Posts by hiddenhound3

I have finally sat down to experience her latest album, and frankly, there is little to say other than it is magnificent—absolutely stunning.

It is true that we won't hear those signature, raspy vocal strains (😍) that once defined her sound, which arguably undermines her previous claims regarding the unyielding nature of her Voice. On the contrary, she has demonstrated that she possesses far greater range; she can master whatever style she chooses, a quality that, in my estimation, places her among the absolute elite of musical artists. I hold no resentment whatsoever toward this sudden shift in direction. Rather, I see it as a sign of genuine evolution. She refuses to cling stubbornly to the exhausted concept that originally brought her fame; instead, she is prepared to march boldly toward more commercial waters, guided by gorgeous, playful melodies and unexpected, refreshing harmonic shifts. In my view, she is only improving, and I anticipate many wonderful things from her in the years to come.

Bravo, Joanna!! 👍

(Additionally, there is an increasing presence of trombone within her ensemble, which is, naturally, a significant advantage for a home like 😁)

Joanna + trombone 🙏

Also quite beautiful, featuring easy from the new album.

analogstag29 said:The Enlightenment thinkers represent the ultimate force and wisdom of our entire world; they always have been, and they always will be. But honestly, it goes way beyond just the famous names you find in history books. That true Enlightenment spirit is tucked away inside all sorts of people—writers, artists, painters, sculptors, musicians, even actors.

In this day and age, we need those voices more than ever before. Anyone who feels that spark of truth burning inside them really ought to nurture it and let it grow, rather than snuffing it out, no matter how difficult or costly that path might turn out to be.

The real tragedy is how that spirit gets dampened from the very beginning by parents, then school, then college, then society at large, and so on and so forth...

They basically try to convince you of the opposite. If you ask me, life really boils down to two main chapters: everything before you reach true understanding, and everything after. Once you hit that point of realization, everything else becomes secondary, more or less.

It almost feels like the current global establishment has made some sort of unspoken agreement to use every ounce of its power to make things difficult for these types of souls, trying to stop them from answering the greatest calling there is on this earth. Some people find them disruptive, but that’s nothing new under the sun; it’s always been that way. And most people? Most people just want to stay comfortable right now. Unlike the true visionaries, they're essentially just children of the moment, chasing fleeting pleasures and minor indulgences. Then, when those comforts inevitably vanish, they always find someone else to blame for it. It’s just a cycle that keeps spinning on this planet, from the dawn of time until today.

Those who carry the light of the Enlightenment were, and will always be, the light of the world. The only issue is that there are plenty of frauds running around nowadays pretending to be the real thing, but you can tell pretty quickly who's genuine and who's just an actor...

I find myself in complete agreement regarding the notion that upbringing, primary schooling, and higher education serve more to dull the intellect than to enlighten it. In truth, the entire apparatus is designed to suppress one's intuition and the inherent sense of the natural order that exists within us all to varying degrees.

Personally, I have never held much affection for the Enlightenment; my distaste stems not from its questioning of religious dogma, but rather because it merely introduced a different kind of dogma—rationalization.

I hold a remarkably similar view regarding Maria Theresa—she served as little more than a strategic matchmaker for her daughters, ensuring that the reach of Austria extended across as much of Europe as possible. It was a profoundly rational maneuver, driven entirely by greed and a raw "will to power."

Furthermore, I find myself unconvinced by any notion of collective salvation, whether it be the spiritual promises offered by Christ or the secular ideals championed by the Enlightenment. It is difficult to quantify the exact damage the Enlightenment has inflicted upon the world, perhaps no more so than Christianity itself, but they are essentially two ends of the same rope being tightened around our necks.

As for slavery, it will never truly be eradicated, for the root issue lies in the ambivalent nature of humanity—that we possess an inherent drive to both rule and be ruled. Only when there is a fundamental shift in human consciousness—specifically, when we move past dualities and abandon the concepts of currency, power, and ownership—will the entire structure change, allowing true prosperity and happiness to surface. For the time being, such qualities are only visible in isolated individuals who remain unattached to any movement, regardless of whether they emerge from religious circles or the philosophical-scientific milieu of the Enlightenment.

mellowraven22 said:Haven't checked if there are other variations of Blondy-ri out there yet. Nah, just leave it like this.

