This is not a review. It is my thoughts on a subject that came up because of the Movie. Something I realized in one part of the movie, then when I was leaving I realized it fully.

I'm not myself. Not right now, no, I'm UMA THURMAN - "The Bride". Not in body, but in spirit. I can't shake my thoughts thinkging that I'm her. Or at least have a part of her in me. That scares me.

I've never noticed it before when I'm racing home from the latest movie, Imagining that I'm the star I picked out,my favorite person in the movie; whatever it may be. I'm not saying in my mind "Wow, I'm going to imagine that I'm Bla(first name) Bla(last name)" or "I would like to be Bla(first name) Bla(last name)." No I'm not.

But I am acting like that person, almost seeing their fingers on my hand. Almost feeling that I'm them. That my movements are their's. Like my thoughts aren't mine, they are theirs.

I realized this tonight because, and it's not a spoiler to say, because Kill Bill had LOTS of killing in it. And Blood. And cut off toungs. And Limbs. And Heads. All Cut Off. Death all spread around by the person only known as "The Bride."

I came to the realization because normally we don't see the "Real Life" in "Realistic Movies." We see styalized versions. Ones without spirting blood. We see ones where the hearos do have blood on them- but we almost never see how that blood came onto that hero.

You wonder why people would be stupid and race off after seeing The Fast and the Furious and kill people by driving fast and stupid don't you? It is because they think they can became like Brian O'Conner, and think that the gods of the road will protect them in their car, as they drive a fast as they can and run redlights along the way. Then someone innocient, and maby them selves, will die. At then hands of a movie.

It's almost funny. Read the headlines "Movie killes person" or "DEATH- Caused by Movie." It makes me want to snicker. Those stupid people. "Silly Rabbit"
But there is no "Silly Rabit" to protect me from my thoughts that will follow me wherever I go. I will remember this movie. It will stick in my mind. I will be thinking about something else, then I will remember "So and So" havving their Head cut off in a movie called Kill Bill.

SirRoger-GSN
 

Yes, its violent, but that doesnt really bother me at all. Perhaps I am desensitized, but I didn't really think of the violence so much as the intent and the characters. Sure its violent, but thats all people seem to notice. In all the description I have given about this oh so great film, I never really mention the violence. I mention how well I think the acting is, how well the music fits every instance, how beatifully shot and coreograhped the whole thing is.

But the violence isnt really an issue to me.

Again, I am not sure the point you are trying to make about the film, but the violence seems to be at the forefront of your mind.
 

"Kid blows away store clerk after playing the 'Top Secret' role playing game."

Well, this happened years ago, and as perfectly normal teenagers we had to get it right away. It was borring.

Almost every time someone looses it and starts killing people the media looks for a scapegoat. But why? Don't they understand that the person had something wrong with them to start with? But I guess if you can blame it on the latest movie that just grossed 100M or so makes for a better law suit.

I grew up on Road Runner, Woody Woodpecker, Three Stooges, and many more "violent" shows. But I have never went out and actually tried any of the dumb things I watched in those shows. Why is it that some people take fiction and turn it into reality?

Sorry, this is a sore point with me and the battles I fought when younger to be allowed to play games that were termed as "evil" and "mentally disturbign." Let those of us who are sane have our fun, and stop blaming the other things for crazy people's actions.

And then, he realized that he and I were doing exactly the same thing. Sure, nobody was *really* dying, so the effect on those we were watching was different, but, being caught up in the realism of the movie, it was affecting us the very same.
 

Not to say that we didn't enjoy watching it - we did. For a movie with virtually no plot, we had a great time. The editing was awesome as was the musical score (again, in its strange 50s tv action drama sort of way).

I wanted to be Daniel Day Lewis after watching THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS, and after seeing the very first STAR WARS movie for the very first time, I drove home wishing my car were the MILLENIUM FALCON.

It doesn't happen with every movie, but some movies really do connect with me, and I walk out of them with a different walk than I walked into them with.

So, yes, I can see how someone could be affected more strongly and actually think they are some character in a movie--or wish they were strongly enough to act out what they've just seen.

To make this more "on topic," can anyone think of any books that have had that effect? Or is this something that happens in a visual medium, like movies, and not in a written one?
 

But after reading Treason for the 4th time I still felt that way. A good book can draw me right in. Movies have become to stereotyped now. I figure that they have ran out of good stories so they go back and make movies out of old tv series, all of them were bad attempts at comedy.

Movies have been warped to appeal to the teenager. What do the mass group of kids today want in their movie? Action, with better special effects than the last movie they watched. Yes, they are making some good ones in other catagories, but those never do as well.

But books...books are the opening to whole worlds where knights fight the draggon while the mages cast their spells. The can rewrite history in a different way, or take you to the farthest reaches of time. Where are the movies that do any of this on a regular basis?

Compare the first Harry Potter book with the movie. The movie could not provide all of the smaller struggles and petty hatred that went on. If the producers were relying on the audience to have actually read the book, then it would be fine, but that isn't the case. With the exception of getting to watch the quidich game, I was disapointed.

Last night, I wished I was Aaron Boone. I often wish I was A-Rod. When I saw 61*, I wanted to be Mickey Mantle (at least the baseball player, not the drunkard and adulterer).

When I comes to history, I rarely wish I was a great historical figure, but I always wish I was a close friend of a historical figure. What would it be like to be a disciple of Socrates or Plato? What would it be like to be an apostle of Jesus? What would it be like to be in the court of Charlemange? What would it be like to be friends with Martin Luther? You all get the picture.

