Tag Archives: USA

To think and talk in Blacks and Whites

16 Oct

So did anybody see the game last night? That was a great game. They really brought that trophy home. I really loved how it was a thriller until the end. That the winning point was… Who cares. Let´s think about thinking instead.

``Oh, that´s original (!)´´

I love to discuss thing with people and when you do something many times and have a consciousness you can sometimes discover a pattern. What I have seen as a regular event in many discussion is that I am being told; “You see things in blacks and whites“. Which probably means something like I overgeneralize, simplify and use broad brushes to describe my world view and opinion.

Then I started to think “Doesn´t everybody?

Here is my perhaps overgenrealizing, simplified and black-white argument:

Every time we say something as a matter of fact… Every time we give expression to a strong opinion be that well reflected and well weighed or otherwise it´s still a statement of blacks and whites. At once someone draws a line in the sand between their “right” view and others it has become an argument of contrast and possible conflict.

Nah, that ain´t true“, you may say and at once proving my point. “Black and white” is a argument of contrast and when you state you don´t agree with my opinion you are individualizing and claiming my view faulty therefore you are contrasting. There will be no conflict with an indifferent person. Ambivalence does no harm, but do no good either (gray, get it?). So when you have an opinion about something that diverse from other people in your group you have created a conflict that is polarization. A statement that splits between you and others.

But let´s complicate a bit… Why is it that a well thought of opinion with every sides views and situation is taken into account is just as black and white as a statement of pure bigotry and ignorance? Because you take for granted that the other persons sides views are based upon pure bigotry and ignorance. We all do. We all expect people who believe otherwise to be at fault because of some reason or other and seldom do we make the argument that is because they “know to much” or because they are “to good“.

Soo…

What is my point? Not to make any argument pro or con anything? No, but please never say that my opinion is more black and white than yours, because it really isn´t…

I think.

Blog 2.0 - ``Ebony and ivory goes to getter in perfect harmony!´´

A nightmare on Elm Street – Remake (2010) movie review.

6 Oct


Soo…
I saw it, the A nightmare on Elm Street – remake (2010) and I instantly started hating it, but at the end credits I had seen some moments that was far better than the original. Here are some differences for good and bad.

What was better than the original:

1) Story explains why the kids suddenly falls into sleep:
A very annoying thing about the original series was that the kids fell into sleep for all kinds of reasons. They could have fallen asleep at a Acid vs Metal concert when on speed. It have always felt forced, like “now someone has to die, make them fall asleep NOW!”. The last part of the film had a much more logical or at least explained constant falling asleep through story telling.

2) Krueger looks better in this movie
In A nightmare on Elm Street part 3 we had stopped seeing Fred Krueger as a menace and threat and more as a creative killer of annoying teens. He became cartoon, but in the original Elm Street he was suppose to be scary. But he did´t look like a burn victim, he looked like someone made of plastic (like a melted, rubbery Chucky.) In this movie, Krueger looks like he got burned. In short he looks more scary and menacing. I also like the explanation of why he killed children in life, but now only kills teens (as that seemed to be a plot hole in the original, although understandebal.)

3) Everything looks better
Well post-production can pretty much fix anything except acting talent and give something a soul. Some of the transitions between dreamscapes, bloody deaths and surprises where visually realistic, believable and pretty. Everything production value was far better in this film than in the original.

What was worse:

1) The characters are 1. dimensional:
I don´t remember if the Wes Craven´s version had any more depth to the characters, but I am pretty sure that the story went a little slower before massacre starts. The characters in this movie are so boring and uninteresting that even with all the crazy effects I just don´t get involved. Hollywood have forgotten that with scary, as in funny, the pauses increases and emphasizes the feelings.

2) With all the effects, why not make the dream events more dreamy?
The dreams weren´t very surreal. There where some events, but they still felt way to real (fillmed in studio to represent) to be dreamy.

3) Not much new to tell
Yes the effects where good, Krueger looked better and was more evil than in all the original, but something was not there. It felt like “A nightmare on Elm Street” for the new generation (who are soulless retarded with no opinion, taste or mind) but in the last 26 yeas nothing new could be added to a movie with lots of fans. I mean, come on, there had to be some fans who interrupted more to this movie than this. Some creative person who saw something else to focus on. But no, this movie, although not a completely identical plot as the original, feels futile and like a gold encrusted fruit.

In conclusion: This movie is like all other remakes, darker visually, darker plot wise (more or less explicitly states that Krueger was a pedophile), better effects but… It´s soulless. Not made by a fan or a visionary, but a person and company who want´s to earn more money on a franchise (“dah!“). Hollywood deserve to die. They are old and unimportant. Krueger kill Hollywood though the American dream for me.

Blog 2.0 - The scary part is that we are told ``Not to fall asleep´´ but our eyes gets heavier and heavier though each minute of film

Mulla Krekar has been shot at. Now what? (“I believe in homicide”)

25 Jan

Dear Internet,

the infamous mulla Krekar was shot at by unknown assailants around 2.00 am. It was a “failure” and only his son in law was hurt according to all the Norwegian newspapers. Now I don’t want to make blogs about currant affairs as it feels more like gossiping than reflection, but here are some thoughts that sprang to my mind as I heard it.

1) “There’s no justice like vigilante justice“.
I have had dreams about doing the same things myself. I have no knowledge about who or why Mr. Krekar was shot at, but if he got shot at by Norwegian civilians than that is another example of how Norway, because of globalization, has become more aggressive and violent. There’s a growing anger in Norwegian society that has no constructive outlet. There’s a “see no evil, hear no evil and laugh about others who claim to see evil” mentality in government and media that slowly builds up a pressure that could be the reason for such an attack. The Krekar problem, that is “knowing a terrible person will not be brought to justice because of idealistic reasons“, have become really inflamed.

