.jpg)
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The Daily Beast reports that George Clooney has done the green thing – starred in a new big budget Summer eco-disaster film, which aims to make us feel bad about warm weather.
According to The Daily Beast;
… When was the last time Transformers made you think about your carbon footprint?
Cinematic ambition has long defined the summer movie season. That typically refers to how many different, new, and spectacular ways studios can blow up things, transport us to other dimensions, and delight us with whizbangs and kabooms.
Tomorrowland, as visually stunning of a blockbuster as we’ve ever seen, certainly boasts all that technical ambition. But what sets it apart from what we’re used to is a little bit of moral aspiration, too.
…
The ideas of Tomorrowland, if occasionally heavy-handed, are admirably resonant. How do you wake people up out of their somnambulant compliance and get them not just optimistic about the future, but engaged in charting the direction of it?
In fact, a lot of the scoffing at the film’s Big Idea ambition speaks to the jadedness and state of culture that Tomorrowland actually seeks to expose and confront. Given the rolled-eye reaction to a lot of it, perhaps the challenge is greater than even the film estimates. …
I’m an unashamed Clooney fan – movies like Three Kings, Gravity, Syriana, Clooney has starred in a lot of interesting, thought provoking movies. OK, some of the science was a bit wonky in Gravity, but it was still in my opinion a very watchable movie. The fact someone who normally demonstrates good taste, with his choice of which movie roles he accepts, has gotten mixed up in what looks like a heavy handed, preachy global warming flick – what a shame.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Syriana, seriously? Oh, brother!
O Brother, Where Art Thou, maybe.
My thoughts exactly, although I thought Tim Blake Nelson stole the show!
Have to agree.
” Oh Brother.” The only movie Rosemary’s Nephew made that had any sense of integrity – and great music.
. You Americans must stop believing your own Hollywood propaganda – it is unbecoming intelligent folk
True. And some great homage bits to the ’30s movies, even down to Leni Riefenstahl, although funny N*zis are always problematic.
PS: IMO Intolerable Cruelty was also pretty funny.
Bad graphics but…
Well I guess we differ in our tastes. I can’t even imagine a set of circumstances under which I would waste my time watching that person hang washing out on a clothes line, let alone in a movie.
Well I suppose I could be persuaded to watch him in a WWF royal rumble match.
I don’t see how it is possible to separate Hollywood’s self appointed elites, from the movies they choose to participate in.
Lawyers get a pass for defending the scum of the earth; I guess they never developed any code of morality; but I’m not going to extend that licence to actors. Particularly in this age when movieland is just a propaganda mill.
Alec Baldwin is no Jimmie Doolittle, and for him to portray that role is obscene.
Agreed. Besides which, Baldwin did a terrible job. Doolittle wasn’t anything like as portrayed.
This song was featured in the movie “O Brother, Where Are Thou?” Movie full of good songs.
Full move – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNxAmv51oK8
Good lipsync by George
The soundtrack was actually sung by Dan Timinsky of Union Station Band with Alison Krauss on fiddle.
checkout Jerry Douglas on dobro….
…..more of him here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RZFQGT40Lo
enjoy
great song, great acting I don’t care how liberal they are !
Definitely, Brother!
WTF Syriana? What a forgettable film.
Can you name a Hollywood big gun that HASN’T starred in some sort of preachy movie? A good game is to watch old movies and see the ’causes’ crow-barred in, which at the time went fairly unnoticed e.g. in the Mel Gibson Danny Glover (yeah, should’ve known) Lethal Weapon 2 (I think) there was family outrage at one of them eating a tuna sandwich and the obligatory explanation of why it was soooo wrong.
How about the PC “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves”, with Morgan Freeman (a good actor and great American) as the 12th century Saracen Azeem, who has a telescope, which instrument was invented in the 17th century Netherlands?
Many claims of who invented whatever are highly politicised. For example neither did Baird invent TV, nor Marconi radio. Nor Edison the lightbulb, and Bell might or might not have been the first to deploy a telephone system. Then again, we NOW know that the ancient Greeks had sophisticated clockwork mechanisms, a suggestion which would have been considered fantasy a few decades back. I don’t say that the Saracens did have telescopes, but it is plausible as a plot item. Their scientific knowledge far exceeded that of our Mediaeval forebears, after all.
