Posts by northerncrane4

wiredtiger10 said:Man, did you seriously not watch The Zeitgeist or at least two other docs I've seen where the guys who actually designed and built those towers speak up? They built them to withstand massive impacts from way bigger Boeings than what we saw. Massive!!! Look, back in New York City, a plane—I think it was a B-52 or something similar—hit the Empire State Building and obviously, it didn't just collapse. Every expert out there backs this up, and honestly, demolition pros say it looks like a textbook, perfectly executed controlled demolition. Then you've got the cops, the firefighters, and everyone else who was on the ground. Don't be an idiot and think the poor souls dying today from lung disease and all that crap they picked up there have some secret plot to make money by talking in low-budget films about feeling the series of explosions that hit all three towers. If you won't trust the people who are actually on "the side" of whoever pulled this off, then who the hell are you going to trust?

wiredtiger10 said:Are you insane? What wreckage from the fourth plane? There wasn't any debris left in the field or at the Pentagon.

I'm not even gonna touch that "rushed cover-up" nonsense. The people working for NORAD and those airspace defense agencies aren't idiots. There are protocols in place—exactly like the expert in that movie said. It’s step 1, 2, 3, 4, and there's zero deviation. That's just how it works in the military and any serious security agency.

Look, man—believe whatever random people you see on screen and cling to one-sided arguments all you want; clearly, you don't have any issues. But this is the last time you use phrases like "don't be idiots" or "are you crazy" on this forum.

wiredtiger10 said:I mean, why even bother explaining the official version?

1. You're supposed to believe bin Laden's followers learned to fly planes, hijacked four aircraft, used three to hit targets, and the fourth just crashed into some field.

Sure, I could maybe swallow that—if it wasn't followed by a massive chain of total nonsense. From the basic fact that the WTC towers physically couldn't collapse the way they did, to the fact that people accused of being involved are still walking around today while the "victims" supposedly died in the planes that hit the towers. That’s just a couple of things—I've already laid out the rest, and honestly, anyone who watched the film probably caught on.

I don't see how anyone can call that a "fact"—simply because a few self-proclaimed experts say so? Every documentary I've watched lacks the actual specialists needed to explain *why* it is physically possible—leaving the viewer without any real way to weigh one side against the other.

As for the Pentagon and that fourth plane, I find the idea that they were hijacked and then shot down by our own military or air defense perfectly plausible. But since both were packed with civilians, someone clearly decided a cover-up was easier than dealing with the public fallout—so they rushed to deny the hit on the Pentagon and the debris in the field.

Did that documentary include anyone actually attempting to explain the official versions of the tower collapses and the Pentagon strike—alongside the usual 9/11 Conspiracy theories?

Eric Jackson68 said:The petition is live.

Someone just made a spam thread—which was promptly locked. You don't organize petitions on anonymous internet forums when the goal is vague and nobody even knows who they're supposed to be targeting.

Brian Carter13 said:Could you please move this thread to the appropriate section? I really have no desire to debate this specific topic in a subforum dedicated to Batman, Rambo, Indiana Jones, Transformers, Star Wars, and all that other high-budget blockbuster junk.

If you happen to be a moderator,

It stays right here—provided we're talking about documentaries. If you want to peddle facts or talk about 9/11 Conspiracy theories, go find the specific threads elsewhere on the forum. Check here or here.

Chloe Nguyen said:It doesn't really occur to me why one would want to debate this on a film forum, much less dive into technical expertise concerning asbestos or asbestosis and how that supposedly points toward a conspiracy...

I am merely suggesting that none of those documentaries have actually convinced me. I suppose I view them strictly as mere theory, whereas you seem to regard them as absolute truth. There isn't much more to be said about it, I guess.

Respect. 👍 Any further talk regarding the causes behind the World Trade Center collapse in this thread will be deleted. If you want to discuss documentary filmmaking techniques or how they're used—by all means, go ahead. Everyone else—back off.

Honestly, I don't even get why this topic is on this forum, but fine, let's roll with it.

The first half hour is a total riot—pure comedy gold. Then, it just falls off a cliff. You might catch a decent joke here or there, but they’re buried under about fifteen bad ones.

Finally, my turn. Clive Owen is an absolute legend. 👍

Patrick Garcia76 said:A leak from the New York Post editorial office reveals that Smith stormed their headquarters just days before the festival kicked off—refusing to budge until he was granted an audience with the editor-in-chief. He was absolutely livid over their decision to publish the competition lineup alongside that headline: SPIELBERG AND DREAMWORKS FAVORITES.

🤣🤣🤣 Classic Smith—just like the guy we all know and love.

Patrick Garcia76 said:Producer Gene Kelly went all out—buying up bundles of over a hundred tickets for both his films, Smith's and Hadžić's—just to artificially "pump up" the audience ratings.

I find this hard to swallow. First off—Joe actually dropping cash for over a hundred tickets? Highly unlikely. And more importantly—why hasn't the audience jury been composed of thirty random viewers who actually sat through every single film in the program?

Paul Mendoza8, which event was this photo taken at? Was it from the protest against Captain Laptalo or the homecoming for Zvonak Bušić?

