You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#3201 Re: Guns N' Roses » Axl Rose on India » 702 weeks ago
It's better to say nothing and release something!
#3202 Re: The Sunset Strip » The "real" box office » 702 weeks ago
Dude, downloading, wide screens and dvd's were not around in 1997 
(Yes, we have become that old!). Least not enough to have any measurable effects.
Impressive sure, but not out of the ordinary.
Avatar is more surprising. Not just because of everything you said, but because it's such a shitty movie.
#3203 Re: The Garden » World War I » 702 weeks ago
League of Nations was the precursor to the UN, and that was created as a response to WW1. The reason it failed was because the US didn't want to become a member.
The only reason?
It was doomed to fail from the start with or without US participation.
Not the only reason, the main reason. And it might have been doomed to fail, but without WW1 even attempting it was an impossibility.
Off topic, but its funny how the world hates the US interfering in its affairs but when something doesn't go as planned without US involvement, they're blamed for it.
*Trying to think of a major conflict without US participation*
IMO its natural for the world to want to unite after a global conflict. What's the other option....more war? I just don't think there's a conspiracy behind it. If there was, it was a terribly planned one. The UN has a horrific track record and usually makes conflicts worse.
Considering it took 3 world wars for it to happen, I don't know. Either way nukes changed that so now we just bomb countries that don't have them instead. The US and NATO have invaded quite a few countries since 1945, and initially the public support was usually there.
The track record is horrible yes, it is a bloated bureaucracy after all. But terribly planned? Your own defense secretary admitted not long ago that NATO and the UN now decide when the US goes to war. Of course that's simplifying things. The decision to go to war isn't really made at NATO or the UN, but it certainly isn't made in Congress either. That's a huge change.
France and Britain lost their empire.
Countries that overextend themselves to that point deserve to lose it.
They weren't overextended, they fought 3 huge wars without any real gains. Brittain just recently paid off their WW1 debts.
German nationalism got obliterated.
Hmmm.....I wonder why?
Because rich industrialists in the west funded the political ascent of a deranged radical. It's easy to blame Hitler but guys like him had always been around, they'd just not been allowed in the political arena until then.
The US and Russia became ideological empires both amassing unprecedented military machines. Today they are both debt ridden, secular and fascist entities.
I think the US and Russia are civilization's last two empires. I cant imagine the EU, China, an emerging power in Africa, or a united Middle East(new Ottoman Empire) taking their place. Even if the US and Russia both suffered a depression, no one can step into the breech because as you pointed out, the military deterrent is simply too massive.
Yep and that's the point. With no nations left to withstand it, enter world government. Mission accomplished.
Back to WWI....
Should the US have entered this conflict earlier? Learned something last night that I didn't remember. In the early stages of the war, Germany considered bombing the Panama Canal and taking it to control the shipping lanes. Another plan scrapped earlier than that was bombing the east coast of the US. Would US intervention over such a threat have altered the war due to intimidation alone? How many enemies could Germany have endured that early in the conflict? Another moment of entry for the US would have been when Germany and the British were battling near the Falklands. I realize the US was not a major military power at that early on, but even a token force may have altered the outcome.
Not by intimidation alone. Though with a great production potential the US was not a huge power at the time. Their participation would surely tip the scales in the Ententes favor, but there's no way the Germans would leave the trenches at that point. The war might have ended sooner, but the cost of life and materials would probably not be much different. Possibly greater as rookie US troops try and storm hardened German defense lines (as they eventually did, and it wasn't pretty).
They should have stayed out of it altogether. The outcome of the war would have little to no effect on US domestic affairs. Nor was Germany the aggressor or any form of "evil empire" in that war. It was just a continental squabble for dominance provoked forth by external reasons, not by any design from a particular nation or leader.
Another question....
Would the European powers abandoning their African colonies and instead focused on their own turf have made any difference, or would this simply have created a massive vacuum for the Ottoman Empire to expand even further? That Armenian genocide is without a doubt the most evil event of WWI and if Flagg reads this thread......yeah this "chicken hawk" would have entered the conflict much sooner.
The Ottoman's were dead at this point, the war itself being the final blow to their empire. If they had survived, going to war with Brittain or Germany by seizing their colonies would surely not have been the first thing on their minds.
We did mop up duty and brought the horror to an end. Had the US never entered the conflict, those trenches the size of the Great Wall of China would still be there, filled, and in a stalemate.
So yeah....we had an influence on the outcome of the war.
If the US stays out likely Germany wins the war when France surrenders and Brittain sues for peace. This would probably not take very long either. Discipline in the french army was hanging by a thread in the final days of the war. If any part of the line had cracked the whole thing would have went down like a house of cards.
I'd say whoever pulled the coup in Berlin is the most responsible for ending the war, although that situation was largely precipitated on the US involvement in the war.
#3204 Re: The Sunset Strip » The "real" box office » 702 weeks ago
Lucas and Spielberg have 8 movies on that list.
The record is actually 73 years old. Goes to show how big cinema was in the golden age.
