Just like Jerry Martin19 said—we’ve drifted way too far from actual cinema and true art. At this rate, maybe they'll start recommending we just enroll in philosophy classes instead?
Richard Howard2 said:I’m not saying morality doesn't exist—that would be a stretch—but let's be real, it certainly isn't being practiced in his version of transparency. The world operates on this double-layered strategy—a messy stack of illusions masking actual, hidden desires—and the whole thing hinges on the subconscious of the masses. People go about their business identifying with these grand moral principles, all while simultaneously sabotaging them deep down in their own minds. It's a strange loop, really.
Maybe you’re expecting too much from morality? It isn’t some grand, lofty metaphysical concept—it's not like we're debating the fabric of the universe here—but it’s pretty damn important for actually living a life. There isn't a ton of dense theory involved; it’s really just a conscious effort to live a life that’s a little more upright and, honestly, a lot easier on the conscience. I don't know if you've ever been in a spot where someone offers you a bribe or you're tempted to just swipe something that isn't yours. Obviously, there’s this internal tug-of-war between two extremes, but choosing not to do it is usually just the rational move—because the fallout ends up causing way more damage than whatever tiny benefit you get in the moment. The reason morality stays relevant—even if it is somewhat relative—is simply because most people are willing to follow rules they know are right (or, to be more precise, rules that are more useful than just acting on every primal impulse). Society aims for that middle ground, and it also acts as a sort of filter between those people who actually have the strength to lead and those who definitely don't. But let's not dive into the deep end of the psychology of true leadership just yet.
Richard Howard2 said:The system is fundamentally amoral—and the kicker is that it achieves this by loudly declaring itself to be incredibly moral. It’s actually quite clever, really; that constant performance of virtue acts as a sort of shield against any genuine moral backlash. You don't see any real contempt, only the staged kind—the sort where the actors aren't even aware they're playing parts. There is no actual practice of morality here. Every action is essentially a double act: on one level, we’re shouting about our values from the rooftops, but on the second level, we’re actively rejecting them.
The whole system is basically built on exploitation and undermining people—think Alinsky style. It’s funny, really—they go out of their way to broadcast this huge public image of morality, while behind closed doors, they’re doing the exact opposite. But that's not even the kicker. The real irony is that because there’s this persistent, manufactured sense of being "purely moral," there’s also this endless, driving urge to keep "improving" the system. It just goes in circles.
Richard Howard2 said:Society actually rewards immorality—it’s almost built into the system. We all cling to this collective delusion that we’re these incredibly moral people who actually give a damn about truth, justice, or looking out for one another, but honestly? All I see is a constant sabotage of those very ideals. If the scenario you're describing were actually the norm, the world would look nothing like it does now. For starters, George W. Bush wouldn't have cruised through two terms, and we wouldn't be stuck watching movies fueled by "wrong" morality—you know, those projects where they twist basic principles just to pad the profit margins. After all, Hollywood basically gives the audience exactly what they want, which, in a weirdly cyclical way, is how they manufacture those desires in the first place.
Look, I don't think we should be getting this exclusionary about everything. Life isn't just black and white—it’s got way too many layers and nuances for that simple binary. For instance, Americans have this innate, almost hardwired urge to step up for their neighbors. It’s deeply rooted in the culture. Just look at those grassroots fundraising campaigns online—you’ll see people aiming to raise maybe a million bucks for a local maternity ward, only to end up hitting 3.5 million because everyone chips in. That drive to help? It’s definitely there. What we lack here—and honestly, what most disenfranchised communities struggle with—is any real trust in the system itself. An American will give you the shirt off their back, but they won't trust the bureaucracy to handle it. $0.33 You could show them a photo of a sick kid, and they still wouldn't cough up $3.25 every month for the rest of their lives to some nonprofit—mostly because they don't have this nagging feeling that the system actually works. It's funny—unlike certain other communities that share a collective sense that you can actually move the needle through official channels (because they see themselves as part of the machinery, I guess), we tend to view ourselves—much like any kind of laborer—as being entirely outside the system. We figure the people running the show aren't us, so we just go about our business on the sidelines.
