Greetings fellow marvelers of the menacing and macabre, and welcome to another installment of what is indisputably at least the eighth best weekly recurring article on this site. For the next several weeks, we shall be exploring your humble wordslinger’s favorite single genre of horror, giallo.
I will preface the reviews with a brief history of the genre itself, the horror directors most well known within it, and its larger impact on American cinema.
First, lettuce define our terms. Giallo is greasy wop-talk for “yellow,” like the color of my wife’s skin, and refers to a particular style of Italian-produced murder mystery film which often includes elements of horror fiction (such as slasher violence and eroticism). The genre developed in the mid-to-late 1960s peaked in popularity during the 1970s, and subsequently declined over the next few decades. This description is copied entirely off of the beginning of the Wikipedia article, but if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, says I.
Without getting too into the weeds on the subject, the genre covers a fairly broad range of films, from pulp murder mysteries to straight supernatural horror. There are some common elements. First, there is almost always a psychological element to the films, some insanity provoked by trauma in one of the main characters. There is always killing, and it is always very violent and very much center screen – this is not a genre of happy fluffy bunnies. There is very (and I do mean very) little focus on the cohesiveness of plot or dialogue throughout the film. Don’t get me wrong – it isn’t the purposeful insanity of, say, House, or the purely so-over-the-top-it’s-weird-ness of Zardoz. More of a…benign indifference to strict logical flow. There is, essentially, just enough of a storyline to ensure that one event leads to another, and that’s about it. There is a great focus on cinematography, on capturing interesting or provocative or just plain unusual shots. The soundtracks are usually awesome, as in, done as if the keyboardist from an early 80s synthpop or electro funk band was on some mellow acid and just decided to score some movies in his spare time. There’s even a band, called Goblin, most well known for their movie soundtracks. I could go on and on, but this gives you the gist of it. Seriously though, if any of you guys want to just meet somewhere and listen to me wax philosophic about this genre and all the movies that I love in it for six hours while drinking beer, I am always up for that.
We begin our exploration with one of the seminal works of the great Lucio Fulci (more on him next week), Zombi 2. Or as it was known in America, Zombie.
Italian copyright law (pre-EU) was a funny thing. Any movie could be marketed as a sequel to any other movie, without having any direct relationship. We of the superior Anglo-Saxon lineage understand that George Romero’s masterwork Dawn of the Dead was a direct sequel to his groundbreaking Night of the Living Dead. As the science of phrenology teaches us, Italians aren’t nearly as intelligent as we are, and so were ignorant of this fact. Personally, I blame all the out-race breeding. Dawn of the Dead was released in most European markets titled Zombi, and the audiences thought it was simply a stand-alone. Ever one to try and turn a quick buck on the cheap, the Italian movie industry decided to cash in, and Zombi 2 was green-lit. The title Zombie is for the American release since over here, it is not a sequel.
As a brief aside, this started a bizarre and, for the collector, irritating trend of any movie involving supernatural cannibalism to be labeled as a Zombi sequel in Europe. So there are a shit-load of movies that all have multiple titles, but if you’re hunting them down, they might be known as one thing, or might be known as Zombi 3, 4, 5, etc., depending on which production company is doing the release at any given time, and varying according to release region. In two weeks I’ll review one such, chosen to show just how far afield this trend can go. Though not one of the chief offenders of appropriating the Zombi moniker, Non si deve profanare il sonno dei morti (I Do Not Profane the Sleep of the Dead) is one of the worst, having been released with over 15 different titles. My personal favorite of the titles for that film, and the title on my copy is Let Sleeping Corpses Lie.
Anyway, I won’t go into a great deal of background on director Fulci, because I’ll cover him some in next week’s installment of giallo background since he is an important figure in the genre. Suffice to say the man has some kind of obsession with eyes. I own six of his films, and I’m fairly certain I remember seeing eyeballs punctured or mutilated up close on camera in every one of them.
That started with Zombie. After a brief opening scene in a hospital where a doctor shoots somebody wrapped in a sheet in the head, we cut to an abandoned boat drifting into New York City. Officers variously described as either Harbor Patrol or the Coast Guard find somebody dead inside, and a zombie, which bites one of the cops in the throat (they look like harbor patrol to me, though one of them makes a crack about getting a big bonus for bringing this ship in, so maybe they’re some kind of salvage crew mercenary harbor patrol cops?), killing him. His partner blasts the zombie back into the sea, and his dead partner is taken to the city morgue.
