When I listened to Shine On You Crazy Diamond, particularly the instrumental in the second half of the album, I could tell that Tool took a lot of inspiration from Pink Floyd. I mean it was already pretty obvious anyways, but that instrumental was borderline proof.
I was like "That's a Tool instrumental/build up if I've ever heard one"
Specifically starting about 15 seconds into this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur4J7hhhto8&list=PLfimnwaZdumgdg-BPofqK8h6cdkxIxe2H&index=5
Thanks, glad I could be of service!
The character the girl is allowed to pick.
There's the improved version
Thank you so much! It feels validating to be seen and heard. This whole journey has been like a Safari for me where I conquer the wild beasts that try to hunt me down. Safari of course being apple's built in browser bundled with their various apple products. It too values privacy, while also seamlessly integrating with the IOS and Mac ecosystem.
I don't write anything with AI. Even in the editing stage on my substack I edit the old fashioned way of reading my writing out loud and hearing how it sounds on the tongue and changing it accordingly so my human voice is retained. This is 100 times slower than asking AI to edit it. But a distinct human voice that doesn't get altered by AI subtly changing tone is important to me and should be important to everyone frankly.
I'd rather read a badly written article by a human than a "good article" by AI.
That said, you are correct. My hands are succumbing to the final stages of leprosy as we speak, but it was worth it
Thank you good sir!
Is this a Cape Fear reference? I don't understand
Also of course we all know diversity just means "not white".
An all black cast or an all mexican cast, you know 100% will be absolutely up for an award. Praised for it's "diversity" even.
Yeah don't get me wrong, there's plenty of movies I can go back to and love from that time period, but I just think the 2000s wasn't great as a time for "films". But 100% with the non-woke, non-"diverse" comedy movies that are just meant to be fun.
Waiting (2005) is like that for me where I can rewatch it and it feels totally like a time capsure. There's only one non-white guy in the entire movie. A single black guy who is the dishwasher. Edit: forgot it's got Luiz Gomez hispanic guy who's one of the chefs, so two out of the entire cast.
Also I may get crap for this, but I like the movie Employee of the Month starring Dane Cook. I know everyone's supposed to hate Dane Cook and I know Employee of the Month is objectively a movie made for 14 year olds, but it's just a feel good type comedy that they made back then that are really re-watchable in my opinion.
Also one of the greatest movies ever made in my opinion K-Pax is in the 2000s, 2001. K-Pax is a masterpiece I'd put in my top ten films of all time.
But yeah 2000s had better comedies than I gave them credit for at the time. In some ways 90s comedies, as much as I loved them, haven't aged as well as the 2000s comedies. Like Dumb and Dumber is still the greatest comedy of all time and it was 90s, but 2000s was way better for comedies than I gave it credit for back then; Step Brothers, Hot Rod, Waiting, Van Wilder, Just Friends.
A lot of those have aged better than a lot of the 90s comedies I loved.
To counter that, I'd say for the good examples you give, like Pirates and LotR, they still look horrible compared to the T-Rex CGI in Jurassic Park.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc_i5TKdmhs
2:13 in the video.
That's the best blatant CGI blending into the scene ever got and it was the early 90s.
In Lord of the Rings, the Mines of Morla where they're fighting that giant troll thing, it looks like a video game. Likewise for the Balrog.
Same with Pirates of the Carribean and the skeleton CGI scenes, not one movie has come close to blending CGI well with the overall look of the scene as Jurassic Park.
Which means that in order to use CGI effectively you need to be Steven Spielberg, put an inordinate amount of effort, time, money, artistry in it and apparently it's not worth it to do that as even a perfectionist like Peter Jackson who made background orcs have realistic chain-mail couldn't make the fight against that giant troll in the mines of morla look like it's not a video game.
Full disclosure I haven't watched to, or listened to this video. I just saw that the premise is "2000s movies looked good" and that's enough for me.
I consider myself a bit of a film guy. I was born in the early 90s, so I should have nostalgia for the 2000s films, right?
Well I mostly watched what we had recorded VHS tapes growing up, Neverending Story, Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones trilogy, etc.
