lisaBObeesa,
i did it. it worked for me.
peace,
todd
this is a question my df mother would like me to post for her:.
would it be morally right to go back to the jws, even though she doesn't feel it is god's org?
she would do this in order to speak with her life long friends and her youngest daughter, all of whom are quite emotionally distraught due to her dfing.
lisaBObeesa,
i did it. it worked for me.
peace,
todd
i hear tell there are some aficionados out there.. as a young man i secretly loved ray bradbury, isaac asimov, l. sprague decamp, poul anderson, arthur c. clarke and others.
loved brian aldiss' "super-toys last all summer.".
when the movie "2001: a space odyssey" premiered, i sneaked into a theater all by myself, and was blown away.
DCs Ghost
what i believe is the biggest let down of the movie is the choice of director, Spielberg is more about family entertainment ... he usually focuses on sci-fi/fantasy, blockbuster Hollywood ... i'm not knocking Speilberg cause i feel he is a talented and gifted director but his vision is different.
I could not agree more. His technical skill and attention to detail that you mentioned are his strengths but his focus on the family/summer blockbuster genre is probably the main reason the Hollywood establishment has ignored him at Oscar time. Did you see Dark City? I thought it was an excellent example of futuristic sci-fi. Machines played a major role in that film, too, but from a very different perspective.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
truman
I felt that the movie was largely about the futility of the search for ultimate acceptance.
Her failure to give him the love he wants, is not his lack, but her own selfish, or human motivations. It cannot be his lack, because he was functioning within his design parameters, but he perceives it as his own failing. If he was lacking, it was not his failure, but the failure of those who created and used him...
What do you say about this:
One reviewer that I read likened David to a VCR or a microwave oven that either no longer works or suits our purpose. I disagreed. I think the point of the movie is that David was more than a robot but more like a pet if not intrinsically more important. I think that is borne out in the mother's hesitancy to return him to the factory where he'd be destroyed (a preposterous idea, I thought... couldn't they just remove the imprinting chip and insert a fresh one?). By her actions she viewed him as a living, sentient being. And as it turned out, he was. Sorta.
...yet, he is a constructed machine, and is the love he gives or recieves anything more than an illusion.
Ah! That is the question about love itself, the kind we feel and express. What IS love? The chemical reaction in the brain can be duplicated with the consumption of chocolate. And who is it that benefits, the one who loves or its recipient? These are the types of questions I thought the movie might explore.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
joelbear
I walked out of the movie saying, "Is artificial love the only love that will last?" I think one important point of the movie and maybe its most important point is that man's need to be able to manipulate everything, including creating manmade love, will be his downfall.
A provocative question, in view of the negative aspects that come when love doesn't last. If people could avoid those (e.g. a broken heart when a lover moves on) why wouldn't they? The success of nearly every technological advance has demonstrated that if we can afford it we are all interested in rearranging our environment to suit our immediate needs, WHATEVER THEY ARE. Cars, air travel, air conditioning, electricity, pcs, medical care, prostitution, amusement parks, virtual reality... the list is endless. It is not a stretch to believe that if it were possible today, there would be a market for Davids. Till then, people have pets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeker
It makes an enourmous difference whether or not those are aliens at the end or mechas. With mechas, you have a unified whole to the picture. The story arc is complete. With aliens, you would have something out of left field thrown into the picture at the end, with no foreshadowing.
Personally, I see no "arc" in the story... for me that was one of the problems. As I said, I see no difference with whether they are aliens or advanced mechas... if you wanna make 'em aliens, go for it.
To me they are simply a vehicle to effect the fairy tale ending -- allowing David to reach his emotional destination. One thing that leads me to believe that they are aliens is that the earth has been under ice for two thousand years, and David himself had to be reawakened by something unaffected by all that ice. You think they are Fords, I think they are Chevy's. Whatever they are, they are peripheral to the point the movie is making if the point of the movie is something other than "the machines are going to rule the world when all the humans are gone." I hope the point of the movie is something other than that. If not, I wasted even more time than i thought.
Kubrick's original script treatment included the 2,000-year-future scene ... So if you want to criticize the ending, it wasn't Spielberg's idea. In fact, one of the three original Brian Aldiss short stories on which this movie was based had a 2,000-year-future scene. It was always part of the story.
I haven't read Aldiss' short stories. How close did Speilberg's treatment of the ending match those stories?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximus
Now that you've seen it, Is the whole human race searching, crying, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy, ...?
