Dear Wendy exposes the US’s gun culture

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charlie Fox makes a good point! Here we have a bunch of British fops playing with their Dandies. And the movie is in English. Not German. Wonder whose guns skills made that possible?
 
Socialist Worker...as in National Socialist Workers Party? ????ing fascists
 
I name my guns all the time. Their names are old M1 Garand, CMP M1 Garand, AR15, P14.45, etc......

Buys a toy pistol that turns out to be real? what a crock.
 
Naming

Some guns I name, some I don't. Some cars I name, some I don't. Actually, the thing tells me its name if it is to have one. And that name is the right name for that thing. If it is not to have a name, so be it; it gets called the Mk II, the Enfield, the '06, etc.

Those who NEVER name their guns, may have less imagination, or it may be just that's their personality. Those who ALWAYS name their guns are under an obligation--unless they just happened to have been singularly fortunate in what guns they have acquired.

Each person must find their own path. And it will be the right path for them.
 
Reality check time...

-"General Store" sells a REAL gun, thinking its a toy gun???

-Pacifist buys a gun, and it turns him violent?

-A love of guns brings together a bunch of social rejects and they find acceptance and fellowship together?

Unreal.

Oh, yeah. And these kids acquire a Broomhandle Mauser without being serious collectors? Unreal.
 
Yet again it's another immigrant from WESTERN EUROPE who attacks America with both fists. Time and time and time again these filmmakers and writers from Denmark, Germany and the UK use their talents and resources to tear us apart, and yet most folks here seem more worried about the guy picking vegetables without a green card.

THESE PEOPLE ARE THE ENEMY! I know them. I've argued with them for years on line. You cannot trust them, and you should always keep two eyes on them. The greatest threat does not come from some gibbering Muslim extremist or some Mexicans--it comes from the people with the talent and resources to actually change our laws and government. You will never change the minds of these people. You will never persuade them. They REALLY DO hate our Constitution and our way of life! They think it's an outdated document and will never stop trying to change us.
 
It's pretty obvious that the filmmakers haven't spent even two minutes studying the U.S. "gun culture" they supposedly are "exposing"...it's not even a recognizable parody or caricature thereof. Their ignorance is rather astonishing... :scrutiny:

Hatred and paranoia about people you don't understand isn't SUPPOSED to be a progressive value, but it certainly appears to be the state of mind they are operating under.
 
It's pretty obvious that the filmmakers haven't spent even two minutes studying the U.S. "gun culture" they supposedly are "exposing"...it's not even a recognizable parody or caricature thereof. Their ignorance is rather astonishing... :scrutiny:
Click to expand...
I doubt that Thomas Vinterberg proposed to "expose" any kind of "gun culture" in Dear Wendy, any more than he "exposed" the "incest culture" in Festen. As a feature filmmaker, he makes up stories. As a moviegoer, you choose to attend or stay away. The nadir of presumption is to rail against the story whilst staying away. This kind of posturing mimics a Soviet milkmaid denouncing the banned writings of Solzhenitsyn or a blind mullah issuing a fatwa against Salman Rushdie. Feeding the flames with tendentious criticism culled from a yellow rag is unbecoming of citizenship in a constitutional republic. Has any contributor to this thread actually seen the movie that he is railing against? I am planning to.
 
Dogville was both poorly written AND badly directed. I have some strong opinions about the set dresser and casting agent as well. :evil:

Dancer in the Dark was long-winded and ultimately unsatisfying.

Bjork is a cute little button however. :D
 
I think we should be flattered. All these idiots spend a large amount of their time, money and energy railing against the evil United States. They're obsessed with us! The writer of this movie has never even been to the U.S because he's afraid to travel! So even with our haters we're number one. They can't get enough of us. Cool. Go U.S.A.

Altogether now. USA USA USA USA. Go USA! :evil:
 
"The nadir of presumption is to rail against the story whilst staying away."

Why? If someone I trust tells me they stepped in something stinky I don't feel a need to sniff it before agreeing.

And anyway, the old, old movies are much better - even if they've been colorized or whatever that abomination is called.

John
 
"The nadir of presumption is to rail against the story whilst staying away."

Why? If someone I trust tells me they stepped in something stinky I don't feel a need to sniff it before agreeing.
Click to expand...
Extending trust to a fellow man is a human prerogative. Passing for your own an opinion acquired at second hand is a betrayal of this trust.

Rational judgment is the faculty that distinguishes men from beasts. Rote imitation involves no part of reason. It behooves sheep to follow the shepherd. It behooves men to navigate by their own lights.
 
Extending trust to a fellow man is a human prerogative. Passing for your own an opinion acquired at second hand is a betrayal of this trust.

Rational judgment is the faculty that distinguishes men from beasts. Rote imitation involves no part of reason. It behooves sheep to follow the shepherd. It behooves men to navigate by their own lights.
Click to expand...

That's a great sentiment. However people have never really attempted to follow such idealism and I really doubt that they're going to start. People are judgemental and frequently form their beliefs and opinons from heresay and others opinions. Actually you could argue the filmakers are not following your advice. As was pointed out earlier the writer has never even been to the United States. And most of his movies are set in our country, but filmed in Europe.
 