Of course, if you want to exploit people, you have to mentally colonize them first. You have to drill into them this sense of inferiority. All exploitation starts on a psychological level—it happens when the exploited start believing (or even craving) that the values held by the exploiters are somehow superior to their own. Take our country, for example; people here often think imported goods are inherently better than anything made domestically, or that everything will be fine as long as we sell it all off to some foreign corporation that’ll swoop in and act as our benevolent overlord on our own soil. It happens everywhere. You see it with Native American girls wanting to look blonde because they think European features are the gold standard for beauty. That’s exactly why the garbage coming out of Hollywood doesn't bother raising people with high aesthetic standards. Developing an eye for aesthetics actually develops the human mind, and frankly, that’s bad for the people doing the exploiting. But hey, progress is a beast you can't really stop.
It makes perfect sense that exploiters push their own pseudo-culture, causing the lower tiers to swap out their own heritage for something else. Sure, George W. Bush had his terms, China has its Olympics, and women in Iran aren't allowed to drive—there will always be more exploiters in the wings, but people are waking up to it, and the outcry is getting louder. Eventually, the system shifts. It won't happen overnight; it’ll be incremental, leaving room for further refinement. Struggle is basically the essence of life. It’s pretty naive to believe in some ultimate set of moral truths—or the arrival of a Messiah—that will descend one day so we can finally just go to sleep. No more fighting, no more effort, just paradise where we get white robes and golden harps... That kind of expectation is a fantasy, likely born from a misguided desire to dodge the hard work and struggle of living.
Richard Howard2 said:This societal obsession with proving and detecting everything—with uncovering some "ultimate truth" or fixing every perceived injustice or inaccuracy, regardless of whether the action actually makes sense—to the point of obsessing over the technical minutiae of every media project (like a movie), is a symptomatic effect that actually sabotages morality itself.
Hmm, there's a catch there. In Space, nothing stays still. Everything is in motion. You either evolve or you decay. You can choose to view morality as a relative value—assuming you're capable of that, anyway—representing limited but useful improvements worth fighting for. Or, you can just get disillusioned with everything and spit on the whole thing.
That disillusionment comes from the fact that the human mind naturally craves infinity and freedom from all limitations. Obviously, you won't find that in morality, which is why I say morality is valuable precisely because it is relative. You won't find it in physical objects either, but that’s hardly a reason to reject food or clothing, right? There were plenty of people who preached various forms of asceticism, but they never reached that ultimate freedom the mind instinctively seeks through that path. It's the same deal with morality—it's another finite, relative thing. It doesn't lead to ultimate fulfillment, but it provides actual, immediate utility in the real world.
That’s where art becomes vital; on one hand, it gives us a glimpse into the eternal things that exist beyond the reach of the mind, and on the other, it fosters positive connections within our relative, yet very real, world.
Richard Howard2 said:Instead of experiencing Gladiator in a way that actually respects it as a piece of art—you know, looking at it as a conceptualization of humanity and society through a historical lens—we basically sabotage ourselves. We actively avoid that. Instead, we force ourselves to treat it like some mere technical manual, obsessing over tiny little flaws in the mechanics that don't even matter to the big picture.
So where’s the actual immorality in all this? Is it because the movie isn't technically flawless, or is it because we've reached a point where we demand technical perfection instead of searching for something substantive?
Look, fine, the movie is garbage. It can honestly be viewed as nothing more than a really poorly constructed mess. It’s great for zoning out to, which I guess is its primary social function. But even on that low bar, it still demands a certain level of intelligence because it’s genuinely insulting to the viewer. And maybe that’s why it fails its own purpose—by being so mediocre, it actually contributes to the general decline of everything from culture and ecology to religion and economics... though I doubt the filmmakers intended for that to happen; those things just sort of happen on their own.
Richard Howard2 said:Things aren't simple at all, and honestly, let's just avoid this debate here. Let's not "pollute" the thread with philosophy again.
Sure, we definitely earned a ten-day ban on this topic and an exile to the desolate wasteland of philosophical junk. Straight to the ninth circle of hell for me. 😂 I swear, I won't bother anyone with morality or my pseudo-philosophizing anymore!
