- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/13/11 at 1:34 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
It might help you if you could type out all your anger you have, direct it at me if you would like.
Not anger, I do most things on here in jest.
quote:
Get it out here. What troubles you?
Sure. I like discussions on the Bible. I dont know if you do it anymore but on the OT you had nightly discussion on it trying to finish it in a year. I repect that; I dont go to the OT much so I didnt join.
My thing is your reviews/movies you watch, contradict your holier than thou attitude. Contradict what the Bible says. Now im imperfect just like every human and I have plenty of faults, but I dont go around here like im the board minister making everything or in your case every review spiritual.
For instance all the R rated movies you see/review. Psalms says that God judges the righteous and the unrighteous and "anyone loving violence he hates." Why do you watch movies then that can engender traits in someone that that God hates? Love of violence, sex etc. Eph. 5:3 says something like "let fornicationa and uncleaness and greediness not even be mentioned among you." Yet half of the stuff you watch and rate highly focus on all those things. Violence, killing and sex oriented movies. I cant think of a scripture but what about movies invovling demons/wizards and the like... Just dont see how you justify those given the attitude/lifestyle you project to everyone. Quoting your reviews I saw how you mentioned Tree of Life being a gift from God or something. Really?
As far as your reviews in general... Not everything has to be philisophical. Nobody wants the philisophical review of Smurfs 3D. Honestly. Just write a normal review not trying to sound smarter than everybody every time you do one.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 12/13/11 at 1:51 pm to iwyLSUiwy
The Daily Bible Study Thread is ongoing. We are in the middle of Job now. Here is The DBST Reference Thread for past studies, if you'd like to catch up.
How can a Christian find justification in watching movies that have violent or sexual themes? That's a very good question and is a modern example of a debate that has always been present in the Church. We are called to be holy, but as Paul says, "Do not conform to the patterns of this world" (Rom 12). But we are also called to be active servants and teachers in this world. How does one teach without understanding the language of his students? To paraphrase Jesus, we are to be in the world but not of the world (John 17). We are not called to be removed from the world, to set ourselves aside as a piece of fine china only to be used at special dinners. We are to be out, experiencing the world, witnessing to the miracle that is the grace of God-became-flesh. Along the way, we will experience things that are entirely of this world. For instance, watching violent movies is such a thing, but we have the freedom to watch them through Christian eyes. And it is through those eyes that I critique movies. Unlike many reviewers, I do not try to hide my bias. Indeed, my Christian bias is what informs my worldview and how I see everything. Nothing makes sense to me without that worldview. Being Christian, though, is not being given a prohibition from participating in the world. Being Christian is to be called into the world, to experience it fully, while not accepting what the world offers as truth without questioning it and judging it against what Christ teaches. Christians, IMO, would do their calling much more justice to be involved in the world in all its greatness and all its failings, and specifically here, in critiquing art through the lens of faith.
How can a Christian find justification in watching movies that have violent or sexual themes? That's a very good question and is a modern example of a debate that has always been present in the Church. We are called to be holy, but as Paul says, "Do not conform to the patterns of this world" (Rom 12). But we are also called to be active servants and teachers in this world. How does one teach without understanding the language of his students? To paraphrase Jesus, we are to be in the world but not of the world (John 17). We are not called to be removed from the world, to set ourselves aside as a piece of fine china only to be used at special dinners. We are to be out, experiencing the world, witnessing to the miracle that is the grace of God-became-flesh. Along the way, we will experience things that are entirely of this world. For instance, watching violent movies is such a thing, but we have the freedom to watch them through Christian eyes. And it is through those eyes that I critique movies. Unlike many reviewers, I do not try to hide my bias. Indeed, my Christian bias is what informs my worldview and how I see everything. Nothing makes sense to me without that worldview. Being Christian, though, is not being given a prohibition from participating in the world. Being Christian is to be called into the world, to experience it fully, while not accepting what the world offers as truth without questioning it and judging it against what Christ teaches. Christians, IMO, would do their calling much more justice to be involved in the world in all its greatness and all its failings, and specifically here, in critiquing art through the lens of faith.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 1:55 pm
Posted on 12/13/11 at 2:00 pm to iwyLSUiwy
keep that religious nonsense in the OT. 