I can honestly say I've never wanted to be a fictional character. Except maybe for Indiana Jones.

However, good, serious novels with intellectual, emotion, spiritual, and moral depth affect me deeply. A good novel gives a "revaluation" (to use a term from Nietzsche) of life. A new insight is gained. C.S. Lewis said that the key difference between the literary vs. the un-literary is that the un-literary are chained to a myopic scope of the world and of the human person, whereas the literary, because they open themselves up to the strangeness and mystery of existence through fiction, have a magnanimous vision and understanding of the world. There's a depth to the literary that the un-literary can neither understand nor hope to attain.

Can movies have this effect on the viewer? I don't know. I think that this revaluation is something unique to the domain of the novel. I don't think a movie, or play, or poem has this power because a movie, or play, or poem doesn't allow you to enter so deeply into the life (or lives) of a character (or characters).

I think this is true, but I think this because no movie, or play, or poem has ever had this effect on me. I've seen what I'll call powerful movies and plays, and I've read powerful poems, but I've never had the effect of a revaluation of life that I've had when I've read a great novel.

[This message has been edited by Balthasar (edited October 17, 2003).]
 

True, this is not a revaluation based on logic or reason, but there is nothing about the definition of revaluation that demands a connection to rational thought.

In a novel, where we can be presented with a strange world, our chance to revaluate comes more from thinking about the logical implications of the ideas on which the world of the novel is based. In my Imperium setting, slavery of a sort is justified by the fact that the 'slaves' are all varients (castes) of a type of warrior breed that doesn't have the ordinary human motivations. They are physically and mentally superior to ordinary humans, and they actually run the Imperium as a group, but individually they can't operate in the context of being humans, so by the laws they have designed, they are classed as property rather than citizens.

To make it a little more ambiguous, I don't make them genetically engineered or created, but rather a genetic 'defect' natural to humans, a type of person that we currently tend to throw away or institutionalize as useless.

To be successful, there has to be some revalution of the idea that slavery (even slavery frankly based on racism) is inherently wrong on the part of the reader. In my book, it will proceed logically from the situation presented. In the movie Gone with the Wind, it had to proceed from the fact that Vivian Leigh(sp?) and Clark Gable(?) were so attractive that people naturally wanted to be them and think of them as being good, despite the fact that they embraced an irrational and evil 'cause'.

Which brings us back to Kill Bill. I'm rationally convinced that extreme violence is not always wrong. But while I can't say much to the plot of Kill Bill--not having seen it--I don't imagine that the narrative outline gives the audience new logical reasons that violence is sometimes okay. Instead, it relies on having a beautiful woman (former supermodel, right?) be one of the most violent people in the movie (and I assume she is supposed to be a good guy--though perhaps I am wrong). The instinct of the audience to sympathize with this attractive and famous individual overcomes the steady diet of "violence is bad" on which we are supposed to be fed, and for a while we feel (rather than think) that violence is okay, even desirable.

Of course, if someone usually feels something, then the habits of thought are likely to be entrenched in supporting the usual feeling. Thus a person that usually feels that violence is wrong will have the mental habits of thought supporting the notion of violence being inherently evil. And so a movie that causes a different feeling about violence will create a conflict between emotion and thought, which can be disorienting to some people.

On the other hand, someone that feeds on a steady diet of media which induces the feeling that violence is good or acceptable will generally feel that violence is okay, and will develop habits of thought justifying violent behavior--first in the attractive persons seen in the media, and inevitably in the self.

I think that it is the degree to which a persons media intake tends to always be conducive to feeling that violence is good (particularly that the most violent characters are the good guys--or at least the most attractive) which predicts the development of a nihilistic view of violence. I don't see a lot of R-rated films (I still can't believe that Last of the Mohicans was rated R) because too often the violence engaged in by the "heroes" of such films is utterly gratuitous, they seem to win because they are more violent (rather than despite being less violent).

Tears of the Sun was a wonderful exception (as was Last of the Mohicans), as the heroes were men capable of delivering extreme violence, but they avoided it to the degree that they seem almost pacifistic, while the villians were brutally violent for no cause at all (and yet, they were scarily realistic). But I doubt that most extreme violence is so portrayed--even in films that I consider very worthwhile (BlackHawk Down, for instance, is a very good movie, but you can't avoid the fact that the Americans inflicted a hell of a lot of causalties, many of them on innocent people--including women and children). The fact of the matter is that when it becomes a pure contest of violence, the most violent win. Inevitably, when we portray a conflict in which the ability to use violence is the only decisive criterion of victory, the most violent will will, and if we want a happy ending, then our heroes have to be the most violent.

Real life is rarely that simple. Power does not come solely from the barrel of a gun--after all, the willingness to use violence can't create a gun or even tell us how to use it. But movies are never going to be a particularly complex narrative form.

If I want to feel, I watch Enchanted April or The Joy Luck Club. If I want to think, I read books (about complicated characters that overcome evil by means including but not limited to violence).
 

quote:

---

The instinct of the audience to sympathize with this attractive and famous individual overcomes the steady diet of "violence is bad" on which we are supposed to be fed, and for a while we feel (rather than think) that violence is okay, even desirable.

