in the third century B.C. Hannibal Barca, son of Hamilcar Barca, driven by hatred of Rome and devotion to his father, launched the 2nd Punic with Rome and made world and military history by traversing the alps with 45,000 men (including elephants) to invade Italy. After several initial battles on the Italian peninsula Hannibal faced at least 85,000 Romans(some historians believe it could have been more) at the battle of Cannae. Hannibal defeated them with a smaller force using advanced military tactics. For the next 9 years Hannibal would terrorize Italy, it's allies, and threaten Rome itself.
Despite the thousands of Roman battle deaths, the republic gathered its strength and realized that they had to stand firm in the face of terrorism or become its slave. General Publius Cornelius Scipio(Africanus Major) decided that the best way to rid Italy of Hannibal was to attack his home turf in Spain and in Carthage. After hearing news that Spain was now under Roman control and Carthage was under attack Hannibal finally retreated from Italy back 'home' to Carthage and never set foot on Italian soil again.Most modern historians show respect for Hannibal and military leaders have referenced his tactics for ages. But at the time the Romans despised him and did not have full rest until they burnt Carthage to the ground. To the people of Rome, one of the most civilized people on earth, Hannibal was a terrorist and the phrase "Hannibal is at the Gates" would strike fear into anyone's heart who remembered such a terrifying invader of their homeland.
Fast forward to 9/11 2001. Osama Bin Laden, driven by hatred of America and devotion to jihadist islam launched an improbable yet highly successful attack against the United States, the psychological effect which is still being felt 7 years later. Like Hannibals invasion and his victory at Cannae, Bin Ladens attack was a strategic surprise in a new kind of warfare and created an emotional scar that caused fear and anger for revenge among many Americans. Although Bush may not be remembered in quite the same way as general Scipion he was the one who encouraged America to stay the course and not give in. And also to advance the idea that in order to rid oneself of a terrorist you have eliminate his power base and pursue him wherever he should flee. Although Hannibal is revered as a great general he was cast out of his homeland and spent the rest of his life on the run until he was driven to suicide in order to avoid Roman assassination. And like wise although Bin Laden is revered by many in the middle east his fate will follow that of history and despite damaging america in the end Bin Laden will only have made us a stronger nation, better prepared for an uncertain future. I think many comparisons can be made to the response of the people of Rome and the response of America after 9/11 and by consequence between Hannibal and Bin Laden. And although Hannibals death toll was far higher than Bin Ladens and Hannibals tactics are studied today and revered to some degree like Rommel, I think Bin Laden will be despised forever by all civilized countries because he represents barbarism and the destruction of civilization as opposed to a legitimate alternative (though not the best) such as what Carthage may have offered. And the comparison raises another question as to the definition of terrorism and civilization. Ultimately it involves the morality of the attackers and their goals. The 9/11 hijackers were terrorists. Bin Laden is a terrorist. Hannibal terrorized but for some reason he doesn't fit the definition completely. Maybe because his fighting methods were legitimate warfare although tactically ahead of the romans. Or that he recognized the Roman authorities and government and sought surrender terms from them. Its a difficult line to draw but i think it can be drawn if clearly thought through.
i just dont understand this phenomenon. i was traveling abroad for over 6 months and everywhere i looked normal looking people of average weight were going to work, shopping, and raising their children. and despite some less than first world practices and traditions people seemed happy and healthy - especially the women. on only very very rare occasions did i see a woman who was ugly and overweight as i find currently in the grand old USA. and now that i am back in the US im finding that the ugliness of american women stands out even worse than it did before i left. where did all of these women come from with their short hair, perma-frown, 20-100lbs(or more) over weight with no shame. im dying having to look at this everyday!!!!!.....ugh another one. anyway here is something of an example of foreign beauty i saw and aspire to.
and below here are some pictures of what im talking about in america. no wonder so many men just want to find a foreign wife and marry her. below is some of the strange creatures youll find in the good ol USA. imagine being a young boy and growing up around these type of women? OMG its crazy. no wonder so many men are gay or hooked on pornography. after looking at american women your entire life.......and im not exaggerating either....