The daughter (Tisa Farrow) of the man whose boat was found adrift teams up with a reporter (Ian McCulloch) investigating the ghost ship, and they trace its route back into the Caribbean. There’s a hilarious scene where the cab driver on the island they fly to tells them there aren’t many boats about to be hired, and then we see them walk along a dock which is literally cluttered with civilian boats. There they meet Al Cliver (who was born Pierluigi Conti – cultural appropriation!) and Auretta Gay, who are just about to set out on vacation on their yacht and agree to take our investigators with them to try and find a sinister island that the natives are rumored to avoid.
Here’s where this movie gets fucking awesome. Auretta strips down to just a thong bottom and goes scuba diving. She encounters a tiger shark, which is attacked by an underwater zombie that keeps trying to bite it. This scene is pure cinematic gold. There was a diver, done up in water-resistant zombie makeup, and he actually fights a tiger shark they doped up so that it wouldn’t be too aggressive. When you see the guy biting on the shark, he’s actually doing that. Man, they just don’t do movies like that anymore, and it’s a goddamn shame.
While fending off the shark before the zombie showed up, the boat was damaged, and so the protagonists fire off some flares. On the island, doctor’s assistant Lucas sees the flare and asks if it’s the Devil. Yes, Lucas, the fucking Devil is firing off bog-standard emergency flares from just off shore. This is why a white guy is in charge of your island.
The foursome are rescued by Doctor Richard Johnson, who was also in one of the great all-time classic horror films, The Haunting. I’ll review it someday – it’s really superlative. A complete sense of dread built up with almost no effects whatsoever. Also, it lent the opening sample to a great White Zombie song.
Once ashore, we learn that Richard Johnson was friends with Tisa’s old man, and they were researching why the dead are increasingly returning to life on the island. The film never makes a definitive statement, but voodoo is mentioned several times, so I guess we’re going with “magic” in this one. He agrees to help the stranded newcomers but first asks them to check on his wife up the road while he tends to more zombie research right quick.
Of course, the fucking gardener was left in charge of security at the house, and he blew it. You already know the wife’s dead, because of a fantastic scene earlier in the film where she’s showering (yay, more titties!) and a zombie breaks into the house and kills her. Here you have another one of the great moments in horror history: for the first time in a major release, you get an agonizingly slow, up close, center camera shot of a big splinter of wood jamming right into and bursting her eyeball, no cutaways or wide angles to lessen the impact. I remember seeing a brief interview with Tom Savini for Bravo’s 100 Scariest Movie Moments where he recalls watching that scene building, and wondering if Fulci had the guts to do what even he hadn’t dared in Dawn of the Dead (for the tragically ignorant amongst you, Savini did the effects for that film).
Fleeing in terror from the scene at the house, our protagonists are making their way back to the hospital when they stop to catch their breath. For some reason Tisa and Ian start making out when it turns out they’re in a Spanish conquistador cemetery, and the remarkably still meaty former Spaniards begin to reanimate.
Fight fight fight people die, eventually, we have a last stand at the hospital, and I won’t spoil the ending for anyone who decides to see it. But New York City at least gets overrun, so I’ll leave it at that. Serves all the progressives who live there right! If it wasn’t for major cities, there’d be no national democratic party! Down with urban dwellers! REEEEEGION WAAAAAR!!!
Look, everything I write about these movies is going to be biased because I love them all so very, very much. I could seriously sit down and watch this shit all day. The barely-there storylines, the garish, brutal on-screen killings with bright red pulsing blood, the horrifically rotting zombies dropping piles of worms out of their eyes, I even love how you can’t tell what language the fucking things are shot in (pro-tip: most of the time they’re shot without the dialogue being recorded at all, and dubs are put over it in post-production for each country that it’s going to be released in. Hell, in Zombie, half the cast were English speakers who had no Italian, and the other half were the reverse. This is because they were always filmed with an eye towards international release since none of the European nations were large enough to guarantee good gross receipts by only catering to their own native audiences). So don’t take my word for it, because I’m going to tell you to watch every one of these.
I picked this one first because I think it’s a good way for those of you unfamiliar with the glory of low-budget 1970s Italian splatter-horror to segue into the genre with a fairly familiar motif. Everybody knows zombie movies and has seen at least a few, so the transition from American “don’t show anything too graphic and try to make sense” movies won’t seem so jarring. The bottom line is, if you like horror, you will like this movie, I guarantee it. If you don’t like horror, then what the fuck are you doing reading this anyway? Fuck you too, buddy, and just get on with posting all your endless goddamn “hurr durr let’s all give HuffPo more advertising money by hate-sharing their posts” OT links in the comments below. Always remember how much Zardoz loves you all, my children.