---

That's what I was betting on, even after I read the script. (Yes, I read the script before I watched the movie. Two VERY different experiences.) I figured it would be the same old action movie, where I was rooting for the good guy to kill the bad guy . . . preferably in a fittingly horrible way. Damn, was I surprised.

I think you might have a different experience with this film than with most other violent ones. I loved it for a lot of reasons. In large part, I loved it because I felt different about different moments of violence in the film. There were one or two "WOW!" moments just like we all experienced in the Matrix. There were one or two moments of horror. And there were a few moments of that 'insert fight here' type of desensitized film violence. It just made the movie incredibly powerful.

Because, and this is very strange, as violent as this movie is, the severed limbs and spraying blood are not what makes your guts churn. It's not the flashy moves that make you say "Wow!" It's the why behind violence that really gets to you. It's the motivations, the characters. You won't find me saying this is some deep, meaningful story with layer upon layer of truth in it . . . that's BS.

But there is truth in it. These are all good people gone HORRIBLY bad, and there's a moment for each character in the film where we sympathize with each of them, and we don't really want anybody to die, because at least at the beginning, they were good, decent people. Behind all the flash and choreography, there's a pervasive feeling of inevitability and sadness.

Yes, sadness. I felt sad every time one of the bad guys died. I'm not sure I can say that about any other movie. I felt sad every time the bride killed them and realized it didn't make her feel any better.

And the interesting thing about this violence, is that it's NOT toned down so audiences can stomach it. Every second of every fight, you KNOW that these people are trying to kill each other, and you KNOW what it means, and you feel the finality of it when one of them dies.

From a purely technical standpoint, the fights in this movie are some of the most brutal I've ever seen. They truly feel like life and death struggles, rather than simply "dancing with swords". The only more convincing fight I've ever seen was the one in "Gross Pointe Blank".

But that's a side point. What shocked me most about this movie was not the blood, the violence, the story (there are some pretty horrifying moments in the story, too.) or any of QT's quick little GOTCHA tricks, it was the fact that I actually felt something while I was watching other than an adrenaline rush.

The one moment that STILL gets me is near the end, as O-Ren Ishii and The Bride, both injured, face off in that Japanese garden with snow falling around them. There's no more trash talk, no more pretense, just an unspeakable sadness that you can read on their faces. There's no hatred in either of them, no malice, just regret. For that moment, you just want to cry.

And then it's over, and you feel just as empty as the Bride does.

As over the top as they were, there was a humanity in these characters that I've never seen in another action movie. And as I left the theater, there was a part of me thinking "If THAT'S what violence is all about, I'll pass, thank you very much."

At least, that was MY experience.

-Nate
 

Actually, what you call "dancing with swords" is the closest approximation to how I've experienced actual violence. Partly this is because superior fighting abilities absolutely depend on the ability to detach one's self from the consequences of violence. If you worry about killing or being killed, you cannot fight well. The same is true of regrets and horror. In a real life and death struggle, you cannot afford to feel like it is really a life and death struggle.

Usually, of course, it is not necessary to fight particularly well. It is only necessary to fight hard. When you are far stronger than the enemy, it is enough to throw your heart into the battle.

This probably doesn't have anything to do with Kill Bill, though. And your post raises a more interesting point.

Does anyone else share Falken's opinion that the bad guys are not really bad, and if so, how then do you not feel that it was The Bride who was bad for killing them all?
 

First off Kill Bill is the BEST movie to come out this year.

Period.

Second Are any of you SWAT members? Assassins? Serial Killers? In the ARMY?

Then how in the hell do you know what realistic violence is?

How do i even know?

The closest i ever got to seeing any violence is a motorcyclist who just got hit by a car and his blood was everywhere and twitching on the ground his helmet rolling on the asphalt. Thats it.

3rd No matter what movie it is I always root for the "bad guy". and to answer a guy above me : no one is the bad guy. everybody is just themselves trying to make it. The bad guy in the movies or novels is just against the main characters or thier beliefs.

And for killing...Thats just natural. only religion and society took that power away from us. Whats the 2 powers in humanity? passing on your genes and killing. Giving birth and bieng the hand of death. IN the natural order of things thats the only power for us.

so how do you become more powerful than that?

creating a religion that says its bad to kill. Creating a society based on the principles of religion and say killing is bad.

WHy would somone doe this?

so only they have the power to kill.

Back in the day if you killed somone you would be punished and put to DEATH!

giving the church the only right to take life.

if thats not power i dont know what is.

Now you can get jailed or murdered if you kill someone.

But president Bush can declare war on another nation and kill thousands of people and its ok.

hell if you want to be a serial killer join the united armed forces. plenty of killing there.

so whos the bad guy?

who evers opposed to you.

why would i state this?

Because Kill bill is a bad ass movie about a person who kills to get her way and to get what she believes in which is REVENGE.

its a bad ass movie.

Its Quentin Tarintino.

Its Kill Bill.

[This message has been edited by Damascus (edited November 15, 2003).]
 

after these movies I wanted to be the main character

Micheal Corleone "GodFather"

Ray liota from "Goodfellas"

Tyler durden "Fight Club"

Martin Blank "Grosse Pointe Blank"

The Joker "Batman"

Daniel Day Lewis in "Gangs of New York"

Denzel Washington "Training Day"

And many more "Bad Guys" or "Anti-Heroes"

Because theyre the best.
 

Realistic violence is what you experience in a situation where you fight with someone in a life and death situation. 'Nuff said.

