| Author |
Message |
|
| censored-03 |
 Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:30 am |
 |
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 3058
Location: Gotham, Big Apple, The Naked City
|
Quote: We were still standing at the end,(of WWII) but I'm not sure that makes you a winner. |
_________________
"Life is a comedy for those who think and a tragedy for those who feel."
-- Horace Walpole |
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:55 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
O Canada! Happy Canada Day to our Eyes to the north (or east or west, depending on where you live).
Jeremy - That is what I meant. I find the construction of Schindler's List to be very formulaic (and condescending) from a Hollywood point of view. The dominant culture saves the minority culture, proving the dominant culture is good and kind and, yet, still stronger than the minority culture. It's what ee cummings described as the Reader's Digest syndrome, "8 to 80, anyone can do it, makes you feel good." |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| zzzzzzzzzz..... |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 35
|
| I worked for a while in kracow Poland. I can relay the experience of someone I met there who went to auchwitz. It was about 45 minutes away. They went on the tour and were taking pictures. About halfway through they realized, What the hell am I doing! I never want to remember this place and stopped taking pictures. They also asked the tour guide how they could visit such a place of eveil day in and day out. The guide replied it waas only hard when people in the camp came back......... |
_________________
She turned me into a newt.......I got better |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:54 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marilyn,
While I don't care for the movie myself, I don't understand
Quote: The dominant culture saves the minority culture,
Since this is in fact what happened. Not just in the case of Schindler, but the Holocaust and WWII over all. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:57 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
Frightening news:
O'Connor retires from Supreme Court
By GINA HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
Published July 1, 2005, 9:47 AM CDT
WASHINGTON -- Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court and a key swing vote on issues such as abortion and the death penalty, said Friday she is retiring.
O'Connor, 75, said she expects to leave before the start of the court's next term in October, or whenever the Senate confirms her successor. There was no immediate word from the White House on who might be nominated to replace O'Connor.
It's been 11 years since the last opening on the court, one of the longest uninterrupted stretches in history. O'Connor's decision gives Bush his first opportunity to appoint a justice.
"This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure."
President Bush planned to make a statement at 11:15 a.m. EDT in the White House Rose Garden on her resignation. Spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush would not at that time be announcing a nominee to succeed her.
O'Connor's appointment came amid speculation that the aging court would soon have a vacancy. But speculation has most recently focused on Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, 80, and suffering from thyroid cancer. Rehnquist has offered no public clue as to his plans.
The White House has refused to comment on any possible nominees, or whether Bush would name a woman to succeed O'Connor. Her departure leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the only other woman among the current justices.
Possible replacements include Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and federal courts of appeals judges J. Michael Luttig, John Roberts, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Michael McConnell, Emilio Garza and James Harvie Wilkinson III. Others mentioned are former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, lawyer Miguel Estrada and former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson, but Bush's pick could be a surprise choice not well known in legal circles.
Another prospective candidate is Edith Hollan Jones, a judge on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who was also considered for a Supreme Court vacancy by President Bush's father.
O'Connor's appointment in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, quickly confirmed by the Senate, ended 191 years of male exclusivity on the high court.
She wasted little time building a reputation as a hard-working moderate conservative who emerged as a crucial power broker on the nine-member court.
O'Connor often lines up with the court's conservative bloc, as she did in 2000 when the court voted to stop Florida presidential ballot recounts sought by Al Gore, and effectively called the election for President Bush.
As a "swing voter," however, O'Connor sometimes votes with more liberal colleagues.
Perhaps the best example of her influence is the court's evolving stance on abortion. She distanced herself both from her three most conservative colleagues, who say there is no constitutional underpinning for a right to abortion, and from more liberal justices for whom the right is a given. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:00 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
| Joe - I'm putting SL in movie context, not reality context, but if you want to do that, how about the United States, which closed its doors to refugees? This movie was made for an American audience by an American director. True, Schindler was not American, but the identification with him as the hero must have made a lot of Americans proud for what they did (or didn't do, actually). Winning WWII was not the same as saving Jews; the fact that 6 million of them died attests to that. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:03 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
I wasn't thinking of it in a movie context. I get your point now.