So like any kid I'd watch and rewatch those movies. So around the time where I'm starting to use my head and observe, entering in my early teens and going to theaters I can tell that movies are different to the classics I'd watch and rewatch on tape, or older movies I'd see on cable.
CGI looked ugly to me, film looked more artificial.
I've always been able to tell CGI and it always pulled me out of the film. It's just too contrast-y with real footage that I don't know how people can be immersed by CGI effects.
Even stop motion effects are real physical objects being captured with the same cameras that capture the rest of the movie. My brain can accept a bad stop motion effect better than a good CGI effect easier because the stop motion effect is a physical object.
CGI it feels like a PS3 game just entered into the frame. I don't know how it's not immersion breaking for others.
Anyways I've always maintained the same opinion I had 20 years ago. The early 2000s were awful for movies (and haven't gotten any better, only worse) and awful for music (rock died in the early 2000s, everything started trending towards stuff like Coldplay and Justin Timberlake whereas 90s had Alice in Chains as a major band on the radio), but the early 2000s were great for video games.
That third opinion, the video game one is one I feel even moreso now in hindsight. I merely enjoyed video games not realizing how great they were in the early 2000s, whereas I could detect the real dropoff with film and music in the early 2000s.
To me, the 90s was the last good decade for film, not just in things like acting and scripts, and overall feel, but also how movies looked. I really don't think 2000s movies have that filmic look I love about 90s and earlier films. King Kong 2005 looks artificial and like people are doing all this post process color grading, and that was the standard. This color grade crap was a plague on film.
So to see 2000s films being praised for their visual style is pretty bad, and it's like yeah, if you judge anything from right now, it will look good, because modern movies are past the rubicon of even being considered films anymore. But that shouldn't be the standard. It'd be like praising Maroon 5, that pile of garbage, because they're not Cardi B.
That's what happens when your measurement is the modern day.
If you consider 2026 then yeah 2000s movies are masterpieces of visual intention.
If you consider every other decade the 2000s was a giant dive off the cliff visually.
The Warriors from 1979 has more visual interest than all the 2000s films put together, and it was mostly down to good looking film stock and good lighting decisions.
I've seen "racist cops" and "authoritarian cop" compilations and videos and 99% of the time it's standard police behavior.
Sometimes the videos will be cops dealing with one of those sovereign citizen types who hasn't committed a crime but is an extremely obnoxious smart-alec. The comments praise the guy as "standing up to the authoritarian pigs" who happened to be put off by his attitude, but if it were any other profession, nurses, restaurant workers, etc they'd tear the guy to shreds for the same intentional disagreeable-ness and needless oppositional attitude.
Those comments would say "nurses, waiters, plumbers etc have it hard enough without this guy making their day worse.
Well that applies to police too. They deal all day with people lying, giving attitude etc.
If you're innocent and get pulled over just be base level of civil and things will go easy instead of taking a highly obnoxious attitude.
Like I said Ive seen plenty of "look at these authoritarian cops" videos and for every 1 where it's like "yep that's a clear cut case of douchebags on a power trip" there's a hundred where the cops attitude would be totally different if the subject innocent or not didn't jump out the gate acting foolish.
Now I hate when cops enforce bullcrap like COVID mandates and other unconstitutional things.
But that's an issue of most people are a mix of not brave, and not critical thinkers and that problem is universal, not exclusive to police.
It is, but I'd argue it is because of Christianity. Had Christianity not been adopted by whites, rejected, but adopted by India for instance, whites would have stayed in the druid, viking sort of stage, while India would have advanced and elevated people. Christianity elevates people. Godlessness creates misery.
And the reason white people are on average more attractive is because when you have a prospering society like the west for the past centuries, you can start making more choices with mating.
In survival based societies where the pagan nature keeps it miserable, like India, a lot of breeding comes down to convenience, security, not attraction.
So while I accept the premise that white people are more exceptional in general, I give the credit to the West adopting Christianity and what that does to nations.