On the other hand, I happen to be reasonably well placed in a religious hierarchy...does that count for anything?

The old religious law was not that only the religious authority had the right to take life, but that no one had the right to take innocent life (that is the original meaning of 'murder'--and the equivalent term used in the old form of the law). In fact, essentially freelance 'vengeance killing' was an essential part of the old law--if some jerk did you or yours a serious enough wrong, then you were sanctioned to hunt the guy down and kill him (there were certain restrictions, of course, having to do with sanctuary law--basically a court of appeal).

It is as we have lost our religious values that we've lost the distinction between murder and just any form of killing.

Plus, QT is a joke.
 

Theres no way I could back up what I said about killing other humans because we have been brainwashed good or bad for thousands of years not to kill each other.

SO the statement is about the natural right as a living creature for survival of the fittest.

Another thing I NEVER said the army, swat or whatever were just killing machines. But that is a place where you could go and maybe see some real violence. Or witness a killing.

So Tell me please what other BASIC powers are there? Basic to the sense of Natural law concerning humanity.
 

giving birth and passing on your genes is the closest to immortality that you will ever get.

ALso thats it. I think that thats the only point in life.

Have sex pass on your genes. THeres no other reason we are here. just like birds and alligators.

Have sex and pass yourself on.

Religion was created as a tool to control and bring humans from the murky mess they were situated. How? Fear. just like they use it in television today.

YOu dont beleive that some old bearded guy created you than your SOUL is going to rot in hell for ETERNITY!

LOL. Too bad there was no education back then. Then we wouldnt have to deal with this sticky religion mess we have gotten almost the entire world tied up in.

Hell why dont muslims eat pork? because back in those days they really were FILTY animals and you would get sick and mess you whole village up (remeber this was before antiseptics) SO you get a church in there tell them that if they pork their faces will fry in butter grease while bieng jumped by 6 year old children with golf shoes for the rest of eternity.

But oh no. thats wrong. some mythical guy who can wrap up the wonders of universe into one super philosphy "God works in mysterios ways" Funniest thing i ever heard.

SO now you dont need to eat your pig and you dont have to ask why because god told you.(through a priest of course)

so humans rise out of the dark ages and into the light of THe future.

SO do we really need this ancient Survival religion or shall we update?

OR better yet....(DRum roll PLEASE!)

just get rid of it. as far as i can tell thats the only good thing religion ever did. after that it was war war war inquisition war war war crusades war war war Holy Jihads war war war war

I cant wait to be a christian with the horrific past they have.

Or any other religion for that matter.

Its so ridicolous.

I never understood how kids couldnt drop off God just like santa clause and the tooth fairy.

Same bracket.

But now i guess religion is fading away.

TV is here and taking its place.

You know how the bible is the best book of all time?

Well i wonder if you calculate how long it took each person to read the bible and then compare that to the time people watch TV?

Who do you think would win?

LOL

Its so horrible. Its bad that i hate the entire race of humaity and all its institutions.

I can't do anything at all with my ideas.(because therye so stupid right?)

except write.

THen people tell me to enjoy life and embrace such things as MTV the sequel to Fast and the furios farmer john hats pop crap and all other stuff i hate.

Just like the guy who listened to God about his pig

so I plan to stay misrable until some miracle happens and all the religon just disapeers from earth one day.

and then that will only be the first step.

[This message has been edited by Damascus (edited November 15, 2003).]
 

quote:

---

so I plan to stay misrable until some miracle happens and all the religon just disapeers from earth one day.

---

I have tried that concept. But I was fortunate to discover that life goes so much better when you enjoy what you can. If you look at the average day you may only have 10 minutes that you enjoy. Sometimes more, sometimes less. But when you live in misery all day you can miss those few enjoyable minutes.

Ok, I may be a bit nuts, but it comes down to a point of view. Just like in writing you can have two different concepts happening at the same time, and you only see the one you read. But if you read the other point of view, then you can see the same situation from a different point of view, with a different understanding.

If you wish to be miserable, that is fine with me. If you want to write stories that someone will want to read, then you will need to learn to enjoy writing. So if you are miserable, you will have little chance of enjoying writing. So to me, it sounds very self defeating. Of course, I could be wrong.

Edger Allen Poe was rummored to be somewhat disturbed. But who is to say he didn't enjoy writing?

As for religions? They are still needed. Although you may not have it, there are still many people with the desire to believe in something greater than themselves. There are still people out there that could use someone to teach them some things are wrong. Living near the DC/Baltimore area (They are ususally in the top ten for murders each year), there are quite a few people that could use some extra moral instruction.

Just drive down any interstate at rush hour near any major city, and you will see that we are not the highly intelectuall, understanding souls you think we are. I would use the word "animals", but I know too many nice animals. If this is your concept of people who know how to work for the better good of the society...you need to drive the interstates more.

We are animals, our base instincts are rooted to what all animals have in common: reproduction and food. The fact that we managed to control (ok, some of us) our base urges to some degree, and work together to help each other. Yes, I made it sound much prettier than it is, but that is the reason we have civilization and the rest do not.

I would imagine that a lot of thought was put into some religions, my personal favorite for its control factors is the reincarnation system blended with a cast system. I believe it was or is Hinduism?

I choose to believe the way I wish, and ignore any particular religion.

