When is a movie not "just a movie"?

[marykmusic]

From the thread on the metaphysical experiences of a retired baseball player, I took this quote:<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Disney is influenced by Langley. Count on it.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>It was about <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Chicken Little</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> and how strange this Disney movie is, and does it create little automatons in the image preferred. So, rather than continue moving that thread away from its topic, a new one is justified.<br><br>Disney movies are full of subliminals, we discovered some years back, and got rid of them all. Our kids watch Wallace and Gromit, which is much more creative, sort of like back in the day with Walt and his dancing mushrooms.<br><br>We also consider <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The Matrix</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> (all three movies) to be a documentary and take it very seriously. A lot of truth in <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Men in Black</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, also. And don't get me started on the original three <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Star Wars</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, lest I put a wrinkle in the Force.<br><br>Science fiction books have long shown indications of telling a piece of the truth; Robert Heinlein was probably an asset. His early books' basic premises are now known to be a glimpse into the cutting edge of secret research and development.<br><br>I read the Battleship Earth 10-book series while in high school. It seemed to me to say something more than fiction... Ron Hubbard was an asset of some sort, too...<br><br>Discussion? --MaryK <p></p><i></i>

[dbeach]

todays sci fi is tomorrows science<br><br>I love the old serials from the 30s and 40s with the mad scientists/foreign agents working with local criminals fighting the govt agents trying to save the US from another takeover..battling for control of death rays ,invisible machines..and other super weapons..<br>which could be used to control the nation <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

When it changes your perception of reality.(for good or ill) <p></p><i></i>

[HMKGrey]

I saw the BBC series "The Century of the Self" - made by the guy who made the excellent "The Power of Nightmares". <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/century_of_the_self.shtml">www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/doc...self.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Both are essential viewing for everyone on this board. <br><br>I don't recall that TCOS dwelt on Hollywood so much as the industrial and manufacturing economies but the analogy is easy enough to draw. If people literally sat around in a room deciding that industry needed to shape society then it's barely a hop, kip or a jump to assume Hollywood was in that mix somewhere and remains so to this day. <p></p><i></i>

[starroute]

I'm wary of the word "asset" being thrown around too loosely. Heinlein, for example, certainly had insider knowledge. He'd been in the Navy, I believe he had friends in Naval intelligence, and when he worked at the Philadelphia Naval Yard during World War II he was part of some sort of brainstorming group of science fiction writers set up by the military to generate wild ideas. He very much shared the military/Cold War mentality.<br><br>But Heinlein was also far too self-willed to have served as anyone else's mouthpiece. I don't believe for a moment that he ever wrote anything that wasn't exactly what he chose to write. Goodness knows, Heinlein's own agenda was bizarre enough at time, but I can't see it having been imposed on him from outside.<br><br>Now, the business end of publishing and movie-making is something else again. There I can easily believe that money mysteriously becomes available to publish and promote certain novels or films while others go unnoticed. It may be no coincidence that Heinlein is considered the Platonic ideal of science fiction while A.E. van Vogt, who has actually been far more influential, is barely known. But that's something else again.<br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[bvonahsen]

I don't think Chicken Little is as <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>crafted</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> as others would have it. And even though Walt was a pedophile the subliminal content may well have simply be there because animators like getting a jab in at the corp ya know?<br><br>I do have some scifi to recomend though: Peter Watt's <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.rifters.com/" target="top">rifters</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> series of <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.rifters.com/starfish/s_main.htm" target="top">Starfish</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->, <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.rifters.com/maelstrom/maelstrom_master.htm" target="top">Maelstrom</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> and <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.rifters.com/behemoth/b_main.htm" target="top">Behemoth</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->. That is... if you like near future dystopian futures that are disturbingly close to current events.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Your world, and welcome to it.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br>The rest of this site is a fantasy, albeit not a very pleasant one. This is reality. From here you can look down and watch the lights going out; if you squint, you'll even see the twinkling of firestorms along the west coast. I leave it to you to decide whether the real world is any sort of improvement.<br><br>They say I have to keep the site fresh, that you need to be lured back with new content. There's not much I can add to the other pages—how do you update a world that hasn't even happened yet?—but here, in the present, I can drop the pretense and indulge in some of that self-aggrandising tub-thumping we authors are supposed to practise in the name of "self-promotion". So here, for what it's worth, am I: links to biography and blurbs, to credits, to late-breaking news and opinion.<br><br>If it's fresh content you're after, keep an eye on these links. In the meantime, take a load off, look down from geosynch, and watch the world turn inexorably to shit.<br><br>It's happening way faster than it did in the books.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[darkbeforedawn]

