Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - easytiger95

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 79
General discussion / Re: Philip Seymour Hoffman dies
« on: February 03, 2014, 12:39:36 PM »
What it proves Cold Tea, is that you are a moron that can't read. To define that as a list of "celebs" just proves you should go back to the Daily with the rest of the trolls. What is Bieber up to today, I wonder?

As for my original point, creativity and addiction are often intertwined - which they are, as people who are fairly high up the creative genius curve tend to have characteristics that can make them predisposed to addiction - that doesn't mean that they will become addicted, it also doesn't mean that their creative output is enhanced by their addictions.

You're right Milltown, but again that is because of enviromental factors that can leave people exposed/ predisposed to addiction e.g. if you're living in a block of flats where heroin is easily available, you're unemployed, under pressure, these can all be factors - but it doesn't mean you certainly will, and most people don't. What differeniates those who do and those who don't is the nature,soul and personal circumstances of the person, something none of us can fully claim to know. Which is what I was saying in response to people dancing a jig on a man's grave.

General discussion / Re: Philip Seymour Hoffman dies
« on: February 03, 2014, 12:14:22 PM »
George Best, Jimi Hendrix, Rimbaud, Bob dylan (intermittently), John Lennon (listen to Cold Turkey), Syd Barret, Kurt Cobain, Jim Morrison, David Bowie, Lou Reed (listen to Heroin), Dylan Thomas, Brendan Behan, Lord Byron, David Foster Wallace, John Kennedy O'Toole, William Faulkner, F Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway.....

do you want me to go on - or do you want to continue to make bullshit statements?

General discussion / Re: Philip Seymour Hoffman dies
« on: February 03, 2014, 11:57:16 AM »
What a sympathetic bunch we are today - should be proud of ourselves ::)

Hoffman was a gifted man, and unlike a lot of other gifted people, worked hugely hard and left, even at the relativelty young age of 46, a legacy that stands up against any actor working in Hollywood today. He wasn't a Brando or a Pacino - I think he was more of a character actor in the alec Guinness/Olivier mode. He was also an immensely talented theatre director.

The word genius is thrown about too often in obits - but I first thought he was blessed/cursed with it after seeing his immensely empathethic role in "Magnolia".

Of course I didn't know the man, but with his own work, he shed a light on other peoples lives - the essence of great art.

Addiction and creativity are often intertwined - and the most tortured people can be the most illuminative of the human condition. It's a terrible situation for his family and kids, but just as there is no place for crocodile tears from ambulance chasing fans, there is no place for judgement from people who didn't know him. None of us can know what put the junkie on the street or the needle in the arm in any situation. Kindness shouldn't just be reserved for personal acquaintances.


General discussion / Re: A Genius in our Time - Discuss
« on: January 10, 2014, 10:47:33 AM »
Good stuff BBB  ;)

General discussion / Re: immigration hardly room to swing a cat
« on: January 09, 2014, 08:11:22 PM »
Nice article from last month - excuse my wishy-washy liberal bias

the facts are that 1. net migration to the UK is falling year on year (a trend that began before the Tories started cracking down).

2. The Uk (and a lot of other Western democracies with low birth rate) need a bigger flow of immigrants than currently exists just to sustain, let alone improve their GDP figures.

3. Most studies suggest that far from being welfare tourists, that migrants are far less likely to access welfare benefits than native born citizens.

4. Quite apart from their value to the labour force, again studies show that migrants are far more likely to add to GDP growth by setting up SMEs and that areas with large migrant communites show a benefit to the local economy above and beyond comparable areas (i.e working class enclaves) with little or no immigrants.

5. The scariest thing of all is the ignorance of this subject, demonstrated by the figures in the closing paragraphs of that article detailing the public perception of the problem. When asked what is the percentage of immigrants in the Uk population, most people thought the figure was 31% - real answer 13%. When asked what percentage of those are asylum seekers, people answered 21% - real answer 4%.