Although I am not sure of you age, I wanted to point out a few things that will either imply you are young...Abuse of capitalization. We all make mistakes, but I have noticed that younger people have adopted a abuse of capital letters as a form of style, no matter how annoying it may be. Also, anyone unfortunate to visit a teenage chat room will know, that to keep up with the other kids in the room the sentances must be short and quick. Since the current conversantion would be gone before I got my sentance typed I never bothered. So short sentances without using paragraphs is another sign. The tone is not as easy, but combined with the others makes it almost a givaway. Your sentances scream rage and unhappiness. You're upset with the world for not being the way you thought it should be. These all point to a teenage person.

Not that I care, I just figured I would mention it.
 

If God exists, then our rights are inherent, and prohibitions against fornication, adultery and murder are not arbitrary rules of conduct.

Me? I firmly believe we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, and I believe the God who made us gave us the blueprints for living a satisfying existence. It's our pig-headedness that gets us in trouble.

[This message has been edited by Kolona (edited November 15, 2003).]
 

Lord Darkstrom I humbly grovel at your feet for your powers of perception. 'Tis true that I am a young man at only the age of 19. You are quite clever OBi one. But I am required by the peoples of my age to refute.

First Sir Darkstorm I never said that we were highly intellectual biengs. As your statement reffering to this I agree completly. We are all animals. However you say that some people NEED(excuse the capitlization OH exhalted one) religion. I have to strongly disagree with you.

I don't mind if you practice your religion faithfully or unfaithfully but the world would be a much better place if there was none. Like you said you

Qoute
choose to believe the way I wish, and ignore any particular religion.
qoute

Why do you need not a strong Church to teach you moral values? What makes you an exception to these other mindless angry Interstate driving maniacle animals? I am guessing that your answer will be that you were raised in an open home where ideas flowed like milk from your mothers breast. That you were raised in knowledge and not ignorance. If this is true then why can we not change the present to keeping everyone on the same high level as yourself? what keeps these poor ignorant animals from wanting the knowledge that you and i share so freely? It only comes back to my statement before that religion does not want you to question this. You shall Have faith in god and nothing else. That why is answered by "God works in mysterios ways." would it not be just as easy to change the bible to The peoples history of the united states?

Therefore we come to my young naivete. That I am...

Qoute
upset with the world for not being the way you thought it should be.
Qoute

...as you so eloquently put it. Of course this is not the truth but merely an assumption and quoting Quentin Tarintino from pulp fiction

Qoute
When you assume you make an ass out of U and me
qoute

I am not angry that the world is the way it is. I am angry because people do not want to change it(another sign that I am a teenager right?) That they are happy with what they have and that they should enjoy the scraps of happiness that society gives them.(a few minutes a day right? what did you say LORD darkstorm? 10 minutes.) I am sorry if I have annoyed you my lord. I aslo empathize with a great pity that you live in such a horrible place(better than bolivia or somalia though) and that you see the horrors of human kind in the form of The INTERSTATE!(OMG!) So i can guess by your response that you have completed college or soon are and all the knowledge to make you into a perfect societal robot has been implanted in your brain already. Its all to obvious.

But you contradict yourself twice if not more in your response. One you say some people need religion but you also agree that it is used for power. Second you say that you do not care about my age but write a 9 lined paragraph about it. For something you do not care about that is truly a lot of effort over nothing.(heck you had to guess and ASSUME all that stuff too!)

Third I enjoy writing immensly even though I am misreable. It is my escape from the apathy and complacency of the world i live in. (By the way my liege did you VOte? if not my respect will dwindle some) Now to tie this back together I wrote all that so people could see that Killing is a natuaral part of life Before religion and all that jazz came So I could explain that people should just enjoy the movie even though it has VIolence.

I am sorry if I have disturbed or made you angry My Lord Darkstorm but i must say this...

Thank you for the tips on writing. Now I can disguise my age more cleverly.

Damascus

[This message has been edited by Damascus (edited November 16, 2003).]
 

quote:

---

Why do you need not a strong Church to teach you moral values?

---

Because I was brought up with them. And church was part of it. My parents took the time to teach me to follow rules and backed it with punishments that inspired me to more readily follow the rules set down. (Pain on the behind can have that effect) The knowledge I gained from reading and self learning.

What keeps people from wanting to learn? Why not ask a few of the people you see out partying instead of at home reading or studying for school? It has to do with personal desire. Even in animals you can find a varying range of intelligence.

Religion has been transformed into a form of control. I do not believe it was always this way, but over time it was a very good solution. To use an example: A low intelligence dog, given all the food it wants could very well eat itself to death. A more intelligent dog would stop when it is full. People who are not too intelligent follow their base urges more readily than a person with more intelligence. (Remember these are generalizations, not constants) Back when the more intelligent people realized that civilization could only be maintained by people who are willing to try and control their urges; killing being one of them. Religion was there, telling the masses to control themselves and be better than the animals. I doubt it took much effort to shift religions enough to serve as a controlling factor in people's lives since many of the intelligent people doing it were the religious leaders.

quote:

---

You shall Have faith in god and nothing else. That why is answered by "God works in mysterious ways." would it not be just as easy to change the bible to The peoples history of the united states?

---

As with many of our cliché phases in life, this one probably started after hours of trying to explain a simple concept to a simple mind. The short answer "God works in mysterious ways", probably saved time in convincing the simple minded person to do as they were told since they would never understand. It does also double as a cover story for the holes in some of the religious logic that doesn't hold solid.

