I need to finally get around to watching Vertigo so that's going to be my pick.

So, the theater was short on attendance today. But I decided to try again and be more proactive with notifying and reminding everyone.

But I do want some feedback for when you guys want the next stream.

I'm thinking either Monday (tomorrow) or Wedneday.

I'm also wondering whether you want 8 EST or 9 EST, cause I feel bad for west coast people. Either that or I could have the movie stream back-to-back.

Please let me know. I hope to make this work. If no one replies, I'm probably going to do it Wednesday at 9 EST, maybe with back to back showings.

Once times are decided upon, I'll leave comments tagging everyone in the morning of the showing, one hour before the showing, and at the time of the showing. Hope this helps everyone.

b_b, humanodon, ButterflyEffect, OftenBen, roysexton, iammyownrushmore, blackbootz,_refugee_, mk, eightbitsamurai, Ave, camarillobrillo, havires, kleinbl00, ecib, insomniasexx, elizabeth, nowaypablo, pigeon, rjw, StJohn, Mindwolf, Meriadoc, beezneez, longstocking, theadvancedapes, ghostoffuffle, T-Dog, jonaswildman, coffeesp00ns, bfv, cgod, mike, thenewgreen, zebra2, Kaius, Zurangatang, InkBubble, Scorpio, enjoyablethings, edricarica, subduedit, protorobot, War, Formerly_Me, joelg236, steve, rinx

These are likely people who decided on their degrees after googling how much their major was "worth."

Fuck em.

Yeah I was just telling my girlfriend that I think Paul's having a bad night.

I'm actually disappointed. I'm not a right libertarian, but I wouldn't mind having a republican candidate who was against the drug war, foreign intervention, NSA surveillance, etc.

I mean they all attack social programs anyway.

Hey, those hugs were real.

Of course, the video is an oversimplification. It is hardly trying to be more than that. This is some guy's YouTube channel, not The Journal of Political Opinion, and while the guy is definitely pushing an opinion, he's hardly acting like he's Noam effing Chomsky. He's definitely not telling everyone watching this video to go out and buy his colorful propaganda to hang around your cities and to donate to his cause. The comparison is dishonest.

It seems like everyone whose jimmies were rustled by this video had a particularly bad time with his simplified class notions of black people, poor whites, and masters. It's not that complicated of a simplification, and it's really just talk of class:

Black people = Lower Class, riddled with minorities. Poor whites = Middle Class, a more diverse group. Masters = The Upper Class

If you look at it this way, it's not that controversial. It's not like the guy thinks there's no Hispanics, Asians, etc in the country. I don't think it's meant to be literal or academic.

Nowhere in his video does the guy say the "masters" come together at this hotel every last Tuesday in May to plot how to keep everyone down. It's pretty much the implied argument me and deanSolecki have already gone over. The upper classes act in their own interests, with more access to power centers and influential people, benefiting themselves and creating inequality. He brings up the consolidation of media and growing inequality to show how the upper classes have gotten more entrenched and powerful, nothing more.

He does say that the powerful enacted Jim Crow with specific intentions, but, hey, the powerful in the South DID enact Jim Crow with specific intentions of keeping black people down and unequal. And his assertions about the "caste" system seem to be how society became organized so that black slaves were worse off than poor whites, hardly a controversial claim. He says the system benefited the "masters," not that they created it in their basements to harm black people specifically because they thought the color of their skin was icky.

What does slavery committed by Africans have to do with anything? No one says slavery is inherently a racist institution, but slavery as it was practiced in the United States became a racist institution. That's the reality. And you can't deny there were feelings of supremacy against Africans. Look at White Man's Burden. Look at the colonization of Africa in general. Look at the arguments for slavery but slaveholding Southerners.

What does the universality of societal prejudice against minorities have to do with anything? The reality is that the US has racial problems. Being the "melting pot" doesn't give the country a pass. It's quite ridiculous to even contend that it should be given one.