Well, Al-Haytham wrote The Book of Optics around 1015 AD, the monumental work that described the mathematics of optics and vision. Written records show–monks were the couriers–that Kepler, Copernicus, Galileo, Tycho Brahe, Roger Bacon, and Leonardo da Vinci, all worked from translations of Islamic science, which as Ian MacDonald notes, far exceeded that of our Mediaeval forebears.
http://harvardmagazine.com/2003/09/ibn-al-haytham-html
http://www.1001inventions.com/yearoflight
MRW: Islamic science?…hmmm, so most of the West’s inventions/advances/discoveries were Christian science? A debate for another day.
The original contributions of “Islamic science” consisted mainly of preserving Greek works. And naming stars, which are more readily observed in the clearer air of the Middle East than cloudy Europe. Plus transmitting Indian numerals to Europe, where they came to be called Arabic.
The conceit of a 12th century Muslim telescope is, in a word, preposterous. It could be argued that the 13th century Italian invention (or reinvention) of magnifying and corrective lenses owed something to translations of Alhazen, but it could just as well stem from European improvements in glass technology.
In any case, there is zero evidence of Muslim corrective lenses, let alone telescopes. There were “perspective glasses” in 16th century England prior to the Dutch telescope. Bruno probably got his conception of infinite worlds from looking at or through one while on the Misty Isle. The Digges family, friends of Shakespeare, are implicated.
So the date of the invention of something like a telescope could be considered debatable. But for the precise configuration of lenses used by Galileo, it’s known that he got the idea from the Dutch. And, familiar with perspective glasses, Thomas Harriot trained a Dutch-style telescope on the moon even before Galileo.
The original contributions of Islamic science consisted of far more than preserving Greek works or naming stars, or numerals. Read Chapter Five of Robert Briffault’s The Making of Humanity, 16 small pages, if interested in the topic. The first four pages are slow-going, then it gallops.
Lenses? Kepler, said to be the inventor of the camera obscura, improved upon al-Haytham’s first invention of it with a negative lens behind the positive lens, which made the projected image larger. This is how telephoto lens work today. Kepler worked from Gerard de Cremona’s translation of al-Haytham’s The Book of Optics into Latin, known as Perspectiva or De aspectibus.
Air America.
Error America.
“Can you name a Hollywood big gun that HASN’T starred in some sort of preachy movie?”
Clint Eastwood?
Please, the entire Dirty Harry Franchise was one long diatribe against the hug a thug crowd. Just because I happened to think they had a point didn’t change the fact it was pretty heavy handed propaganda.
Thought he used a funny little gun with three extra shells in the butt.
Eddie Deezen.
Million Dollar Baby was as preachy as they get, right in there with Cider House Rules.
Grand Torino is a ‘Must See’ movie for those who haven’t seen it.
Thank goodness we have Matt Daaaaaaaaamon to tell us the oil companies want our faucets to spit fire.
At the risk of flooding WUWT with movie reviews 😉 I see that Canada’s National Post newspaper gave “Tomorrowland” 1 star out of 4…
“For all the time it spends explaining things at length, gallingly, Tomorrowland remains pretty opaque. The fundamentals aren’t clear. I spent virtually the length of the film’s running time straining to keep up with the labyrinthine details of the future world and its leader’s complicated plan — then walked out with only the vaguest idea of what had happened.”
http://news.nationalpost.com/arts/movies/tomorrowland-review-atlas-shrugged-some-more
I think I’ll wait the movie to make it to TV.
That review, if accurate, says that “Tomorrowland” is the PERFECT metaphor for AGW:
Vague, unclear…. lost in its own plot. lol
AND it puts AGW right where it belongs… In a FANTASY land of FICTION…
The idea that folks believe fantasy shows is daft…
Janice! Guess who is back!
Pamela! Who??
Guesses:
1. YOU 🙂
2. that wonderful farmer…
3. Jimbo (MIA quite awhile, now)
4. Gail Combs (MIA for a VERY long time)
Well, if it is YOU (yes, noticed you’ve been posting very infrequently… hope all is okay)
— glad you’re back!
Even if it was not you, do post more often! Your dry humor and informed (and highly educated, O Chemistry Professor) insights are missed.
Janice
#(:))
The wonderful farmer! Rekindled it he did (and now he is managing multiple farmers). Reached out to me and I grabbed his outstretched hand. My move further away from his home base apparently did not matter to him. I have been blessed.
As for the reduced comments, I am still not used to the tangential nested comments and much prefer linear thought.