One of the reasons I dislike religions is for the very reason they are self serving. Many of the religions I have been around like to change things to better suit themselves. I believe in God, and Jesus...and I try to be a good person (according to the Bible). So do I need someone interpreting the Bible for me, telling me that I should look at one sentence and skip the second? Since the second blows the interpretation they wanted to make. I have no problem with God, I have a problem with people warping other people into believing something that is possibly incorrect.

I do believe religions are a necessary evil. People who do go to church and put forth some effort into being a religious person are less likely to go kill someone.

quote:

---

I am not angry that the world is the way it is. I am angry because people do not want to change it(another sign that I am a teenager right?)

---

Well....yes. The world is what it is. It is often times ugly and violent, and we deal with it. As long as our personal lives are not hindered much by what is going on around us, most just let it be. If one person could change the world, it would change..........hmmm....no changes yet. A group of people might have an impact on their local environment, but they will not change the world. Even a very big group can have an impact on the world, and not actually change it. Just look at the terrorists. They dislike the world as it is and want to make it the way they think it should be. But is the world becoming the way they wish it to be? No, the world is turning against them.

Just recently I went to another state for a week (900 mile difference). Just the differences in culture was amazing, not because I had never been there before...I had never actually paid much attention to it before. So if we can have 2 very different cultures in the same country...how would you propose the world be changed?

quote:

---

So i can guess by your response that you have completed college or soon are and all the knowledge to make you into a perfect societal robot has been implanted in your brain already. Its all to obvious.

---

It seems my analysis skills are a bit better than yours. I did not get a degree from college. Being young and stupid once, I decided to get married and have a child (well, part of it was my decision). I worked to where I am today, no one handed me anything. And since next month will make me 34, I still skirt the middle between young and old.

The interstate example was just that, an example I felt would have the widest range of association. Since you did not seem to understand my frustration at the lack of thinking rational people on just about any interstate I would assume (I do that all the time) you have little experience with it, or are one of the irrational people.

quote:

---

One you say some people need religion but you also agree that it is used for power.

---

There is a contradiction here? If I said drug addicts need drugs and the drug dealers use that addiction to maintain power..would that be a contradiction too? Not that I am associating drugs and religion, they are two different aspects of one area of discussion.

Many people feel the need to believe in something greater than themselves, and that the universe was created with a purpose rather than a random occurrence. This is a fact.

Religious leaders have had very powerful roles in controlling and running the lives of their (and often times not) followers. In more modern times the Govt has replaced the church in terms of punishment of crimes, but still hold some levels of control in the lives of their followers. This is also a fact.

I do fail to see any contradiction.

As for me not being upset by your age. I am not. I was upset by the lack of consideration to the other readers here (myself mainly), who find it irritating with a hard break after every sentence. Also the capitalization abuse is quite annoying also. The fact that it implies immaturity is a fact that many younger people use unusual formatting to create style. I wish they would realize style is something you want to create with what you say, not how you format it.

As to the latest comment. Thank you. It is a vast improvement. Also if you take some time and leave out the attempts at baiting someone:

quote:

---

You are quite clever OBi one.

---

quote:

---

LORD darkstorm

---

quote:

---

By the way my liege did you VOte?

---

I do get a nice chuckle out of it, but it doesn't upset me.

And finally...

quote:

---

I am sorry if I have disturbed or made you angry My Lord Darkstorm but i must say this...

Thank you for the tips on writing. Now I can disguise my age more cleverly.

---

Your welcome. But do you realize that you have managed a post that, in formatting, is starting to resemble everyone else here? I would still suggest more work on your abuse of capitalization.

Overall, when you can write your messages and not waste too much effort on trying to insult or defend, you will be even closer.

 

As for changing the world I think your wrong. Before World War 1 a certain individual decided to assassinate the Duke of some country(austria?) and this one act was the breaking point for the enitre war. One man changed the world. The terrorists of today, as far as I am concerened acomplished thier mission. According to our idiotic president(and dont even say that hes not) we are living in terror. He created Americas first secret police, instituted the Patriot Act, and has the fear of america under his thumb. The terrorist's probably didn't change the world, but they sure changed America, who has the odassidy to claim rightful protector of the world. Seems to me they picked the right Target.

About the contradiction; you are saying for poeples own good it is necessary to learn morality from a Organization that is enslaving thier minds and using them for power? When you say this this is good for the people then you are making a contradiction because it is obviosly not good for the "Drug Dealer" to take advantage of the buyer. Unless of course your religion taught you different.

You contradict yourself again when you say that you got mad at me for writing like a teenager, which I am, and lashed out by making a big deal out of my age by condensation. ITs okay little baby Damascus. But later you say this is very immature for me to insult you.....

QOUTE

Overall, when you can write your messages and not waste too much effort on trying to insult or defend, you will be even closer.

Qoute

That is ridicoulous. Have you not heard of the term argument? If everybody on this site just rolled over every time somebody suggested a different point of view than that wouldnt be acting like an adult that would make a person who holds no strong opinions, hell no opinions at all. EVEN you defended yourself in your post directly above me. And you defended your argument! Have you lost your marbles!?! Why I am I talking to a Brain washed religios 34 year old? People in thier 30s are the most likley to be the most ignorant of all! BEcause they sit CONTENT with their knowledge and try to out smart and pick on teenagers. Ridicoulous. SO long Lord Darkstorm. YOu can attack your next teenage victim when he happens along your pathetic path.
 

PS you actually beleive that some old bearded guy like santa clause invented this entire universe?