Done.

I appreciate it; everything was handled quite swiftly. 🙂

I would like to formally request that my username be changed to hiddenhound3 🙂

That can certainly be done. Please reach out to Tyndall to finalize the change.

wearyowl29 said:I certainly am... and I believe my conviction exceeds even that percentage.😍

I have no desire to infringe upon anyone else's personal convictions or insights, nor do I wish to correct what others believe, so I shall leave matters exactly as they stand.🙂

That is precisely the point... yet there lies the true absurdity regarding religious people. Their most beloved go to God or Allah, while others simply weep because they feel "envious"—resenting that those individuals move on while they remain stuck, languishing here in the Valley of Tears.

One of the most profound lessons a person can master in this life is acceptance. It is an act of active Love, directed toward oneself and everyone in one's orbit. By refusing to resist, we preserve our energy for the specific path laid out before us. Consequently, embracing the tears is the most effective route toward happiness—happiness defined as a fundamental state of being.🙂
A truly happy person will not look upon the journeys of others with envy or negative emotions.

Brenda Cook4 said:Oh, absolutely. I see it as something inevitable... but it feels so distant from me, almost imaginary. That’s why I told you—it feels like something that might never actually arrive. Because of that, these thoughts don't carry any heavy burden; they’re more philosophical. Honestly, I don't spend much time worrying about tomorrow, either...

I believe the deceased are right where they belong, yet I still find myself feeling sad.

Maybe it is just the end of a chapter, but if you feel like this current chapter isn't exactly a walk in the park, there's no guarantee that the "next" one won't be just as rough... or even worse.

Of course, I am not necessarily looking at things through a linear lens, nor am I clinging to any hope for improvement; rather, I see it as a continuous cycle that moves forward regardless of us (and by us, I am not referring to our essential souls, but simply our personas, our egos, and our material existence).

wearyowl29 As follows:
The passing of another soul serves as a profound reminder that our time here is fleeting. Yet, there is a certain comfort in knowing that what is inevitable can never truly be lost; death is merely the process of returning us to the place from which we first emerged.

Are we quite certain? I must ask, are you absolutely positive about that? 🤔 I am certainly not.

We are ultimately just standing on the shoreline, mourning our own losses and weeping for ourselves.
We are inherently selfish to a fault.

That is an excellent conclusion, and I find myself in complete agreement with your perspective. The void left behind by a physical absence in our lives is profoundly painful. This suffering stems from the fact that our fundamental sense of security has been shattered, and it is only natural that we weep in its wake.

Brenda Cook4 said:I don't really dwell on my own end; it’s almost like I live under the assumption it’ll never actually arrive 😬...but I definitely feel the loss of those who are gone... I still ache for my very first dog.

If this life we’ve been dropped into is one big surprise, who's to say what kind of shock awaits us on the other side? If you’re sitting there thinking death might be some great release from the struggles of this world, well, don't be too surprised if things look exactly the same—or even more intense—on the flip side. 😬

..But honestly, without the backdrop of mortality, life probably wouldn't have any substance at all. I can't quite wrap my head around what it would be like... but that "flavor of life" definitely gets its color from knowing it ends.

ps
this isn't supposed to be from this PDF😢

So you don't think about death, you say? Does the thought truly never drift into your mind unbidden?

I do not grieve for the deceased because I am firmly convinced that I must allow them to continue their journey. Quite literally, I believe that every tear I shed acts as another weight around their neck. I would much rather they be free, soaring unhindered wherever they wish or are destined to go.

...but honestly, this existence probably wouldn't be what it is without the backdrop of mortality—I don't know how it would look, but the fleeting nature of life certainly provides its color...

That is almost certainly true. In principle, I view death as a conclusion, though not as the end of existence itself, but rather as the conclusion of a single chapter.🙂

Paul Campbell3 said:I just hope there isn't anyone from Reddit or this specific sub here...😢

No, certainly not... rest assured, it is not from anyone on this forum. 🙂

It is merely my own personal lamentation, offered quite freely.