Oh, Pamela!!!!!
I just got back up (read your reply on my “smart” lol phone in bed (I get up at 5AM) and HATE typing on it — why do people prefer texting to speaking on the phone? Typing on a phone is ridiculous!!!) because…
I AM SO HAPPY FOR YOU!
#(:))
Oh, Pamela. I was SO sad when you told me a few months ago that all appeared to be (sob) over due to mutual “busyness.” (iprayedmanytimesforyouaboutthistoosincethen).
OKAY! Now! Planting will be done by the middle of June (IIRC)… harvest not until early fall… you are on break for the summer soon… . So, I’ll expect to hear some “news” before too long. #(:))
I wish you knew how happy I am vicariously for you. I, too, have shared (and likely will for the rest of my life — just the way it is) the cold wind that blows through a lonely heart. Your joy is my joy. I’m just hoping my “farmer” (completely different situation) might seek me out when we’re in our 80’s or 90’s (remember the final scene from the movie “Always”?). That’s kind of a loooong time away…, but, better then “never.” Seriously! Well, I’m talking too much. Just wanted you to know how heartfelt are my tears of joy for you.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING!
Take care,
Janice
This is for you, Pamela, and your wonderful farmer, meant to be.
“You’re the Inspiration” — Chicago (youtube)
You should know,
everywhere I go,
always on my mind,
in my heart,
in my soul… .
Here’s to the happy couple — whose love was meant to be.
*CLINK*
#(:))
Janice
(and this one’s for you, dear ……)
You are funny! Don’t expect an announcement. We are too old to get pregnant.
Oh, Pamela, you silly — I didn’t mean a BABY announcement (chuckle)…
I meant something along these lines:
#(;))
Anyway — just very happy you are TOGETHER (no matter what “news” there might be to announce or not).
“I think I’ll wait the movie to make it to TV.”
Me too…and then I won’t bother to watch it on TV either.
I saw it last night as part of a drive-in double feature. Lots of drivel about man causing the world to die through all our industrialization. Glad that I got to purge it with the Avengers.
SPOILER ALERT
They undermine the whole environmental preachiness at the end by showing that the whole “end-of-the-world” thing was being caused by Clooney’s character’s irrational fear being amplified by the device he created to predict the end of the world. The world was fine – but was about to be destroyed by one man’s environmental idealism/anti-capitalism and another’s (Hugh Laurie’s character) quest for power and moral superiority.
Sounds like the plot to Forbidden Planet and the Krell amplifier.
Should it be retitled as Fantasy Land?
Oh well. There goes another one.
Perhaps if they changed the movie name to
“Never Happen Land”?
…and changed An Inconvenient Truth‘s name to Never Never Land.
As far as watching a Clooney flick goes, tomorrow will never come
… and that’s exactly how the warmunists approach their religion – whenever the supposed climate disasters never transpire within an earlier stated time period, the goal posts are always moved into the future. Tomorrow never comes.
Which is perfect for job security – the taxpayer-funded climate-obsessed academics and hangers-on have seen what happens to those of us who complete project work on time and/or during economic downturns.
I think that it’s OK that film makers put an accent on such topics. It is a good way to warn the public about climate change, global warming and other effects of wars and over industrialization. Although I am relying on science and on scientific facts, I admit that sometimes I enjoy watching such movies. Then, if the film caught my attention, I try to find some well-documented articles on the subject….
Why does the public need to be “warned” about “climate change”? What threats do you suppose “global warming” poses. You are aware are you not that there has been no global warming for almost two decades?
I’ll grant that the public should be warned about the possible risk of coming climate change in the form of global cooling, but that’s not what the political class wants the peons to hear.
Thanks, sturgish. Well said.
Thanks. In my haste, I missed a question mark.
Well it is ok to warn somebody about to walk across a railway line, that the train is just 100 meters away and coming fast; but what is the purpose in warning somebody about a possible something, over which they have no control, and for which they have no remedy and can take no precautionary measures ??
Because they’d be forced to go against Ecogreen dogma in order to provide subsidized energy for heating.
Why, so they can be really, really SKEERED, and put all their faith and money in the hands of our enlightened “leaders” like Al Gore!
Well, since you are “relying on science and on scientific facts”, you know that there is no reason to waste time warning the public about either “global warming” or “climate change” (as used by the main stream media), even in a movie projecting a “futureland”.
