too American...

I said that it made me sick but I understood why there is so many flags cuz its an American phenomena, so you dont have to explain to me why there is so many flags. go read my post again before spitting out your opinion.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I said the space race was motivated largely by American nationalism, how exactly does that make me brainwashed?

"I am a collage of unaccounted for brush strokes, and I am all random!"

reply share

add reply

formatting help

1. If you understand why the movie is the way it is, why complain about it?

2. My point was that YOUR statement that "Triumph of the Will" is a propaganda film was irrelevant due to its being blindingly obvious.

3. Actually a documentary that looks like a Hollywood film IS a good achievement in that far more people will watch and identify with it than otherwise would. After all, at least part of the point of any documentary is for it to be viewed.

4. If you think documentaries don't have scripts, I have sad news for you. Every movie ever made has had at least some sort of script. (with the possible exception of "Empire" and other experimental films) Having said that, however, I will concede that the amount and volume of music may have been too much for some people. I tended to like it, though. To each his own....

5. It was a darn good joke, if I say so myself (and I do).

reply share

add reply

formatting help

this is not a MOVIE that has a SCRIPT

Sorry, but you're wrong here. The movie has to have a script of some sort in order for it to be edited properly and for it to portray the vision the director / producer / documenter had when the film was envisioned.

That said, there are definitely unscripted portions of the movie (I haven't as yet seen it, but my assumptions here are reasonably accurate). The interviews with the astronauts, for instance. They would have most likely been the first footage shot for the movie. The questions asked would definitely have been scripted to one degree or another, but the answers provided by astronauts would not have been. Once those interviews were "in the can", transcripts would have been made and then the relevant portions of the interviews would have been incorporated into the film's script.



Evil PURE AND SIMPLE by way of the Eighth Dimension!

reply share

add reply

formatting help

mmobini is exhibit A of how antiAmericanism is a mental disorder. And, sadly, that's the least of his problems. Lacking basic comprehension skills and reason are just two more. Listen, you dolt, the documentary only used REAL footage of REAL events and real people. How in the world can you say the film didn't reflect reality? There was absolutley NOTHING remotely 'Hollywood' about it-as you describe it...a world of fake and fiction. It was the antithesis of that. You just hate America and Americans so much that your blood boils that the film doesn't reinforce your own hatred. So, you twist and distort the very obvious reality that the film is stunning and moving and COMPLETELY fact based. And, in the end, you throw a hissy fit claiming the opposite. Like I said, a mental distorder.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

It's not too American, it's just American.

I'm English, and saw the film last night. It was a thoroughly brilliant experience. I know that when I go to see a film about the triumph of America's Space Programme, that it will have all the elements you (the original poster) have complained about.

I got a lot out of it. I can see past the score, what it meant for America and the World, and the new sense of 'we', and how America made that possible. I can let that wash over me, because I was interested in the personal stories of those astronauts who, years on, no longer necessarily bear the weight of American Official Public Relations departments. They know what it was meant to mean, but we find out what it actually meant to them on a personal level, how they reacted to something that only 24 people have experienced. I enjoyed the varying perspectives of each astronaut, particularly the one (I believe it was Mike, the CapCom for the first mission) who talked about how he responded to his experiences, in a 'spiritual' rather than 'religious' sense; how the astronauts now view the reading of the Bible, and how it was maybe inappropriate; the nature of Neil Armstrong, and his perennial words as he stepped on the moon.

There is so much more to take from this film than the soundtrack, the style, the American flags. It can be very personal, awe-inspiring - for example, the shots of the various parts of the rocket disengaging - and cause for reflection.

It was American, and I wouldn't expect anything less. Especially so, coming from an Englishman, that believes nowadays it is too much of a stigma to celebrate something, to feel proud of something, and to voice it. And these missions are something for these astronauts to feel proud of, and rightly so.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

James19, I am Canadian and I love this film. I also enjoyed reading "Carrying The Fire" and "Liftoff" by Michael Collins, "A Man On The Moon" by Andrew Chaikin, "Failure Is Not An Option" by Gene Kranz, "Lost Moon" by Jim Lovell and Jeffrey Kluger, and most recently, "Voices From The Moon" by Andrew Chaikin. I've spent a lot of time at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal site as well. I have a picture of Apollo 16 astronaut John Young and the American flag on my bulletin board. (It's this one: http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/AS16-113-18339HR.jpg)

Regarding Canadian contributions to mankind that involved space:
http://www.spaceistheplace.ca/Arrows.html
http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/canadarm/default.asp

Please do not stereotype about Canadians.
__________________________
"I am a collage of unaccounted for brush strokes, and I am all random!"

reply share

add reply

formatting help

The computer in different stages has been created by many people around the World.
As for the internet it is 100% all American. I feel that you should read more
before telling tall tales.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Actually, the American's DID invent the Internet, but back then it was called ARPANET and was nothing like what we call the Internet now. One article I read explained it this way:

Most historical accounts say the Internet was created in 1969, when the first network of widely separated computers was set up by the Defense Department to aid in computer research. It was called the ARPANET, and it was created by scientists at Bolt Beranek & Newman, or BB&N, in Cambridge, Mass., and at Stanford University, based on concepts described earlier by Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientists J.C.R. Licklider and Leonard Kleinrock (and a few others).

Well, in a historical sense, that is a reasonable claim. But it's also a bit like saying the Interstate Highway System was created by the first Native Americans who blazed some of the trails the highways would later follow.

Source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/nett20.shtml

And Al Gore, while he did not "create" the internet, actually was (at least partly, if not mostly) responsible for the expansion of the internet into newer fields

Gore is credited by the technological cognoscenti for having sponsored legislation that helped launch the expansion of the fledgling Internet to ever-wider uses. As early as 1986, Gore articulated a vision of widespread connected computing, and later introduced a follow-up bill to expand access to the network.

None of these histories comes close to giving him credit for the "creation" of the Internet. One account, written by Vinton Cerf, states: "I think the vice president is very deserving of credit for his active support for the Internet and the businesses that depend on it daily."

Source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/nett20.shtml


Evil PURE AND SIMPLE by way of the Eighth Dimension!

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I have to agree with mmobini. Why do people attack a poster, rather than use someone's post as a springboard for legitimate discussion? There's no need to take everything personally; mmobini's opinion might seem flawed, but rabbiting on about mental retardation and the like just lowers the tone further. I didn't agree with the original post, but I think it sparked a genuine discussion. Personally, reading posts about where the internet or computer was invented, and topics such as posters' levels of retardation lowered my IQ much further than mmobini's legitimate reaction to the film; legitimate because it is the expression of an opinion. Calling him a retard isn't.

reply share

add reply

formatting help