"The nadir of presumption is to rail against the story whilst staying away."

Why? If someone I trust tells me they stepped in something stinky I don't feel a need to sniff it before agreeing.
Click to expand...
Extending trust to a fellow man is a human prerogative. Passing for your own an opinion acquired at second hand is a betrayal of this trust.

Rational judgment is the faculty that distinguishes men from beasts. Rote imitation involves no part of reason. It behooves sheep to follow the shepherd. It behooves men to navigate by their own lights.
Click to expand...
That's a great sentiment. However people have never really attempted to follow such idealism and I really doubt that they're going to start. People are judgemental and frequently form their beliefs and opinons from heresay and others opinions. Actually you could argue the filmakers are not following your advice. As was pointed out earlier the writer has never even been to the United States. And most of his movies are set in our country, but filmed in Europe.
Click to expand...
Dear Wendy is advertised as a work of fiction, not a travelogue. Besides, the facts that Lew Wallace never set foot in Imperial Rome, nor Thomas Keneally, in a Nazi labor camp, have failed to precipitate a flurry of righteous detractors besmirching their veracity. Finally, opposing putative ignorance by echoing uninformed cavils is contrary to the titular charter of this forum. These three reasons should suffice to support my point.
 
Conversely, and with fewer syllables :D , if your experience with a certain artist of any stripe is that their work has been, in your view, tripe; it is neither unreasonable nor intellectually or morally suspect to determine that his new work may be of a type.

In addition, if you as an individual have come to respect and trust the opinions of another individual concerning such issues, if such respect and trust has come from repeated past confirmation, it is again neither unreasonable nor intellectually or morally suspect to continue to rely on said opinions from said trusted source.

It is, in a practical sense, impossible to view each individual or individual's work of art on its own to judge its particular value and thus it is intellectually proper to practice some discrimination based on past experience with the artist and, say, a synopsis of the work at hand in a written review. At least until other information comes along.

Like a positive review of said film from a source other than the review and synopsis contained in the aforementioned Socialist Worker.
 
Conversely, and with fewer syllables :D , if your experience with a certain artist of any stripe is that their work has been, in your view, tripe; it is neither unreasonable nor intellectually or morally suspect to determine that his new work may be of a type.

In addition, if you as an individual have come to respect and trust the opinions of another individual concerning such issues, if such respect and trust has come from repeated past confirmation, it is again neither unreasonable nor intellectually or morally suspect to continue to rely on said opinions from said trusted source.

It is, in a practical sense, impossible to view each individual or individual's work of art on its own to judge its particular value and thus it is intellectually proper to practice some discrimination based on past experience with the artist and, say, a synopsis of the work at hand in a written review. At least until other information comes along.

Like a positive review of said film from a source other than the review and synopsis contained in the aforementioned Socialist Worker.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the missing syllables are regrettable, e.g. in writing "conversely" to mean "contrariwise".

That said, I have already answered this objection above. Forestalling future disappointment of the basis of past experience and forming opinions on the basis of respect and trust thoughtfully extended to a fellow man are responsible practices. Rote mimicry of empirical shortcuts and thoughtless relaying of second-hand opinions to third parties as if they had been acquired at first hand, are betrayals of responsibility. Men are far less warranted to entrust their betters with the burden of making up their minds, than they are, to delegate the duty to defend their lives.
 
I apologize for my mistake in word choice. I often write as I speak, colloquially and inexactly, which is a lazy habit in both.

I just don't see
Passing for your own an opinion acquired at second hand
Click to expand...
as being relevant to what was said by the previous poster.

In this case, simply basing a preliminary judgement on the content of two reviews and synopsis posted by others. The corollary to trusting and accepting the opinion of a reviewer who has demonstrated a similar taste to yours in the past would be to trust yet reject the opinion of a reviewer who's stated beliefs are in opposition to yours.

For example, if someone who's beliefs and values I am confident diametrically oppose mine says a film is brilliant based in large part on those beliefs and values, I feel it reasonable to assume, based on past experience, that I will probably not agree with that assessment, given our viewpoints.

I can, therefore, reasonably figure I won't like it, for the same reasons they apparently do.

Though I may be misconstruing the previous posters stance.
 
I'd never heard of this Lars Von Trier or any of his movies, but after reading this thread, I intend to avoid seeing any of them. Thanks for the heads-up.

Yup, I tend to trust the opinions of those who like the good old USA, and to distrust those who badmouth it, or who make enemy propaganda flicks against it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Gunlaws.com - Gun-Control Symposium
Replies
9
Views
576
tinygnat219
T
C
  • Locked
God and Glocks: Why Churches Should Not be Gun Free Zones
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
RKBABob
R
2
  • Locked
Guns are Really Neat
Replies
0
Views
490
2dogs
2
2
  • Locked
Another Hollywood twerp to ignore or despise
Replies
20
Views
1K
hso
hso
M
  • Locked
WI: Wisconsin Gun Owners (WGO) is trouble
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Coronach
C
Back
Top