In other words, what WAS that movie about? Your synopsis is one, but there are several others. That's the reason I was disappointed. I have a hard time saying WHAT the point of movie was. You could say that several themes were addressed but none were covered well.
I'd love to hear other views on this from those who've seen the movie... If you had to sum up A. I. in five sentences or less, what would you say?
A couple of tidbits about Kubrick's trademarks from http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Kubrick,+Stanley :
Often features shots down the length of tall, parallel walls... All of Kubrick's films feature a scene that takes place in a bathroom... His films have a common theme of dehumanization.
tj ~still scratchin' his head...
raymond franz unwittingly reveals the truth insofar as the comparability of todays jehovahs witnesses and those who were true worshipers in queen esthers day.. raymond franz said:.
raymond franz, a high-ranking jehovah's witness who was disfellowshipped and then wrote two books about the inner workings of the faith, said he doesn't believe cases of pedophilia are any more prevalent in the denomination than in others.
but the religion's insularity leads to problems, he said.
Yadirf, I was going to make a point, but Jigrigger beat me to it. Is the fact that jws are spread out but separate a defining characteristic of “god’s people” today? If so, several other religious communities qualify. Comments?
this being my first proper post i wanted to raise a question that i asked of an elder.
the only response i received was that i was questioning god.
when i pressed further i was accused of being an apostate.
Btw, indi,
I used to look in the Jan 15 wt for signs that the ratio of JWs in those Eastern countries was improving and it was always something outrageous like 1 JW to 500,000. How in the hell were those people going to get an adequate witness before the end, especially since the org was committed to the door to door method and rejected those marketing, er... uh... preaching methods (radio, TV, commercial newspapers, etc.) that would have helped reached a larger audience quickly? And, AND, we're close to the end, too? I don't think so... soyonarra all you Indians, SE Asians, Malaysians... it was nice knowin' ya... things are NOT looking good....
this being my first proper post i wanted to raise a question that i asked of an elder.
the only response i received was that i was questioning god.
when i pressed further i was accused of being an apostate.
Hello, individual, and welcome to the board,
Are the scales balanced, based on JW theology? Of course they are! In actual fact, no way.
Your question, that those in other (mainly non Western) cultures having less of a chance, is a question that bothered me for years. Of course the Society's pat answer was that, "before the end, they'll get a full opportunity to hear the good news." The case of Abraham delaying the angels who were on their destructive mission to Sodom and Gomorrah was used as a biblical type.
Another question along the same lines that I had was: non-JWs, so-called "worldly" people, who died just before the outbreak of the great trib (like my maternal grandmother) had a chance for a resurrection, while those still alive following it's start didn't. Did Jehovah actually determine down to that second what a person's everlasting future would be? Yes, according to the Watchtower.
Hey, there's bunches and bunches of conundrums like these in both WTS doctrine and the bible itself. All in a day's work, bruddah... all in a day's work.
Again, looking forward to reading more of your contributions.
peace,
todd
i hear tell there are some aficionados out there.. as a young man i secretly loved ray bradbury, isaac asimov, l. sprague decamp, poul anderson, arthur c. clarke and others.
loved brian aldiss' "super-toys last all summer.".
when the movie "2001: a space odyssey" premiered, i sneaked into a theater all by myself, and was blown away.
MORE SPOILERS BELOW..........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
A coupla comments on your comments...
Young Sir Haley Joel is a very gifted little boy, eh? I remember when he was in Sixth Sense Bruce Willis and others commented on how he could be kidding on the set one minute and within seconds slip into character for his scenes in front of the camera. He astounded many people. I hope Hollywood doesn't use him up like it does so many child actors... he is extra special... very enjoyable to watch.
I also took note of your comment:
I feel it would have been much darker had it ended at the bottom of the sea with David wishing to the fairy, much akin to man's prayers to god, and I feel that having him sit at the bottom of the sea for eternity is the build up of the movie...
I thought the movie might have made a better "statement" ending there, also... the futility of life, unanswered prayers... the coming of inevitable oblivion in the darkness of the sea. Or even earlier when he became so disillusioned that he decided to drop off into the water.
For me the movie seemed to be trying to say too much, losing its focus, at times. Personally, I think a big part of the problem is that out of respect to Kubrick Spielberg was saddled (or saddled himself) with making someone else's movie instead of filming his own vision like he did with Shindler's List or Saving Private Ryan.
