What's on your Brain. Objectivity affects what force, before Subjectivity is manifest?


World Trade Center : the Hollywood Movie pt. 3

Do you think that there is any significance to the fact that [i]Hollywood A-list[/i] actor, [b]Nicholas Cage[/b] is in both [b][i]World Trade Center[/i][/b] (Aug. 2006) and [i]Wickerman[/i] (Aug. 2006), and supporting [i]World Trade Center[/i] actor, [b]Maggie Gyllenhaal[/b], also has a forthcoming wide-release film to follow?

This probably will seem like a stretch, but perhaps this is a sign that the Hollywood [i]Box Office[/i] is being greatly impacted (more than they let on) by the quality of the modern home-theatre experience, and any consumer with the aptitude for the illicit distribution of popular media (such as pirated DVD's). Could it be that [i]Hollywood[/i] has stooped so low in edging moral indecency, that they should boost ticket sales by pushing a high-budget film, depicting on a political front, the most devastating massacre of United States civilians in history? Maybe my radar is off-center. Maybe it's not a question of ticket-sales to Hollywood film-makers, but the propagation of a political agenda.

"Political front!?", you question? Then, to you I would ask: Where is the Hollywood A-List film, completed in so little time and in such grande fashion, which chronicles the leveling of New Orleans by [i]Hurricane Katrina[/i]? What is the title of the film, and did it sell millions of tickets? Does it shame the victims, or is it a definitive account of American Heroism; of the People of New Orleans and those who came from miles beyond miles, called by nature to react in an [b]apolitical[/b] catastrophe, pulled together, and helped so many brothers and sisters, friends, neighbors, homeless and other nameless victims to weather the storm? Did you buy the DVD? Did you enjoy the alternate endings?

Which film is a testament to American Pride, and which will act as a Trojan Horse for its misdirection?
My biggest problem with [i]World Trade Center[/i], the film, is the way the Marketing genius slipped it into our homes, right under our noses-- deceptively, allowing little public debate over its production or National impact. Americans are encouraged to share opinion over the bane of Tom Cruise or Brittany Spears, yet the collective opinion of the American voice was hushed in the circumstance of [i]World Trade Center[/i].

[i][b]We, The People[/b][/i], so often afforded public venue to speak to our fellow man, so often weeks before rumors become fact, are encouraged to share opinion via televised news media, talk-shows and elsewhere, seem to have been deliberately robbed of our voice in this instance. I recall no discussion; no public opinion, and no time to think; to actually show support for, or put forth any opposition to the film. I know how much my neighbor loves or despises Paris Hilton, but I know nothing of whether he or she believes that the screening of [i]World Trade Center[/i] has come too soon, or at an inappropriate time.

is it a happy ending? what about all of the US Marines who are still in active duty, witnessing anything BUT a happy ending night after nght? which image do you really want in your mind to remind you of the attact we bore on our own soil on Sept 11, 2001-- do you want to picture the image of a hollywood actor, a happy ending, and niceties-- to help you brush it under the rug and shrug it off-- or do you want to remember your anger-- remember what was wrong about the deaths of so many innocent Americans, civilians, on Sept 11, 2001: men, women and children whose lives ended that day. are they being properly honored in the film? is your brother, or your aunt who died in active duty being honored by this film while it's solicitation, in theatres and soon to come, DVD, etc-- surely must line the pockets of "Hollywood". Which image do you want to remember when you pay $4 at the pump for fuel?

[b]Misdirection[/b] is the key to manipulation. [b]Misdirection[/b] is the tool of those who wish to fool, corrupt, and use others for the fulfillment of their own will.

Americans, and those who believe in Freedom of Choice:
If you're as unlucky as you can be-- if the worst possible thing could happen does happen-- and you eventually accept the fact that American quality of life, and American Freedom has not been affected by terrorism-- if you can sleep at night more easily because you've been misdirected into seeing a happy ending, then you have already kissed your Freedom goodbye, and the freedom of your sons and daughters.

The moment you stop caring about your own Freedom, and the Freedom of your fellow citizens; the moment you pay for its very exploitation in the Media is the moment when that much of the Freedom has been taken away from the Citizens of the United States of America, and from us all.

When the Trojan horse was viewed as a peaceful offering; when past strikes upon them were overlooked because of that artful misdirection, what was the outcome?

Filed under: Uncategorized No Comments

World Trade Center Part Two

My opinion on [URL=http://my.opera.com/jsabarese/blog/show.dml/373989]the forthcoming American Hollywood film, World Trade Center[/URL], has finally been further developed. I just noticed a moment ago only the second advertisement for the film since the first i saw, when i wrote [URL=http://my.opera.com/jsabarese/blog/show.dml/373989]my first entry on the subject[/URL] -- almost exactly one week ago today. It's that very time-lapse which helped me to see part of what bothers me about this film.

Okay, hear me out. Consider the following, and see what you think about it after doing so:
[*]We've got a film w/ Hollywood A-List actor, Nicholas Cage, coming out soon. Why aren't there advertisements all over about this film?
[*]Is there a particular reason why the approach to advertising the film has been rather low-key?
[*]Is the advertising approach a bit surpressed? (meaning-- is it only my imagination that the ads have been infrequent, or is it truly not in high-rotation?
[*]Assuming the ads are being supressed, why is there a recognition for a need to do so?

my own feelings on the matter are like this: if there's nothing wrong or offensive about this film, then why hide it? it reminds me of someone going, uninvited, to a party with the intent to cause trouble. then, only after denying his appearance was in fact to stir trouble, he proceeds to do so anyway! is there an analogy there?

sooner or later, i'll figure out how i feel about this, and have a much more easy time at writing about it. for now, it's just at that "it bothers me" stage, and i'm still not quite sure why-- so that's why my commentary on the matter may seem a bit disjointed and unclear.

Filed under: Uncategorized No Comments