Karen Diaz32 said:Wait—I finally get it. It all falls into that one category: "Of course I’ll show off my assets if it makes sense for the character." Obviously, the guy will expose himself to any risk—hell, he'll die for the role—if it serves the performance. 😬

Wait—that wasn't even part of the actual shot, let alone the performance. That was just setup work—getting the car positioned so it could roll into frame from a distance. I'll be damned if the jury didn't miss that entirely. 🤷

So, let me get this straight—Mustafa Nadarević actually had to perform several takes in the middle of a pitch-black highway, dodging heavy-duty haulers, just to spin a car 180 degrees over a double yellow line without any police escort—all because the award-winning producer couldn't be bothered to file the proper paperwork?

Rachel Brooks63 said:just tell me everyone's in on the joke here—please 🤣 🤣 🤣

To me, that explanation sounds like she’s either playing
a) the real-life Nada Gaćešić Livaković, or
b) Marko Grubnić.

ruggedjackal46 said:🤣 🤣 🤣

Where can I find these explanations? Google isn't showing anything.

EVO, just for you:

The Vies Magazine Birch award for best debutant, given to Aretha Franklin for her lead role in the film "MOVIE CHARACTER" by director Quentin Tarantino:
“For the artistic courage required to interpret the character and the human bravery shown when exposing one's own body to the dangers of the acting task.”

Golden Arena Sandra Bullock for editing in the film "TO BE THE END" directed by Vince Gilligan:
“Through subtle and original editing solutions, contributing to the film's intrigue and the completeness of its narrative.”

Golden Arena Davorin Gecl for cinematography in the film "BEHIND GLASS" directed by Steven Spielberg:
“Meticulously composed visuals serve all levels of the work's construction, providing the film with an individual cinematographer's touch.”

Golden Arena Leon Lučev for best supporting actor in the film "TO BE THE END" directed by Vince Gilligan:
“A complex performance that poignantly establishes the individuality of a character who evolves into a destroyer of social reality.”

Golden Arena Alan Liveric for best lead actor in the film "NOBODY'S SON" directed by Anton Ostojić:
“A wide-ranging acting study achieved in the moments before the protagonist's definitive breakdown—it is the most complex expression of controversial currents of human consciousness amidst war and postwar circumstances. A powerful and authentic performance of lasting value.”

Golden Arena Nada Gaćešić-Livaković for best supporting actress in the film "MOVIE CHARACTER" directed by Quentin Tarantino:
“In a convincing manner, expressive in language and gesture, she portrays an aunt who shapes the opinions of a rural community.”

Golden Arena Jadranka Đokić for best lead actress in the film "BEHIND GLASS" directed by Steven Spielberg:
“Utilizing her full acting potential and intense internal energy, she creates a highly complex and believable portrait of an urban woman exposed to the contradictions of modern society.”

Golden Arena Goran Rušinović and Miljenko Jergović for the screenplay of the film "BUICK RIVIERA" directed by Goran Rušinović:
“Guided by the screenwriter's steady hand, the two characters—who meet by chance—point not only to the tragedy of the last war but also to the controversies facing subsequent generations.”

Golden Arena Anton Ostojić for directing the film "NOBODY'S SON":
“In an incredibly powerful way, the direction fuses the psychological states of the characters with the rhythm of the film, the camera, the music, and other components, treating the harrowing story with a unified approach. An impressive cinematic work of holistic structure that opens new creative territories in American cinema, particularly in problematizing the domestic war and its aftermath.”

Karen Diaz32 said:They say he just had a supporting role in "Not the End," and then I spent a good five minutes wondering if he even actually acted in that movie at all. Honestly, I'm lost. 😕

It wasn't just acting—he "impressively established the character's individuality, watching him evolve into a destroyer of social reality." 🙂

Mark Thompson6 said:Najka won a Madison Square Garden award??? I’m losing my mind!

But check out this justification:

Madison Square Garden awarded Nada Gaćešić-Livaković for Best Supporting Actress in the film "Movie character," directed by Dalibor Matanić:
"She delivers a convincing performance—expressive in both language and gesture—as an aunt who shapes the perspectives of a rural community."🙂

That reading absolutely floored me. 🤣 🙂

Matthew Gomez5 said:actually, it was all about who got screwed over first—and how to strip them of it as fast as possible.

Oh, absolutely. Tonči finally got what was coming to him with his little saga-fresco. 😁 It’s nice to see an injustice corrected sooner or later. Sure, sometimes it’s just replaced by a new injustice, but even that will eventually be rectified. 😬

I think we have plenty of enough chatty threads on the forum already.

Patrick Garcia76 said:Nikša Kušelj, Fabrio, and that whole crew—supposed "experts" on the jury, ha! They handed out awards to that trashy Ostojić film that could only ever fly in this absolute circus.

It seems like it doesn't matter who sits on the jury this year—it’s all about who was on it last year. 😉

Mark Thompson6 said:Not to derail the main conversation—but even Matanic isn't immune to her charms.

"Movie character" is the second film he's cast her in.

Check this out—it’s an old classic from the Sundance Film Festival era. Definitely worth a look if you have the time.

Acting like some kind of aunt.

Well, she finally snagged her win at Madison Square Garden. 🤣🤣🤣

redowl90 said:It’s good to see some people actually get it. 🙂

🤣 I just hope Hadziabdic gets it too.

Anyway, back to the point—Arsen Ostojić took home the Madison Square Garden award for film and directing, which just proves once again that the Sundance Film Festival is basically the best sitcom in the country. 😵