Posted on 12/13/11 at 2:02 pm to fouldeliverer
Posted on 12/13/11 at 2:13 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:tulane, i try to be as nice as i can to you for the most part, but if you don't stop with the arts board talk, i might pay some guys to cut off your fingers
We are on The Arts Board to share our thoughts
Posted on 12/13/11 at 3:10 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
. We are called to be holy, but as Paul says, "Do not conform to the patterns of this world" (Rom 12). But we are also called to be active servants and teachers in this world. How does one teach without understanding the language of his students? To paraphrase Jesus, we are to be in the world but not of the world (John 17).
It does not take movies to undertand the language of students. That really cant be debated. Jesus later says in that chaper in v. 16, "they are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world". Meaning that he wasnt involved in all the things that were bad, that the world considered to be normal and acceptable. Same for us, loving violence, sex, etc. is all common and acceptable. We cant conform to the worlds standards and its ratings and what it views as acceptable but rather base it off what the Bible considers right.
quote:
Being Christian, though, is not being given a prohibition from participating in the world. Being Christian is to be called into the world, to experience it fully, while not accepting what the world offers as truth without questioning it and judging it against what Christ teaches.
Experiencing the world fully goes completely against what the Bible teaches. Like i've said, im not trying to act like im perfect but I dont go around acting like im Jesus' right hand man. You practice abstinence I think you've said before. So you obey that part of the Bible, but nake exceptions to other parts, like...
quote:
Along the way, we will experience things that are entirely of this world. For instance, watching violent movies is such a thing
quote:
Christians, IMO, would do their calling much more justice to be involved in the world in all its greatness
Completely opposite of Jesus' guidance in John.
No comment about my critique of your actual reiews?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 3:14 pm to fouldeliverer
quote:
keep that religious nonsense in the OT
Sorry, ive never been in a religious debate ever on TD. Its hard not too though with Tulane. I was trying to direct it towards his movie reviews bc they are very religious even when they dont need to be imo.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 7:33 pm to iwyLSUiwy
Experiencing the world fully is exactly what is prescribed in the Bible. To live life and live it fully, that is one reason why Jesus came. Life abundant, as he says. Does that mean we should revel in the things that corrupt the good life? No. But we should not turn into monastics who shun the world and the physical. To do so would be to turn Christianity into Gnosticism, and Jesus did not do that. Jesus came to redeem body and spirit, so that we might be raised to new life, body and spirit, just as Jesus was. A Christian should love and do as they will, in accordance to John. Christians are called to be in the world but not of the world. To watch movies is to be in the world. To critique those movies using faith and reason is to be not of the world. I strongly believe it is part of a Christian's calling to be in this world, experiencing culture, and critiquing that culture, as I do in the movie reviews. There is much benefit and good in some of the movies many Christians would never want to watch. As the author of Genesis writes, "What they ended for evil, God intended for good." Also, there is much that is wrong in explicitly "christian" movies. These things, especially, must be brought to light.
As for movies not being about philosophy, that is incorrect and too narrow a view of philosophy. Every movie has a philosophy, a world view, if you will, and it is important that the viewer see this. From Smurfs to Tree of Life to Twilight, each film has a philosophy that the director wants, at least partially, to impart on the audience. Contemporary philosophy, which often bogs down in jargon, is not indicative of classical philosophy or the very definition of philosophy, so I can understand why you might think bringing philosophy into reviews and dissecting the philosophies of even bad films may seem unusual. But rest assured, it is important to do. Every song, every show, every film, every piece of culture imparts a philosophy. If we act like it doesn't we open ourselves to the possibility of being manipulated, brainwashed, if you will.
