ADVERTISEMENT

Movies, books, tv

I want to but it is not playing here. Not sure I can drive to Indy.

Don't miss this one, Marv. The film is a very unemotional and undramatic account of what flying B-17’s over Europe was like. Notwithstanding that, the emotions came through. The crews were kids, 20-24 years old. A 30 year-old was called “gramps”. The crew comments about switching from precision bombing to pattern (carpet) bombing were revealing about the state of mind of those young men.

One thing I didn’t know was more people died flying B-17’s in the 8th Air Force during the war than died in the Marine Corps.

All footage was actual, no mock-ups.

A tid bit. The Memphis Belle has been fully restored and since May of 2918 has been on display at the Air Force Museum in Dayton

A shocker at the end.
 
I know someone mentioned "The Umbrella Academy" on here somewhere, but not sure where. I have watched the first 2 episodes, and have found it very enjoyable and strange.
 
Don't miss this one, Marv. The film is a very unemotional and undramatic account of what flying B-17’s over Europe was like. Notwithstanding that, the emotions came through. The crews were kids, 20-24 years old. A 30 year-old was called “gramps”. The crew comments about switching from precision bombing to pattern (carpet) bombing were revealing about the state of mind of those young men.

One thing I didn’t know was more people died flying B-17’s in the 8th Air Force during the war than died in the Marine Corps.

All footage was actual, no mock-ups.

A tid bit. The Memphis Belle has been fully restored and since May of 2918 has been on display at the Air Force Museum in Dayton

A shocker at the end.

For anyone interested, it is on HBO on June 6 as part of the D-Day remembrance.
 
I finally listened to Sapiens, recommended by Rock and others. Made a Michigan drive fly by and learned a lot. Really interesting book.
 
I just got through watching the mini-series Chernobyl on HBO and thought it was very good. It really showed the flaws of having totalitarian rule where no one is permitted to question a superiors orders. Gorbachev is quoted as saying later in life that Chernobyl is what really caused the demise of the Soviet Union.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noodle
I just got through watching the mini-series Chernobyl on HBO and thought it was very good. It really showed the flaws of having totalitarian rule where no one is permitted to question a superiors orders. Gorbachev is quoted as saying later in life that Chernobyl is what really caused the demise of the Soviet Union.
Great show
 
I've mention "Dead to Me" before, I think. Stars Christina Applegate and Linda Cardellini, on Netflix.

https://www.netflix.com/title/80219707

Heard an interview with Applegate on NPR the other day, and they said it was picked up for another season. Made me wonder. They way the show had progressed, and how it was obvious the big reveal was going to happen, I couldn't see how another season would work.

Watched the last episode last night. Now I know.
 
I've mention "Dead to Me" before, I think. Stars Christina Applegate and Linda Cardellini, on Netflix.

https://www.netflix.com/title/80219707

Heard an interview with Applegate on NPR the other day, and they said it was picked up for another season. Made me wonder. They way the show had progressed, and how it was obvious the big reveal was going to happen, I couldn't see how another season would work.

Watched the last episode last night. Now I know.
I’m in the middle of it now. Just finished Fleabag and Bosch. Chernobyl is next.
 
I've mention "Dead to Me" before, I think. Stars Christina Applegate and Linda Cardellini, on Netflix.

https://www.netflix.com/title/80219707

Heard an interview with Applegate on NPR the other day, and they said it was picked up for another season. Made me wonder. They way the show had progressed, and how it was obvious the big reveal was going to happen, I couldn't see how another season would work.

Watched the last episode last night. Now I know.

Shows like this are tough to be multiple seasons. I liked it, but I am not sure how it could progress.

Killing Eve has a similar problem. The first season was good. But during the second season I saw Fonzie's bike in mid air over a tank of water. And the finale, dozens of Fonzie's on bikes over tanks of water.
 
I thought this was interesting: Chernobyl is now listed as the highest rated show ever on IMDB.

https://www.imdb.com/chart/toptv/?ref_=nv_tvv_250

Russia is really upset over how it made the USSR look and they are going to make its own version blaming the C.I.A. Trump needs to issue an apology to Putin over the obvious fake news being perpetrated by HBO.
 
I thought this was interesting: Chernobyl is now listed as the highest rated show ever on IMDB.

https://www.imdb.com/chart/toptv/?ref_=nv_tvv_250

Russia is really upset over how it made the USSR look and they are going to make its own version blaming the C.I.A. Trump needs to issue an apology to Putin over the obvious fake news being perpetrated by HBO.
"Chernobyl" is very good television. Its critics mostly say that it doesn't make the USSR look bad enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
Great show
"Chernobyl" is very good television. Its critics mostly say that it doesn't make the USSR look bad enough.