and you might think some women have evolved and are more sophisticated but dont be fooled. what little outward beauty these prolonged adolescent hags below have is mostly fake(think massive plastic suregry and silicon) and covers up the fact they are really just symbols of ugly women who are waiting for that mr right combination of low testosterone and a big paycheck to come along and satisfy her narcissistic shopping needs. 50 years of feminism for what? emotional trainwrecks, designer shoes, and one night stands?!! :(
its to early to say that we are living through a CGI golden age but nothing lasts forever and this past decade with all of its comic book and sci fiction-films cannot last forever. eventually everyone will reach the point where they say, "been there and done that" and the budgets for these films will have to be cut or eliminated in favor of something new. i think its inevitable though as much as i hate to acknowledge it, that every theme will have been exhausted by 2010. think about it, what hasn't been done that people would be interested in seeing? will these movies just keep going making prequels and sequels and new trilogies until the DVD box sets are 9 deep? sci-fi is definitely on the brink of exhaustion i think. from 2001 to Blade Runner and Alien to Back To The Future to the 5th Element to Star Wars and Star Trek what hasnt been done? what could someone possibly imagine that is original? FPS video games are caught in the same cycle already.(WW2, Swat Team, Apocolypse, Virus, Governement Lab gone wild etc etc) In fact alot of them draw from films like Terminator, Aliens, and Star Wars. Im not even sure how original DooM was, it may have been a simple rehash of cheap zombie movies(which by the way have been exhausted thoroughly) .
at some point maybe like Moores law in computers directors are going to hit a barrior. a writers block of sorts thats made of steel from years of recycling the same ideas until they have popped out in ten different movies, 5 different books, and 15 different video games already. Maybe Electonic Arts (EA) or Blizzard have something brewing for video games. At least Nintendo had the courage to make the Wii, that was genius for sure, and its going to spawn a whole new of intereactive games i think.
Guitar Hero is fairly original but somewhat of spinoff japanese games that have been out for five years already. maybe all the original ideas will come from asia. maybe the US has exhausted its cultural potential or will exhaust it very soon. i just dont think there is anything left imagine that is innovative or oiriginal in film. Batman? great movie but wholly derivative. only the acting by ledger was purely original i think. Terminator? not really sure, they are going on the 4th installment and people are eager to see it but it perform in a mediocre way like Hellboy and Underworld which had huge potential but couldn't capture blockbuster interest. why is that?
i almost walked out of Hellboy 2 it was so boring at points. and Underworld although it cool themes seemed like it was just the Matrix in another form. Was the Matrix original? the first one seemed like it had something going for it. it definitely spawned copycat themes thats for sure. Equilibrium was painfullly unoriginal. Ultraviolet...ugh!! I am Legend was fairly original in its atmosphere i think and in its acting but the zombie virus theme is a top 40 hit played a thousand times. whats new? whats worth seeing? im predicting a major shift in movie going attitudes within the next 5 years and a lot of high budget bombs(like The Hulk, Catwoman and Prince Caspian which were all underperformers to say the least), because movie producers didn't see it coming. the Watchmen movie just might be the first sign of the coming change because i cant imagine people being interested.
like baseball cards there are just to many heroes and end of the world scenarios to actually care about anymore on a wide scale. maybe Batman is ahead of the curve. when you think about it, if everyone has seen everything already what do you have left? ..... plot twists.... acting ..... character development. maybe the future is going to be dramatzing history like the "Titanic" or the "Patriot". or creating hybrids like "shaun of the dead" that realize that its all been done before. thats was the pattern for Mafia films it seems. speaking of which, thats a terribly exhausted genre, the whole gangster theme gets so old becuase you get tired of ending up in the same general area at the end of the film every time - people dead, in jail, betrayed....zzzzzzz credits roll. i think producers are going to have to look deeper as the well runs dry.
After all how did "Meet The Fockers" gross $280 million? "Home Alone" grossed $285 million! and the "Sixth Sense" $ 293 million. The budgets and marketing for these films were miniscule compared to Starwars, IronMan, or Batman. yet somehow they resonated with the audience. i would hate to be the producer of the X-files because i dont think people are in that kind of mood at this point. and the X-men? or the next Underworld? i hear the sounds of blockbuster budget bombs.