And while western nations were exceptional by worldly standards like Greece and Rome compared to the rest of the world before Christianity came, they were also filled with pedophilia and moral degeneracy and that's even when they were at their "peak" not just when they decayed. Egypt used to be the king of the crop in the world once upon a time, but they lost it, so I feel without Christianity, Greek and Rome and the West in general would have devolved into un-exceptionalism very quickly where the nation and people that adopted Christianity would be the most prosperous, most attractive, etc. Because again, when your society is so prosperous, more people can marry with looks being a higher factor.
If Western white countries didn't adopt Christianity and we were still in that struggling stage, white people would probably look a lot different and would be uglier.
Also in that hypothetical, the spiritual powers of the world attack the other nation and ethnic demographics that most accepted Christianity and elevate white people along with any other people that rejected Christianity because it's always been about attacking Christianity
But I see your point. Some large percentages of certain races may be envious and truly would want to throw away their identity to be white. A lot of the behavior seems like jealous behavior. There's no way to know for sure.
It's a cheeky reference to a netflix "we wuz kangs" type documentary where that line was in the trailer for it.
The fact that Cleopatra was Greek is historically overwhelming, but someone's black grandma told them otherwise, so case closed.
Likewise here this woman has enough self professed life evidence to question the narrative of "police oppress black people" but the universal trait of "police make me a bit nervous" means case closed.
I'll just copy paste what I said to someone when I posted this to the Donald. It goes beyond a race thing even.
I was thinking about the Chris Rock thing. It's an absurd thing because there's no white people I'd want to become either.
If I imagine being Elon Musk, I imagine having his money and power. I want to be ME but with his money and power.
I don't want to wake up and look like him, have his personality, etc. that's body horror losing your identity.
Sure id want to be where Chris Rock is financially, but I don't want to become a different person. I don't want to be any other race and I wouldn't expect an Asian would want to be white either.
It's weird to literally want to be someone else.
Like being 1980s Kurt Russell sounds cool, but do I really want to lose everything that is me to do it?
No, and I don't think there's many people who loathe themselves so much they'd trade everything about themselves for a different status. That's the plot of like Twilight zone horror, loss of identity.
So yeah, i wouldn't mind Chris Rocks money (although I don't want to be famous...that sounds like an exhausting curse) but I don't want to BE anyone else. Even the parts I don't like about myself are familiar to me. Being someone else is an existentially scary thought.
"The jewish dominance can only exist under continued optics of defence."
That's literally your quote
As far as my belief if the United States is the biggest player aka the main power in terms of countries, yes we are by a longshot.
Is Israel exacting the level of control the anti-Israel people claim they are?
My position is im highly skeptical of how Jews are portrayed as basically illuminati level of control and again when you're dealing with things like the illuminati, it would be by nature mostly hidden and what I'd say is too much is discounted and cherry picked to hold to the view of Jews being these uniquely evil puppet masters.
I've already explained a bit of why I find the arguments are less than rock solid and I'd either be repeating myself or making other points that people would ignore anyways.
You said this
They had a strategy of flying-under-radar that was remarkably successful, and put them in soft-to-hard control over just about everything except China and insignificant pockets of savages in the Middle East. All they had to do was keep reaping rewards, governing with a light touch, and don't get caught, and the gravy train has no end in sight.
And this
The jewish dominance can only exist under continued optics of defense. By their own actions, it's looking less and less, hourly, like defense, and more like power-mongering.
Is this not a statement of the viewpoint of Jewish control of the world?
My statements were a rebuttal of at least pre-supposing that this viewpoint is some infallible foregone conclusion.
The covenant literal restoration and repentance of the Jewish people as a nation began officially in 1689 as a codified belief as in officially named which you'll notice is about 100 years after the reformation meaning a generation got their hands on the Bible and could start interpreting it and seeing what it said rather than trusting the Catholic church's "just trust me" interpretations with only those who knew Latin reading it.
The foundations for believing in the Covenant return for Israel are Biblical based which is why both the church 100 or so removed from the twisted traditions of Catholicism, believed it, Paul believed it as inspired by divine revelation, and Charles Spurgeon believed it as did the Bible first evangelicals as they're called (as though evangalizing the good news is a bad thing) of the 20th century also believed it.
