Sukhov
-
Posts
9,392 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sukhov
-
-
Silvia Pinal as Satan disguised as Jesus in Simon of the Desert
-
-
11 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:
What ?
It's word salad from a post-modernist philosopher. He's messing around with the Sarge.
-
2
-
-
-
Carmina Burana, Jean-Pierre Ponnelle, West Germany
Film version of the Carl Orff work with Lucia Popp and Hermann Prey. The music is beautiful and the sets and costumes are wonderful. Some of the supernatural/ demonic themed costumes reminded me quite a bit of Haxan. My favorite part was the rendition of "In Taberna Quando Sumus."
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, TopBilled said:
It would certainly be interesting if you had to deal with people complaining about your schedules.
Let's try a little empathy, mate!
I'd love to have Nipkowdisc do the programming for a whole week. Hot Spell, 50 Foot Woman, Nunzio, Aztec Mummies. It would be the best week in TCM programming history.
-
1
-
5
-
-
"Femmes, Femmes, Femmes" from the Merry Widow
Next: Song from a movie version of a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta
-
Querelle
-
11 hours ago, Sgt_Markoff said:
--Uncle Joe
I get the joke here. Yawn. 'Playing' with verbiage. Seen it 1000x before.
Okay. Taking it seriously: gee, since when is it ...'pseudo-scientific' or 'theoretical' ..."jargon" or ..."rhetoric" ...when major financial periodicals like Forbes and Fortune report on a trend? Is that mere "verbiage"?
The original quote was from Homi K. Bhaba on "cultural hybridity."
-
16 minutes ago, Vautrin said:
There are a number of times I've read philosophy professors on the net replying to folks who
talk about the idea that post-structuralists believe everything is an opinion, there are no facts,
that there is no such thing as objective reality, the profs usually say that this is a gross
exaggeration and an erroneous popularization of their views. I think the profs might have
something there. Nietzsche the father of post-structuralism. That's not a fact, just an
interpretation.
Yeah, you do raise a good point. They don't believe there is no objective reality and anything can be true but rather no objective "truth" as in moral view of the world. Zizek explains the antisemite's postmodern view of the world in this article.
https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/three-variations-on-trump-chaos-europe-and-fake-news/
Problems begin with the last distinction. In some sense, there ARE “alternate facts,” though, of course, not in the sense of the debate whether the Holocaust did or did not happen. (Incidentally, all the Holocaust-revisionists whom I know, from David Irving on, argue in a strictly empirical way of verifying data; none of them evokes postmodern relativism!) “Data” are a vast and impenetrable domain, and we always approach them from what hermeneutics calls a certain horizon of understanding, privileging some data and omitting others. All our histories are precisely that – stories, a combination of (selected) data into consistent narratives, not photographic reproductions of reality. For example, an anti-Semitic historian could easily write an overview of the role of the Jews in the social life of Germany in the 1920s, pointing out how entire professions (lawyers, journalists, art) were numerically dominated by Jews – an account that is (probably more or less) true, but clearly in the service of a lie.
The most efficient lies are lies performed with truth, lies which reproduce only factual data. Take the history of a country: one can tell it from the political standpoint (focusing on the vagaries of political power), on economic development, on ideological struggles, on popular misery and protest… Each of the approaches could be factually accurate, but they are not “true” in the same emphatic sense. There is nothing “relativist” in the fact that human history is always told from a certain standpoint, sustained by certain ideological interests. The difficult thing is to show how some of these interested standpoints are not ultimately all equally true: some are more “truthful” than others. For example, if one tells the story of Nazi Germany from the standpoint of the suffering of those oppressed by it, i.e., if we are led in our telling by an interest in universal human emancipation, this is not just a matter of a different subjective standpoint. Such a retelling of history is also immanently “more true” since it describes more adequately the dynamics of the social totality which gave birth to Nazism. Not all “subjective interests” are the same, not only because some are ethically preferable to others but because “subjective interests” do not stand outside a social totality; they are themselves moments of that social totality, formed by active (or passive) participants in social processes. The title of Habermas’s early masterpiece “Knowledge and Human Interest” is perhaps more actual today than ever before.
Also Nietzsche and Heidegger are generally viewed as the forerunners to Post-structuralism.
-
-
I've seen that version before and disliked it. I thought the costumes were horrible and didn't like how they edited the play (though that is to be expected with the short runtime). The atonal soundtrack certainly doesn't do it justice either. Lee Remick is the best part about it by far.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Sgt_Markoff said:
Questioning historicism is good; and has a lot of different directions you can pursue. But its also dangerous. because it can lead down the path that the post-structuralists took. Minds like Foucault, Derrida, Kristeval, deleuze, deMan, and Lacan.
2 hours ago, TheCid said:Have no idea who these people are, but I looked up post-structuralism on Wikipedia. The heading quoted below sums it up pretty well.