after seeing Batman the Dark Knight once ive come to realize that im going to have to see it again just to catch all the philosophical ideas that were touched on in the film. politics, game theory, crime, social darwinism, human nature and being a real leader as opposed to just a hero are some of the topics introduced in this comic book film. but the one concept that has stuck in my mind is the actual character of the Joker. now, its not just that Heath Ledgers performance was a tour de force or that the character was all covered in a sadistic clown makeup that causes him to standout. its that the Joker comes off as a metaphor for all those who oppose civilization, especially western civilization - the bane of the easily offended. if you look at everyone through out history that has opposed those who are good and the civilization that they represent they all have qualities of the Joker. they are irrational, sometimes unpredictable, bitter, envious, emotionally driven, angry(in the Jokers case apparently he had an abusive childhood and family problems is a common theme among the perpetually angry.), frequently isolated, many times narcissistic and in many ways socially dysfunctional. also sometimes they feel left out or cheated by society and therefore seek to exact revenge on those who have caused their pain.
judas was greedy for money, lee harvey oswald was angry about cuba(supposedly anyway), manson was just plain nuts, the washington dc sniper and the seattle synagogue killer were angry muslims, and osama bin laden was offended by the west and its presence in the middle east(among other things). al gore feels betrayed by the bush administration, michael moore is angry at bush about 9/11, john stuart and colbert dont have what it takes to lead or run for office so they engage in childlike anger driven satire. none of the behavior is constructive its all destructive. nothing about democracy, debate, objective journalism, or the lefts dreaded concept - faith. its all about them and their perceived need to get back at all of us - to make us pay.
these Jokers all have the same thing in common they are on the outside, they don't want to participate in society in a constructive way, they want to bring things down and replace them with...better leadership? state control? carnage? anarchy? in many ways the Jokers sidekick clowns are the michael moores, the john stuarts, the colberts. self destructive, bitter, angry, envious, unwilling to participate in the real world all they can do is joke and mock and side with others who do the same. and todays real Joker, the real madman, is Osama Bin Laden - an angry, desperate irrational person who "just wants to see the world burn" who can't be reasoned with, negotiated with, or placated in anyway. remember nick berg i think, who had his head cut off on video? remember those US army soldiers who were captured and tortured by terrorists in iraq? remember daniel pearl? what madness Bin Laden has perpetuated.
no i take that back, Osama is history. his Al Qaeda crime organization has been stopped cold in Iraq. his plans for a caliphate have been thwarted and his desire to acquire nuclear weapons have been foiled. Gotham (AKA the west) will not burn by his command. it will come at the hands of that small man from Iran, mahmoud ahmadinejad, who like Napoleon has an inferiority complex and like hitler he hates the jews and the west. he is the real Joker of our times now and it remains to be seen if the world will burn because of him.
i think its up to us the civilized ones to try to build a society that upholds what is noble and good and gives everyone a fair chance at participating. its up to us who believe in western civ to uphold its values. to protect the weak, educate the ignorant, reform the criminal or punish him, and to maintain the laws that have allowed for free elections, a free economy, freedom of religion, and a free people. its up to us to root out corruption and deny the Jokers of this world an opportunity to strike at our way of life.
The Joker is a metaphor for terrorism(and unresolved anger) and he is very scary to watch. Lets see it as an incentive to do good.
i went to the friday night standing room only showing of Batman and came away satisfied for once that i paid so much for a movie ticket. although i had to put up with the usual goofy mothers bringing their infants and toddlers to a serious movie and the occasional numb nuts who flips his phone up to text his mom to tell her that hes having fun(note to the clueless: a glowing cell phone screen is just as annoying as a ring!!!!) the film was intense enough to make me forget the rest of the crowd was there in the theater - and thats an achievement.
heath ledger was of course brilliant, he definitely puts the crazy-get-back into the jokers character and makes other portrayals of the joker look pathetic and anemic. it really is to bad he had to die because i think he would have explored other roles with great intensity like the jokers and maybe even have wanted to do other characters or villains....but who knows. RIP. Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman(i heard his accent come out at one point i wonder if anyone else caught that), and Maggy Gyllenhaal all do great jobs as well but because of Ledgers performance and death i think most of it will be overshadowed.
the movie dives into several deep areas about life that you would think would be reserved for stage theater or a serious novel. how many films can you think of that touch on human nature and all of our competeing plans, terrorism, and game theory decisions? what choices would you make if each choice came with a cost? what do you do when life gets gray and no option looks good? how far do you go when confronting terrorism without sacrificing your own moral integrity?...these are some of the questions that the films raises i think.
i also came away fearful of terrorism, i know the director didnt intend for the film to be statement about the war on terror but there sure are strong parallels to be made, especially with the joker representing the irrationality of radical islam. it makes a person appreciate the sacrifices that have been made to protect our civilization from people who, "just want to see the world burn".
