The real question I’m wrestling with here is whether this whole concept of a "thing-in-itself" is actually as deep as these philosophy professors try to make it sound. I mean, think about it... if we can use our own brains to decode everything around us—basically grasping the underlying essence or the "noumenal" side of things through pure reason—then what's actually left? Is there even anything remotely interesting hiding behind that curtain once we've mentally unpacked it?
There’s such a thing as a "metric" for faith. And that metric? It’s all about justification.
I mean, sure, you can believe in just about anything under the sun. But the real question is how much actual justification there is behind that belief.
If you look at this through the lens of strict Epistemology, even what we call "knowledge" is basically just defined as a justified belief.
It’s kind of like asking why those gritty crime stories from 60 Minutes always make the front page of the morning paper and why everyone rushes to read them first...
... And the real kicker? The explanation is actually that people are inherently good... believe it or not...
What’s your take on the sheer, systematic lack of talent found in the "worst director ever"? I get that whenever you try to debate his work, people might think you're just making fun of him, but the massive amount of cult following and dedicated websites out there proves this is something way deeper than a simple joke. It’s like how we spend all our time analyzing what makes a movie great; with Woodov's stuff, you can spend an eternity dissecting exactly what makes a movie terrible. Ed Wood is a total anomaly in the film industry because nobody else has ever managed to pair those two specific traits: a complete lack of skill and a fanatical, unshakable belief that what he was doing was actually right. That combo is what makes his films so unique—his subjective vision stays unbroken from start to finish.
Honestly, nobody was more qualified than Tim Burton to tackle a character like this. He totally nailed it by capturing the exact same vibe that his fans fall in love with. In the whole movie "Ed Wood," it doesn't feel like they're mocking him; instead, it's this constant, subtle sense of irony.
P.S. Does anyone happen to have a copy of "Plan 9 from Outer Space"?
Sam Perez2 said:Wait, was there only one other? I feel like there were more, or maybe something else is in the works.
My bad, totally slipped my mind. That was just the second adaptation I was aware of. There are actually a ton of movies based on his stuff—you should check them out here: http://us.imdb.com/Name?Dick,+Philip+K.
The movie’s actually pretty solid. As far as I know, this is the second time they've tried to adapt a Philip K. Dick story, and honestly? They pulled it off. That being said, even though people were already warning us about it, you just can't hold it up against Blade Runner. That film reached legendary masterpiece status for a reason, and nothing else quite touches it.
musical: Harry - American in Paris crime: Dirty Harry - Donald Siegel thriller: Vertigo - Alfred Hitchcock horror: Psycho - Alfred Hitchcock dramedy: ? comedy: entertainment - "The Party" by Blake Edwards action comedy: ? action film - attack on police station no. 13. - John Carpenter action Sci-Fi: Blade Runner - Ridley Scott war film: Apocalypse Now - Francis Ford Coppola Sci-Fi drama: 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick drama drama: "A Streetcar Named Desire"; "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" - Tennessee Williams animated (comedy): ? animated (drama): ?
When I actually sit down and crunch the numbers, I’ve probably only hit the movie theater three times in my life—and honestly, only two of those weren't a total waste of time: *Lord of the Rings* and *Minority Report*.