I rate Zombi 2/Zombie six decayed heads out of seven.
“…eighth best weekly recurring article on this site.”
It’s in the top 10, to be sure.
Late to the party, but you can watch the full movie on youtube for free.
And the NSFW swim scene is 31:34 in…
You are undead to me.
If there were ever really a zombie apocalypse. The zombies would starve.
Lack of brains? Depends on their location probably. The ones in Hollywood are proper fucked.
Freezer burn come winter is the main issue, as I recall.
I’d try to find a dolphin tank somewhere
I’m happy somebody else has a casual enough knowledge of the laws of thermodynamics to point this out.
Any movie could be marketed as a sequel to any other movie, without having any direct relationship.
This explains why Troll 2, directed by an Italian, had nothing to do with Troll and also did not feature any trolls. A delightful documentary was made about it.
http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1144539/
Speed 2 did not depict anything going at a particularly high speed, Beverly Hills Cop 3 did not take place in Beverly Hills, and I know I’m missing quite a few others that are even more fun.
Leprechaun in Space did feature a character that looked just like the Leprechaun; but there was very little of him, he was never identified as the Leprechaun in the film, he was not billed as the Leprechaun in the credits, he did not appear to have anything to do with the Leprechaun of the standard universe, and in fact in the international release the movie itself was not even called Leprechaun and did not even show the critter in its ad campaign.
But yeah, Troll 2 has to be the ultimate.
thanks, DL’d it.
I assume you have several pounds of weed in your place right now.
unfortunately no.
I’ve watched at least 2 other docos people have recommended here (Jodorowsky’s Dune, and Chuck Norris vs. Communism) and both were good. Figure this should be similar.
I keep wanting to get into that Dune shit but the whole thing just seems intimidating and exhausting. Part of me is intrigued; part of me says I’d rather spend time exploring Star Wars’s crappy ass extended universe; at least there I know I’ll never tire myself out giving a shit.
If you’re talking about Frank Herbert’s Dune, it’s fucking great.
Nah, just read the first novel. The rest of it’s not necessary, and gets worse the farther from the novel it is.
Up through God-Emperor wasn’t too bad.
Just read the first novel, if nothing else.
I just finished reading the first two books within the last month or so. Feel free to skip them, as Herbert is not a good writer. Not that I don’t like the themes, but, I would almost rather read another Grisham story.
One true athena is pretty much spot on.
I saw Goblin live last year. Great performance, they had scenes from their movies projected onto a screen them.
Sometimes it seems like the biggest horror in these movies is the crushing defeat the actors and director suffer realizing this is the highlight of their careers.
do you really think the snobby A-list people in that industry or the B-list people are more fun to work with?
Haven’t tried any of the more extreme Italo zombie flicks like these, but I do highly recommend “Dellamorte Dellamore“. (aka “Cemetery Man”). Pretty sure the dub on the dvd isn’t as bad as what’s in the trailer but I need to watch it again.
(also…technically an adaptation of the Dylan Dog comic too IIRC).
Man… he got around.
The video was almost over before I got the joke. Not my proudest moment.
FWIW…couldn’t come up with enough material for a full post on this last month around the actual “official” date, but hopefully some of you glibs here will want to run with this.
Celebrating a Century of Socialism
I haven’t been on the derpbook much this year (and haven’t seen it listed as a google holiday yet), but looking at the calendar, I couldn’t help but notice that we recently passed the official(?) date marking 100 years of socialism – 8 Mar (subject to calendar variations we may have already passed one date). Although I suppose it may be better to clarify it as a century of active socialist governance in one form or another.
Obviously, people should be made aware of this auspicious era so that they can give it the attention it so rightfully deserves…and who better to take the lead in promoting this notable date than we Glibertarians?
Suggested themes/slogans include:
– 130 million dead – we’re just getting started! (some people may try to lowball us – it’s important to acknowledge that we’re #1 for the 20th Century!)
– 27 failed states – but who’s counting? (Not giving us credit for each member of the USSR and the rest of the Warsaw Pact? Someone’s asking for trouble.)
– Just because the right top men have never been quite the right top men is no reason to quit now.
– Socialism: Because who uses toilet paper these days?
Suggestions?
Hard to bet your last one there.