the dark knight was not without a dash of comic relief though. the joker at times is genuinely funny, especially seeing him dressed up like a nurse, man that was hilarious. and when he is being interrogated batman slams his head on the table...that brought chuckles to the whole audience. overall i give the film an A-. it could have earned a plus if it dared to show how dark things could actually get because i thought for sure that someone in the real world would have pushed the button on that detonator on the ferry. i think the director, nolan, was making a statement in that scene which wasn't wrong. there are people who do choose to do right. but on any given day you never know who might just have to make that decision and i guess that what game theory is about. google the 'prisoners dilema' thats a classic that will shed light on the ferry scene.
where on earth do we place this film? its darker than the hulk, deeper than spiderman, and more serious than ironman. its definitely close to the spirit of our times. this film would not have resonated prior to 9/11. i think it would have scared people away. but for some reason it just fits at this time in american history. 10 years from now what will people think of the dark knight? another 'dances with wolves' that people just kind of watch and scratch their heads? who knows, i think it will have a timelessness about it.
after serving in the same parish for 30 years father potts of Boston decided to start molesting boys in order to get transferred to another more dynamic parish in Los Angelo's. "I was tired of this congregation," said father potts. "every Sunday the same old lame people stuck in the 40's would show up. i mean come on, its a post Vatican 2 world. we need rock music not a return to the latin mass"
according to diocese records father potts applied for a transfer 8 times over a 15 year period and was turned down each time. cardinal walter who oversees all parish assignments said, "father potts needs to be content where he is at and stop romanticizing about other congregations. if the grass looks greener on the other side its because your not taking care of your own flock." in an exclusive interview with local a news station father potts was quoted as saying, "after molesting over 30 boys they finally approved my transfer. i now can go to California or Chicago. what a blessing"
ironically the catholic church has paid out an estimated 1 billion dollars over the past ten years in priest sex abuse cases including 35 million to clean up after father potts yet little has been done to rectify the transfer angst that exists with so many priests. "we are considering the matter very seriously," said cardinal walter. "we simply have to find a better way to transfer priests without it costing us so much money. father potts should have stated in his first letter that he was going to molest boys, then we could have transferred him right away."
irregardless with recent pronouncements by the Vatican that a 1 boy 1 transfer policy will be instituted by next year the problem of disgruntled priests feeling trapped in dying congregations in a dying faith may be solved.
the National Organization of Women (NOW) and the National Transgender League(NTL) have successfully filed suit in the 9th circuit court of California to have Hollywood remove all gender specific references from films including the scripts, screen titles, and dialogues. "We believe these films perpetuate misogynistic stereotypes and convey an ethos of female inferiority and thats why we have worked so hard to achieve what we have achieved this day" stated Betty Frigid of NOW. "We have suffered so much in this country and in a male dominated world. by eliminating these references in gender specific films we can change the way people think and eliminate prejudice against women worldwide."
Several Hollywood executives who did not want to be named have stated that fan favorites such as 'Spiderman', 'Superman' and the 'X-Men' will all be refilmed and rewritten in order to comply with what they believe will be more politically correct and gyno safe dialogue. According to one exec 'SpiderPerson 4' will be out in 2010 and 'SuperPerson Returns' will debut in the spring 2011. Some obstacles will have to be overcome though in order to release 'X-Persons' because it sounds so vague and no one is sure if anyone would actually go see a movie with that title. "Its important that creative freedom and movie goer preferences be subject to a small minority of people who are easily offended " , stated one Hollywood Producer "we have even considered making superman... i mean person, a transsexual because they are really super people."
Of major concern is the film 'Men In Black' or 'MIB' which would have to be changed to 'Persons In Black'. many on the Hollywood inside just don't think it would do well. some fear that the only thing to do in order to prevent the spread of patriarchal structures through portrayal of female inferiority by the use of gender specific terms such as 'men', 'male' and 'man' is simply to burn all films and scripts that have these terms. it has been rumored that 'MIB' s digital master has been deleted already and that all thats left is to collect the remaining copies and destroy them. "we must stamp out all that is offensive for the greater good" stated Frigid.
in response to NOW and the NTL and what will eventually be a supreme court victory an online underground of black market for 'gender specific' films has quietly formed and has marked over a million downloads of 'SpiderMan' with the old title still unerased just in the last month. and the United States Marine Corp has petitioned the president to keep "A few good men" as a slogan despite righteous indignation of an angry minority.
