Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Carmina
Published Letters: 31
I thought TWBB was an extraordinary movie. I understand the point Zacharek is making however I believe it is misguided. I disagree that Day-Lewis' performance does not inspire conflicting sympathies within the viewer. I, for one, could see how much he loved his son, yet at the same time, what a monster he could be - he was absolutely full of contradictions! Where I think the problem lies is that it is difficult to balance-out Day-Lewis' performance and this is best illustrated in Plainview's scenes with the preacher, Eli Sunday. Frankly, those scenes left me feeling uncomfortable because I almost felt bad for Dano, the actor playing Sunday. I believe he was miscast. The role of the preacher should have been a bit more subtle but powerful, to counter-balance Plainview's mania. It was underwritten and one-note and could not hold it's own against Plainview. On the other hand, the scenes with Plainview and his son H.W. or his brother Henry are absolutely poetic. The scene in the restaurant where Plainview sits with his son, glowering over at the Big Oil perps for an offense made months before? Incredible. At the beach with his brother, with the waves trying to crash down and cool the obvious volcano that is about to erupt? You can see how Plainview gradually loses any shred of faith in the goodness of man, you see how his soul eventually turns black and burnt. Day-Lewis' performance is extraordinary. It's only that it's hard to balance out his performance with other performances/characters that are just as full-bodied, particularly the lead support. I believe that may the responsibility of the director, or perhaps casting to a certain degree? In any case, I do enjoy Zacharek's reviews. She adds a really unique voice to the typical movie critic round-up. It's evident that she really cares about movies, takes them seriously, which doesn't always seem to be the case.
The women on the View today came off horribly, I wouldn’t be surprised if they turned people OFF from voting for Obama. It was like a bunch of harridans. I have less respect for Walters now and I like McCain even more. He was eloquent and honest on the topic of religion - given to a bit of hyperbole with Palin- but seeing him handle their tag-team grilling with aplomb sealed my vote. In addition, I heard the recording of Obama confirming the sex-ed for kindergarteners and his comments about it are easily found on the internet, just google it, it’s right there. So how is that ad a lie? Barack should just take him up on his Town Hall meetings offer. As for now, McCain has my vote.
I was merely pointing out that the ad is not a lie. If that's where the Obama campaign stands on the issue, then proudly say so, rather than responding "lies!!" because that is deceitful in itself. And your clarification that "..sex ed for kindergarteners is about age appropriate things such as "where do babies come from", offers an opt out to the parents..." Well, why the heck should a kindergarten school curriculum offer an "opt-out" to parents on such an important, personal topic? Shouldn't that be the exclusive responsibility of the parents at such a young, impressionable age?? Sex ed in later years sure, but at five or six years old? This is how public policy makes children of us all! I don't need, and shouldn't need, a schoolteacher teaching my young child about sex because it is too uncomfortable for me and I want to opt out. I should be held responsible for that, in whichever way I want, and rightly so.
Of course children should be educated on how to protect themselves from molesters, etc, but the difference between you and me is that I think that should be the responsibility of the parent to teach their own five year old child about that. It is the parent's implicit responsibility. We should not need to have kindergarten teachers in charge of that and I don't want some school board deciding how they are going to go about doing so. Just educate my child. If everybody committed to their responsibility as a parent, we'd be a lot better off. And as for obfuscating the truth, I will concede to you that yes, both sides do it and that is pretty much what our entire, litigious society runs on. So it's no wonder that politics, overrun with lawyers, is full of double-speak as well.
This is beyond the pale. And you are validating such actions by listing the contents of her inbox? Elected officials must use private email addresses to correspond with other public officials if the material deemed not government related. This should be condemned by the Obama camp, at least to retain a modicum of respectability. This seems like a witch hunt more and more everyday. Reprehensible.
I know this video might upset some people but it is incredibly informative and gives some cold hard facts in regards to the current crisis. It was removed from Youtube but here is another link: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/burning_down_the_house.html
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