I think only a minority of self-described socialists–even in this country, where the label barely extends into the social-democratic mainstream–would use the Bolshevik Revolution as the marquis event to celebrate the dawn of the history of socialism. (There are *a lot* more appealing, and apparently benign, candidates.) Despite what it may be fun to think, Americans may be increasingly fucked up in the head in all sorts of ways, but they are more conscious than ever that this per se is nothing to celebrate. (Besides, we’re having a bit of a George Galloway – Ken Livingstone Brexitesque split on the “far mainstream left” in this country right now; while half roll their eyes and remain true to the old school, the other half don’t want nothin’ to do with no stinkin’ Russians!) Anyone thinking they’re going to put their fingers on the pulse of today’s socialist movement will certainly be deluding themselves. You are going to get the handful of Soviet nostalgists, combined with the tiny number of Maoists, Stalinists, and the ever-entertaining Trotskyists (which probably dominate numerically, oddly enough, nowadays).
For an accurate look into contemporary American socialism, as defined by self-identification, you will have to look elsewhere.
For an accurate look into contemporary American socialism, as defined objectively, here you go.
What if zombies riding sharks were caught up in a tornado? Zombiesharknado?
The Hillary campaign
Hyperion described something exciting and worth considering. I think you owe Hyperion an apology.
Apparently more than you could imagine.
Is that not the perfect description of the last election? Think about it.
I’m gonna need some of Gilmore’s weed.
“Man, they just don’t do movies like that anymore, and it’s a goddamn shame.”
I remember reading about when they actually killed a water buffalo for Apocalypse Now. Damn, you couldn’t get away with that in Hollywood anymore.
I didn’t know that. Was it Barney or Fred?
I’m missing something here.
Here ya go.
You got the Asian fever, boy!
I thought it’s yellow fever?
He done gone Asiatic.
Orientophileismo
Oh, no! We got it, too, Hyp!
Asian chic w/owl glasses for the win!!
You know who else exchanged promises with Japanese people?
What did you hear?
There is a vaccine for that.
Slavic Girls?
I was referring to the actual disease, but there is nothing wrong with slavic girls.
They’re the best vaccine if you’re thinking of dating one of those cute college Bernie Chicks.
Ukraine strong.
Well, cute at least.
Speaking of things that need to die.
Plates are also called China. There is no place for this foreign nonsense in Trump’s America.
Yeah, if you’re somebody’s grandma.
Who voted Trump into office? QED.
I thought that was going to be about the obsession of snapping pics of your food. That needs to die too.
Isn’t that a mostly dead thing now?
Not with this awesome tend of serving food on household items.
Hipsters are now serving food on “things other than plates” to try and seem interesting?
i’ll accept the “slab of meat on cutting-board” presentation, but everything else depicted there is retarded
What about on swords like the Brazilians? Or any other shish-ke-bob type serving?
Or fajitas on a cast iron griddle?
I prefer to eat straight from the bucket so I don’t have to wash dishes.
I like these new Facebook ads. They’re honest. Yeah, you can connect with your friends in these weird, esoteric ways. And once you hit send, you’re left feeling just as empty and dissolute as before. Hooray!
You still have friends?
Nah. And if these commercials have any effect, neither should anyone else.
W00t!
I am not a big zombie movie fan. I tried to play Deadrising on xbox, and frankly, it creeped me the fuck out. But I am a lame gamer, and might just be a pussy when it comes to creepy things.
The best zombie game is probably Dying Light. Only because it’s a good game, not because zombies. The entire zombie thing must be the most overdone thing in the history of entertainment.
[Sherlock Holmes clears his throat while impatiently tapping his foot]
I thought The Last of Us was a pretty good zombies game, even if the story was one giant (well-done) cliche. But then again, they also weren’t the typical undead shambling zombies, but biological mutants.
Zombie movies s bore me. I find them to be quite drool. I remember going to the theater to watch I am Legend and was disappointed to find out that it was basically just a zombie movie.
Oh good, I’m not the only one.
The only zombie movies that I’ve actually enjoyed were Zombieland and Shaun of the Dead, and I’m not sure either of them “count”.
Yeah, Zombieland was pretty funny, and you’re right, not really a zombie movie, they were just props. Never saw Shaun of the dead but heard it was worth watching.
Shaun of the Dead was excellent. The first 10 minutes or so is a perfect allegory for the mindless way most of us stumble through life, oblivious of the psychopaths around us.
Cool. I’ll keep that in mind next time I’m looking for a movie to watch.
I don’t like zombie movies either. It just doesn’t seem either scary or interesting. just gross for no reason. and seems (call me crazy) weirdly ‘disrespectful’. I just think there’s no reason to turn decomposing bodies into ‘entertainment’.
i mean, if you think of a movie like “invasion of the body snatchers”? Its about “loss of free will” more than anything. A Hive Mind takes over humanity. And its fucking TERRIFYING. But the ‘fear’/scary bits come from the idea that we can lose our free will, and that people we know will no longer recognize us, etc. Not “its going to eat my brain”.