the recent success of Batman has also been very very problematic. with so many people going to see the movie no women have come forward to complain about the title. "It will be changed to 'Bat Person'," said Frigid angrily. "if you think im going to stand by while women are shamed liked this your all crazy."
im choosing to write about this because of the recent decision by the supreme court to allow people in Washington D.C. to own a firearm. several years ago i used to live in an average crime rate neighborhood. that is during the day anyway. for some reason at night the crime rate entered another bracket of local law enforcement statistics. over a five year period i had two different cars broken into for my stereo, a windshield shattered, and my apartment almost broken into(i was home and turned on the lights before they could enter). so i eventually purchased a handgun. a 9mm springfield with double safety's (one on the grip and one on the trigger) so the gun couldnt accidently go off if it dropped. i kept it loaded but not chambered and an extra clip loaded on the side as well. i felt good after buying it and would periodicly take it out to look over and hold.
i come from a gun family. several members are ex-mil and current NRA members and hunters. so guns aren't new to me. but owning one was. and i was surprised how easy it was to get one. i simply went to the gun store, picked the gun i thought i needed then, filled out some paperwork and then waited seven days. it cost about 500$ and i was able to bring it home. of course some people have to have a foid card and no criminal record whatsoever but that it. thats all i had to do. it surprised me. i remember thinking, "this just isn't right". two years later without firing a shot i unloaded the clips, returned the ammo and sold the gun back to a local gun store for about half what i paid for it.
i still respect gun owners and i like watching you-tube videos of people using guns. and on the holidays when the family is together the men will get together and talk guns and sometimes get one out to show everybody after the turkey has been eaten. and thats always cool to listen to. especially the old timers talking about shotguns. barrel lengths, shot patterns, and the good old days before lead was banned. but im just not ready to have a gun. i don't feel i should be able to own either even though i am qualified. im not going lib or pink i just feel that the bar should be set higher.
i think if i have to be 16 to drive - 18 to vote/enlist - 21 to drink - and 27 before my car insurance gives me break then i should have to be required to at least take an exam to get a license to own a gun. a FOID card is just a card it doesn't really mean anything and how many states have that as a requirement?. i should be required to take a written test on gun safety and a field test that requires proper firing and cleaning of a shotgun/rifle and handgun. simply not having a criminal record and waiting seven days is really not all that much of a hurdle. some states require a license to ride a motorcycle and ticket you if your not wearing a seat belt. why not require a gun license? it would increase knowledge about gun safety and foster responsible gun ownership. having a bunch of untrained people with loaded guns in their houses frankly is an accident waiting to happen.
for now ill still stick to shooting a paintball gun but in the future i might get a handgun for self defense. like a small 9mm with a 6 shot clip. but not until a take a safety class and practice at the range. there is enough people in my family to talk to and thats a big help but not everybody has my type of family. i think "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." should be contingent on being able to actually safely use those arms as was probably standard when the bill of rights was drafted.
in the third century B.C. Hannibal Barca, son of Hamilcar Barca, driven by hatred of Rome and devotion to his father, launched the 2nd Punic with Rome and made world and military history by traversing the alps with 45,000 men (including elephants) to invade Italy. After several initial battles on the Italian peninsula Hannibal faced at least 85,000 Romans(some historians believe it could have been more) at the battle of Cannae. Hannibal defeated them with a smaller force using advanced military tactics. For the next 9 years Hannibal would terrorize Italy, it's allies, and threaten Rome itself.
Fast forward to 9/11 2001. Osama Bin Laden, driven by hatred of America and devotion to jihadist islam launched an improbable yet highly successful attack against the United States, the psychological effect which is still being felt 7 years later. Like Hannibals invasion and his victory at Cannae, Bin Ladens attack was a strategic surprise in a new kind of warfare and created an emotional scar that caused fear and anger for revenge among many Americans. Although Bush may not be remembered in quite the same way as general Scipion he was the one who encouraged America to stay the course and not give in. And also to advance the idea that in order to rid oneself of a terrorist you have eliminate his power base and pursue him wherever he should flee. Although Hannibal is revered as a great general he was cast out of his homeland and spent the rest of his life on the run until he was driven to suicide in order to avoid Roman assassination. And like wise although Bin Laden is revered by many in the middle east his fate will follow that of history and despite damaging america in the end Bin Laden will only have made us a stronger nation, better prepared for an uncertain future.