Black people in this country are the minority so people should point out how they are disadvantaged. It doesn't matter if, hypothetically, they would be the oppressors in bizarro world where they are the majority. The reality is they aren't, and this is how it affects them. Jim Crow targeted black people because it promoted racist institutions. The War on Drugs disproportionately targets minorities because it's a racist institution. And it is. I never worried about police rolling through when I wanted weed.

He's hardly focusing only on how problems affect the black community, as well. He talks about the indentured servitude of white people as you say, he talks about how there are more in prison than ever before, and he talks about how poverty affects the white people. His overall point was how "poor whites" and black people should ally and work for their interests against the upper classes.

Also, I've never read A People's History, but if you're referring to this chapter, I'd say your characterization of what Zinn said was quite disingenuous. He never calls him an Uncle Tom or House Negroe. He does put forth the case that MLK was favored by the establishment, and that nonviolence worked only to a point. But that's a bout a thousand times more nuanced than what you said.

The guy brought up a bunch of factoids in the middle of the video. You admit they're mostly correct. That's the most important part of the video.

Everyone is talking about the goodness of government in here. And here I am with my hand raised as an anarchist ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Libertarian socialism is what I usually use to describe my politics.

Still doing plenty of research, but that seems to be the political philosophy that resonates most with me.

8 1/2 is one of my favorite movies, and I hope everyone enjoyed it.

I remember, when I first watched it, that the camerawork and blocking (position and choreography of actors in the frame) stood out to me. It's evident in the early scene when Ride of the Valkyries is playing. The camera sweeps along giving screen space to several of the older patrons of the health resort before finally stopping at our out-of-place protagonist Guido (played wonderfully by Marcello Mastroianni). Another one of my favorite uses of the camera and actors occurs when Guido comes face to face with the actresses and producers attached to his film in the hotel lobby.

I also enjoyed the surreal, avant-garde aspects as well. Those parts really gave the film great depth and allowed for intersesting storytelling in a way that only a film could do. You can feel the influence of these scenes in movies such as Eternal Sunshine, Synechdoche, New York, and even Annie Hall.

One scene that probably sticks out to many is the famous harem sequence. I've always found this scene hilarious for many reasons. For one, it's a great use of visual storytelling to characterize Guido. It perfectly captures Guido's pig-headed attitudes toward the women in his life, most evident by the fact that the scene begins when he fantasizes that his wife and mistress are getting along (as he hilariously applauds them in the background). However, it also shows his inner need for women's love and affection. While it's certainly implied that those women exist in his fantasy for sexual reasons, it's important to note that, in the scene, they only care for him as he was cared for as a child (the bath, preparing food, etc). And of course, the women do revolt at the end, and the scene further shows him how he mistreat his wife. Also, it's another example of the great camerawork and blocking in the film.

I can also now clarify what I was saying in the voting thread.

If you pay attention, you'll notice that the film Guido is creating is 8 1/2 itself. The title actually refers to the fact that the film is Fellini's 8 1/2th project. In the beginning, the critic picks apart the dream sequence that starts the film, and he further critiques the movie as it goes on. Guido tells the priest early on that he plans on having the protagonist meet him while taking a mud bath in a spa, and that scene literally plays out later in the movie. Most obvious is when the casting videos are being watched.

Also, about Claudia's clothing. If you notice, you'll see she is wearing all white in the scenes when Guido envisions her. This, to me, shows how he's putting her on a pedestal as his muse. When the actress finally shows up during the casting videos, she's wearing all black. She then criticizes his work and plans on their car ride ("Because he doesn't know how to love"). Then at the end, all the characters appear in the great finale clad entirely in white. I see this as Guido accepting all these people as important to his life and his creativity. However, it could also be seen as a kind of afterlife. It's pretty open to interpretation, as the best movies are.

All in all, it's a great movie to me. La Dolce Vita has a similar style minus the surreal elements and is another Fellini movie people should check out at least once.