I used to work in a place where were many kids, teenagers especially. Unfortunately I noticed that they were not reading, almost not at all (I remember reading tons of books in my childhood, and even now I read at least 2-3 books/month). But they were TV and cinema addict. They speak about movies, they watch movies, they are the fans of George Clooney and of other cinema stars. I was thinking about them when I wrote my comment, since THEY ARE THE NEXT GENERATION. So, if we can address them by movies, so be it! I’m pretty sure that we won’t make them read a book, at least not in the case of most of them…..
How about this. A movie warning about narcissistic totalitarian politicians.
Film making is over industrialized. Oh. The irony.
I’ll bet he has a green lawn.
He keeps putting his 80-room villa on Lake Como up for sale, but don’t know if he actually has sold it or not. Just his jet-setting around makes his carbon footprint approach the magnitude of Prince Albert’s hypocrisy.
On my trip to Italy last summer the local guide explained that Clooney bought it from John Kerry at an over market price, therefore it will be decades before he can resell without taking a bath.
Buying a house at a significant premium could be considered stupid, unless of course you are buying it from a prominent politician, in which case it might be called a political bribe.
Meh. I go to movies to be entertained. I couldn’t care less about the politics or the message a movie might promulgate. The Hollywood folks are, generally, so far out in left field (and usually hypocritical, too) any message they might promote in their productions is easily ignored. If it’s entertaining, Great! If it’s not entertaining, Who cares! From the reviews and things I’ve heard about “Tommorowland”, I doubt I’ll be going to the theater to see it.
Most people at the movies are 15 year old boys who want to watch their favorite CGI comic-book characters blow things up.
Sometimes it’s kind’a nice to pretend to be 15 with no responsibilities for a couple of hours. What’s wrong with some of my favorite comic book and Saturday morning cartoon characters being rendered in CGI on the big screen… As long as it’s fun and entertaining. Besides, it helps balance out the overly dramatic, tear-jerker chick flick I am occasionally afflicted with.
Obama and Clooney did “science” together. Not sure where or why
but they most certainly have studied their catastrophic parts.
“The ideas of Tomorrowland, if occasionally heavy-handed, are admirably resonant. How do you wake people up out of their somnambulant compliance and get them not just optimistic about the future, but engaged in charting the direction of it?”
CAGW thinking does not lend itself to optimism about he future, and it misleads about its direction; No, we are not going to fry, and no, atmospheric CO2 increases are not going to rise the global temperatures by a measurable amount. The Sun modulated by cloud coverage will do as it pleases.
Thanks, I’ll sit this one out.
This movie really irked the CAGW establishment because it placed too much confidence in human ingenuity. In fact, the negative-feedback causing climate change (and other badness”) in the movie was established and controlled by the antagonist — it wouldn’t have happened on it’s own. Once the feedback loop is destroyed, the happy technologically-advanced future is re-instated.
I recommend the movie wholeheartedly as a fun, optimistic, achievement-oriented film.
I’m waiting on Iron Sky….looks like a hoot
This isn’t the first time that George Clooney has expressed his climate change beliefs. A few years ago, I responded with an open letter to a comment he made at a fund raiser:
https://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/11/26/open-letter-to-lewis-black-and-george-clooney/
Re: this quote in your fine letter, Mr. Tisdale:
“If you have 99 percent of doctors who tell you ‘you are sick’ and 1 percent that says ‘you’re fine,’ you probably want to hang out with, check it up with the 99. … .” George Clooney
@ur momisugly GClooney: you are so YESTERDAY.
Read this: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/26/richard-tols-excellent-summary-of-the-flaws-in-cook-et-al-2013-the-infamous-97-consensus-paper/
And unless the 99% are following pharmaceutical propaganda supported by the AMA/NIH/FDA.
Note: the following was done without their authorization and will never see development because it is such an inexpensive non-profitable treatment:
http://discovermagazine.com/2011/jul-aug/13-how-pig-guts-became-hope-regenerating-human-limbs
Right, he is a repeat offender.
On the other hand “Church of Global Warming”, at http://www.climatereview.net/ is till playing for free. Fun and accurate.
Thanks for that Bob. As you say, Clooney puts a lot of time into charity work – he’s a good man. Its a real shame he hasn’t taken a little extra time, to ensure that all his efforts to do good achieve the positive outcomes he obviously desires.