#3205 The Sunset Strip » The "real" box office » 702 weeks ago
- polluxlm
- Replies: 18
Adjusted for ticket inflation, numbers in $ billions.
1: Gone With The Wind 1.6
2: Star Wars 1.4
3: The Sound of Music 1.1
4: E.T. 1.1
5: Titanic 1.0
6: The Ten Commandments 1.0
7: Jaws 1.0
8: Doctor Zhivago 0.98
9: The Exorcist 0.88
10: Snow White 0.87
11: 101 Dalmatians 0.79
12: Star Wars - The Empire Strikes Back 0.78
13: Ben-Hur 0.78
14: Avatar 0.77
15: Star Wars - Return Of The Jedi 0.75
16: Star Wars - The Phantom Menace 0.72
17: The Sting 0.71
18: The Lion King 0.71
19: Indiana Jones - Raiders Of The Lost Ark 0.7
20: Jurassic Park 0.68
#3206 Re: The Garden » World War I » 702 weeks ago
Some of those points valid, but I think you're really reaching on a conspiracy to create the UN and NATO being a reason behind the war....especially since neither occurred until over 20 years later. The dysfunctional relationship between the US and Soviets in the final days of WWII led to those entities.
League of Nations was the precursor to the UN, and that was created as a response to WW1. The reason it failed was because the US didn't want to become a member. If you go back to the Vienna Congress in 1816 you'll see they're talking about the very same thing (in response to the Napoleonic Wars). Coincidence? I think not.
Wilson became a repenting man in his later years and he too talks about these issues quite frankly in his bio.
If you go deep enough you'll see that all these world wars have been fought between protestant and orthodox countries. The result? France and Britain lost their empire. German nationalism got obliterated. The US and Russia became ideological empires both amassing unprecedented military machines. Today they are both debt ridden, secular and fascist entities.
Meanwhile UN policies are forcing millions of catholic and muslim immigrants over western borders. First by bombing their country and making them refugees, then forcing the rich countries to accept them because of human rights. The Caesar emblem on their logo would be proud.
With that I realize we've blown the weirdometer for the day. Carry on. 
#3207 Re: The Sunset Strip » Most Recent Movie You've Seen » 702 weeks ago
Marie Antoinette
It was alright. Mostly for its portrayal of court life at the twilight of Versailles and the Bourbon dynasty. Using modern music in a period film always catches some flack, but I think it worked. And I always like to watch Kirsten Dunst.
Problem is it really doesn't go anywhere. At the end you're left asking yourself, "and?".
Lawless
Hillcoat is always worth a watch. With Tom Hardy and Jessica Chastain in the cast too it's pretty much a must watch. Good characters, nice photography and decent pacing. Not spectacular, but good enough.
End Of Watch
Another corrupt cop movie from David Ayer. The shaky cam is taken to extreme lengths here, very tiring on the eyes. And Jake Gyllenhaal better hope he never goes bald in real life. Apart from that it's a good ride. Two beat cops bust a couple of drug outfits by accident. When it turns out they belong to the Sinaloa Cartel things get rough.
A fairly realistic portrayal of regular cops, though amped up for dramatic purposes, and some subtext implicating the Feds in the drug war.
Men In Black 3
Meh.
John Carter
I can see why it was a bomb, but actually a decent film. I liked it a lot.
The Dreamers
Didn't really watch it. Eva Green takes her cloths off, a lot. The film itself didn't look all that exciting.
El Narco
Mexican film about the effects of the drug war in Mexico. It's a dark and satirical take on the situation, made as a response to the national centennial.
We follow "Benny". A former emigrant who has returned home after 20 years in America. His brother has been killed and he feels he's forced to join the drug trade to make a living.
Definitely worth a watch if you can find a version with the rights subs.
#3208 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » Chris Cornell: "Guns N 'Roses were all normal types minus one" » 702 weeks ago
Axl had a tale that if a bunch of young guys have a car together, than all of them wants to have the wheel, but none wants to take care of the needed repair, so it will be driven off the cliff. So one has to own it and there is only one who can have the wheel. Congratulations Axl, you got it. Your buddies all escaped, seeing your driving (leading) skills. And you really drove it off the cliff.
#3209 Re: The Garden » There Are Over 200 Bodies on Mount Everest » 702 weeks ago
polluxlm wrote:Me_Wise_Magic wrote:Pretty crazy. You would think after seeing so many dead bodies up there that people would know what they are doing is ridiculous and foolish.
Yeah, that's what I always say when I walk past the cemetery.
I didn't mean for my post to be directed in that way. Feel free to delete if you guys took it the wrong way. I apologize.
No, not at all. Just saying a lot of things are dangerous, including life itself. I can think of worse places to die than at the top of Mount Everest.
And 200 sounds like a lot, but you'll still make it 99 times out of a 100.
#3210 Re: The Garden » There Are Over 200 Bodies on Mount Everest » 702 weeks ago
Pretty crazy. You would think after seeing so many dead bodies up there that people would know what they are doing is ridiculous and foolish.
Yeah, that's what I always say when I walk past the cemetery.
