dana wrote:
There's a few folks on the eplaya that make it hard to tell when they're "being in character", being too obscure, having a bit of a joke, etc. Like when you had the rant going and ended it by asking if she was "with you or against you" - I assumed you were being ironic and making a point. (The point being that both Hollywood and our lovely brilliant politicians like GWB tend to make the heroes and villains all black and white, all good or evil and you better take the right side... or something like that.) or were you serious??
AIIZ Sez, As I have always said, "This eplaya is an extension of the playa and as on the playa, things and people are not always what they seem" and that is good. If we can play different roles on the playa and have some fun, then why not here. Shake up the internet and get the many mundane people that post here excited even if you have to get them mad. Though for some people that don't know, as you say, "in character" then how do you know when they are not. Then you must throw in the Hahahaha, or, "only kidding!", every once in a while. On this issue, 300, I'm mainly serious, but I wasn't out to kill Diane's fun. She knew what was real and what was fantasy. But remember, those that don't can walk out of a movie thinking they were fed history. Don't take me wrong, I love fantasy or I wouldn't be a burner.
My sarcasm, "are you with me or against me!" is just a point I was trying to make on what America has become, An Imperialist Empire! When Bush envokes speaks that famous line, he is invokes Warrior Tribute.
dana wrote:As far as any "Hollywood" conspiracy, you really only made that as an oblique comment. I can't see Hollywood exec's as doing anything more sinister than making very definite decisions about what will sell. If they plan to invest millions in a movie, you can damn well bet that they think long and hard about what kinds of villains the American public will get into, because that is the villain the audience gets to take pleasure in when the good guy wacks em at the exciting climax. Sure, George feeds us the same shit. But no direct relationship between them.
Don't be so sure of yourself! During world wwII, how many movies cashed on the war fevor? I can't even phantom the number. The movie industry was behind the war effort and they walk all the way to the bank with record box selling records. Of course, wwII was a war I could support, but I would have been there as soon has Hitler crossed over into poland not years later. As far as "300" being a part of the new effort against Iran and the funtamentalist movement, I would hold back my judgment if I was you. Why was Paul Wolfowitz, our Dep Secretary of Defense encouraging Bush to attack Iraq when the evidence was screaming Afghanisstan!!!! What is Paul's ulterior motive? Oil? Or is there something more? Israel? Think about IT! Knowing the religous backgrounds of the people behind "300" could there be an ulterior motive there as well for supporting the war mantra against Iran. Iran has lots of Oil too. And they're a pain in the ass to the Israelis. They're really too far away from america for me to be concern, unless someone lets down his guard: intentionally!
300 focused positively on the Battle, on Greek religion, the focus was totally negative with reason!
Think A'bout it!
AIIZ
ps- isn't Pauli at the world bank now?
capital imperialism!
)
)
