Blake Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 So there is a "movie" that came out last year, independently made, that even stars an oscar winning actress, called "What the [bleep] do we know?" It was recomended to me as a great film that really inspires you to think. It turned out to be the longest most inane piece of garbagee i've ever seen. Anyone else get a load of this thing? Lots of the scens were filmed in PDX too. Offical site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 Dude I could have told you your mind would get more use if you dropped acid and watched "Waking Life" What The etc. was better off retitled as Why The (bleep) Would Anyone Watch This Gibberish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knotzen Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 Yeah, I didn't think that much of it, either. The point that how you think about things affect what/how they are (i.e., the power of positive thinking), is a good one, but too much bs lecturing to sit through, for my taste. Had to force myself to keep watching it more than once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I didn't watch more than 5 minutes of it. Piece of shite and not worthy of the hype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 Waking Life, however was cool with the cartooning, line drawings, and real life. Even if the content was a little idealistic, the visuals kept the mind entertained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted September 27, 2005 Author Share Posted September 27, 2005 crazy cult in Tacoma! http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/09/16/bleep/index_np.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
layton Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I saw it with a bunch of "friends" (i.e. people that do not climb) amd after suffering through 1.5 hours of pseudoscience and some really big leaps in logic and philospohy(like how we're in control of our lives due to the fact that a particle can be in 2 places at once???) i jumped from my seat in the Baghdad theater in PDX and shouted, "What a stupid fucking waste of time. i honestly feel dumber!" only to find that the whole audience gasped at me and my "friends" no longer thought i was cool. carlos castenada wrote more logical pieces of fiction. A brief history of time, and even anything my Michio Kaku, or Elegant Universe, or shit even Dancing Wu Li Masters or the Tao of Physics made this look like a skittles commercial asking me, "what is real?" liked the plucky young black kid with the basketball. any movie where kids know more than adults immediately screams Disney. did i mention i hate this movie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirp Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 carlos castenada wrote more logical pieces of fiction. No Fing way Mike, all 9+ book were NONFICTION, I'm a dreamer man, I know this shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billygoat Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 All is ok brother michael. It can be very tramatic indeed facing a paradigm shift of this magnitude. Peace be with you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I thought it was good in that it brings to attention a subject that sometimes gets fully forgotten about, namely, the mysteries of this friggin' universe we live in. Sure it's easy to pick apart cuz of its overly dramatic presentation, and yeah it was hokey in many ways, but overall, I liked it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 There's a distinct connection between that movie and the Ramsters in Yelm. You know, followers of Ramtha? That would the the 35,000 year old warrior who channels his wisdom through the former wife of a Tacoma dentist? Mount Rainier's gonna erupt and the Lizard People will come out? Those people. One of my employees went to one of their all night extravaganzas, but I was relieved to learn it was because Selma Hayek (current celebrity devotee) was going to be there, and my employee was convinced he'd wind up tied to her for half the night. Didn't really work out that way.... Oh, and no, I didn't go see the movie, even though the illustrious world premiere happened only 12 miles from my house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 (edited) Besides Ramtha (actually JZ Knight) being in the movie, what is the connection? It's kinda funny to me the reaction a movie like this can elicit.... I'm somewhat neutral to it overall, thinking it was at least an attempt by someone investigating in movie-form something pretty damn interesting. I haven't really heard a response to the material in the movie, more just emotive reactions based on vague generalizations.... Edited September 27, 2005 by sexual_chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 If you want to talk about really fascinating shit that goes on in the universe, why not stick to the facts and do a Nature or Nova documentary? Those are infinitely more interesting and wondrous than this new-agey POS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I am waiting for an Intelligent Design version of this movie, and I just KNOW my good Christian Brethren will not have those awful swearwords in the title (implied or not!) Thanks, Mr. Fundy Mentalist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I would again invite you to present the particular "factual" inadequacies presented in the movie.... Perhaps just one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 (edited) And yes, some like their "science" in a very orthodox form, sticking exclusively to the packaging of a Nova or Nature presentation. Quite dogmatic though, if you ask me. People will build anything into a "religion", including "science". I especially like emotive defenses of "science", full of hubris and profanity; I would think that a scientific mind would realize the handicap of over-emotionalism, thereby curtailing its power. Spock is a good role-model for those aspiring to scientific neutrality. Edited September 27, 2005 by sexual_chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PVD Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 What really bugged me about this film was the lack of attribution. The talking heads were not identified until the end. I was thinking, "who are these people, and why should I think they have any credibility at all?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 And some like their "science" in a paticularly dumbed-down and flakey form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I would question your need for validation of this sort. I think the movie-maker did a good job NOT identifying the "talking-heads" until the very end. This way those so inclined might look at the ideas without prior prejudice (simply believing what they hear because the source is a PhD, or dismissing because it's some new-agey loon). The more I think about it, the more I realize: Boy, what a great movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 What really bugged me about this film was the lack of attribution. The talking heads were not identified until the end. I was thinking, "who are these people, and why should I think they have any credibility at all?" Scientific American came out with a short, scathing commentary on this movie. It shreded the "scientists" in the movie and took apart their "theories". It was a greatest movie review I've ever read. And hey, Dancing Wu Li Masters won a pulitzer price dude. I loved that book when I was in high schoool and thought I was all smart and shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 And some like their "science" in a paticularly dumbed-down and flakey form. You seem to be having great trouble answering my above question regarding the particular points made in the movie that you deem fallacious. You are beginning to sound like Pat Robertson, relying on emotive innuendo devoid of substance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 And some like their "science" in a paticularly dumbed-down and flakey form. You seem to be having great trouble answering my above question regarding the particular points made in the movie that you deem fallacious. You are beginning to sound like Pat Robertson, relying on emotive innuendo devoid of substance. Have you seen I (heart) Huckabees. Now THAT'S a fun movie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted September 27, 2005 Author Share Posted September 27, 2005 SC.... I think you are just fishing for responses, but if that salon.com article, and other i've read read are true, then the whole movie is bullshit. The story about Caribbean nativse looking at Columbus' ships and staring right through them without noticing them is made up. The story about how meditation caused a drop in DC crime in made up, and the Japanese quack who claims he can use "the force" to change the structure of water/ice crystal by using "happy" or "angry" thoughts is complete BS. Most of the talking heads were devotees of the Ramtha cult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 SC.... I think you are just fishing for responses, but if that salon.com article, and other i've read read are true, then the whole movie is bullshit. The story about Caribbean nativse looking at Columbus' ships and staring right through them without noticing them is made up. The story about how meditation caused a drop in DC crime in made up, and the Japanese quack who claims he can use "the force" to change the structure of water/ice crystal by using "happy" or "angry" thoughts is complete BS. Most of the talking heads were devotees of the Ramtha cult. Actually, you are mistaken about this. Mind you, I do agree that the movie is hooey. But the mediation and the water studies are real. And like all science/belief, they are subject to be disproven in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted September 27, 2005 Author Share Posted September 27, 2005 so you are saying that it has been scientifically proven that we can use thought to transform the phyiscal properties of elements around us, dependably and within a series of hours? In other news, I'll be freeing City Park tomorrow, by just thinking happy thoughts, and imagining some nice big holds. I might solo-downclimb it afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.