
And the bible tells us that God is unchanging, darkblue. that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
if something is unacceptable to God millennia ago, it remains so.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
I wouldn't exactly use the word "blazing" here, ham my friend, as while the present POTUS hasn't exactly been quite as "judicious" in lowering the number of times HE'S used this measure that which our Constitution empowers our Chief Executive and TO the degree to which those above words he spoke during his first run for the White House would suggest he would, but PLEASE take a few moments to look and contemplate the contents within the following links I've supplied you with here, and I believe you'll come to the conclusion that as of date he HASN'T been NEARLY as free to use this power has many of his predecessors have, AND not NEARLY to the degree that his political opponents seem to continually suggest that he has and in what seems blatant attempts to confuse(in other words, to pretty much LIE about) this issue for their own political gain...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/executiveorders.asp
Yep, ham ol' boy, this probably all comes down MORE to the idea that what REALLY sticks in the craw of his political opponents is NOT the NUMBER of his Executive Orders, but instead WHAT those E/Os consisted OF, and which in many cases were orders that THEY simply didn't like nor approve of.
(...your friendly resident Centrist signing off AGAIN for now!)
HE the same guy who numerous times has professed his christian faith...
and then celebrates a scotus ruling that makes a mockery of traditional marriage???
Oh! but of course his personal view evolved.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
There is a third possibility, beyond that which is known to man.
...
And it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge
it is an area which we call....
the twilight zone.
-
It's really all about money, eh?
I dunno, I kind of think, after the first billion or so, it would get kind of meaningless.
Sean Connery has gone on record as saying that he loves being retired, and has no desire to work. (Unless maybe it were to appear as a celebrity guest on Jeopardy.)
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
If the republican party as it is today keeps control of the Congress and gets one of theirs in as President this country will almost certainly head directly to running off of an economic cliff in the not too distant future. While simply electing democrats isn't the best answer, it is the far better alternative.
economics? maybe. but what about foreign policy and national security? I mean just how smart is it for Obama to let isis run rampant for years?
doesn't common sense inform most people grounded in the real world the sooner you destroy a malignant thing like isis the better?
yet Obama's willing to let them continue existing for years. just how many more decapitated heads would Obama have the civilized world tolerate?
"All the evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing"
-
It looks like a print off of Youtube someone added captions to.
better procuring thru economics.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Well, speaking of 'truth'...you guys DO know that the old saying, "The truth lies somewhere in the middle", has a very good reason for being, doncha?!
(...your friendly resident Centrist here now signing off from this thread)
yeah!....the truth is out there somewhere beyond the Cygnus.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
...and besides, darkblue, if I were happy with the current GOP establishment, do you really think I would be supportive of Donald Trump?
I be unhappy with them but for different reasons than you I'm sure.
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Your one to talk about the truth?????????????
maybe he is ...Klaatu!
-
LIARS!
in MOD REVIEW
Truth is now an utterly foreign concept to right-wingers.
They abandoned any semblance of it long ago.
That's why a really good education system is so important - to help kids to learn critical thinking. And it's exactly why education has been ridiculed and defunded by Republicans. People who can think are the enemy.
are people who think there is a higher power other than humankind the enemy too? most of the world's population believe in a higher power. only a small minority of people do not believe in a higher power.
Is it really fair to suggest that all the multitudes of people of religious faith on the planet are ignorant, stupid and unenlightened because their basic human intuition tells them there is or might be a higher power other than man?
just how open-minded is that???
but I do agree with you, darkblue, at least in part...
progressives are all for the encouragement and advocacy of critical thinking...
just so long as those future critical thinking conclusions come down on the progressive side of the ideological fence...
otherwise, the progressive tells him or herself...
prejudice, bigotry and ignorance will surely be the result.
would honest and objective seekers of the truth really be quite so arbitrary in their own thinking towards those they disagree with?
but I do know this, there have always been two lines of thought governing humanity throughout time.
1. God is God
2. Man is God
many will chose the former.
-
did they URGE Clinton to repudiate it?...and if he refused they should have threatened the withholding of all labor support of the democratic party.
the avoidance of the current state of our labor force and manufacturing required nothing less!
that is what I think.
it's kinda like what captain queeg said to ensign keith...
"doan forget, for want of a nail the horseshoe was lost and then the entire race."
labor shoulda insisted to Clinton in the strongest possible terms that a sell-out of the american work force and manufacturing will not due.
you say labor urged nafta's defeat. yes, I do remember that. but after it was voted into law it shoulda never have been resigned to. some didn't want to get on the new president Clinton's back too much. I suppose.
-
OK, I'll tell you. I was part of organized labor at the time (secretary-treasurer, Yakima local of The Newspaper Guild) and organized labor energetically called for NAFTA's defeat. Maybe you haven't noticed, though, but organized labor ain't what it used to be.
did they URGE Clinton to repudiate it?...and if he refused they should have threatened the withholding of all labor support of the democratic party.
the avoidance of the current state of our labor force and manufacturing required nothing less!
that is what I think.
Jekyll & Hyde 1920 vs 1932 vs 1941
in General Discussions
Posted
it's my favorite version too. and the fredric march version is pretty good as well.
Palance as Hyde looks like Liberace in that shot.