“Tomorrowland” —
a fiction film
whose title was taken from a region in a fantasy park (Disneyland)
where you can “drive” a car attached to the track (Autopia ride — only really, really, little kids think they are really driving — nice metaphor for climate simulation models, though).
Just like AGW “science,” it’s about the real world.
*********************
And, like the rest of the AGW propaganda (yawn)……. zzzzzzz — Huh?? Oh, sorry. BORING. Figures.
It is just so reassuring to know that Clooney and Hollywood are here for us and poised to save the planet.
Nevertheless, I don’t think I’ll be handing over any money at the box office to hear George’s lecture.
Just can’t do the “green” thing, huh? 😉
That reminds me…..an oldie but goodie:-
The Green Thing
Checking out at the supermarket, the young cashier suggested to the
much older woman, that she should bring her own grocery bags because
plastic bags weren’t good for the environment.
The woman apologised and explained, “We didn’t have this ‘green
thing’ back in my earlier days.”
The young cashier responded, “That’s our problem today – your
generation did not care enough to save our environment for future
generations.”
She was right — our generation didn’t have the ‘green thing’ in its
day.
Back then, we returned milk bottles, lemonade bottles and beer
bottles to the shop. The shop sent them back to the plant to be washed
and sterilised and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and
over. So they really were recycled.
But we didn’t have the “green thing” back in our day.
Grocery shops bagged our groceries in brown paper bags, that we re-
used for numerous things, most memorable besides household bags for
rubbish, was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our
schoolbooks. This was to ensure that public property (the books
provided for our use by the school), was not defaced by our
scribblings. Then we were able to personalise our books on the brown
paper bags.
But too bad we didn’t do the “green thing” back then.
We walked up stairs, because we didn’t have a lift in every
supermarket, shop and office building. We walked to the local shop and
didn’t climb into a 300 horsepower machine every time we had to go half
a mile.
But she was right. We didn’t have the “green thing” in our day.
Back then, we washed the baby’s Terry Towel nappies because we didn’t
have the throwaway kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-
gobbling machine burning up 3 kilowatts – wind and solar power really did
dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids had hand-me-down clothes
from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.
But that young lady is right; we didn’t have the “green thing” back
in our day.
Back then, we had one radio or TV in the house – not a TV in every
room and the TV had a small screen the size of a big handkerchief
(remember them?), not a screen the size of Scotland In the kitchen. We
blended and stirred by hand because we didn’t have electric machines to
do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the
mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or
plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn’t fire up an engine and burn
petrol just to cut the lawn. We pushed the mower that ran on human
power. We exercised by working so we didn’t need to go to a health club
to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.
But she’s right; we didn’t have the “green thing” back then.
We drank from a tap or fountain when we were thirsty instead of using
a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We
refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we
replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole
razor just because the blade got dull.
But we didn’t have the “green thing” back then.
Back then, people took the bus and kids rode their bikes to school or
walked instead of turning their Mums into a 24-hour taxi service in the
family’s £50,000 ‘People Carrier’ which cost the same as a whole house
did before the “green thing.” We had one electrical outlet in a room,
not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances and we didn’t
need a computerised gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites
23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest Pub!
But isn’t it sad that the current generation laments how wasteful we
old folks were just because didn’t have the “green thing” back
then?
Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a
lesson in conservation from a smartarse young person…
meltemian,
I am actually old enough to remember those days before WalMart (our area didn’t even have shopping carts, you typically bought what you could carry in your arms) what with open clothes lines, tub and washboards, cars and houses with no air conditioning (used water coolers/useless on a hot rainy day), clunky cars with tube radios powered by a mechanical vibrator inverter, and whose engine typically had to be overhauled at 50K, expensive B&W tube TV’s with limited over the air programming (was better with a motor powered directional TV antenna), no computers, cell phones I-pods or any simulation thereof, no things like skate boards or reliable electric frying pans or satellite TV/cable/internet. The interstate highway system was not completed so in many areas, trips were down slow two lane highways with many stops at intervening towns. And by the way I don’t miss those days at all, I’ll take the present with lots of electricity using appliances and efficient air conditioned autos and houses. The greenies, not having lived then, have no idea what they are not missing.
meltemian: Yep, I’m only 62 and remember all of those pre-green technologies. Closest thing to a computer was the one slide rule that got me through high school and which I still have today.
