None of these are real, either:
Do you have a real problem calling any of these art?
Posted on 03/05/2009 11:55:58 AM PST by EveningStar
I guess I shouldn't be amazed at the number of slacker ignoramuses who are up in arms about my frank review cutting down the absolute crap they worship a/k/a "The Watchmen", coming out in theaters late tonight. The e-mails they send me and the comments they make about how "deep," "edgy" and "profound" this vile piece of trash (which is none of these) reminds me of the blind statements of followers of Jim Jones. And we all know what happened after they drank he purple Kool-Aid. If only this movie could achieve that result, it would be the most fantastic exercise in natural selection ever conducted in America.
(Excerpt) Read more at debbieschlussel.com ...
None of these are real, either:
Do you have a real problem calling any of these art?
"Dark Knight" is a vision of America as an Oligarchy - dependent on the capabilities and dark and light side of individuals - men. In this world, citizens are helpless if a bad man is in power - or a good man turns bad.
We are not helpless against evil men (The Joker) cowering and running in fear - we, the people, will defeat evil, even if the D.A. is among the evil. We are a representative republic. It is the people, the constitution and the rule of law - not men - that makes us great.
America is not an oligarchy, ruled by an elite (or singular) hero. Electing Obama will not save us - as the liberals envision. Our strength is in our people, our government works for us, we are not at the mercy of it.
Hope this explains my comment somewhat clearly. And thanks for your question.
No actually, it’s called seeing evil as surmountable. We tend to see bad as very large, when we develop heroes they tend to be larger than life people who combat evil and win.
The list goes on and on. Heroes are a foundation block of western civilization.
In the 17th century Shakespeare was “just” a talented playwright who made entertainment for the masses. His plays were considered overly melodramatic and of inferior quality to his poetry, now they’re considered some of the greatest plays ever written.
Just because a book has pictures in it doesn’t mean it can’t tell a strong story. The idiocracy here is the person who passes broad judgment on something he clearly hasn’t even bothered to experience. Don’t review a book you haven’t read, it just waves your ignorance around. The fact that this “mere” comic book is almost a quarter of a century old and is right now the #1 selling fiction should tell you a bit about what’s going on outside your blinders.
That is a basic tennet of Humanism and idolatry.
Evil cannot be contained by men, since evil is the very essence of man. We can only conquer evil through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
Heroes, yes, but the “secret identity as more real than the pre-existing alter-ego” trope is relatively new.
Odysseus disguised himself as something unremarkable to fool his enemies, he didn’t become something more impressive than he had been before as Odysseus. This is what’s remarkable about the comic book hero tradition and the 19th century characters who prefigured it.
It was founding the country on the Gospel of Jesus Christ that had made the country great, and the departure from that foundation is the reason the we are no longer great.
The path back is clear.
Odysseus was modeled after King David.
I’m very interested to see one scrap of evidence to support that notion—what sea journeys did David undertake?
Evil as a concept cannot be contained by man. But evil actions by evil individuals can. It took men to stop Hitler, I’m sure Jesus helped but in the end it was heroic men on the ground.
Debby should work at sticking to one good topic- like OTHUGO’s Selective Service Records
Depends on how you look at the heroes. Really super powered heroes have a strong link to Greek heroes like Odysseus. When they’re in their “civilian” mode they don’t use their powers they wear normal clothes, they disguise themselves as something unremarkable. Especially notice the standard comic trope of the heroes wearing their civilian clothes over the top of their hero outfits, we like to think of the hero outfit as a costume but within the stories it tends to be the other way around. Even in non-super powered heroes there’s a lot of this, it’s been remarked many times both about and within the Batman stories that Bruce Wayne is the fake personality and Batman is who he really is. Then there’s the fondness for team-ups, The Argonauts and X-Men and Avengers all have very strong parallels. And let’s not forget the Greek fondness for the “heroic nude” (or near nude when there’s an important piece of clothing) and how 4 color heroes run around in their underwear (and very small underwear in the case of female heroes).
Odysseus the “person,” not the irrelevent details of their battles.
In the next great battle, there'll be no heroic men fighting evil; only Christ and his Angels, and the blood will run deep.
I don’t know, we’ve got heroic me fighting evil right now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The presence of heroic men is important, for one thing it’s the proof we might still actually deserve Christ’s sacrifice.
Hmm. Let’s see:
Odysseus: born a prince, becomes a king, courts Helen, marries Penelope, goes to war to honour an oath against his will, preserves army and retrieves artifacts necessary to win favour of the gods, conceives trick to bypass enemy defences which wins war, tries to return home but undergoes series of magical adventures including the summoning of the spirits of the underworld to advise him and ultimately returns home to slaughter the usurpers attempting to assume his rightful place.
David: born the youngest of several sons of an obscure landholder, anointed king upon the apostasy of the ruling king, distinguishes himself in battle by his faith in God rather than his own wits or feats of arms, but is nonetheless driven from court by the jealousy of the reigning king. Lives a guerilla existence on the fringes of his homeland for several years until God’s anger at the reigning king culminates in the death of that king and nearly all his heirs. Takes power and forgives everyone who had persecuted him.
I don’t see the similarities at all, except both were kings.
Can you please elaborate?
Your descxription of David is twisted, and grossly lacking on most of the significant points.
From whom did you get it?
The Trojan War (assuming it actually took place) was roughly in the early 12th century BC , whereas King David (assuming he actually existed) lived from from 1037 to 970 BC according to Biblical chronology.
If anything, David would have to be modeled on Odysseus...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.