I have contemplated the concept of death on countless occasions. My encounters with it have rarely been direct; rather, I have witnessed it through the passing of loved ones, whether they reached the natural end of their journey or were overtaken by the heavy weight of illness or profound sorrow.
The sudden passing of an acquaintance online has once again prompted me to reflect deeply on this subject. While others offer condolences and shroud the deceased in mourning and gloom, I find myself experiencing a strange sense of lightness.
A person is finally liberated from all suffering, pain, and those endless existential dilemmas that plague us. They have finally attained ultimate truth, cast off the heavy shell of mortality, and now dwell in an undisturbed eternity. To my mind, this is news of the highest order—so profoundly good that nothing could surpass it.

How do you approach the idea of death? Do you harbor fear regarding your own end, or do you find yourself consumed by grief for those who have passed?

Benjamin Thompson66 said:unknown acts as a constant presence in every single film. 😍

It certainly is, much like Jodorowsky or even Mount Sinai, as previously noted. 🙂

Matthew Anderson4 said:One of these days, I will simply have to force myself to sit down and finally watch this. 😁 I suppose I should decide on a strategy first—whether to break it up over several evenings or just power through it all at once. 🤷

I watched it at 6x speed, and honestly, I enjoyed it quite a bit.

ruggedridge22 said:Well, you see, I haven't seen this one yet. I'm actually downloading it right now, so thank you for the recommendation... 👍

It is an absolute must-watch; a truly beautiful film.

And this part as well... though I must say, the entire film maintains that exact same tone 🙏🙏🙏

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rj57-Do-O1Q

However, Matthew Anderson4, my absolute favorite scenes—those moments where the little girl is tormenting the cat—are simply nowhere to be found 😢

ruggedridge22 said:That's a bit much.

We shouldn't overlook Stalker; there are two truly exceptional scenes here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk1PxpZ-hfE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ShUA885VjI

Speaking of Stalker—for me, this represents perhaps the most moving seventeen seconds of cinema ever captured.
It is profoundly raw, pure, and hits you with such direct emotional weight... 🙏🙏🙏

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXyKlqS07tc

An unintelligent and hollow piece of American propaganda quasi-thriller that serves as a decent enough watch for those with mediocre tastes.

👎

dustyskipper3 said:God be praised, I suppose someone is looking to moderate things here on this forum. 🙂

Normally, if anyone is unhappy with something, they should just click that little triangle icon to "report offensive post" or maybe send a private message to a moderator. I have to admit, I haven't really looked at your thread in quite a while... it wasn't very active for a bit, and then it suddenly popped back up. Plus, my internet connection has been acting up lately, I guess. It keeps glitching out on me, so sometimes the whole page won't even load properly—it just hangs halfway through. That seems to happen most often with those longer threads that go on for multiple pages. My bad, truly. Maybe hiddenhound3 could take a look at it too.

But that simply isn't possible. 😁

Ethan Johnson said:In my book, we’re basically just the observer—it’s just that most people are walking around totally oblivious to it.
I can tell you one thing for sure, what we aren't🙂: We aren't our clothes, our cars, the house we live in, or any of that stuff we go out and buy.
We aren't our nationality, we aren't our hometowns, we aren't even our names, and we definitely aren't our bodies.
I mean, think about it—your body is constantly shifting. Every single second we're aging, so in 5 or 10 years, we’ll have
totally different cells, different blood, maybe some wrinkles, or we might lose our hair... It's a big deal;
we aren't our emotions either! Just like the body, emotions are fleeting and they can actually be
managed—if we're actually aware of them. Same goes for our
thoughts. If the observer stays "awake" and self-aware, if you really get to know your emotions,
they might still sting, but not enough to make you feel like you *are* those feelings.

Society loves to slap labels and definitions on everything. But that’s not who we are. We shouldn't get caught up in those labels, because that’s where the suffering starts.
We need to realize who we truly are without getting tangled up in our emotions. You have to recognize them, but don't let them become part of you.