Is there a boogyman in your closet right now?

Did santa visit you house last christmas?

Did you know god is a logical impossibility?

I would explain more but I know it would be usless

CIAO!

PSS like my style?
Damascus
 

quote:

---

Some damn thing in the Balkens

---

Sorry, that guy that shot old Arch Duke Ferdie didn't change history, he was just an interchangable pawn. Serious students of history understood years before that that the instability and unrest in the Balkens was going to cause another war, and a big one that would have serious repercussions for Germany.

DAC, this is a boring conversation that is obscuring a perfectly reasonably topic, which was the discussion of how we portray violence in our fiction.

If you indeed decide to leave us alone, I for one will be all too happy to see you go. Read some of the previous threads on this site, and you will realize that the reason you arouse so much contempt here is because we've seen your kind, spouting the same sentiments, many times before. You are not as original as you seem to believe. You are certainly not free of 'brainwashing'...and logic is a logical impossibility without appeal to God, a point that you seem to have missed in your vast education.

Everything you say is ill informed and poorly considered, and most of it falls apart on even cursory examination...which doesn't matter because this is a writer's formum! It isn't a place for you to vent your absurd and ignorant sophistry.

DamAs...
 

I didnt say i was original! NEVER! **** you guys ASSUme a whole lot.

I bet reading your stuff you would have to assume a lot about your characters
 

quote:

---

PS you actually beleive that some old bearded guy like santa clause invented this entire universe?

---

No. I believe God is the universe.

And if you want people to take you seriously, please try and use capitolization the way it is supposed to be used.

[This message has been edited by Lord Darkstorm (edited November 17, 2003).]
 

1) Kolona, Survivor: If either of you end up in Utah sometime, I'd love to buy you dinner.

2) I believe it's impossible to reliably transmit morals from one generation to the next without religion. My opinion is based largely on observation. I don't wish to argue this point - I just wanted to put forward my opinion.

3) Damascus: Go play on ornery.org or something.
 

I just noticed (actually, I noticed last night when I posted it) that I misspelled forum--in bold, italic type, no less. At least it wasn't all caps.

I do have to say that I'm having a problem with a couple of the characters I'm trying to write because the reader can't make a lot of assumptions about them...the main character of a story I'm currently flogging for crits on is a good example. I'm looking at this guy with fresh eyes and realizing what a freak he is (I mean, I knew he was a bit strange, but he's really messed up!). The terrible thing is that I know perfectly well why he's so messed up, but I can only hint about it to the reader, and most people so far miss many of the main hints (hint, the guy carts around an illegal, custom built, pocket assault weapon with an integrated silencer even though he never uses it--how messed up is that?[to be fair, he does use it a fair bit once the story gets started]).

I mean, I'm pretty messed up, but I'm not that messed up (if I cart around a custom combi-weapon, I have a use in mind, yes I do).

One reason this belongs on this thread is because my character is a really violent person, he's killed probably around a hundred people personally and has no problem beating people up to get what he wants...but you don't really get that from his internal geometry (one reader who did notice it thought it was a character anomaly--that a person that pretty regularly beats information out of people wouldn't ever actually think of doing so).

I cry out in anguish: What is a writer to do?
 

quote:

---

So do I need someone interpreting the Bible for me, telling me that I should look at one sentence and skip the second? Since the second blows the interpretation they wanted to make.

---

quote:

---

one reader who did notice it thought it was a character anomaly--that a person that pretty regularly beats information out of people wouldn't ever actually think of doing so

---

Um...anyway....
 

Survivor, I don't understand why you can only hint about why your character is messed up? Why can't you show it...is it a plot twist or something you're deliberately hiding from the reader?

From what little you've shared, it seems that simply carrying around an (albeit nifty) powerful pocket weapon isn't enough of a hint. Just arming someone doesn't scream "messed up" to my jaded little mind and it probably doesn't to other readers. If you only want to reveal his troubled mental state via hints, have him kick a dog for no reason while walking down the street. Show him saying something unspeakably rude to a beggar. Mention that he misses his wife ever since he killed her. Basically, be more obvious.

Of course, this advice is based on scant understanding of your actual story and what you are trying to do. However, if you want another pair of eyes to look at it, you can feel free to send it to me. Either way, good luck with it!

[This message has been edited by Hildy9595 (edited November 21, 2003).]
 

quote:

---

it isn't that he doesn't use the weapon, the strange thing is that he never planned to use it, but built the thing anyway.

---

Ah, well. I'm not the first misunderstood writer...
 

quote:

---

We are all animals.

---

Back in October, Zogby had a worldwide poll of religious beliefs, the upshot of which was that people blame politics, not religion, for fueling violence. Mr. Zogby is quoted in the Washington Times National Weekly Edition (October 20-26, 2003)as saying, "Religion is hardly a mandate for extremism. People see it as a good thing that produces good values."

That same edition of the Times had an article on Kill Bill, in which Gary Arnold wrote: "If [Quentin Tarantino] has started to believe his own press, he wouldn't be the first over-praised and over-indulged young Hollywood director to succumb to delusions of grandeur....However, the latest cycle of Tarantino interviews betrays a weariness and impatience with his posturing. If the killing sprees provoke more distaste than guilty pleasure, a once adulatory press may be content to let Quentin Tarantino's comeback movie strangle on over-familiar wretched excess."

To which I say a hearty, "Amen."
 