"This article may be too technical for most readers to understand." Wikipedia
To some extent, economics, politics, sociology, history and much more is based on "opinion." I remember the classic description of histories of wars. It is written by the victors. The information age and access to so much information is why truly objective studies and reporting have become so difficult.
Don't forget the father of post-structuralism - Friedrich Nietzsche.
"You are aware of my demand upon philosophers, that they should take up a stand Beyond Good and Evil … This demand is the result of a point of view which I was the first to formulate: that there are no such things as moral facts. Moral judgment has this in common with the religious one, that it believes in realities which are not real. Morality is only an interpretation of certain phenomena: or, more strictly speaking, a misinterpretation of them. … [M]oral judgment must never be taken quite literally: as such is sheer nonsense. As a sign code, however, it is invaluable: to him at least who knows, it reveals the most valuable facts concerning cultures …"
-
1
-
1
-
-
Maitresse - Depardieu and a dominatrix start a relationship and things do not go smoothly. Very disturbing, unsimulated sex scenes. 5/10
Morgan, the Pirate- cheesy swashbuckler with a Welsh pirate fighting everyone in his path. Meh. 4/10
Beyond Good and Evil -Italian retelling of the life of Friedrich Nietzsche as he grapples with a world around him he sees as weak and pathetic. Nietzsche tries to woo Lou Andreas-Salome while developing a good criticism of the slave mentality he sees around him (this would later become the eponymous book "Beyond Good and Evil). 7/10
Waiting Women - Some women wait around for their husbands and tell stories of their lives with them, ranging from hilarious to depressing. 8/10
Come Drink With Me -a martial artist woman rescues her brother from bandits. 7/10
Ten Tigers of Kwangtung - Some more martial arts fare with pretty much every big martial artist from the 70s in it. 7/10
-
2
-
-
Yeah, Leni Riefenstahl was my favorite director till I heard about that whole *NAZI* thing.
-
3
-
-
On 4/10/2019 at 11:47 AM, jamesjazzguitar said:
I'm headed to Salzburg in May. Looking forward to visiting the castle there.
Sounds like a lot of fun. Hope you have a good time, James!
-
1
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, TheCid said:
Not sure I will watch the rest. It appears that Gates had an agenda and wrote the script to reinforce it. He then secured services of commentators who would support his theory. It would have been a far better program if it had been more objective. After all, there was the white side of Reconstruction. Especially the poor whites, farmers and so forth. PBS can do better.
It was briefly mentioned that the poor whites and poor blacks sometimes worked together but yeah, they should have really gone more in depth with that.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Sgt_Markoff said:
It seems as if lots of sound information which is better presented in printed form, was 'lost' in the adaptation to visual entertainment. I wish I could say this was atypical but as we all know it happens far too often. Dense academic topics simply fare awkwardly on a televised medium. To tell a visual story, nuances and complexities are effaced away for the sake of continuity and coherence over the screen. Television is absolutely not a platform to which we can ever consign our intellectual life. It is frankly disturbing how many allowances we make for it, simply for the sake of convenience.
Yeah, it's only a quick overview in a two hour doc. It does well with information for the time it has. I think the first person accounts that were read were a nice touch.
-
25 minutes ago, TopBilled said:
It feels like she has prejudices and that's why she starts these threads. But then she prevents herself from elaborating, because she knows she's wrong or that she'd be strung up if she was explicitly ugly. So everyone else ends up commenting. Then she comes along with another thread and starts over.
Well she did also make a few threads about African-American films I believe (I don't exactly remember what specifically).
-
They want the coveted S&M demographic. Now if only they would show the Ilsa series.
-
3
-
4
-
-
Depardieu's character seems unnaturally violent in this one. He overreacts to everything here. He almost seems confused that his dominatrix woman is doing things with the customers though that is probably just not coming to terms with her profession. The scene with the nail is also a little puzzling. Why would someone get off to their own genitalia being destroyed like that?
I just hope they used a prop for that scene and didn't mutilate someone just for the film.
-
5 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:
By that I mean a general reluctance up to this point to include them with the older classics. I've noticed many trying to claim them as still modern films that aren't authentic or true classics, and i feel that is wrong.
I understand and agree with what you are saying but I feel like when people say "classic" around here it is more specifically being used for the Studio Era in particular. I don't think they mean modern films can't be great quality too. That's how I look at it at least. Also I agree that there generally needs to be some time after a movie is released to see what is just a passing fad and what is a "classic."
-
1
-
-
Time of the Apes
-
I just hope they used a prop for that scene and didn't mutilate someone just for the film.
Why do some classic movie fans bash newer films?
in General Discussions
Posted
What I like is that usually when they show newer films they at least sort of have a classic Hollywood "theme" to them like they have shown the Artist (influenced by silent era movies) and Chicago (influenced by 1930s musicals and Kurt Weill).