It's today in our increasingly pagan nation where people are rejecting the Bible as the literal capital T truth to look to in order to discern truth that people are going back to other ways to discern truth which ultimately leads to adopting aspects of the world systems belief, which includes wanting to eliminate Jews and Israel something foreign to the Bible.
Not foreign in certain branches of Christianity, but certainly foreign to the Bible.
Charles Spurgeon believed in the dispensationalist view of Israel and the Jews in the 1800s before Israel even became a nation again.
He believed Israel would become a literal nation which would precede Christ's return.
Don't take my word for it. Ask AI what Charles Spurgeons beliefs were, whether he prescribed to replacement theology or dispensationalism?
Pretty sure he was before the 1970s.
Your worldview assumes Jewish dominance and assumes the ideas put forth about who controls the world and how everything is controlled by Israel and Jews. You have to assume that premise in order to say as fact that them ignoring the optics is them losing their "shield" or "defense". They get attacked always and for everything. Just like white people can't win, Jews can't win, so I don't accept the premise.
When liberals assumed that white men are the reason the world sucks, and white people are inherently privileged, they would equally view a white person disregarding the label of racist as foolish for the same reasons you say to the Jew. Just as you know full well that the liberal framing about white men is bullcrap and it's used to justify all manner of evil (punch a nazi where anyone we decide is a nazi), what if you're wrong about the presupposition about Jewish cabalistic control?
Nearly every circular easy reasoning about an "it group" turns out to be wrong, and great evil is perpetuated in the pursuit of this wrong.
Most of the world is far more complex than "this is the group that's responsible for the problems".
The accusations against Jews are by their nature hidden, so any sort of radical call like a "final solution" are heinous because it puts solidifies assumptions which can't be solidified.
Arguments about the Jews nature and role in the world are like views about the illumanit. They are by nature too hidden to have much confidence in them.
People leaping to assuming they're just better observers than others and KNOW Jews are this way or that way and are the cause of this and that in the world and if we just did solution X then we'd have outcome Y are a bit arrogant in my opinion.
I'll take a group we absolutely can observe, the black community. No mystery or hidden nature there at all. They're open about their problems, even brag about them.
What do you do about the black community?
Commit genoicde against them? That's evil. If you're just a pragmatist and don't care about good and evil, then you'll face God's judgement when it comes to that.
Many people have thought about how to fix the black community and we're all left scratching our heads. It's easier said than done. We know the solution is for them to adopt personal responsibility and do the three or so things needed for self improvement, but you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Barring them not holding themselves accountable we say make society stop coddling them, and make society just as tough on them as anyone else.
Ok, how do you do that? You can't is the answer.
So the problem with the black community remains and the only thing you can do is point out the problems and hope little by little the message gets across.
The problem with Jews though is they're not so easily diagnosible.
The black community is highly collectivist.
Jews are collectivist but in a very different way. A liberal secular Jew will be miles different than an orthodox Jew.
And that difference will be different in America than in Israel.
With black community, people who break the mold are outliers. But with Jews, there's no solid "this is what a Jew is and acts like".
So codifiying a single belief about them as a whole is difficult for the same reason it's difficult to codify a belief about white people. Too much variance, too many factors.
It's a ball and cup game with Jews. When you want to point to Jews being globalists, you point to secular atheistic woke Jews with power in America, ignoring that they are often anti-Israel, anti-Zionist. The same Jew led studios that push wokeness, also push pro Palestine sympathies. They are very different than orthodox Jews who tend to be more conservative. The reason powerful Jews are liberal is because they're powerful. All powerful people succumb to liberalness given enough time. It's why the big Christian bands like Newsboys or DC Talk end up leaning towards woke Christianity because money and power corrupts. You want a theologically sound Christian band? Look to a local band who hasn't made it yet.
The same corrupting power towards Christian artists who are rich and famous is the same corrupting power on secular Jews.
But just like DC Talk and Newsboys is not a good representative of Christians as the average Christian does not lean towards woke Christianity, the powerful Jews don't represent the average Jew very well.
And the Jews in Israel don't have very good analogue match up to American Jews either.