Zombie movies gain most of their ‘scary’ parts from the Body-Snatcher concepts – and the rest is just “corpse-porn”, which i don’t really get the entertainment value of.
For me the weirdest part is you can watch actual blood and gore pretty easily these days, but most people don’t want to.
I guess it’s easier to be entertained by horror when you know it isn’t real.
You could say killing your father and marrying your mother is gross for no reason, too. Still makes for one helluva drama.
I think you’re still confusing my point about the essential “idea” versus the mere-physicality.
My point is most zombie films (that are any good) simply rely on some basic story idea that would probably work *without* the zombies. The fact that you’ve got decomposing corpses is mostly just ‘phenomenal’ and not really so much what makes the story interesting at all.
The story of Oedipus is fascinating because it addresses taboos. That’s not really ‘gross for no reason’ in the sense i’m describing.
Gore is part of the genre, of course. Gratuitous? Sure, but even the worst zombie movies at their core are involved with asking the question of what is human? Is the meat sack you’re walking around in “you”? Many of them overly rely on shock gore to sell tickets, but some actually dig into the meaning of being human. It’s a matter of taste. Some people don’t like them. I hate slasher films because I think they are often more guilty of the criticism you’re making of zombie flicks.
Not really a horror fan in general. I do enjoy a good psychological thriller on occasion though.
which is exactly what i described above as the “body snatchers” core-idea.
The frightening thing about that idea is how our bodies are merely temporary vessels and that we can lose agency. it doesn’t need the corpsification parts at all for that sort of story to work. In fact i’d argue that Snatchers is far more terrifying without the gratuitous gore.
i’m not saying gratuitous gore is necessarily wrong or bad, just that its not interesting by itself. The stories that are injected into Zombie films are sometimes good, but my point is that they rarely (if ever) actually need the ‘gross out’ stuff for the story to work. Its just a visual layer that for some is entertaining. i have no idea why (as derp noted) some people find it entertaining in zombie movies, but would be grossed out if they saw footage of a mortuary or an autopsy.
“i have no idea why (as derp noted) some people find it entertaining in zombie movies, but would be grossed out if they saw footage of a mortuary or an autopsy.”
I think it has to do with the mental disconnect of fantasy vs. reality. Despite what Moral Guardians freaked out about 10-20 years ago, most people intuitively know when something’s real or fantastical, and they’re affected differently. Hence why they don’t have a problem with the intense violence of something like The Walking Dead but can’t bring themselves to watch footage of the ISIS executions.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers was an excellent flick. Pretty much any movie that relies solely on anything prepacked theme is boring to me. IBS captured the feeling we all have of “Do I really know that person I’ve known for years?” and amps it up using the body snatcher contrivance. You could make a similar case for some of Romero’s works, too. It’s about the writing after all is said and done. A movie like Cube has unbelievably nasty scenes, but because it was so well written, it works beautifully.
Well, “Warm Bodies” is an interesting one that came out a few years ago – has some folks regaining humanity after being zombies for a few years. Good romantic comedy – not heavy on the gore – but well done overall.
I suggest a review of the 1985 version of The Blob.
It has an impressive body count:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeYIGazVFHE
For no particular reason:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/04/how-liberals-fell-in-love-with-the-west-wing
Please, no meat touching, ma’am.
Hah! Mission Hill FTW!
Jesus, I almost spit vodka.
I am proud to have never watched a single second of that show.
I’m go googling it now…
This is beautifully uncomplimentary. The show sounds like The Thick of It for genuinely stupid people.
That is an amazing show. Got every season on DVD so far. I need to do a review for “In the Loop” as well – hilarious flick.
Yeh that’s a popular (nauseating) tactic of lefties in the media and Hollywood. ‘The Bible quote’ to expose hypocrisy even though the average progressive is abjectly ignorant of the Bible and Christianity as a whole.
I watched the West Wing a few times. The dialogue is contrived, cutesy, and unbearably smug (though the rest of the world would only notice Sorkin’s insufferability when taken to cartoonish extremes in the far inferior Studio 60 and The Newsroom). I know exactly why you watch it; it’s so you can laugh at my country. It’s also specifically engineered to make Joe Prog think it is being “evenhanded” while his brain is starved for blood from his episode-long hard-on.