As for movies not being about philosophy, that is incorrect and too narrow a view of philosophy. Every movie has a philosophy, a world view, if you will, and it is important that the viewer see this. From Smurfs to Tree of Life to Twilight, each film has a philosophy that the director wants, at least partially, to impart on the audience. Contemporary philosophy, which often bogs down in jargon, is not indicative of classical philosophy or the very definition of philosophy, so I can understand why you might think bringing philosophy into reviews and dissecting the philosophies of even bad films may seem unusual. But rest assured, it is important to do. Every song, every show, every film, every piece of culture imparts a philosophy. If we act like it doesn't we open ourselves to the possibility of being manipulated, brainwashed, if you will.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 12/16/11 at 4:14 pm to TulaneLSU
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol - My mind is not as fleet as it once was, so I cannot remember who said it, but I like this quote: "It is the nature of man to rise to greatness if greatness is expected of him." Was it Walker Percy? Or John Steinbeck? Regardless, I like it because it is true. The more we expect from someone, the more they will achieve. The converse is true, usually, as well. This philosophy can be taken to extremes. Consider Todd Marinovich or any failed pre-med who throws away her life because she could not meet her expectations. The converse of that axiom is true in Hollywood. If we expect and accept garbage, we will receive garbage. Tom Cruise knows that, and he and others like him have made careers giving audiences with low standards exactly what they want.
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol adds to an already sprawling landfill that grows larger by the week. Let's hope they can make something happen with River Birch. If not, where will all the refuse go? Despite the bloody intro, I have to admit, I thought to myself, "This is going to be a fun movie. Enjoy it for what it is." And I thought I would. But somewhere along the way, I realized I had seen this movie before. Not once, or twice, but many times. International espionage. Stolen codes to Soviet nukes. A terrorist. A good guy. A race to stop a nuclear holocaust. I think half the action movies in the 80s and early 90s had the same plot. Sorry, but did I just spend $10 for a matinee on this? Yes, thanks to IMAX, I did.
The action shots are good, but the most impressive part is the opening overview of the city. Those shots are amazing, but the movie is downhill from there. Kids will love the BMW. Adult males with penis fixations will adore the Dubai highrise. In fact, I almost want to say this movie is an infomercial for that building. The 80s nuke plot is just window dressing. All in all, and I will make this quick, I thought it was typical blockbuster Hollywood garbage. Violence, explosions that are supposed to bring back memories of the WTC, and fancy gadgetry, and futuristic cars. With a romance story forced on us for goodness' sake. Bringing shame on us all, this movie will make hundreds of millions, and convince Hollywood to drop off more trash in the landfill that has become the American mind. 2/10
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol adds to an already sprawling landfill that grows larger by the week. Let's hope they can make something happen with River Birch. If not, where will all the refuse go? Despite the bloody intro, I have to admit, I thought to myself, "This is going to be a fun movie. Enjoy it for what it is." And I thought I would. But somewhere along the way, I realized I had seen this movie before. Not once, or twice, but many times. International espionage. Stolen codes to Soviet nukes. A terrorist. A good guy. A race to stop a nuclear holocaust. I think half the action movies in the 80s and early 90s had the same plot. Sorry, but did I just spend $10 for a matinee on this? Yes, thanks to IMAX, I did.
The action shots are good, but the most impressive part is the opening overview of the city. Those shots are amazing, but the movie is downhill from there. Kids will love the BMW. Adult males with penis fixations will adore the Dubai highrise. In fact, I almost want to say this movie is an infomercial for that building. The 80s nuke plot is just window dressing. All in all, and I will make this quick, I thought it was typical blockbuster Hollywood garbage. Violence, explosions that are supposed to bring back memories of the WTC, and fancy gadgetry, and futuristic cars. With a romance story forced on us for goodness' sake. Bringing shame on us all, this movie will make hundreds of millions, and convince Hollywood to drop off more trash in the landfill that has become the American mind. 2/10
Posted on 12/16/11 at 4:22 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
Kids will love the BMW.
quote:these statements made me
Adult males with penis fixations will adore the Dubai highrise.
quote:why would you think this?
Violence, explosions that are supposed to bring back memories of the WTC
Posted on 12/16/11 at 4:29 pm to Flair Chops
Currently at 94% on RT (102 fresh, 6 rotten). Not saying Tulane has to go with the majority, but I knew as soon as I saw the 2/10 score that it was going to have pretty good ratings. Say what you will about Cruise but he doesn't typically do bad movies.
Posted on 12/16/11 at 4:34 pm to THRILLHO
The last three films I've seen that have starred Tom Cruise:
Mission Impossible
Knight and Day
War of the Worlds
Tom Cruise, IMO, has become to action films what Adam Sandler is to comedy films.