As most Norwegians (I guess) I am against the death penalty. I am against it in every instant (be that a child-killer or war criminal) but I do believe in consequences for wrong doings. I just don’t think killing another person will bring balance or justify evil. But with the problem of Krekar our Norwegian ideals has been brought to the surreal. One person should not bring as much trouble as this Krekar has done. Let’s just ship him to the country who wants him and rather send angry letters when he is dead. It is my opinion that sometimes we have to think realistic (“is”) rather than ideally (“should”).

2) Is Norway under siege by Americans?

If so STAY OUT! If there has been American soldiers carrying out a mission on Norwegian soil then you are in big trouble! We will complain and whine you to death. Perhaps you will even get an annoyed official letter from our Prime-minister. TAKE THAT!

3) Drive-bys belong in Compton and is not Norwegian.
Now we all hate Krekar, as we all hate people who kills other people and gets away with it. But is there any real difference between what mr Krekar did at what the assailants did (except, you know, in scope)? If we take the moral argument that “to kill the terrorist and mass-murder Krekar is good” as “he deserves it”, then shouldn’t the persons who did it come forward to receive praise and/or consequence for what they did? If a person believes they are in right to do what they did then they should come forward and take responsibility and if they don’t believe they were in right then they shouldn’t do it (I too can speak ideally (should)).

(I love Radio Broker in GTA IV. It really have my sound and attitude. “It isn’t much of a cultural revolution any more, is it?” No, it isn’t Juliette Lewis. No, it isn’t. But why do all the cool spaced-out kids (you and Beck) belong to that sect… oh, sorry “alternative to psychiatry”?)

A little reminder (“Am I gonne see God, Mommy?”)

19 Oct

Right now there are many children with cancer! They look at their parents wondering why their lifes will be cut short as their bodies slowly decay when every cell in their bodies rots away. We can all help them by talking, spending and giving money and perhaps look at blogs where the parents write about their day to day hardships.

Remember when God gives us lemons, you should sell them to others. There are no evils that can’t be banished, and perhaps when the children are dead the parents can come on Operah or Dr. Phil to tell all about their loss. That’s when it is important to watch. To see their tears, and cry with them. That makes you sensitive, and sensitive people are better than others.

So remember; Children with Cancer! It makes you a better person.

On Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize (“I can see your Halo, Halo, Halooo-oo-oo”)

9 Oct

Remember, remember the 9 of October 2009 (later it will be referred too as “10/9” to make it more significant and timeless). That’s the day Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Norwegians are ambivalent too this, as many are against it and some are for it (also called a democracy).
Why this could happen?“, you may ask. Let me try to explain the whole thing from a Norwegian perspective.

Norway has an inferiority complex, since the swedes bullied us when we were younger. We also have this growing feeling, that infest the entire country and entire culture, that we do not deserve to have it this good. So you can add a self-loading to the inferiority complex. We feel that we somehow owe the rest of the world something, but all we have are money that are pumped up from the sea, so we spend it abroad hoping that other nations will recognize us as kind and generous to ease our inferiority and self-loading. This never happens, or it doesn’t happen enough, so we need to get the rest of the worlds attention by doing something new and nice.

The “new and nice” this month is given President Obama the peace price knowing well that he hasn’t really done anything. At least nothing to do with “peace”. He has of course been braking a race barrier (or something like that) and he has charm and he seems new and nice but he isn’t all that!

To my understanding, Obama has been a disappointment to USA as the “changes” he was talking about didn’t happen over night as everybody thought. He didn’t stop the wars, he didn’t realise all the prisoners from Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and he seems to scare many with is new healthcare system (you have nothing to fear USA, it works for Norway. Although not the exact same system.)

There is also another side of this award. The person who had the honor of giving the reward was a man named Jagland, and he was (or is) a member of the Norwegian left (Labour party) and as the swedes once said; Norway is the last communist country. What that means here is that being a labour party man (never done a days labour in his life, mind you! [citation needed]) he knows that as a leader he must lead and leading means he “has to make unpopular decisions” (the slogan of the party, 2nd only too “ignorance is strength”).

Thirdly, and lastly, as I have said the Norwegians self-loading is great and thus we all look forward to having PRESIDENT OBAMA coming to us and saying stuff like “What a great country” (ahh!), “lovely nature” (ahh!), “Peace loving people” (oh, ahh!) etc. while we jack-off to his praises. This will be an important day for us, many kids will not cut them self that day, and suicide rate will decline. So in many ways; Obama showing up, alone, will be a reason to earn that price.

So now you know (another side of it) and you may use this information as you please. I would just like to add that I do not think this award was wrong, but perhaps a little bit (reads; alot) early. I do not think that Obama is a bad president (I feel calm as he talks). I do not think that Norway has showed carelessness to the Nobel price (as the swedes soon will say) and that we should loose the price to another country (i.e. Sweden). I do however think that Jagland should resign, and that Norway (and other countries if they have an opinion) should have a serious debate as to where this award is going and where we want it to go. Obama, Al Gore and many other prices this past 10-15 years have really been “unpopular decisions”, and has made a mockery of an important event.

Lovebomb 2.1

Lovebomb 2.1


(NB: inferiority complex, self-loading and the Norwegian Labour Party being the new Ingsoc is of course satire. But like all satire, there probably is some truth in it. The comment on suicide and self-harm are all true, though)