The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Sept 6, 2005 18:42:44 GMT -5
Is it just me or does this movie seem like another very lame-ass attempt by the mainstream media to push religion on everyone. Even in the preview when the "psychologist/doctor" says that "There are no medicines for the devil!" it just seems very ridiculous to me.
|
|
|
Post by Hilly on Sept 6, 2005 20:24:21 GMT -5
I've only seen a preview for this movie once, at first glance it looks silly. I did enjoy the Exorcist when I first saw it many years ago. I have heard when it was first released there were some people who had to leave the theatre they were so upset with the movie. Its incredible to me that the Catholic Church still to this day maintains that people can, and have, become possesed and thusly in need of an exorcism.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 7, 2005 2:54:34 GMT -5
How do you explain the phenomena, for instance how people in this state can float in the air?
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Sept 7, 2005 8:12:20 GMT -5
How do you explain the phenomena, for instance how people in this state can float in the air? You're kidding right?
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Sept 7, 2005 8:18:32 GMT -5
|
|
The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Sept 7, 2005 8:27:16 GMT -5
Here is an interesting tidbit of info, the original Exorcist movie can not be shown in Vatican City because during the exorcism scene lightning struck the spire atop the Vatican Church and the pope took it as a sign from god that the movie was evil. This is an actual law on the books of Vatican City it states that The Exorcist can not be shown to the public in a public place, and that it can't be sold there either. Re-goddamn-diculous!
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 7, 2005 11:43:49 GMT -5
This is getting repetitive. Generally I don't kid, and if I do it is easy to tell.
And by the way, "they are lying" is a way to explain it, so I don't think my question was bad at all. Of course I haven't seen anyone levitate, and I know Randi hasn't seen anyone levitate. Put it this way. I don't believe in things, but at the same time I am not prepared to say they are definitely not true, just that I haven't seen them yet.
That is not to say that I think aliens might be running the US government, etc. I just wonder if there are some phenomena behind some of these reports (not the aliens, the poltergeist stories, etc).
I realise how people make up stories and lie. A good example is the Philadelphia experiment. There was a new channel the ships went through, which is why they were seen supposedly after a long journey. The journey wasn't long at all. Everything else was people's imagination.
Or take the Roswell incident. The foil thing they saw was a top secret weather balloon, and the grey aliens were a combination of monkeys in space suits and dummies testing high altitude parachute deployments.
So I know I can fall back on 'the onus is on the claimant' but that just seems boring. I know there is truth in the saying that lies are complex, the truth is simple. The complex explanations have no relation to anything at all. Still, if there was some phenomenon that drove them to think up this story I would like to know about it.
Like the sun was the phenomenon which gave rise to Ra, or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 7, 2005 12:17:29 GMT -5
Ok let me go further. Whether or not people can levitate, or whatever, doesn't interest me much at all. I'm not about to start meditating. However, I have noticed that people tend to say things without explaining them. They bring across that something is (according to them) blatantly obvious, without explaining how it is. We humans seem to just accept it, because it happens so often.
The news is like this all the time, so-and-so politician says X is bad. Gee, now I understand. I don't like it when people do that. If they want to make a statement that goes beyond fact, they should be prepared to back it up.
When somebody says something like this, what do we really learn? We learn what they think. We don't know why they think it, etc. We really don't know enough. You hear statements like this all the time, from both sides. Hearing this, and then that somebody else thinks exorcisms are real, doesn't really mean anything.
If people are going to give an opinion, tell me why you have that opinion. It is not so much that I necessarily want to understand, although it does suit me to gain some knowledge about the subject, but more that I want to know what led to that person thinking that. It tells me more about the person than that they have X opinion.
If I was truly interested in poltergeist phenomena or whatever, I would become a paranormal investigator or something like that. I am not. I am not a scientist.
At the same time, I realise that people don't know themselves why they do things, so I do take what people say lightly. However there's no reason to push the point. I know I won't get an answer from Hilly. When I ask questions like this I never do.
And in that, I learn what I need to know. Said person (whover it may be) has an egotistical urge to preach, but not to go into detail. They want to be part of the pack. It might be subtle, but it is there nevertheless.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 7, 2005 12:23:56 GMT -5
SolidSquid, at the same time, in how I respond to you, perhaps I can learn about myself. That "this is getting repetitive" remark was egotistical, whereas I don't mind you asking. It was some knee-jerk defensive reaction to being questioned, which is strange indeed. I have much to learn.
|
|
|
Post by droskey on Sept 7, 2005 14:31:33 GMT -5
My understanding is that this movie is more of a courtroom/psychological drama than an occult horror. It's supposed to be based on a case that went to court in Germany. Essentially this is what happened: A girl started experiencing all sorts of weird phenomenae that convinced her and her parents that she was posessed. She was known to have and diagnosed with epileptic seisures. Anyway, her problems grew worse and included hallucinations and eventually hearing voices. She refused to eat and eventually became violent. The Catholic Church santioned an exorcism. The exorcism took place and after about 8 months the girl died from malnutrition. The priests and parents involved were prosecuted and convicted for negligence. This movie is supposed to be the story of the court case with flashbacks to show each persons interpretations of the events that took place.
I'm actually looking forward to seeing it. It could be very interesting.
|
|
The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Sept 7, 2005 14:49:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the plot jacopo. The thing is is that this movie is being marketed as a religous horror film; and I still have a problem with that.
|
|
|
Post by Hilly on Sept 7, 2005 21:26:40 GMT -5
Well you know I'm an atheist right? When one is atheist its probably a safe bet that they don't believe in demons, possestions etc. as well as a lack of god belief. I mention the Catholic Church specifically because they are so mainstream and accepted in society and yet they have these ideas ie exorcisms, which to me are absolutely ridiculous. There is zero proof of demon possesion or demons even existing for that matter, yet there are plenty of proven maladies such as epilpsey, or some types of mental illness that could account for bizzare human behaviour. I know I have a tendency to post and run, and maybe come across as blunt and for that I apologise. However, me egotistical? Ive never been called that before.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 8, 2005 8:38:12 GMT -5
Don't take it as a criticism. It's pretty much inherent in humans. We are all egotistical.
It's not incredible to me. By saying it's incredible, you assume the Catholic Church has some sense in its method or intention, as though if they realised what you are saying they would change their way. They won't. Don't try to apply sense to the Catholic Church. Just accept that it is nonsensical. When they do things you might think are incredible, it isn't, it is par for the course. Don't expect more of them.
We generally give theists too much credit. It's time to stop that. When Hitler fights for the Germans, "God's chosen people", don't even go so far as to say that it is a perversion of religion. Religion is the perversion.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 8, 2005 8:43:56 GMT -5
It was only this one case, and it didn't come across bluntly. It came across as "hey, I agree with what atheists agree with". I'm not saying there's something wrong with that, I'm just saying it is egotistical. If you think it wasn't, I'd be happy to hear about it.
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Sept 8, 2005 8:48:42 GMT -5
I don't want what I have said to be taken the wrong way. When a person makes a statement of opinion, it is either to test that opinion, in that somebody might disagree and then both parties may benefit, or it is to be 'one of the bunch'. The second use is the egotistical one.
|
|