It's a shame. Like I said, based on things I'd read, including interviews with Spielberg, I expected a more profound message about where human society is headed vs. where it COULD BE headed. Instead, I saw the same ol' "the machines, ie. computers, are taking over" theme that we've seen before as in 2001 and Terminator I and II and others.
I thought it was interesting that when I first heard "mecha" I thought they were saying "Mecca" (the city), the ultimate goal Hobby's company hoped to reach--the perfect robot.
Also plays on the symbolism "a bad moon rising" was obvious. <g>
More later.
peace,
todd
give him his fucking plane!!!!!!!
john leonard is taking his pepsi challenge to court.
the 21-year old business student says he's collected his pepsi points and wants his prize - a harrier fighter jet like the one pictured in a pepsi promotional tv ad.
and i have YET to meet a smart norwegian...
i hear tell there are some aficionados out there.. as a young man i secretly loved ray bradbury, isaac asimov, l. sprague decamp, poul anderson, arthur c. clarke and others.
loved brian aldiss' "super-toys last all summer.".
when the movie "2001: a space odyssey" premiered, i sneaked into a theater all by myself, and was blown away.
Just went to see A.I. and was disappointed. I don't know what I expected, but that wasn't it.
The first ten minutes of the movie were the most provocative, the remainder of it variations on that theme. As the decision is made to produce a new kind of mecha, the woman states the conundrum of why God created man and making the question relevant to the discussion in the room -- "what's in it for me"? David's quest for his "mother" throughout the movie suggests that either Spielberg/Kubrick were unhappy with their relationship with their mothers (or saw such dissatisfaction on a fairly wide scale) or were on an impossible quest to find SELF acceptance.
I did enjoy the thoughtful ideas dealing with what love is, what causes it, where it originates. That David came to be imprinted on someone who ultimately cared so little for him -- sending him on a trek worse than death -- as well as a voiceless statue that did nothing for him in real terms makes interesting topics for discussion. Also, the benevolent and caring attention he received from the "heartless" nanny mecha as well as Joe in contrast to the lack of love personally shown him by the Flesh Fair operator (and virtually every other human he encountered) made for obvious commentary on our uncaring world.
One scene that stood out for me was when the mother went through with the imprinting. I expected her to say something intelligible, like "I am your mother and I'll love you forever" or something like that. That the magic words were UNintelligible was cool, like the equally unintelligible "goo goo, gah gah" that mothers speak to their infants but which are crucial for bonding. The intent in both cases is the same, a promise to love and care for the youngster always. The mother turned out to be a horrible example of motherhood.
I also thought the scene when he meets his maker, Professor Hobby, was very good at foreshadowing the act that David would eventually commit. Having lived under the delusion of uniqueness and the hope of finding his cosmic center (his mother) his act made total sense. I was almost happy for him when he did it because it became more and more obvious that genuine happiness would always elude him since his approach to "life" was flawed at its core.
I could go on, but these are the superficial thoughts I had during the movie. As I mentioned, A.I. was over all a disappointment and, for me, didn't match expectations. I'd give it a 6 (out of 10). Btw, Seeker, aliens or robots work equally well at the end, imo. I don't see what difference it makes.
peace,
todd
disengaged.
in some respects i should be flattered that you used my animations (sorry the animations i have personally chosen) for your post.
come on there are loads of animation sites, please use something different as your permanent animation.. i feel that once we've found a pic or animation and no doubt other will agree, that they become personal to us, plus other posters recognize us by them.. .
Shelby?
Thanks. I saw my Norwegian friend's jpeg offered in my honor. I guess he enjoys verbal beatings with no ability to respond. I do love lashing him over and over, but the thrill is loosing its charm. I'd thought of a comeback or two, but what's the point?
I already said my piece in Sunchild's "for Emyrose" thread. As you pointed out, the little fellow had earlier proclaimed to the board that he'd be shunning me. Your pointing out his tendency toward untruth is a good thing. You really have to question whether what he says is the alcohol or his juvenile brain. More and more are coming to this unmistakable conclusion, and it's good that more and more are speaking out.
as DC said, the truth will be revealed by and by...
peace,
todd
Btw, kent, you're a chump! <he grinned with a dismissive wave of the hand...>
do we,can we,make time for ourselves?.
many of us exiting the wts were limited and restricted regarding our free time/vacation activities.most activities didn't meet with wts approval for various 'reasons'.
"worldly associations,is it 'wholesome'?
<hmmmm.... i wonder what it says....>