It would be like a bad epsiode of Family fortunes (as if there is any other kind!) where it not for the incredibly serious implications for the UK and by extension for ourselves. The New right agenda is a combination of selfish capitalism (disdain for EU regulations and social charters) wilful ignorance (the figures above) and wolfish political cynicism and stunts ( loudspeaker vans telling immigrants to go home, whilst trying to out UKIP UKIP) and media opportunism (Daily Mail, murdoch etc). The electoral maths makes it pretty certain that the Tories will have to become even more extreme to get back into government and whilst they may not have the numbers to force a European referendum, their own domestic needs could see Europe telling them to do one, rather than the other way round.

And if that happens, we are goosed economically - any recovery will be strangled by our largest partner being outside the EU. And dem foreigners? Pawns in a much larger game. I pity the poor immigrant....

General discussion / Re: Sligonian - "Sligo kicks storm in the balls"
« on: January 09, 2014, 06:12:33 PM »
read Morgy's guide and even as a dub was cracking up laughing at it - hopefully I'll be able to show him some puppies the next time I'm in sligo  ;D

General discussion / Re: A Genius in our Time - Discuss
« on: January 09, 2014, 01:32:27 PM »
nteresting stuff Tiger, but can I ask, why would you want a Tarantino film to be 'like' the Dirty Dozen, or to 'stay true to itself' (whatever the f**k that means). Can you not just let it be a Tarantino film - for Christ sake it is all over pitched over exaggerated, comical when it should be serious, but is that not Tarantino?
And I am sorry I don't know my most 'satisfying' Tarantino film (wtf?!!) And pastiche? Is that not a kind of nut? 

BBB, I didn't say I wanted Basterds to be like the Dirty Dozen, I said the Dirty Dozen was the biggest influence on the film, and then drew a comparison between how Robert Aldrich made us care about the characters in that film, and how QT, failed to do so in Basterds, in my opinion.

As for letting a Tarantino film be a Tarantino film, one of my points was that themes like slavery and the holocaust deserve a more serious treatment than the typical QT movie, in my opinion.

As for you not knowing your most satisfying QT film (WTF??!!), I do, and it's Jackie Brown , in my opinion.

And a pastiche is a nut, and very tasty it is too, in my opinion.

So was my original post deserving of your reply? The clue is in italics.

General discussion / Re: A Genius in our Time - Discuss
« on: January 06, 2014, 08:54:07 PM »

General discussion / Re: A Genius in our Time - Discuss
« on: January 06, 2014, 08:08:46 PM »
No internal logic to his films at all - everyone who says he is paying homage to grindhouse films etc fails to notice that these B movies though cheap and full of gimmicks still had a semblance of narrative coherence. the thing was after Pulp Fiction (which I loved) where he played with the timeline to great effect, he then thought he could do that and more in each film - hence the garish unreality of Kill bill, the killing of Hitler in "inglorious Basterds", the ridiculous escape and shoot out at the end of Django Unchained. Imagine the film "Basterds" could have been if he had played it straight instead of going for cheap laughs all the time? It's most obvious influence is "The Dirty Dozen", which is hilarious for the first hour, until it gets deadly serious in the second half - so when they start getting knocked off, it actually packs a punch. QT has lost the knack of making us care for his characters - remember how stange and disconcerting it was to see Vincent Vega killed halfway through Pulp?

In fact check out "Django" with Franco Nero - yes, it may be kitschy now, but in its own time and on its own merit, it is a brilliant spaghetti Western - and there is no one mugging for the camera, no arched eyebrows, no meta references - it stays true to itself. Whereas "Django Unchained" is a modern film pretending to be a spaghetti Western, whilst fetishing the slave trade. It is a film about the 1970s, rather than the 1860s. I don't like to be po faced, but I think the theme of slavery should be more than a convenient prop for a postmodern buddy movie pastiche.