Good show, but one important omission. Left out of the show was why the Soviets built a more dangerous graphite reactor to generate electricity in the first place. This was not a well kept secret. Chernobyl was a weapons plant. It produced plutonium for bomb making. There are other safer reactors to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.

The Chernobyl-type reactor was designed to produce weapons grade plutonium while also generating electricity and used graphite (similar to charcoal). A more prevalent practice is to have separate reactors for power and weapons material.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
I'm just going to dump this here. I spent tonight going back over the Sherlock Holmes collection. There are a few short stories (out of 56!) I never read, it seems, so that was nice to discover, but many more that I last read twenty years ago, so even rereading them felt fresh.

But I had forgotten just how excellent they were. Holmes wasn't just important because of his legacy in terms of crime fiction. He was important because Doyle was an incredible writer. Even today, the stories stand out as some of the very best in the English language. If you've been ignoring the collection because it's old or obsolete, let me tell you, it very much is not. You owe it to yourself as a fan of literature to include the Holmes canon in your repertoire.
 
Did anyone else finish Bosch? I was a bit disappointed. It was good, but Bosch has had a movie made about one of his cases and been in other very high profile cases. No way they let him go undercover.
I like reading Michael Connolly's stuff, including the Bosch novels. MrsSope likes them too . . . she just got done reading Dark Sacred Night and On the Wrong Side of Goodbye.

No way they let him go undercover.

Hmmmmmmmm . . . .
 
This may have already been mentioned, but we're three episodes into Netflix' Dead to Me. Suspense drama with a lot of light comedic banter. Short episodes, each so far with a twist at the end. I'm liking it.
It was interesting for a few episodes, but after the 5th episode we just moved on . . . we felt like we were being taken for the same carnival ride only to end up back at the starting point again . . . .
 
I like reading Michael Connolly's stuff, including the Bosch novels. MrsSope likes them too . . . she just got done reading Dark Sacred Night and On the Wrong Side of Goodbye.



Hmmmmmmmm . . . .

Am I wrong on the undercover part? It would be like sending Dirty Harry undercover when everyone would recognize him from his frequent news appearances.

I keep meaning to read the Bosch books. I am not sure if the time setting change will throw me. How accurate is the series?
 
Ok, I'll take a stab at this. First off I'm not sure I can compare the problems with Judaism to issues that other religions may be having other than I've been told attendance is down across the board. Millenialls tend to be the punching bag lately in that they don't like membership. Perhaps there's truth there, but I've gotta think the problems are much deeper under the surface and maybe they're the first group to have the courage to say institutional religion is bullshit. Mind you I'm not saying they're rejecting religion, but just the way it's being presented to them.

Now back to Judaism, there's a lot of anxiety amongst some that there's mass assimilation and intermarriage and those are the biggest problems Judaism has to face. I'm calling bullshit on this. I think Judaism, specifically in America is simply in transition. Jews from Eastern Europe (Ashkenazic) are experiencing a totally different life since immigrating to the US. Those who left Europe before WWII dealt with extreme anti-semitism, pogroms and had to rely upon the temple community for survival. They moved to the US not just for religious freedom, but to have better lives. Obviously the Holocaust is the single greatest tragedy the Jews have faced in our generation and led the majority of Jews left to immigrate to the US, the newly created state of Israel or disperse around the diaspora. So as a people we've been on the move the last 100 years.

What does this mean? Well in the US our people are finally at a point where they don't need the temple anymore for survival. Jews can now have any job, join non-Jewish country clubs, date or marry non-Jews, be admitted to practically any school. This is fantastic as we've been accepted into the fabric of America. It took some time, but clearly progress was made. The downside is the non-orthodox who no longer feel they need to be part of the Jewish community to meet all their needs. For example you can look at Maslow's pyramid of needs and say the Jews in America have now met the most basic of needs such as food and shelter, moved onto Security needs such as personal, emotional and health, and most recently obtained a need for social belonging. These needs weren't always guaranteed when living in Europe and certainly not during WWII. The next need on the pyramid is that of self-esteem. I suppose some of that may come from how well our people have done in business, medicine, science and across all academics as well as influence in politics and entertainment. You could call this power, but on a personal level its recognition which affects ones self-esteem.

This is where I'll pause when it comes to Maslow's hierarchy of needs because the next one is self-actualization which is where I think Jews are struggling (and perhaps non-Jews as well).

So, let me move back to the Holocaust and attempt to tie some of these pieces together. I think post Holocaust non-orthodox Jews have being dealing with G-d issues. For example the most obvious is, if we are G-d's chosen people why would he let this happen to us?" It seems like a legitimate question. Did G-d turn his back on us or is there something deeper at play?