The point is, they're not very easy to be codified as the source of all the worlds problems, and most of the accusations are cherry picked and involve ball and cup shifting on who represents Jewishness vs who selectively doesn't.
White people got to a point where we stopped apologizing when being called racist.
They are scared because they're a small percent of the world and feel they have no allies. So they try to clamp down on it because they fear they are going to be eradicated.
As a Christian I know their fear is unfounded that they will not be eradicated, but they do not possess the Holy Spirit and have to think through the worlds eyes and in the worlds eyes it's through their own will and attempts to sustain themselves and in that light their fear is well founded and their attempts at self preservation are logical.
With white people, there's no prophecy that we will be around, so when globalists try to eradicate us with demographic genocide we can assume it will happen as we have no prophetic protection.
Jews, I know, as a Christian, will be around despite the worlds attempts to eradicate them.
But the point is, you see how white people have stopped being quiet and started saying "screw you if you're anti-white, and I'm going to start calling out strong anti-white stuff I see in commercials, and elsewhere".
Why do you begrudge the Jews for doing the same when pro-Islamic nations that want to eradicate them is ubiquitous among places like the UN/EU, Middle East, China, etc. Even the US tends to shrink their border rather than expand them. And among the US, they find liberals always side with "palestine" and the right is increasingly anti-Jew so yeah, I should expect them to be more on the attack in their attitude, for the same reason when people celebrate white people will be "extinct by 20xx" and people applaud that, white people are right to start openly attacking that attitude and stop caring about being called racist.
Likewise with the rising attitude of wanting to see Jews eliminated, I don't begrudge the Jews becoming less concerned about the optics of going against the smears and more concerned about the attack against their people.
The Jews see it will only take one hyper liberal to get in as president, or a dissident right to get in, and America, one of their few supporters, will also go away.
So of course they're worried
I don't want any group to be eradicated, not white, not black, not Jew. I want certain beliefs to be eradicated, such as Islam, wokeness, communism, etc.
But to wish any group to be eradicated is to invite them to rightfully want to defend themselves.
First of all, this guy with the swastika probably gets a similar reaction from non-Jewish liberals all the time. If I wore a swatsika openly, I'd always be on edge assuming people would be in confrontation mode with me and since Jews are like 2-3% of the population, I wouldn't assume most of the confrontation would come from Jews.
I'd assume black people would react to me that way, white liberals, or any other form of liberals.
If I wore a shirt saying for women to get back in the kitchen I imagine I'd have some triggered feminists yelling at me.
If I had a shirt saying "Fent Floyd" or something I imagine I'd have reactions similar to the Jewish guy's reaction here.
If anyone of any race wore a shirt mocking that Ukranian girl who got stabbed on the bus, I'd imagine many people, white and otherwise would tear into them.
Having a swatzika will elicit a pavlovian reaction from many groups, this just happens to be a capturing of a Jew reacting to it. I promise that swatzika guy, he gets reactions all the time from liberals in general.
By the way, I think being offended by a Swatzika is retarded. I'm defending against the uniqueness of this as if this is a Jewish thing, and merely pointing out that tons of people get pavlovian-ally triggered by things, but also saying that I don't give a crap about the Holocaust. When something is nearly 100 years ago, you have to stop caring about it. It'd be like the Irish still whining about being persecuted by the English. It's absurd and I'd tell Jews to drop the victim mindset like I tell all people to drop the victim mindset.
But I'm pointing out here that this video is not some "gotcha" in favor of the Jew haters.
Pavlovian reactions are universal and easy to fall into based on how you were taught. Have we forgotten that wearing a MAGA red hat would get tons of people attacked, barred from restaurants, and who was doing that? Leftists generally, usually white liberals.
So yeah, a Jew is ranting about a guy with Swatzika tattoos? And? This is pretty universal behavior seen across all groups.
I'd tell the Jewish guy to stop caring about the Holocaust just like I'd tell black people to stop caring about slavery, but again this isn't some "look how they are" case against Jews. You're just as likely to get verbally ripped apart by liberals for wearing a MAGA hat as a guy with a Swatzika tattoo is.
Who's version?