MovieChat Forums > mcremp > Replies

mcremp's Replies

"What would that be called?" "Almodovar latest movie", maybe? If a movie about Martin Luther King shows that the most important thing about him is not his work and his ideas, but the color of his skin, that would be a very bad movie. And "The Dancer" shows very clearly that Loie Fuller was a lesbian. The movie shows very clearly (to me, at least) that Loie was a lesbian. But the movie is not about Loie´s sex life, but about her work as a dancer. Loie Fuller wasn´t only a lesbian. She was an artist, a professional, a person. Why a movie can´t show that? Every movie about a lesbian must focus in this fact only? The director was right: don´t be sectarian. I can´t imagine a kind of pain that grants the right to hurt other people. Is´s easy to see ONE situation and think that. I can think of a hundred situations where a good amount of money can save someone´s life. The question is: from where this money will come? It will be OK for you if every time someone is needing money I knock in your door and demand your share? Remember, the world have more than 7 billion people. "That is a right. Regardless of whether you are rich or poor. You get the same high quality healthcare" "All we need is a single payer universal healthcare system. It can be done." Not all people in countries like Australia, UK or Sweden agree that the gov provides "high quality healthcare". Maybe if they increase the taxes a little more, the quality will improve... But some people will still unsatisfied. Then another tax raise... No, still not "high quality" to everyone. Moral: If you give something for free, it´s impossible to have everyone satisfied. Basic Human Nature. Three easy ways to have free healthcare for everyone: 1 - Put a gun on the head of doctors, nurses and everybody who works in health-related industries and make them work for free. 2 - Yell "let´s tax the riches!!!" several times. Repeat as many times as necessary. 3 - Give 40 or 50 % of your income to the gov, use the services it supplies, and believe it´s free. What´s a "right"? To have other people forced to do or pay things for you is not a right. I can´t think of any movie made in 21st century with black bad guys. Launching missiles into space... How far? We are talking about millions of miles here. Exactly. Why humans should try to "enforce" something that they don´t do themselves? Humans are soulless creatures too. Of course, some humans believe they are the only creatures of universe to have a soul. Now, if Ava believes she have a soul, too... First of all, I prefer to be careful and not judge things based on a Hollywood movie. You can find this surprising, but movies sometimes twist facts, tell lies and very often distort the reality to present life in a simplistic way; they do it for the money, because they discovered most people prefer not to think too much, and appreciates when a movie brings them a story with all the conclusions already made up, and all the ideas and persons clearly labeled "good" and "evil". Think about it: by giving too much credit to a movie, and letting movies build your convictions, you are endorsing people who deceives, lies, manipulates and steals, all for personal profit. Also, I don´t have the fantastic wisdom to judge someone after viewing a few seconds of him in a movie. And about my previous post: McDonald´s brothers did not invented the name. McDonald is a Scottish name many centuries old. They did not invented the hamburguer, also. Yes, they had a sucessful "network" of only one restaurant with a very clever production system. That´s what they accomplish. On the other side, Ray Croc applied his clever production system and turned a one-restaurant enterprise in a all-over-the-world enterprise. That´s what he accomplish. Last, I really don´t see what your opinion or my opinion about McDonald´s burgers and fries have to do with it. The beauty of the democracy and the free market is that there are many people trying to please the consumers, and the consumer is free to choose what they prefer. In this very moment, thousands of people all over the world are eating in a McDonalds. Probably many of them know that McDonalds does not make the best food in the world. Probably these people just think that a BigMac with fries is just good enough for them and for what they are willing to spend. Sadly, I cannot avoid a feeling that, right now while you are reading this, you are thinking "Yeah, but this hundreds of thousand people all over the world are wrong, and I am right!" Without Ray Croc, 99% of americans, and 99.99% of world´s people would not even know what the word "McDonalds" means. So, what they know is what Ray created, not what the McDonald´s brothers created. There´s a McDonalds about 2 miles from my home, and it was not created by the McDonalds brothers´s corporation. But frankly most people do not care much about who created McDonalds, or Pizza Hut, or General Motors, or NBC, or Nike, or whatever. And if they care, they should not take opinions and decide who was the good guy and who was the bad guy based on a Hollywood movie. How kind and full of love you are, and so fast to say someone with a different opinion is a "homophobic bigot". A saying of my country: "What one´s mouth speaks is what one´s heart is full of". Homo sapiens invented the language for communication purposes thousands of years ago. Now some people are going the opposite path, making communication less eficient, declaring some words "outdated". I hope I don´t live to see the day when the word "ball" is declared outdated and substituted for "that roundy thing that kicks". I think I sorta understand now your "It´s not OK but I really don´t care" position. Some people are "not worth caring about". Good for You. Answering your question, I try not make judgements about other´s people "morality" or "decency". If I have a chance to save someone who´s been abused, I´ll do it. If I have a chance to save two people, I will not stop to judge them and decide if they are "worth caring about". But that´s me. Being a rapist or a murderer is not about being "decent". It´s about being a criminal, as defined in law. If you think that´s ok if someone is raped or murdered - or, using your own words, "Why was I supposed to care about her death?", then you fail to understand some very basic things about how a society works. Even thinking it´s obvious and cliché, I´ll say this: Can you visualize a situation where YOU are a victim of rape or murder, and someone who could help just looks at you and say "Why should I care? You are not a decent person." I have a strong feeling that your answer would be something along "But that person would be wrong, because I am a decent person according to my standards, witch are the right standards". Key sentence from the comments above: "She doesn't reach the bare minimum that qualifies as a decent person." I assume the poster is the current CEO of the United Nations World Comitee for Selection and Certification of Decent People. Otherwise, just another case of a 21st-century boy incapable of understand that other people may not share his own personal beliefs and standards. To do a complete research, don´t forget to check posting history of the ones who complains about white actors; include those who judge if an actor is "black enough" for a role.