Here lies the core of a profound paradox—since change itself, acting as an eternal cycle, is the
only constant in this universe, then we truly become ourselves precisely through those very
(trans)formations.🙂

ironmarlin1 said:

I honestly can't help but feel that we’re all just circling the drain when it comes to discussing this particular subject, drifting through these endless debates without ever truly grasping the core of the matter. It's much like watching a slow-motion replay of a championship game where you know exactly how the play ends, yet you find yourself mesmerized by the sheer, agonizing tension of the buildup. There is a certain weight to these discussions, a gravity that pulls us in, much like how one might feel sitting in a quiet corner of a dim library in Boston, surrounded by the heavy scent of old paper and the unspoken wisdom of centuries. We tend to get lost in the minutiae, focusing on the tiny, jagged edges of an argument while completely ignoring the broad, sweeping landscape that defines the entire conflict. I find myself wondering if we are even capable of seeing the forest for the trees anymore, or if we have become too enamored with our own specialized lenses to ever appreciate the view from the summit. It feels as though we are constantly rearranging the furniture in a house that is already being reclaimed by the elements, performing these intricate little rituals of logic and rhetoric while the very foundation shifts beneath our feet. Perhaps there is a sense of comfort in the repetition, a way to stave off the realization that some questions simply don't have answers that satisfy the soul, but I cannot shake the feeling that we are merely stalling for time. kaže:
I’ll be the first to admit that the ending is absolutely pathetic, but honestly, even that level of melodrama can’t overshadow the core message this entire film carries. Having followed Lars' work quite closely over the years, I don't think any of his previous takes on Medea have ever truly topped this one. I haven't actually had a chance to sit down and watch *Europa* yet—though my expectations for it are sky-high—but since I know you hold an atheist worldview, I completely understand why those Christian undertones left such a bad taste in your mouth. For me, though, I tend to view those religious elements through a purely symbolic lens; religion doesn't carry much weight in my own life either, but I don't exactly harbor a deep-seated aversion to it like some others might.

I don't really have anything against Christian undertones appearing in films—unless, of course, that religious subtext is the entire point of the narrative or something along those lines. It’s giving off major snuff film vibes. It brings to mind those heavy religious epics—think along the lines of *Passion*. But here, there’s this lingering sense that religion is being used as a sort of cosmic "thank you" note to a woman simply because she sacrificed herself for a man, essentially playing out his specific fantasies. It feels like a strange way to frame devotion, though I suppose I’m just circling back to my own point again. 😍

Just one more little thing... have you ever heard of the Aghori? They’re these Hindu ascetics who, even when engaging in their most gruesome and necrophilic rituals, manage to maintain this incredible, unwavering devotion. It’s a heavy concept, I know, but there's something profoundly striking about that kind of absolute commitment. Clean.There’s something almost "Artemidian" about the way he absolutely surrenders himself to his obsessions; it's a total immersion into these heavy, profound themes that feel almost too weighty for a casual conversation right now. But let's be honest—this film isn't nearly as innocent as it might appear on the surface.

You know, you often see these little archetypal nods scattered throughout cinema—think of those Nietzschean tensions between the Apollonian and Dionysian elements, for instance. Not necessarily in this specific film, but as a general phenomenon in the medium. I can't help but feel that, more often than not, we aren't actually seeing what the film implies, but rather just projecting whatever it is we're itching to see onto the screen. It’s a simple byproduct of the fact that a single cluster of facts, or a sequence of events, can be twisted into countless different and even contradictory interpretations. Honestly, I think the absolute worst thing you can do in art is go hunting for the "artist's intention," acting as if the creator holds some sort of divine authority over how their work is understood.

I certainly agree that one ought to strive for goodness, 😁, but even if Trier's intention was to portray virtue through the lens of cinema, that doesn't mean the film actually succeeds in doing so. Instead, what we see is a depiction of how female naivety can be exploited—or, had the film taken a different path, perhaps a descent into madness.

He tells her to sleep with others and that she should tell him about it. But then, suggesting he actually said this to encourage her independence—and that her telling him about sleeping with others is somehow an issue—makes it sound as though sex itself is a moral failing (even though the film never implies that). If she wouldn't have slept with anyone else under any other circumstances, then the way the film ends suggests that God is satisfied with this exploitation and that her actions were somehow righteous. To me, that feels like a deeply inhumane stance toward women.

