leaving congregation meetings has given me the opportunity to see all the films that a group of old men, many of which have little or no respect for the world of art, have told me not to see.
i saw a lot of films from last year since i got my bachelor's degree, in the midst of a job search (which has now ended)...anyway, these were the best films i saw from last year.
opinions welcome..
SPOILERS!
I developed two theories of the film but the theory that does make the most sense (SPOILERS) is that the first part is a dream. When I first saw this movie I thought that nothing in the movie took place in a dream, rather the last half of the movie was the beginning, and Betty merely role-played the part of Diane's lover in some kind of mystical flashback (she is an actress after all). Anyway, that was my impression in a nutshell.
leaving congregation meetings has given me the opportunity to see all the films that a group of old men, many of which have little or no respect for the world of art, have told me not to see.
i saw a lot of films from last year since i got my bachelor's degree, in the midst of a job search (which has now ended)...anyway, these were the best films i saw from last year.
opinions welcome..
Leaving congregation meetings has given me the opportunity to see all the films that a group of old men, many of which have little or no respect for the world of art, have told me not to see. I saw a lot of films from last year since I got my Bachelor's degree, in the midst of a job search (which has now ended)...Anyway, these were the best films I saw from last year. Opinions welcome.
1.) Hedwig and the Angry Inch - My favorite film of the moment. Have seen it twice in theaters, own the DVD, and the cd... The obsession continues, as well as my HUGE crush on John Cameron Mitchell (a.k.a. Hedwig)
2.) Mulholland Drive - I love the whole mystery of the movie, the role-playing, the dream-like atmosphere. An excellent study of the deceptions and lies of films and the industry itself.
3.) In the Mood for Love - Minimalist love story takes huge chances: No kissing or sex (!) in a film made just last year. Kind of like an Eastern "Brief Encounter"
4.) The Circle - A film from Iran that intertwines the lives of several women in a male-dominated, fundamentalist country. One of the best neo-realist films I have seen. A picture of what happens when a religion controls where you live.
5.) The Deep End - Tilda Swinton gave one of my favorite performances from last year in this film about a woman's firm resolve to protect her gay son from blackmail and other nefarious aspects. It's much better than my short summary could dictate. Much like IN THE BEDROOM although I liked this film a lot more.
6.) The Widow of St. Pierre - Excellent storytelling. I admire movies that place much emphasis on character development. A movie with little action but catches your attention to such an extent for the whole viewing you have to see how everything ends.
7.) Panic - Nobody has heard of this taut thriller with William H. Macy and Neve Campbell even though it's one of the best little films from last year. It's kind of like the Sopranos although it focuses on the father/son relationship in a mob family. Great filmmaking.
8.) A.I. - I'm still turning this film over in my mind, whether it was a good or bad film. I still liked it tremendously on my first viewing and my opinion hasn't changed much since then. Possibly the saddest film I have ever seen. Spielberg's most atypical film.
9.) The Man Who Wasn't There - A film noir on the surface with philosophical undertones. The main character remains a passive observer, without any passion or principle. I often thought how much I could relate to him after I left meetings with very little to believe in.
10.) Memento - Some people will say this film is over praised, too much emphasis on style. I do think the style fits the design of the film as we can see how easily memories and thoughts could be distorted and rendered useless. The audience role-plays as the lead character, and we understand how this movie is confusing on purpose.
i have just read the thread that was started with the comment regarding the anointed.
it brought a smile to my face because not so long ago my wife was still working in a nursing home for jehovahs witnesses run by witnesses.
she had been there for over five years and in that time-helped care for five of the anointed class.
I did some volunteer work in a nursing home while I was still a JW and it was a very sobering experience, I'll never forget it....very honest and candid...
we are sitting at lunch when my friend casually mentions that she and her husband are thinking of "starting a family".
"we're taking a survey," she says, half-joking.
"do you think i should have a baby?
!
book review: .
jim derogatis - .
let it blurt: the life and times of lester bangs by graham johnston.
Many people will remember Lester Bangs only from his portrayl by Philip Seymor Hoffman in Almost Famous. I'm surprised, I wouldn't have thought he was an ex-JW. Nevertheless, I think critics for the most part are overpraised. We place just as much emphasis on the person reviewing the art than the creator which is absurd since most critics have never made film, or released music, or what have you. As Jean-Luc Godard once said the only way to criticize a film is to make one.
i was having quite an intense disscussion (ok, argument )with some of my family last weekend.. my brother said in answer to some points that i raised , that the society has scholars who do research and will have the answer to my questions.. i said i know of no sholars in the society, he said thats because the world does not recognise them as such.what i ment (but did not continue saying as the conversation changed direction , again) was that the people who do research and study for the society arent really scholars as they are not free to look for the real truth only to confirm what the society says.their skills are really knowledge of the societies beliefs.. well it is true that a scholar is just someone who has a great knowledge of a particular subject.so you could argue that the society does have scholars as they are people with great knowledge of the organistaions rules .but what must people would mean my scholars are people who put a great deal of time and effort into research and study of an issue as to whether it is true or false, real or make believe.. can the society have scholars in that sense?.
well a recent watchtower article stated that we could not even have private opinions on bibles matters.. in order to research whether a certain witness view point was valid or not you would have to entertain the idea that a certain viewpoint could be wrong.
but this would put you at odds with the society , as you cannot think differently even privately your own opinions on bible matters.
My presiding overseer once told me that F.W. Franz knew more about blood than anyone else in the World (I know, I know) but I thought that statement was fasciating when I heard it as a teenager in the congregation. Isn't it also true that many doctors have traveled long distances to hear him speak? Just a thought...
most of you would know the answer,.
i do mean the most recent - answers -.
given to this question, based on texts.
Isaiah 32 was my first TMS talk, and that's right, the princes refer to elders in the congregation. I was convinced of the the society's view until my third or fourth elder's visit.
i know i haven't been here in awhile, but i just figured i'd drop by and say hello.
:) haven't looked at the new posts much yet.
i'm guessing things haven't changed much, though.
Hi Sunchild,
I just wanted to say that I've read some of your fiction and I can only speak for the many here who wish we had the level of creativity that you possess (I think every last vestige of my creatve spirit was removed as soon as I got my CIS degree last May). Anyway, keep up the writing. Hope it goes well for you.
Preston.
it would have taken more much more time to tell it all.
he told us the meeting would began as soon as the other brothers arrived.
danni: i will give you two.
Ignore the man behind the curtain!
mindchild vs. joelbear.
aka skipper aka joel.
in the view of jurors of the grand jury of participants of simons board, within the website of jehovahswitnesses.com, hereby one mindchild summons one joelbear, on or about, henceforth, the date of this post, to a duel of competing paradigms.
I truly believe Joel is one of the kindest most sympathetic people I have met on the boards, and even though I'm not as regular of a poster as many of you are, Joel was merely stating what I and many other people here have observed, that there has been a lot of hatred, maybe too much for some people who have had to leave an organization that indirectly taught hatred for certain groups of people. Of all the people here at JW.com, Joel has been the most supportive of my "coming out" process and as a self-identified queer, innactive JW. This is suppose to be a haven for people to discuss what it's like to be a JW, ex-JW, or what have you. Likewise, I think our discussions should be based on an unbiased look at what is addressed, something that is of much concern to people like myself and Joel. This is what Joel has done, and I think elevating disagrements, no matter how valid, to that of a huge challenge like this IMHO isn't evryone's cup of tea.