With all the other odd stuff in this thread thought I'd add a bit.

Shawn
 

And you have to understand that most animals don't think about reproduction when they have sex...they think (if think they do) about doing what feels good at the moment. Meaning that pleasure is the only criterion of whether they have sex.

But yes, dolphins do pray, after a manner of speaking.

By the way, my character isn't a monster, he's just a bit messed up. I guess I could use your input on the first couple of chapters...I'm still revising a bit though....
 

Poeple always taking things out of and into context. Get rid of the context. Go out tomarrow and kill a dolphin with your barehands or some bizzare weapon you made up in your ted kazinsky shed. Go out and have gratuitus sex with many diffrent partners of diffrent sex and say foo haha! Burn the bible and read mien kumpf. Say the word "nigger". Say Screw all that liberal green bleeding heart bull crap and bunr a thousand holes in the ozone. Hell if we burn a hole in the right place we can use it as a weapon! Say screw you to all the right wing rich bastards and piss on a picture of president bush(perferably right in his eye)Stop voting in the goddamn two party system if you live in america like me! Run down squirrels and beat infromation out of them with a bottle of Sprite. Screw commercialism and MTV. Scream Foo Haha everytime you see a britney spears comercial and laught maniacly like you are on the best acid trip of your life. Say you are racist against racist people. Say you hate reaganomics and the "trickle down effect" which is rich Incorporations pissing down on poor people and us trying to get a little bit in our mouths. STOP SHOPPING at WAL MART for christs sake.

(Did you Know That WAL MART buys life insurance for its employees and makes itself the sole beneficiary in the case of death? Hows that for company loyalty. Even your death your getting F****D.)

Go out get motivated and kill religion and all that that keeps people under a small group of peoples thumb. Go out and start a revolution! Go light a fire up some ones ass!

Foo HA HA!
 

Please reach out and grasp some reality.

Kathleen?

Shawn
 

quote:

---

Terrorists don't go away by ignoring them

---

Fortunately, he is not a terrorist. I am still trying to understand why he would come here and do his best to annoy/anger the rest of us. I am also curious as to what has caused him to have such anger against God. I watch the news and see people who are doing their best to have God stricken from every public place possible. I believe there is something more than just a lack of belief.

If an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God, then the mention of God should not bother them. Similar to Santa Clause, I do not get upset at Christmas time when a person acting as a fictitious person in the mall. I wonder how upset the self proclaimed atheist would be if the pledge said "under Santa" instead of "under God"? Besides a chuckle from every intelligent person in the country, there would be no issue. So I do believe that a large chunk of atheists are not really atheists at all, but are actually God haters. Sometime in their lives they had something not happen the way they wanted; something bad happened, or they expected to get something that they didn't get, or maybe something even worse. Whatever the cause, there usually is one. To inspire such hatred towards a being they say they don't believe in requires a reason.

So I wish they would just come out and label themselves as "God haters" instead of atheists, since atheists don't actually care if the word "God" is in anything. So is anyone here offended by a jolly fat man with a beard portrayed in schools?

[This message has been edited by Lord Darkstorm (edited November 24, 2003).]
 

And Kathleen has been emailed. What happens to this topic next is up to her. Until then, I'd suggest following Survivor's example and turn the topic back to writing...and keep it there.
 

And by the way, a lot of shit goes on here that doesn't pertain to writing. Some moron posted something about a computer game!!! Did you e-mail Kathleen about that?

Now I am going to take my own advise and shut up.

[This message has been edited by Balthasar (edited November 24, 2003).]
 

The games a hoot.

And if you write like I do hours and hours at a time then edit hours and hours at a time and take a break every hour of so and play a silly game for a bit to give the brain a break--hey why not play one that can improve a tool of the trade.

As to why people respond--well it is within human nature to respond to those who attack or provoke. And frankly, wondering why Kathleen has not shut him down or the thread--well, we are here to discuss writing for the most part of things that influence writers. Why should we put up with an attention grabbing, needing board troll?

There are plenty of um-moderated boards where one can go to be bashed.

Shawn
 

I have to agree that DAC's recent post was of low quality and patently offensive, and I wouldn't mind if KDW deleted it...but I would hardly ask her too. I mean, phibbt!

The fact of the matter is that we can all use occasional examples of truly intellectually and spiritually impoverished writing (as long as it isn't full of profanity and such) to serve as a reality check for ourselves. We look at someone like DAC and ask ourselves, "Do I write like that?" As long as the answer is 'no'... then okay. If we are forced to answer 'yes' or even 'a little', then we have work to do.

There isn't any real reason to get aggravated unless you've got some kind of emotional investment in the guy, after all. There's got to be a billion other humans just as obnoxious and stupid on this planet, after all...many of them probably live in your own physical neighborhood. Okay, I don't know that there's a billion other humans as limited as DAC...that was just a ballpark guess...probably way outside the ballpark, come to think of it. My point is that he's really quite insignificant, whether one of billions or only hundreds of millions.

Back to me Hildy, see if you can contact me (the rest of you are welcome to drop messages as well--though I don't know why you would, I just don't want you to feel excluded).
 

As for emailing Kathleen, Balthasar, she has specifically requested that I notify her of trolls and other issues on the boards. DAC qualifies, so don't expect me to apologize for following her wishes. This is her domain, but she can't spend her time here 24/7 monitoring the boards. I think enough people have expressed a desire to end the prattling to merit letting Kathleen know.