Mission Impossible
Knight and Day
War of the Worlds
Tom Cruise, IMO, has become to action films what Adam Sandler is to comedy films.
Posted on 12/16/11 at 5:55 pm to TulaneLSU
I use this thread to figure out what to watch and go the opposite of what Tulane says.
Posted on 12/16/11 at 7:16 pm to THRILLHO
I havent liked a Tom Cruise movie in a while. Collateral was probably the last one.
Posted on 12/16/11 at 10:46 pm to TulaneLSU
Posted on 12/16/11 at 10:55 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol... I realized I had seen this movie before. Not once, or twice, but many times. International espionage. Stolen codes to Soviet nukes. A terrorist. A good guy. A race to stop a nuclear holocaust. I think half the action movies in the 80s and early 90s had the same plot.2/10
Yeah, no shite. Now grade the movie as the
entertainment it's intended to be.
Posted on 12/16/11 at 11:31 pm to nino2469
quote:
I use this thread to figure out what to watch and go the opposite of what Tulane says.
Same here. But not for all movies of course.
Tulane really puts too much energy in the movies he watches. And I agree with the point that his reviews has a religious overtone to it.
When he watches a movie, he should watch it as what it is supposed to be..... Entertainment that is not reality at all. The movies are an escape from the real world and he should take advantage of that.
He also really needs to STFU about the arts board thing too. I hate that name. What does he think this board is, The Louvre in paris?
I appreciate the energy he puts into TD but he really needs to mellow out and just be a normal TD poster. And he needs to stop talking like he's a rhodes scholar or something. It's annoying.
Going to see Mission Impossible this weekend with my dad and brother. Tulane's review pretty much iced it for me. It's going to be great.
Posted on 12/21/11 at 3:15 pm to TulaneLSU
The Adventures of Tintin I'm not a fan of many things English. The English have been plundering the world for centuries, taking nations and enchaining people with their despotic hegemony. The English pillaging continues today through multinational corporations, and sadly, Americans have adopted a similar corporal colonialism where the modus operandi is invest, do no work, take advantage of those who have no power, and profit. Somewhere along the way, English superiority of the seas transferred to English superiority of literature. Americans think that if it comes from England or has an English accent, it's somehow better. Look at Hollywood's obsession with giving everything in a foreign language an English accent - you see it from Disney movies to Lord of the Rings to Batman's butler. What's wrong with America?, one asks. And what makes England so great?
Nothing in my opinion, and there's not much great that comes from Tintin. From the trailer, one would think that the "greatest storytellers of our time" would have come up with a great story. Spielberg and Peter Jackson take a rather predictable blood lineage story that's a little bit Pirates of the Carbs, part Goonies, part Sherlock Holmes, and dress it up with some fancy CGI coupled with some fun action scenes. It makes for somewhat decent, though mindless entertainment.
What's most shocking isn't what's in the movie. It's the movie's rating. Without a doubt, it should be at least PG-13, if not R. The numerous violent scenes and the gruesome nature of one scene, not to mention the centrality of alcohol leaves the discerning viewer wondering what the standards of film ratings look like today. I'd bring my hypothetical kids to Predators before Tintin. I won't be seeing the sequel. 4/10
Nothing in my opinion, and there's not much great that comes from Tintin. From the trailer, one would think that the "greatest storytellers of our time" would have come up with a great story. Spielberg and Peter Jackson take a rather predictable blood lineage story that's a little bit Pirates of the Carbs, part Goonies, part Sherlock Holmes, and dress it up with some fancy CGI coupled with some fun action scenes. It makes for somewhat decent, though mindless entertainment.
What's most shocking isn't what's in the movie. It's the movie's rating. Without a doubt, it should be at least PG-13, if not R. The numerous violent scenes and the gruesome nature of one scene, not to mention the centrality of alcohol leaves the discerning viewer wondering what the standards of film ratings look like today. I'd bring my hypothetical kids to Predators before Tintin. I won't be seeing the sequel. 4/10
This post was edited on 12/21/11 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 12/21/11 at 3:18 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
you see it from Disney movies to Lord of the Rings to Batman's butler.
Is english dumbass
Page 9 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News