Funniest mindless movie of the last few years. McLovin is the best, and the other guys grew on me. Michael Cera must go and do some Woddy Allen or Charlie Kaufman stuff; he was great at Arrested Development, and is quite enjoyable at Juno and this movie.
In his job he needs to undervalue the suffering of others in order to make more money. Then there’s the smell, the ass and the eye. The degree of objectification of desire is in direct proportion to the self-debasement of the indulger. By degrading the other, he nullifies himself. The very indifference to the overjealous ones, the suppressed recalcitrant losers of the world, is what causes their victims to exist. Great disturbing movie.
A lost science fiction PBS movie with Taoist undertones is a real find, right? A guy discovers his dreams change reality—when he wakes up he finds himself in a world where the content of his dreams have actually happened. He of course gets scared after a couple of nightmares, seeks relief in drugs, and then, because of them, is lead to a psychiatrist. “To let understanding stop at what cannot be understood is a high attainment. Those who cannot do it will be destroyed on the lathe of heaven.”Chuang Tzu
Here's for all the sissy Apple lovers out there... This is the ultimate design for my old Duron, which faithfully downloaded well over one terabyte (mostly movies, 1300+) always on 24/7/365 over the last four years. It also runs Apache and is a file and printer server, as well as a router for my home network (with four, also damn old and beautiful computers). Sometimes I dust it off with a vacuum cleaner.
I really enjoyed Requiem for a Dream, and PI was quite interesting. I may grow to like this one, but for now it just seemed a little too newagy to my tastes. It started a bit boring and I never quite empathized with the characters. On the other hand, some of the visuals (and sounds — by Mogway) are quite appealing (no CGI!), and near the end we have some surprises. Actually, some interpretations may not be that newagy — but pretentiousness still abounds.
I have read the article on “ditching Buddhism” by John Horgan about one or two years ago and I have found it to be as so filled up with misconceptions as not to be worthy even of bad publicity, yet last week somebody remembered me about it and I decided to answer some of its points.
In imdb a user commented: "Annoying little transition into some sort of regurgitated independent film values finds this shallow project from Brad Silberling offering little and providing less in this embarrassingly exploitive work." I agree, yet it is still watchable — even more so if you understand how clichê is the fabricated spontaneity in it. It is as if independent movie has aquired its own hollywood-like formulaicism. So it kind of becomes an interestingly consumated aesthetic portrail of so many cult-status fabricated stylishness examples we see around. Many people liked Me and You and Everyone We Know, and it is surely a much fresher and pure attempt, but "10 Items or Less" explains all the little (but very much present) annoyances I got with "Me and You..."
You bloody bastard, I checked your pics page and there's not ONE picture of me! I'm totally taking it personally, y'know. Personally big time.
Jesus H Christ, bro, you were the one to send me those pics from that (2000's? 2001's? can't remember) "Essence of Siddhi" Drubtchen, you mofo! The bloody year we bloody met!
Honest, that's way more than I can take; I'm solenmly severing our relations as of now.
Which, of course, means I'm officially entitled to retain that lot I would otherwise owe you were things dissimilar .
Regards,
Leonardo.
:-(
Hope you don't plan to include all them 'comments' into your crazy-ass cross-reference matrix. I'd be more than willing to contribute with a little chaos, whether invited to do so or not.
Your chaotically dynamic (Jeez, maybe too much Heidegger?) bro,
Leo
BTW, I don't index the comments yet. So, no Heidegger tags yet.
" 'Roger that.' - I hear you. "
So maybe I'll just conclude I should pocket your piece of the action on that James Brown article; fair enough, dudee?
"Rolling Stone Inc." is a laaaaarge corp.; you really don't wanna see your name associated with any of that shit. Well, 2 late for that anyhow. You can always renounce your paycheck as a token of goodwill though ;-)
In which ccase I'd have to cash your bread in myself, but then again, what the hell; I ain't that selective ;-)
Cheers,
Your Bro.
PS: Here's hoping you're really not that much of a 'monistic idealist' anymore (as opposed to being a 'Sunyavadin' - that'd be sad alright ).
Which by the way should anyhow allow me to cash that dough in myself , is that right ? ;-)
Hehe,
Do you know what did the Bhuddist Nun ask the Hot-Dog guy?
"-Make me one with everything."
Hey! I deal with humans, in this case, you!
As far as I know, I worked for YOU, not for Rolling Stone Magazine! So I'm morally entitled to both receive the dough and bash corporations.