I do love the scene, though, because it only encourages smug progs to make asses of themselves–not that they need it, because their lack of grounding in reality is so profound that they will never stop doing it. See, your basic urban prog has a single unified stereotype for everyone who disagrees with him in any way whatsoever. And that opponent is uneducated, backwoods, and stupid, unlike his urbane, sophisticated self.
Catholics are constantly warned about debating with evangelists: **Do not underestimate them**. Do not look down your noses at them and think, “oh, these simpleminded literalists…” Because these fuckers know the Bible like you know your own first name. And they probably have heard damn near every objection you just came up with a thousand times before. However, progs have not learned this lesson, and never **will** learn it no matter how many times they are humiliated, because they have it insuperably implanted in their mind that evangelicals are **stupid and ignorant**. To admit the possibility of anything else would destroy their very worldview. So they really do think they can quote some Scriptural passage that they got from their Facebook feed that supposedly **totally demolishes** the notion that Jesus would have been anything but supportive of the genderqueer wing of Occupy Wall Street, and totally leave those fundies speechless and humiliated.
This is why I tend to avoid debating religion with evangelicals unless they specifically bring it up first (That, and mainly because I don’t think they’re stupid for believing the Bible. I don’t give a shit what anyone believes in in terms of religion, as long as you’re not trying to kill me over it.)
Very rare of you to acknowledge both points. Most people, despite history and even the present clearly demonstrating otherwise, do not grasp that very cognitively capable people can have very, very “weird” religious views (a lot depends on what philosophers call your “priors”). And they insist on doing shit like accusing religions that forbid gay sexual activity of “hate” (usually with the standard simpleminded business about “love” and “not judging”) and berating their claim to “love the sinner and hate the sin” as though that were completely absurd instead of a perfectly sensible attitude toward their own moral code. They should instead say, I personally reject these sexual codes as preposterous, and I have no particular opinion on what a religion that I am not a part of “should” or “should not” do.
Indeed, the entire idea of having an opinion on what a religion you believe is false *should* or *should not* be teaching–on what “true Islam” is, for example, is *simply incoherent*. I am afraid that Mr. W Bush, in a well-intentioned and commendable move, enabled some very confused thinking on this matter. Some Muslims ask, why are we always expected to condemn over and over these acts of terrorism? Why is it our job specifically? These people are morons. In fact Muslims are the *only* ones who *can* condemn a doctrine as “not true Islam.” The very concept is *incoherent and nonsensical* to a non-Muslim. What does it even *mean* for Bush or Obama, who regard Islam as a *false religion*, to speak of what is or is not “true Islam”? That is not their job; condemning Islamic terrorism as “un-Islamic” is a feat that can only be done by Muslims themselves.
As for the rest of us, of course, *qua* Americans and liberals we do not really give a shit about what anyone *calls* their religion or what prophet they act in the name of. The only attitude we have is: Provided what you call your “religion” is simply a matter for individuals and the voluntarily associated community thereof–with utterly no ambition to use force involuntarily against any individuals inside or outside of your faith, directly or by recruiting the power of the state–we could not care less about any other aspect of its content. If “religion” is anything more to you, if it oversteps that bound even by an inch, we are going to have problems.
For me, at least, a key part of this is that I grew up as an evangelical Christian (who later became agnostic), surrounded by like minded people, so I’ve got a deeper understanding of them then the average progressive atheist outsider, who never really bothers to really listen to them. The fundamental thing these progs tend to have about evangelicals is that they’re not bad people. In fact, most of them are some of the genuinely best people I’ve met. They’re often willing to go out of their way to help you, even if you’re not a Christian. And even though they may believe homosexuality is wrong, they don’t hate people for being gay (with a few notable exceptions of course.) In fact, a lot of them may have gay friends. I won’t go into all the reasons I think they believe what they do, since I’m sure you’re familiar with them, but suffice to say just walking up to them and telling them they’re stupid and wrong isn’t going to get you anywhere. Usually, if I engage with them on the topic at all, my response tends to be “I’m glad that your belief makes you happy and/or content, but it just didn’t work for me.” At the end of the day, I have to agree with Matt Stone, who said “Does it matter if it’s true, as long as it makes you happy?”
By fundamental thing I meant “misunderstanding.” Don’t know how I missed that.
I’ve been exposed to evangelicals for years. Heck, a few on my staff are evangelicals.
It dismays me to no end how they’re maligned by progressives. I’d take an evangelical over a smug prog anyday. An evangelical helps their fellow humans through action. The mobilize (be it bake sales, volunteering etc.), progs expect the government to do it. NONE of the progs I know EVER put their money where their arrogant mouths are. Not only that, evangelicals tend to have substance to their thinking – particularly with religion and its place among humans. Progs stick to their usual boiler plate ‘yeh but the crusades and christianity kills’ stupidity.