That is a very wise conclusion, though perhaps you should apply it to yourself. 😁

The reality is that everyone sees exactly what they wish to see—or more accurately, what they are capable of seeing—depending entirely upon the conceptual framework surrounding the viewer.
By observing our own reactions and the concepts we hold, we gain direct insight into ourselves.

ironmarlin1 said:

I honestly can't stop thinking about how much weight certain cinematic choices carry, especially when you look at a film like *Breaking the Waves*. It’s one of those rare instances where the raw, unvarnished emotion hits you right in the gut before you even have a chance to brace yourself. You know that feeling? When a director isn't just showing you a story, but is essentially forcing you to inhabit the very soul of the characters? That’s exactly what happens here. It reminds me of those old, heavy dramas you’d see playing in a dimly lit theater in Chicago—stories that don't care if you're comfortable, they only care if you're paying attention. kaže:
I’m not suggesting we’re looking at some modern, enlightened version of masculinity here; what we’re actually dealing with is a twisted, archaic form of patriarchy that somehow still manages to hold sovereign power in this day and age. That said, I completely get where you're coming from—I really do. I’m not trying to pick a fight or dismantle his position directly; I’m just attempting to push the conversation one step further.

I honestly think the concept itself is... well, it's complicated. It’s one of those terms that feels straightforward on the surface, much like how a simple melody can mask a deeply complex arrangement, but once you actually start peeling back the layers, you realize there's a whole lot more going on under the hood than anyone initially lets on. Strong women. To call this kind of poetics and philosophy—this whole metaphysical approach—profane or even anti-feminist feels like a massive oversimplification; in reality, the nuances are far more subtle and complex than that.

If you're looking for a recommendation, I’d honestly suggest you sit down and watch Medea.

I’ll go along with the idea that the whole "strong woman" trope has become a bit of a tired cliché lately. But when it comes to this specific film, I can only make sense of it if we assume the path Bess traveled was somehow justified. Personally, I find that impossible to defend; you could have every prophet, saint, and deity descend from the heavens to ring celestial bells in her defense, and it still wouldn't move the needle for me. I have to say, Trier simply didn't win me over. 🤷

I’ll most likely end up watching Medea—though, to be honest, I’ve never been much of a fan of judging films based on whether they belong to a specific series or a director's trilogy; I prefer to let each individual work stand entirely on its own merits. Right now, I'm deep into... 🙏Sidney Lumet 🙏Honestly, it’s kind of wild—this guy just can't seem to make a bad movie, at least based on the handful I've managed to sit through. I've got *The Verdict* lined up next, though there's a decent chance I might end up watching *Medea* instead.

I will admit that the ending feels somewhat pathetic, yet even that sentiment cannot overshadow the profound message conveyed by the film as a whole. Having studied Lars' body of work quite extensively, I find that he hasn't truly surpassed Medea in my estimation. Although I haven't had the opportunity to travel through Europe yet, I hold very high expectations for this particular piece. I recall you mentioning that you identify as an atheist, so I certainly understand your distaste for the Christian religious elements present in the story. Personally, I view such moments through a purely symbolic lens; religion doesn't hold much weight for me either, though I certainly don't harbor any specific aversion toward it.

I will most likely end up watching Medea, though I generally prefer not to judge films based on whether they belong to a specific series or trilogy; I much rather evaluate each work as its own individual masterpiece.

I tend to approach it the same way. While I find value in examining an artist's broader persona, I believe there is a certain intellectual satisfaction in focusing on a smaller subset of their work to trace their individual evolution. It serves as a fascinating exercise, both from a purely theoretical standpoint and through a psychological lens.

I am currently in... 🙏Sidney Lumet 🙏Honestly, I’m convinced this guy simply cannot make a bad movie—at least, based on the many films of his that I have seen. My next move is to watch The Verdict.

I will certainly keep that in mind, thanks. 😉

Just one more small thing... have you ever heard of the Aghori? They are Hindu ascetics who, even in their most depraved rituals involving necrophilia, remain steadfast due to their absolute devotion. Clean.There is something almost "Artemidian" about the way this film relentlessly pursues its own obsessions; it grapples with profound themes that feel perhaps too heavy for the current moment or this particular setting. One gets the sense that this movie isn't nearly as innocent as it initially appears to be.