Mary K I am interested in what you think of the Disney production: "Sourcerer's Apprentice". Or was that Disney? This was a movie that gave my kids nightmares.... <p></p><i></i>

[marykmusic]

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Fantasia</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, which included "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," was the most expensive Disney film ever in its day. There were some changes forced on him, such as removing the nipples from the nymphs in the Beethoven "Pastoral" with the unicorns and fauns.<br><br>What always gave me nightmares was the very realistic and extremely sinister "Night on Bald Mountain," which was barely redeemed by the "Ave Maria" procession in the morning. SOMEbody forgot to close the portal... much more frightening than "Apprentice."<br><br>Whose idea was that, to scare a bunch of little kids with visions of unadulterated evil? --MaryK <p></p><i></i>

[Fat Lady Singing]

Hey, has anyone seen "American Dreamz" or "Thank You For Smoking"? Both of these films are great as entertainment, but there's a whole lotta truth in them, too. <br><br>"American Dreamz" spoiler--a little--follows:<br><br>The Dennis Quaid character is so clearly Bush. The one thing that bugged me about "American Dreamz" is that it lets Bush off the hook at the end...although he continues to be a dolt.<br><br>I don't know if audiences know that almost all the "outrageous" stuff about the Quaid/Bush character is (reportedly?) true. For instance, it brings up his frat boy drunken past, his being on anti-depressants which affect his behavior, the earpiece during speeches, his feelings of being chosen by God for great work, Cheney and/or Laura being the puppeteer(s), and on and on.<br><br>It may be that audiences think this is so outrageous that it's satire; it may be that audiences (if they're composed of folks like me) think the truth practically is satire in and of itself.<br><br>I've never been sure if Bush is "Evil with a capital 'E'" or just incredibly dumb. The movie clearly comes down on the "incredibly dumb" side.<br><br>I myself am not willing to make that conclusion just yet.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[Chiaroscuro]

with consultants and even equipment like the harrier jets in schwarzenegger's True Lies. When movies like Courage Under Fire get no help. I seem to recall seeing a piece on tv saying that the military said if they changed things they would get help but when they refused they got nothing. I would be surprised if more extensive exchanges did not happen. Same with corporations and product placements. Why not tweek a few things to be more favorable to company X in return for more $?<br><br>Disney recently allied with Philip Anschutz in making Narnia. He has made donations to anti-gay org and GOP like Bush. It was the Bush admin who gave Anschutz the OK to drill on land with sacred native american rock art. his foundation for a better life put up some nice billboards around the country with inspiring messages from the likes of Whoopi Goldberg, Kermit the frog and ice skater Michelle Kwan. I bring this up because his son was Kwan's guest at the recent white house dinner with chinese leader Hu. For some reason Kwan was told with Bush and Hu. ere are a few links on Anschutz and his media connections<br><br>The movie, the media, and the conservative politics of Philip Anschutz<br>"Greediest executive in America" teams up with Walt Disney Pictures for film about Christ's "resurrection"<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=97">www.mediatransparency.org...storyID=97</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Billionaire Anschutz May See Redemption With 'Narnia' <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2005/12/06/anschutz-narnia-movies-cx_vc_1206autofacescan09.html">www.forbes.com/facesinthe...can09.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>When Anschutz got into the movie business, he vowed to make films that avoided sex, vulgar language and violence. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is the first of C.S. Lewis' seven Narnia books, which have been espoused by many Christians because of their themes of good versus evil. Anschutz controls the rights to the entire series.<br><br>Anschutz' investments have long been eclectic. After making his money in oil and railroads, he branched out into telecom via Qwest Communications International (nyse: Q - news - people ), spent it on a sports arena (the Staples Center), a hockey team (the Los Angeles Kings), a newspaper (the San Francisco Examiner) and a movie theater chain (Regal Entertainment Group (nyse: RGC - news - people )). He also recently helped soccer phenom David Beckham to open a chain of children's soccer schools (see: "Beckham To Open Eponymous Soccer Academy"). <br><br>---------<br>I find it funny that he vows to avoid violence yet a friend who went to see Narnia complained that so much of the movie focused on battles. <p></p><i></i>