It’s ionic that for all their cheap talk about helping others, progs are least likely to step up and actually help.
Just my observation.
For the record, I don’t watch West Wing.
As for history, since we’re piling on the left, they’re the most frustrating people to discuss history with. It never fails in discussing history that not too far behind their takes lies a recent interpretation by Zinn or Toobin. They just repeat the parts that *seems* to fit their narrative; or in some cases, rework it.
Sure, some do actually read history texts but they always seem to come away with the wrong conclusions. That is, they read history but don’t understand it.
Yes, this is a generalization and doesn’t apply to all of them, but overall? This has been my experience. I had four progs in my circle, it was eery how they all had the same exact opinion on, say, The Crusades yet I knew for a fact not a single of them ever read a major work on it or even bothered to take the time to study the Middle-Ages.
Bah. I’m rambling.
I think the key part is progs are more interested in mocking their enemies than persuading people or accomplishing anything.
Which is a good, thing, come to think of it.
I think that’s why Trump is driving them nuts. For decades, they’ve been in this fantasy world where they’re always right and the effortlessly humiliate their enemies with their razor sharp wit and win over everyone. Trump’s election shattered that illusion in the most dramatic way possible.
This is a real difference. In the ultimate libertarian/conservative wet dream of Atlas Shrugged, the good guys just want to be left alone. In every prog fantasy, they must grind their enemies into the dust and dance on their corpses.
They sure are relishing the fall of O’Reilly. But here’s the thing, they’re still losers.
It’s always about feeling smug and superior. They act like people with zero self esteem that have to knock everyone else down to prop themselves up, and yet they’re narcissist for the most part.
I think this is the heart of it, and the thing that is endlessly missed.
Liberalism, in the american-left sense, is actually “sorta practical” = its defined mostly as a series of concessions to reality.
i.e. “Liberal = how lefty can we be without bankrupting everything too quickly?”
Liberals can talk to conservatives because they both tend to agree about the stuff that needs doing.
Progressives, on the other hand…. want to mostly “BE BETTER THAN“; its not about the ‘stuff that needs doing’- its about Identity, and that identity being the most morally superior one possible.
progressivism is all about never conceding anything to reality. Its about building a huge web of fantasy around one’s identity, so that no matter what happens, they are still the ones who can claim Moral Superiority. “We care more than you do about the poor!!!” they cry. “But you’re actually create them??” say the economists. “Never mind that!! We love them soo!””
Hah, that reminds me of Where the Wild Things Are.
“Oh please don’t go – we’ll make you poor – we love you so!”
From as aside in the article: “The upright and genial Paul Ryan, whom President Bartlet would have loved, is on a lifelong quest to dismantle every part of America’s feeble social safety net.”
Really? Guess he’s gonna finish when he’s 70 then.
“America’s feeble social safety net”
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/entitlement_spending
Subsidies and transfer payments are the bulk of govt spending in almost every country.
One time I was arguing with a prog who said the military accounts for half of federal spending. He did not react well when I pointed out that it was half of *discretionary* spending and about 16% of overall spending.
He seriously tried to argue that Social Security payments weren’t govt spending because it comes from payroll taxes instead of income taxes. Who does he think runs Social Security? The tooth fairy?
I would be willing to accept that excuse if they’d be willing to spin off social security as its own private interest-bearing fun, but of course they aren’t.
Interestingly, there were recent protests in Chile (which has a partially private system for social security) because they want “enough” benefits. This is one of the many cases where people say “enough” when they mean “more”.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/22/thousands-protest-in-chile-against-state-pension-provisions
MORE?
I would eat that (hot chick)!
You eat ass?
Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, it’s forgivable to go ass to mouth.
Since the 1960s?
I’m still on the fence about that. I think one of his grandkids set him up.
That shark scene….Oooooh boy. I will forever be in Gojira’s debt for bringing that to my attention.
That was well worth a watch, even at 5AM.
And another great scene. Most directors would use this as a fake out and save the chick at the last moment. Not Lucio. Bravo!
Huh. So that’s what it would be like if The Thing landed in Viking era Greenland:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CXmej7I1NA
I just have to say, “WOOOOOOOO! ZIBANEJAD SCOOOOOOOORES! EAT SHIT HABS!!!
OT: I’m Poppy.
I’m Pompy
I’m Pompeii.
I’m Pomplamoose.
I’m pa-womp-whombalooobam-pawomp-bambooo
You would say that, wouldn’t you.
**pushes up glasses** Ahem. There is no “bambooo.” That was Elvis. The original (well, not the *real* original, with all the references to lubing your dick up to try to get it into a nice tight ass) did not have that particular ending vowel that history for some reason has associated with it despite decidedly regarding the Little Richard as the preferred canonical version.
(listens again)
by george, he’s right.
In your case…wouldn’t that be “pompadour”?
Where’s my thicc Thursday?
There’s this for a start.
Tries to fill in for HM. Gets fired on first day.
*I* was joking. *You* linked the equivalent of an IED.
OT: Did anyone watch the Season 3 premiere of Fargo last night? DL’d it for tonight, looks pretty solid, was curious to see what people thought of it.
So remember when I said progs are more interested in mocking their enemies than persuading people?
Dems’ new message: Republicans ‘don’t give a sh-t’
So it turns out the universe is a Monty Python skit.
The Democratic Party’s official store is selling a “Democrats Give a Sh-t about People” T-shirt, for $30 apiece.
It’s times like these I’m reminded of this
So they want to sell a lot of t-shirts of donkeys pooping? That’s what i get out of their new motto.
T-minus about 24 hours before someone starts selling nearly-identical shirts that read =
“Democrats Are All About Taking People’s $h*t”
Arkansas is about to execute a retarded dude who was convicted in a trial where the judge was banging the prosecutor. USA! USA! USA!
How many S’s in innocent?
I read an article once comparing executions in the US to Aztec human sacrifice. It was unsettling.
This is pretty close: http://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1374&context=law_facpub
Nobody retarded is getting executed. In Atkins v. Georgia (2002) that was struck down on Eighth Amendment grounds. Scalia eloquently argued that this was completely unprincipled, little more than the majority’s political crusade against the Death Penalty in thin jurisprudential clothing. And a New York Times Magazine article (!) persuasively pointed out that a retardation bar per se really *is* rather arbitrary.
You may have noticed that “retarded” is the latest casualty of the euphemism treadmill; now we say “mentally disabled.” But the usual historical revisionism that we feel compelled to swallow with this process runs into a bit of a snag. “Retarded” was not only not a slur; it, as the accepted professional term for a medical condition, is deeply embedded into official private and public policies throughout our society, and cannot simply be substituted with “mentally disabled.” For you see, “retarded” is NOT simply synonymous with “mentally disabled.” A big difference is that *retardation*, as the name suggests, refers to lack of *childhood development*. If you are not mentally disabled on your 18th birthday, you will *never* be retarded. And thus, according to law, you *may* be executed.
Remember that we are not talking here about people with the minds of children, who don’t really grasp what they are doing. We are talking about defendants who have already been found not only fully comprehending and responsible for their actions, but of explicitly and deliberately *plotting* to commit the most brutal of murders. We are talking about people who are *just* over the lower limit of average intelligence, people you have talked to many times and not thought of as “retarded.” We are talking about people whom prosecutors often conspire to retest two or three times, because everyone gets *better* at IQ tests with repetition, and many do indeed lose their “retarded” status in this way. As the NYTM pointed out, those convicted of these depraved crimes so often have such horrifying backgrounds that for many defendants their technical “retardation” seems the *least* relevant factor for mercy.
So that’s where it stands. As for Bill Clinton’s 1992 ostentatiously showy, media-circus campaign trip back to Little Rock specifically to execute that black “retarded” man to show how different he was from that pussy loser Dukakis (this was *huge* news, for those too young to remember): Despite press coverage and the duly cultivated outrage of Clinton’s carefully baited liberal foils, that gentleman was quite intelligent indeed when he committed his brutal crime spree. As the cops were closing in on him, he put his pistol to his head and fired, blowing a hole in his frontal lobe. About the most “retarded” thing he ever did was not putting the barrel in his mouth.
I loved this movie. I saw it in my AMC ’69 Rambler with a case of beer and two buddies who loved B horror movies at a drive-in.
And then… sexy time?
I was off to sexy time right after i posted that. Sorry for the late reply.
You, sir, are my goddamn hero.
Here’s a pic from from Paris in the aftermath of the terror attack. Speaks volumes and shows what the government’s reaction is: Put the innocent civilian under the barrel of a gun.
So, Paris cops have the same tribal mentality as US cops, eh?
Liberty, security, neither…something, something.
“I mean, I say this every time we’ve got one of these mass shootings; this just doesn’t happen in other countries.”
– Barack Obama
Auretta Gay has got a rockin’ body.
And yes I own this movie on DVD. Though VHS tape would be more appropriate 😉