For those that attend synagogue, and I belong to two different congregations, this is what I can tell you about how we worship. We gather, we say lots of traditional prayers (some in Hebrew, some English, some both), we in a sense bend the knee to G-d, thank him for his creations, read from the Torah (the biblical story), celebrate life-cycle events, remember the dead, sing songs (this varies depending upon the level of tradition) and afterwards usually gather for drinks and food. I'm sure I left out much but I want to give you an idea of what happens at temple. What doesn't occur is the questioning of G-d's power. I don't feel our Jewish institutions have adequately addressed this question. We ask Jews to come to services, bend the knee and recite many prayers in Hebrew that most people have no idea what they're saying. I have a problem with this. The other issue I have with synagogues and the Rabbi's is I feel they do a poor job of making religion relevant to people's daily lives. Because of something we call "Jewish Guilt", many Jews join temples merely becuase their parents and grandparents tell them they should and it's important for the surival of our people. To me this is just modern tribalism. What we have now is a lot of bad faith, we have people supporting things that aren't even working for them becasue they're so freaked out that Judaism won't last unless they belong to the temple, marry another Jew or say prayers they no longer even believe. We're so obsessed with preservation, we've stopped trusting our own experience at synagogue which really isn't all that good.

One of my favorite Rabbi's and thinkers, Irwin Kula, says "Religion is a technology of human flourishing." So I ask the question is religion helping us flourish? Are our lives measurably better because we're Jews and attending synagogue. When 90% of members don't even like attending services I would say no. I would say half the members have one foot in and one foot out. As Jewish guilt loosens it's grip you will continue to see members leave the synagogue. So I sit on the board of my conservative synagoue and I can tell you the conversations are usually about how do we attract more members. Our finances are so bad right now we can barely afford the building. I know we're not alone here either. So the conversation usually turns to either we need to raise dues or get more members. It's my opinion we need radical change and innovate and reimagine Jewish practice. Whatever we're doing inside the synagogue simply isn't working.

Do I have the answers? Hell no, but I'm no longer going to sit and pretend that preserving all traditions is the way to go. Some need to be left behind as we find new ways to practice our religion and flourish as Jews.

I'm sorry for rambling on, but this isn't easy stuff we're talking about but I'll leave you with the following. I'm not convinced to be a modern Jew you even have to believe in G-d. In fact I highly doubt G-d (if you believe in him) is sitting upstairs thinking my number one goal is for everyone to worship me and bend the knee) . I think G-d is hidden but present and his number one goal is for us to preserve and perfect the world he's given us. That includes taking care of all the creatures and the earth. You don't even have to believe in G-d to share these same goals.

On a personal level I feel my job is to help plant these seeds of change, not for the preservation of Judaism but to help people live better more flourishing lives.
Nice post. A couple or three things . .

(1) Regarding millenials, research our church (PCUSA) has communicated indicates that millenials are more interested in getting directly to charitable work than they are in the trappings of communal worship, what with formal Sunday attire, seemingly professional choirs, paid clergy and the like. Not sure whether that carries over to Judaism or not . . . would be interested in your observations (if any) on that point.

(2) Have you ever read any stuff by Eckhardt Tolle? He had a best seller in the late 90s called The Power of Now (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Now) and followed it up with another called A New Earth (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/76334.A_New_Earth). It's more wisdom literature than religious - he espouses no religion and in some of his remarks seems to discredit the notion a bit - but I don't think what he's saying is necessarily inconsistent with religious belief - even the seemingly discrediting remarks. Would be interested in your take on his books if you have.

(3) As an aside, I'd like to mention The Jewish Annotated New Testament (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13049091-the-jewish-annotated-new-testament). It's the same New Revised Standard Edition used by many Christians, but it has annotations that are all done by high quality Jewish commentators, including New Testament professor (Vanderbilt) Amy-Jill Levine.
 
Am I wrong on the undercover part?

Marv, you know I can't tell you that. That'd be like telling you whether you catch Bugs Bunny. What's the fun in that?

I keep meaning to read the Bosch books. I am not sure if the time setting change will throw me. How accurate is the series?

I didn't know there WAS a series until I read this thread yesterday. What network is it on? All I can see online is that it's on Amazon Prime, to which we don't subscribe.
 
Marv, you know I can't tell you that. That'd be like telling you whether you catch Bugs Bunny. What's the fun in that?



I didn't know there WAS a series until I read this thread yesterday. What network is it on? All I can see online is that it's on Amazon Prime, to which we don't subscribe.