In terms of
Quote: but if you want to do that, how about the United States, which closed its doors to refugees
While you're quite right, it doesn't alter the fact that the US was decisive in winning WWII and liberating Jews from the Holocaust. I know very little about the mentality behind our refusing the refugees shelter, to what extent at the time we realized we were sending people to their deaths.
By the way, I'm not suggesting that there weren't Jews (or others persecuted by the Nazis) who acted heroically, in Germany, Poland, or coming over from America during the war. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:07 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
I repeat:
Quote: Winning WWII was not the same as saving Jews; the fact that 6 million of them died attests to that.
Too little, too late. Jews were unintended benefactors of the United States' belated entry into the war. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:08 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Billy,
I'm not quite understanding your response in this discussion. I get that you consider Schindler's List a great movie. I certainly understand having an emotional reaction when a movie I love is dissed.
But you haven't explained why you think it's a good movie, or why the criticism of it presented here is inaccurate. It almost sounds like you are finding the movie above criticism, and no movie is that. I'd like to hear why you love it and where you think the criticism falls short (I dont' think you are doing that in Marilyn's case, because her argument is a larger one than the context of the movie. You're differing about humanity's response to a historical event, more than the success of a movie dealing with one part of the event). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:11 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
| Joe, I'm curious about your reaction to Philadelphia? I felt similarly to it as I did to SL and wonder what a gay man thinks. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:15 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marilyn,
Quote: Jews were unintended benefactors of the United States' belated entry into the war.
I think that's an arguable point (I'm sure Roosevelt wanted to save the Jews, and this was part of his reason for trying to get us in the war), but at any rate they were the benefactors.
It can't be too little, too late. In entering the war at all and ending it, the US saved Jews from complete extinction (had Germany won, that might quite possibly have happened). That doesn't mean a great number of people weren't slaughtered, or that if we had done something much sooner, we would have been able to avert it. But that number looks big only because the Allies prevented it from ultimately becoming much, much larger. And, indeed, Jews themselves didn't forsee the horrible "success" Hitler would achieve in the meantime. In Germany or the US. Some did, but more thought such a nightmare plan was simply impossible to realize. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:22 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
| I don't for a minute believe that Roosevelt was interested in saving Jews as more than an incidental part of his desire to get into the war. If he had been that interested, he would not approved of barring immigration of Jews. He would have tried to save every one of them by any means necessary, and he had the power to do it, too. Jews no longer live in Germany. Very, very few Jews live in Poland. These countries achieved their goal, at least within their own borders. America saved further slaughter, in general, but a number like 6 million cannot be excused by saying it could have been greater. That makes no moral sense whatsoever. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:25 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
Quote: that number looks big only because the Allies prevented it from ultimately becoming much, much larger
The city of Chicago has a population of 3 million. The Nazis wiped out two Chicagos. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Befade |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:38 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 3784
Location: AZ
|
To go back to the demise of the NYT film forum. I really enjoyed my few years on that forum..........Xerxes and I had an understanding.........Nilson was someone I could relate to............there were people there who aren't here........and I wonder what happened to them..........Pambula, someone from DC........can't remember her name. And alot of the people here now were fun then.
I'm just in a different mode now............there are so many people posting here and so often now...........that I can't keep up. And if I have something I want to talk about...........there are so many other topics out there that mine goes by the wayside.
It is very strange that oilcan/jbottle thrived in that dead environment that the NYT forums became.
Any way...............enjoy the camaraderie (sp?).............you've certainly created something new. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| yambu |
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:39 am |
|
|
Joined: 23 May 2004
Posts: 6441
Location: SF Bay Area
|
Marilyn wrote: .....I find the construction of Schindler's List to be very formulaic (and condescending) from a Hollywood point of view. The dominant culture saves the minority culture, proving the dominant culture is good and kind and, yet, still stronger than the minority culture..... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