Me too. I used to buy lightbulbs out of a bin, .10c a piece. Unwrapped. And hardware was NEVER sold in anything other than bins. No plastic wrapped socks or underwear. Belts did not have that damned plastic hanger attached on the end. Produce was never pre-bagged in anything. The list goes on and on.
Not Gravity for pit’s sake. True, his part was watchable, mostly because he died, but the rest of that feminist physics slur was beyond stupid. I could feel my IQ drop by the minute. After watching I felt violated.
IMHO climate alarmism and feminism share too many features to be a simple coincidence.
“climate alarmism and feminism …”
Oh, THAT remark will get those 18-35-year-olds to listen to us for SURE.
So if this was a Communist country we would have to have the debate on Communist terms to get people to listen?
SJW feminism is a bubble. Woman who helped launch the current uproar over sexism in tech is sorry
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sexism-in-tech-uproar-dies-down/article/2564916
You mean people actually read these comments ?
I’ll have to keep that in mind.
I always thought it was just a way to vent 🙂
Hlaford
Nearly killed the DVD at the opening scene. The spacecraft were in retro-grade orbit.
So now you see the root of their problem…
“I could feel my IQ drop by the minute. After watching I felt violated.”
Thanks for posting! I felt exactly the same way. Like an idiot, I got my hopes up after reading all those rosy reviews about how “realistic” and “thought-provoking” and “tense” the movie supposedly was.
I’m sitting there squirming in my seat: Sandra ought to have died about 1000 times over. I’m thinking, just a little realism PLEASE! Die Sandra, die. Do us all a favor.
God help us that our cadre of critics are so clueless about physics and engineering that they could see this idiocy as in any way realistic.
This should make a more entertaining cult film to show at a festival of the AGW generation (along with Al Gores’ documentaries) and laugh at in a couple of decades.
You mean like Reefer Madness was laughed at in my day?
Exactly!
Reports are that the movie is making significantly less this weekend than expected.
The production company is trying to spin it as not so bad and are saying that once the schools let out for summer it will do better because it is the only PG movie released in May. Of course school isn’t in session over the weekend and I don’t really think George Clooney is a big draw for the under 18 crowd.
They must be using the same ‘logic’ as the AGW crowd. Believing that the projected revenue is true even when the real revenue numbers are lower.
It’s those damn models again.
There have been a couple of highly entertaining films poking fun at catastrophic global warming. Interstellar has a Professor Mann broadcasting a false signal from a freezing barren planet to save his neck while lying about its ability to save the human race. And Kingsman casts as the villain a billionaire doomster who much like the Club Of Rome crew believes that overpopulation and CAGW are the big problems that require murder on a genocidal scale to be fixed.
I bet they’re both much more watchable than preachy nonsense like The Day After Tomorrow and Tomorrowland
What, no mention of Clooney’s performance in “Michael Clayton”??
yeah, I’ll watch that one again
As Glenn “Instapundit” Reynolds says, “I”ll believe there is a climate emergency when the people who are telling me there is a climate emergency act like there is a climate emergency”.
Not me. I’ll just laugh.
Watched Kingsman last night with no forewarning. (I don’t get out much.)
Excellent exploding elitist heads, disgusting church violence scene, awful acting, not sure there was a plot.
This breaks my heart, Brad Bird is my hero. I guess he should stick with animation.
I haven’t seen the film but I respect the idea of ‘hope in technology’ leading to a better world. If this turns out to be pessimistic then it does seem to be false advertising.
But even then, who cares?
We still make robots despite the Terminator.
We still have security forces despite Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
We still have monasteries despite the Star Wars prequels – and that’s truly unforgivable.
Hollywood entertainment is not politically influential. If it was then Scientology would not be a joke.
“We still have monasteries despite the Star Wars prequels – and that’s truly unforgivable.”
MCourtney, Star Wars has as much to do with Christianity as Fabianism has with ample food supply. I think I should have told you, as you didn’t notice yourself.
DirkH, It looked like the Jedi temple was based more closely on a Buddhist Monastery, not Christian.
As it was a light-hearted throwaway I’ll ignore your other narrow-minded perspective.
“We still make robots despite the Terminator.”
Well it’s just a bit early, depending on which “expert” you might ask, it could be 2020 to 2045 before the machines take over and even Hawking is afraid.
Let us remember that intelligence is not the main requirement to being a movie actor. Many of the Hollywood crowd prove that on a continuing basis.
In rock&roll The Moody Blues sang, “I’m just a singer in a rock and roll band”. I liked that honesty.