For all the talk of his script writing "dialogue" skills, he can only write "set pieces" instead of scenes - everything always leads to a payoff, which makes you sick or makes you laugh, or both. He doesn't write dialogues anymore like the "Big Mac/Amsterdam" scene in Pulp Fiction. He writes monologues for a series of characters/ciphers who are all QT by proxy.

His most emotionally affecting and heart felt work was the script he wrote for "True Romance" and didn't direct himself - and of his own efforts as a director, I think his most coherent and satisfying film is "Jackie Brown" - and that was based on Elmore Leonard's "Rum Punch."

It is the law of diminishing returns - he became worshipped so early in his career and he has never heard the word "no" - so now it is a spiral of self indulgence. He says that he re-imagines history - I think it is perilously close to an insult of history. I'd be on Spike Lee's side when it comes to QT, but with a touch of regret at such talent being wasted.

Class stuff Sidney -  but disappointed to hear the early drafts of the book have been edited to get rid of a chapter entitled "My Drugs Hell" when Canice detailed the wild party scene that circulated around the Ag Science block in UCD - including his near fatal dalliance with Ivomec F.

If the concept worked, it would be easier to defend. As it is, the balance is never right (and all the complaints from the Irish side about Australian thuggery has affected this). It is now a neutered game, which is all it can ever be given we have removed any possible advantage the Aussies may have had in this code.

Only the Aussies coming back will save it - but why would they show the interest in it? One way would be to go with the Oval ball in Oz and the O'Neills in Ireland - the touring side can go out for maybe a little longer, play more warm-up games against feeder or senior clubs, and maybe make it more like a Lions tour (given the difference in rules interpretations between Southern and Northern hemisphere rugby, I think it is an apt analogy). Maintain the strictness of the discipline and really emphasize the skill aspects. We expect the Aussies to adapt every year - why don't we?

I think for pure curiousity value, a lot would watch just to see how the Irish lads would fare. Maybe the first couple of away trips would be massacres - but I honestly think the fitness gap is very small now, and regular picks on the international team would get used to it.

GAA Discussion / Re: Time to Split Dublin
« on: October 10, 2013, 11:47:22 AM »
Great article Deiseach - Taibi is one of the best journalists out there these days - he'll be up there with the likes of Hunter S. and Tom Wolfe, when people look back on his work on the bailout, Goldman Sachs especially.

By the way, I heard the Eugene Mcgee piece and he was actually decrying the appearance of "split Dublin" topics on message boards. Don't Matter is the the archetype of the internet troll - or a member of the Irish cummann of the Tea Party. It's rare to see a man so invested in his own idiocy.

GAA Discussion / Re: 2013 All-Stars
« on: October 04, 2013, 06:47:03 PM »
I'd far rather see James McCarthy get the All Star at wing back than McCaffrey - Jack has plenty of years of tormenting lads down the wing ahead - James is Rolls Royce standard.

BTW does anyone else agree that once you've won Young player of the Year once, you should be ineligible for it again? No reflection on Cillian O'Connor's quality per se, but surely a year playing at the top level gives a level of experience which should trump the age on your passport? Maybe it should be just rookie of the year and confined to players making their senior debut, no matter what age they are.

GAA Discussion / Re: Championship Draw 2014
« on: October 03, 2013, 07:43:41 PM »
Anytime, anywhere LL  8)

GAA Discussion / Re: 10 Years Ago Today. Tyrone 0-12 Armagh 0-9.
« on: September 29, 2013, 12:10:48 PM »
Said it before and I'll say it again, their performance against us in the rain in 2008 was a pure master class. When I'm thinking of the style of football they played, using a soccer analogy, the best Tyrone sides were like a great German team - outstanding individuals in key areas, but always subservient to the team ethic and the primary characteristic being efficiency - they could play it any way you wanted it. I think Kerry may have touched heights of better football in certain passages of play in the last decade (Kerry 2007 vintage was fairly sublime) but you could never bet against that Tyrone side versus any team. And the key was they reserved their best performances for the biggest games. Respect to all involved in that team.

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 79