It is an Amazon original, so you are out of luck. It has been a very good series. He is a veteran of the War on Terror and not Vietnam. That is the big change I know of.
 
Am I wrong on the undercover part? It would be like sending Dirty Harry undercover when everyone would recognize him from his frequent news appearances.

I keep meaning to read the Bosch books. I am not sure if the time setting change will throw me. How accurate is the series?
The series combines some of the books . I like both, but I’ve read the books long enough ago that I forget what has happened until it happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin the Martian
I just began reading The British are Coming. It is part one of a Revolutionary War trilogy by Rick Atkinson. I have previously read his WWII trilogy.

Even though I am only 60 pages in, Revere and Dawes are just jumping on their horses, I must give Atkinson the best compliment I can. He reminds me of Barbara Tuchman. Tuchman began Guns with the visuals of the funeral for Edward VII, painting a picture that I firmly believe should be used in a movie. Atkinson has now done that same thing in the four books I have read. In this book, King George visits Portsmouth to review the Royal Navy. Atkinson paints the trip, the colors, the smells, the sights. It is all there in a way that makes me wonder if the best Hollywood cinematographers could match it.
 
Anyone else get out to see Once Upon a Time in Hollywood on opening week-end? Sluggo highly recommends it.
 
Anyone else get out to see Once Upon a Time in Hollywood on opening week-end? Sluggo highly recommends it.
Just came back from it. Several people in the audience didn’t like it, but my friend and I loved it. Tarantino is a genius at getting you to feel like you are there. The music and every single prop was perfect. I figured we’d get the traditional Tarantino gore at the end. Many, many funny bits. Great acting, and have to say I enjoyed looking at Brad Pitt and Leo for two and a half hours.
 
unpopular_opinions.png
 
Speaking of books, I'm currently reading Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. Half-way through the second book. It's pretty good so far. Each book has about eight or nine parts, each with their own POV character. So you get the story from multiple points of view, but unlike GRRM, you don't bounce back and forth. You get one part of the story from one point of view, and then you get the next part from another, and so on. But he pulls it all together really well, not disjointed at all.
 
I am currently reading The Quiet Game by Greg Illes, which is the first in a series about Penn Cage, lawyer turned author. Iles seems like a poor man’s cross between Pat Conroy and Scott Throw, but it has been a page turner.
 
I am watching the Hillary Clinton interview with Howard Stern on YouTube. Howard is very good at getting a guest to let down their hair. If Hillary would have come across like this before the election I think she would have won. It's over an hour in length but pretty fascinating about her observations and opinions of various people.

 
I am watching the Hillary Clinton interview with Howard Stern on YouTube. Howard is very good at getting a guest to let down their hair. If Hillary would have come across like this before the election I think she would have won. It's over an hour in length but pretty fascinating about her observations and opinions of various people.

HRC was actually a much more personable person/candidate in one-on-one extemporaneous settings. It was when she was up on stage doing her stump speech where she came off as wooden and disingenuous.
 
HRC was actually a much more personable person/candidate in one-on-one extemporaneous settings. It was when she was up on stage doing her stump speech where she came off as wooden and disingenuous.

First, I think she was an introvert and those big stages brought that out in her. Second, I think this article applies to the last election, being able to fake confidence is more important than almost anything else.
 
I am watching the Hillary Clinton interview with Howard Stern on YouTube. Howard is very good at getting a guest to let down their hair. If Hillary would have come across like this before the election I think she would have won. It's over an hour in length but pretty fascinating about her observations and opinions of various people.


only idiots care what a candidate's persona is like.

what's important is what their policy stances and vision are.

Hilary was a corrupt Wall St shill neocon, who was no friend to the working class, liberal social policies, or anything the Dem party once stood for. (thus why the DNC owners and corporate media loved her and installed her as their candidate).

i could care less if she can be a hoot.
 
I just saw the movie Queen & Slim today. It’s a somewhat controversial movie with overall mixed reviews, but I thought it was very good, powerful even. I’m a sucker for a well written, visually pleasing, love story even if the love is born out of desperation from being on the run for six days. You really connect with the characters and genuinely hope they make it. Powerful and stunning ending.
 
Just finished: The Path between the Seas, Panama Canal (recommend)
Just Started: the Mosquito: Human History....(so far so good)
Probably next: How to Hide an Empire
 
If you have Netflix, I highly recommend "The Kominsky Method", a comedy starring Michael Douglas and Alan Arkin. Very funny.


Second the vote. Several running gags are hilarious, the waiter in the lunch scenes is lol funny. The dialogue is all grown up, sharp witty and addresses a human condition now and then. The interplay between Douglas and Arkin is great. I'll watch Arkin in any movie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bulk VanderHuge
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT