Page 1 of 3

An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:37 am
by 82_28
OK. So I follow a link to the "origin of top 10 lists" and I wound up here. Well, I always wind up here. But what I discovered is astonishing. Perhaps some already know of what I am about to relay. So bear with me, this will not be eloquent, more a stream of thought.

I've been puzzling on the whole thing about where and when did tattoos become so acceptable, warranted, needed, in fashion insofar as this generation. Excuse me for saying so, but I think I have found it. However, this is not my overall point. Just follow me on this. Start here:

Here is what stands out to me on this clip. They are really focusing on the fact Barrymore has tattoos. The camera is focusing on it, then it turns into an act of "pleasing" a man by her getting up on his desk, flashing him etc. Keep in mind this is 1995 -- tats on a female then were easily a novelty. Tats weren't yet in fashion as they are to the extent they are today. Well, I was about to let the clip go and keep it at that (ah! this appearance on Letterman must have set into motion the whole tattoo craze). BUT. Letterman begins to talk about Barrymore's first film. At first he says ET, but Barrymore corrects him. ACTUALLY, she was in one other movie before that and what was that film? ALTERED STATES!

A child starring in two films at a young age, both of which being topical films of such subjects we discuss here and increasingly within the MSM as well. Extra Terrestrials and Altered States AND (Hugh may want to weigh in) the importance of Steven Spielberg in Barrymore's life.

I then wind up watching a much more recent clip of an appearance of Barrymore on Letterman and it has to do with Letterman's dog being "from hell".


Barrymore now is "grown up" and is treated as such. She has no need to prance across Dave's desk. However the topics of "hell", "sinfulness" is the same. Hugh, don't you call this "priming" or something?

So then I go looking for other information and ran into this: ... -door.html

Read the whole thing, but this is the part the refers to Barrymore.

Other likely Monarch slaves have attended parties at the mansion such as Drew Barrymore (Altered States [pure MK], E.T. [standard Spielberg Alien programming movie], Firestarter [government human experimentation/testing leading to special abilities (very Monarch programming symbolic; fire/pyrokenesis symbolizes the chaos/primal fear ((all mammals are instinctively afraid of fire)) in trauma-based Monarch programming)], Stephen King's Cat's Eye, GunCrazy [she plays a sexually abused girl by her stepfather whom she kills, it's important to note her mother 'Jaid' (Jade = old slang for prostitute) was also in this (as "Woman with Dog" [dehumanization]) in terms of Monarch intergenerational programming (Jaid was born in a Displaced Persons Camp; Monarch programming hugely benefiting from the chaos of World War 2 as mentioned in previous posts) this couldn't be more significant; she posed in Playboy shortly after her daughter too (multigenerational playboy kittens)]. See the Barrymore acting family for more on this Marionette puppet (of course many/most of them probably aren't actual Monarch programmed multiples) acting dynasty.

She posed for Playboy in 1995, the photographer consciously focusing (instructing her to lift up her shirt to show it) on her butterfly tattoo (see Paris Hilton's at this post) for the cover, showing what Playboy is all about.

I thought the first Letterman clip I linked is kind of a specimen in the wild, as it were.

Well, what about this Rabbit Hole? The time we all took the plunge has to do with this:



The rabbit rides again

Donnie Darko, a story of death and crashing jets, flopped in the US, not least because it came out just after 9/11. But British audiences turned it into a cult hit - and now it's back.

In the solitude of a cinema, there are still times when it's obvious what the whole audience is thinking. Don't go in the basement. Watch out for the shark. So it was with Donnie Darko. From its very first scene of a freaked-out teenager waking on an empty hilltop road at dawn, before cycling back into a lush, suburban morning with an unknowable grin etched on his face, you could sense every mind in the place silently uniting in one question: so what, exactly, is this then?

I'm not sure I ever got the whole answer. But part of it, at least, was clear. It was a story of young love, time travel and, encompassing both, that same mysterious kid, Donnie (played by the bleary Jake Gyllenhaal), a sleepwalker and semi-reformed arsonist in small-town Virginia circa 1988.

Not that sleepwalking was his only nocturnal pastime. There were the visits from Frank - a monstrous, 6ft talking rabbit warning in creepy, Darth Vaderish tones of the imminent end of the world. Which was precisely what seemed to be under way when a stray jet engine promptly fell from the sky and crushed Donnie's family home.

So that was the story; and the film wrapped around it was (whatever else) pretty much a masterpiece. It was also the UK's surprise hit of 2002, a smash whose ardent fanbase helped found an ever-swelling reputation. So much so that now, two years later, a director's cut is to be released, the preserve of time-honoured classics. There will be additional footage, a buffed-up soundtrack and what its now 29-year-old writer-director, Richard Kelly, calls "new layers of information, ambiguity and mystery".

The movie was never short of those. Driven by its own wired internal logic, its narrative twisted into a puzzle that audiences delighted in trying to crack. Yet that wasn't the whole picture. At first, Donnie Darko was something else entirely - a disaster.

It was late October 2001, and the film had just opened in America. Reviews, squeezed into pages not given over to 9/11 and anthrax in the mail, were polite, if baffled. But at the handful of cinemas playing host to Kelly's debut, business was somewhere between funereal and nonexistent. By the time it limped away from its theatrical run and into Blockbuster, it had made a sliver over $500,000: 10% of its production costs.

Anyone searching for reasons need not look far. Stumbling into US cinemas in the wake of the attacks on the twin towers, audiences weren't yet ready for a meditation on death and metaphysics involving planes as sudden tools of destruction. After all, why seek out talking rabbits warning of the end of the world when it already seemed to be happening? "It was a really upsetting time for all of us involved with the movie," the affable Kelly admits. "Just getting it distributed had been a struggle, so I knew the typical industry executive felt it would never connect with anyone. And at that point it felt like they'd been right. But looking at it now, the fact that it came out in the middle of this chaos had a definite role in that."

But apocalypse or no, maybe this first sad chapter in Donnie's strange trajectory was just what happens when an unknown director offers up a story this odd without a wall of marketing or, crucially, a major star. Gyllenhaal may now be the chiselled hero of the likes of The Day After Tomorrow, but back in 2001, the glow of his celebrity would barely have illuminated a shoebox.

The result was what looked like a premature, but conclusive demise. Until, a year later, the film arrived in a largely oblivious Britain for what should have been a few days of scattered blank expressions in a couple of London art cinemas.

Critics were, once more, as bemused as impressed. But this time, when it opened, people came. And they kept doing so. Enough so that rather than shuffling out of cinemas after a week, the film expanded out of the capital and around the country.

Within a fortnight, Kelly's movie had made half as much money again as in its entire American run. Six weeks later, 300,000 tickets had been sold. More remarkable still, this triumph was based almost wholly on word of mouth - the unfakeable, ever-snowballing real thing. Suddenly, everyone you ran into had either just seen the movie, or was about to see it, or was about to see it again and tell their friends to do the same.

"It was incredibly pleasing and incredibly weird, both at once," Kelly says. "I'd always clung to the thought that somehow the movie would survive, but to see it do so well in another country was astonishing." Ask "Why Britain?" and he's flummoxed, though. "I guess there's a lot of material about teenagers and religion and what you could call the American mindset, and I think those ideas transcend America itself. But as for why Britain specifically, well," he bursts out laughing, "can you tell I don't know?"

The quality of rival releases at the time may have helped (Red Dragon, anyone?). Perhaps the relatively stable UK of late 2002 was simply more receptive to a kid like Donnie than the wigged-out, traumatised US of a year earlier; or maybe movies this good always find their audience eventually.

More likely, the key to its success was a convergence of all of these and a less tangible factor besides: a strange and Darko-esque something in the air. Because, by then, Kelly's movie had been granted a second life in its own country. The awestruck word of mouth behind the film's rise in Britain had, it seemed, also inched its way across the same America that had rejected the movie. Only, banished from the cinemas, Donnie had reached his acolytes by the scenic route of DVD and video. Yet the end product on both sides of the Atlantic was the same - a bona fide cult.

Inevitably, there were websites. The screenplay was published and eagerly received; eBay overflowed with posters, T-shirts, badges. And all of it was pored over by an ever-growing band of devotees, each drawn to exactly the same qualities that had helped doom it first time around - the hairpin swerves of tone between comedy, drama, sci-fi and horror, the plot that left a question hanging for every one it answered.

"I'd always conceived of the story as this dense experience," Kelly says, "because that's what I'm drawn to myself. My favourite books and movies always took time to process and required further investigation, so if I hadn't made the film, I'd probably be trying to figure it out along with everyone else."

The ripples of the film's extended life have ranged from the obvious (booming DVD sales) to the even-by-its-standards peculiar (the soundtrack's version of Tears for Fears' Mad World by LA bar singer Gary Jules randomly becoming last year's Christmas No 1). But however diverting the phenomenon of Donnie Darko, the pleasures of the actual film shouldn't be forgotten.

Witness Donnie himself - in superficially stock adolescent turmoil and yet a universe away from it. That's partly testament to Gyllenhaal (shudder at the thought of, say, the bloodless Tobey Maguire in the role). Yet it also says much about Kelly's writing that he could play so artfully with the dread cliches of teenage alienation. Few characters can have had a more woeful influence on recent culture than Holden Caulfield, but in Kelly's hands the gifted but troubled boy-savant becomes a magnetic force once more.

Which is perhaps the film's real signature. After a while, Kelly's boundless imagination is a given - what's extraordinary is his renovation of the most clapped-out devices. Watch the film's first narcotic pan through the corridors of Donnie's high school - the endless lockers, weary principal, sniggering bullies - and it's as if you've never seen such exotica on film before.

Every now and then, you can discern a sinister hint of David Lynch. Otherwise, Kelly's operating in a world entirely his own. The film may brim with references to other movies, but they're less stylistic influences than loving homages to a ragbag of totems from 80s cinema: Back to the Future, The Evil Dead, Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ, ET - the Extra-Terrestrial.

"One of the most gratifying things ," Kelly says, "is that kids, teenagers, love the film so much. Because there's that idea they can't deal with narrative sophistication, but in fact they instinctively handle what a lot of adults can't - that the film's about a high schooler who talks about the Smurfs and philosophy and metaphysics."

Indeed, it's those co-existing opposites that underpin the whole movie. From the outset, its comedy is inspired, yet every time any other film would go for the belly laugh, Kelly instead amps up the sense of dignity and hidden depths.

Equally, for what is on many levels an arcane slice of sci-fi, never once does it lose touch with its human pulse - flawed, bizarre and stubbornly optimistic. And as such, in Kelly's words, "hopefully as relevant in 2104 as it is now". Few re-releases could be more valuable. Whatever Donnie Darko is, it will, after all, be some time before we see its like again.

Maybe she's just typecast. However, I doubt it is as simple as that. That first Letterman clip to me was like a glimpse at time travel and by way of which, explains a lot about this 9/11 shit and how they were able to hypnotize people of all, every, personality type. I used to get stoned and watch Donnie Darko over and over. And I've always wondered why I did so. This post is part of my journey of why.

for the rabbits on the run...

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:00 am
by IanEye
No longer known as Father John, Father Aaron, Mother Ophelia and the like, many of the founders live modestly near the small town of Kanab, Utah. Mountain, who has a daughter in Denver, is divorced and lives at the sanctuary, making about $30,000 a year from the proceeds of a private business that sells Best Friends merchandise.

Gone are the days when members interviewed mass murderer Charles Manson in jail for the "death" issue of their magazine.

There's no more talk about doomsday right around the corner. No more screeds about "Satan on War."

"A lot of it was really rather juvenile," says John Fripp aka Christopher Fripp aka Father John.

Now, instead of begging for handouts in London, New York or New Orleans, Best Friends founders are as likely to attend a Hollywood fund-raiser graced by Ron Howard, Drew Barrymore, Robin Williams or Bill Maher.

A book available for $15 on one of the group's Web pages professes to be a complete history. It's called Best Friends - The True Story of the World's Most Beloved Animal Sanctuary.

It recounts how a ragtag group of animal lovers turned a canyon where the Lone Ranger was filmed into a vacation magnet for like-minded people willing to devote time to abandoned cats, dogs and rabbits.

The Process Church is never mentioned.

And on top of all this, Ms. Barrymore has the ear of the most powerful director in Hollywood, her godfather, Mr. Spielberg.
"I love that my relationship with him has evolved from 'I want to get my ears pierced' to 'Can I screen that movie for you?'" she told a reporter last June.
It's a far cry from the quilt that Mr. Spielberg sent Ms. Barrymore in 1995, after she'd posed for Playboy. The one that came with a note saying: "Cover Yourself Up."


Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:07 am
by MinM
82_28 wrote:
I then wind up watching a much more recent clip of an appearance of Barrymore on Letterman and it has to do with Letterman's dog being "from hell".

Barrymore now is "grown up" and is treated as such. She has no need to prance across Dave's desk. However the topics of "hell", "sinfulness" is the same. Hugh, don't you call this "priming" or something?...

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 10:39 am
by barracuda
I'd say, if you really want to take the plunge you should look into her family tree.


According to Errol Flynn's memoirs, film director Raoul Walsh "borrowed" Barrymore's body before burial, and left his corpse propped in a chair for a drunken Flynn to discover when he returned home from The Cock and Bull Bar.

The genesis of the latest resurgence of tattoos is an interesting topic, too.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 10:57 am
by sunny
Hmm, I can't say if Ms. Barrymore is the victim of some sort of generational cult but her films do seem to follow a strange pattern. DiCaprio's career is also taking on a certain 'flavor', while Heath Ledger's film choices seemed to be cycling through the tarot. This could be the result of following their own interests and inclinations, or perhaps the H'wood PTB decided they fit the model they're looking for to fulfill certain types of esoteric roles, for whatever reason.

I remember a very strange essay about Steven Spielberg by the actor Crispin Glover that touched on these issues but I can't find it. Anyone have a link?

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:04 am
by Montag
I would cite Allen Iverson as more of a purveyor of tattoos than anybody.

He -- or Rodman -- were the first athletes to be adorned head to toe with them, and now a high percentage of them seem to be.

if eye ever get outta here...

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:33 am
by IanEye
82_28 wrote:Keep in mind this is 1995 -- tats on a female then were easily a novelty. Tats weren't yet in fashion as they are to the extent they are today.


well the undertaker
drew a heavy sigh
seeing no one else had come
and a bell was ringing in the village square
for the rabbits on the run


well the night was falling
as the desert world
began to settle down
in the town they are searching for us everywhere
but we never will be found...


Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:15 pm
by 82_28
Allen Iverson is also an anomaly of reality and fits into so many synchs as well. I always wondered why the Denver Nuggets made a trade for him. The Nuggets, "my team" who I have always loved are they heaviest tatted team across all sports across the board. But Iverson would never be a fit in Denver of all places. His stint in Denver ultimately destroyed him. Why? Could just be NBA "business model".

However, when I began noticing Denver synchs was right around the time Darrent Williams was murdered on New Years, I believe 2007. I felt a spookiness about it that I have yet to explain and have since believed the NFL to be based around an "occult model". A friend of mine was murdered in Denver directly after a superbowl. And every time I go to that town, I feel it. I personally think that the universe is telling me something, but I do not know what. I can only tell you that I sense it. I cannot smoke weed in Denver either -- I get completely freaked out. I cannot tell if it's the altitude, a different strain or if it has to do with something else. The tattoo craze means something, it most assuredly does. Everybody I know from Denver gets tattoos. Of course, I have none. But my GF is sleeved. She's from Denver too, but I did not know her there. I met her in Seattle. I only keep her around because of her eyes and of course that I love her. But her eyes tell me something on a level she can't even describe.

I have mentioned a dream, a recurring dream I had at a very young age here on RI. I was placed on a laboratory table and paste was applied to my nipples and genitalia. Like they wanted me to be a female or something. It's a very odd dream. The room was bathed in an infrared light, other children were around. On tables themselves. No, I'm not making this up. This really is my earliest dream memory and don't at all mean to be triggering. I've just paid way too close to minutia and here I am.

But I wonder. I really do wonder what society itself has done to our heads.

Count on me to always circle around the Denver drain I guess. But I didn't bring up Iverson -- I was simply expounding.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:23 pm
by Montag
David Icke is very suspicious of Denver... I can't recall specifically what he says about it, but it's one of his pet dark places of the Reptilian Hybrids, haha.

Maybe those not familiar with Icke will fail to see the humor. IMO there are a lot of recurring themes in his writings. Denver, Credo Mutwa, the City of London, the Isle of Wight, kundalini experiences, and the time he saw the whites of Prime Minister Heath's eyes turn black are just a few of them. His stuff is very entertaining, if lacking credibility in many people's eyes.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:31 pm
by Stephen Morgan
Holden Caulfield, eh? Something odd about him, can't remember what. Think it was in Sinister Forces.

On preview I see 82_28 has mentioned the NFL: career of choice for oddly named Mujahid Menepta, aka Melvin Lattimore.

See also Michael Barrymore, that swimming pool thing and that.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:37 pm
by Bruce Dazzling
sunny wrote:Hmm, I can't say if Ms. Barrymore is the victim of some sort of generational cult but her films do seem to follow a strange pattern. DiCaprio's career is also taking on a certain 'flavor', while Heath Ledger's film choices seemed to be cycling through the tarot. This could be the result of following their own interests and inclinations, or perhaps the H'wood PTB decided they fit the model they're looking for to fulfill certain types of esoteric roles, for whatever reason.

I remember a very strange essay about Steven Spielberg by the actor Crispin Glover that touched on these issues but I can't find it. Anyone have a link?

Here it is. ... essay.html

(An essay concerning the subtext of the film by the same title)
by Crispin Hellion Glover

Is this culture content? Is it happy? Are the smiles broadcast by this culture's media the smiles that reflect the collective mind? Does the self-professed compassion of the media for the unfortunate seem sincere?

Is this culture a Judeo-Christian culture? Is forgiveness a quality of Christian ethos? Didn't Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold of Columbine high school pose with a caption that stated, "Stay alive, stay different, stay crazy"? Didn't they target Christians? Weren't they accused of being "Nazis"? Wasn't one of them Jewish? Wasn't one of them an honor student? If these fellows were staying "crazy" and staying "different," and thinking on their own, were they perhaps manifesting a counter-cultural ideal?

What else in this culture were the Columbine killers attacking? Aren't "jocks," whom they killed, generally considered common "good guys" buy our culture? Don't jocks represent pro-cultural values? Do those who hold values that counter the culture see jocks as boorish, vapid, brute, conceited and condescending, who willfully insult and violate those who refuse to gang with the masses?

Were Harris and Klebold reacting to the media itself? Did they give their own lives and take others to make a point about the media at large? Can it be true that the media-at-large is so neurotic that it is unable to truthfully describe the Columbine event? Is it true that a videotape they produced just before the killings is now being withheld so the public can not determine their own thoughts about Harris's and Klebold's statements?

In Civilization and Its Discontents, did Sigmund Freud define a neurotic as an individual holding thoughts that clash with those held by the prevailing culture, an individual who subverts those clashing thoughts to the subconscious that later manifest in the form of anxiety and unnecessary behavior? If this is so, what does one consider a culture whose prevailing ideas express hypocrisy, sham and double-standard? Does this somehow define a neurotic culture? Does Steven Spielberg hold the same values I wish upon myself? Does the mind of this grinning, bespectacled, baseball-capped man entirely reflect this culture?

Is it true that in his waning years, Orson Welles asked Steven Spielberg for a small amount of money with which he could make a final film? Is it true Steven Spielberg refused? Is it true that Steven Spielberg bought a sled used in Citizen Kane for an extremely large sum of money?

Do Steven Spielberg's passions burn? Do passions burn in the man now imprisoned who wished to anally rape Steven Spielberg? Do our cultural mouthpieces confidently inform us that the wish to anally rape Steven Spielberg is a bad thought? Could anal rape of Steven Spielberg be simply the manifestation of a cultural mandate? Do you believe Steven Spielberg is an ideal guide and influence for our culture? Do Steven Spielberg's films question our culture? What do Steven Spielberg's films question? Does Steven Spielberg focus much of his fantasy life on young people? Did he portray children wallowing in sewers filled with fecal matter in Schindler's List? Did he use children to finger paint an adult in Hook? Does he collect the illustrations of Norman Rockwell, such as the one showing a young boy in his underwear examined by a doctor? Are the inclinations of Steven Spielberg above suspicion by the media-fed culture? Was Steven Spielberg very friendly with Michael Jackson? Wasn't Michael Jackson supposed to play Peter Pan in Steven Spielberg's version of the story? Now that Michael Jackson is no longer held in favor by the mass media, does Spielberg associate with him? Do Michael Jackson and Steven Spielberg share similar opinions about the sexuality of young boys?

Did Joseph Goebbels popularize certain ideals to the mass culture? Does Steven Spielberg attempt to do the same thing? Is celebrity more special than actual truth in art?

When you join in a conversation with strangers, do you openly discuss any idea whatsoever without fear of conflict? Or do you restrain yourself from discussing certain things for fear of offending people and then becoming an outcast? Are there laws that deem certain forms of thought as bad and wrong? Is what is now termed "hate" a form of thought?

Does our culture consider it acceptable to have a minstrel represent a black person on film? Does our culture consider it acceptable to have a person of average intelligence represent a retarded person on film? Why is one thing questionable, and one thing acceptable? Did Adolf Hitler entertain any good thoughts? Was Shirley Temple sexy as a young girl?

What if you wish to express these ideas? Can people sue you for expressing ideas, particularly if they're blamed for inspiring behavior considered antithetical to cultural norms?

Would the cultural mainstream ever silence or suppress Steven Spielberg? Has the United States government given the immensely wealthy Steven Spielberg millions of dollars to fund a media project that reflects his religious heritage, and his cultural beliefs? Does The Talmud speak of the superiority of the Jews and the inferiority of other cultures and beliefs? Does Steven Spielberg reflect this religious imperative? Is Steve Spielberg neurotic? Is this belief hidden and suppressed?

If one discovers that everything one has been taught to be good is actually false, what then? At what point is one neurotic?

Did Vincent Van Gogh, Diane Arbus and Rainer Werner Fassbinder die for the sings of their culture? Did Joseph Goebbels? Are we fed massive cultural propaganda? Are we infused with the belief that we act as we wish and do what we want? Are we not simply believing what cultural propaganda suggests us to think?

Do you like MTV? Do you like Steven Spielberg? Do you like post-punk rock? Do you like trip hop? Do you like rap? Do you define yourself according to the music you listen to? Do you consider yourself a true lover of music because you are in a rock band, or because your boyfriend is in a rock band? Do you like tattoos? Do you like body piercing? Do you believe that love, kindness, compassion, recycling and equality will save this culture from all its woes? Do you? Do you? Is it considered "career suicide" to question Steven Spielberg if one is involved in the entertainment business? If one is not involved in the entertainment business is it considered a social suicide to question Steven Spielberg? If these things are so, what does that point to? Does this mean freedom of expression is actually curtailed in our culture by certain social pressures? Is calling someone a "fascist" in American culture today the counterpart to saying someone was a "communist" during the Joseph McCarthy era of the 1950s?

Does our culture congratulate itself for taking interest in the lack of original ideas personified by the name of Steven Spielberg? Do his films take chances or take risks in order to amplify, change or challenge the cultural though process? Dose Steven Spielberg take risks, or does he simulate the idea of taking risks? What risk was involved in making Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List, or adopting a black child? Was there any risk at all? Would Steven Spielberg have adopted that same child in the deep South of the 1950s where there would have been risk of being called a "nigger lover"? Were the adoption of a black child and the subject matter of his movies actually business decisions for which he knew he would be congratulated?

When Steven Spielberg clutched his Academy Award for Schindler's List, saying it's for the "six million," was he speaking of a quantity of people killed, or the quantity of dollars poured into his bank account? Did Steven Spielberg truly help the culture understand Stanley Kubrick's ideas at an Academy Awards eulogy? Or did he accuse Kurbrick's films of being "hopeful" to make them seem as if they sell the same ideas as Steven Spielberg's movies? Was A Clockwork Orange about hope? Was Barry Lyndon about hope? Was Dr. Strangelove about hope? Was Lolita about hope? Was Full Metal Jacket about hope? Was The Killing about hope?

Was Steven Spielberg's company sued by an African-American woman who claimed that Amistad was based on her writing? Was this African-American woman suddenly happy with Steven Spielberg after he deposited a lot of money into her bank account?

Does the amount of money taken in by people determine happiness in this culture? Is the earth an unlimited resource, or is there a definitive quantity for people to exploit for gross amounts of money? When a capitalist invokes the word "hope," does he speak about the continued escalation of his earning power, without being stopped? Could this hope be an illusion?

Are the ice sheets of the Arctic and Antarctic melting and shearing off? Could negative population growth possibly help solve this problem? Isn't one child per two people negative population growth? Would Steven Spielberg ever support the idea of negative population growth within the medium? Have the goals of Freemasonry, as encapsulated by the back half of the dollar bill, succeeded? Has a megastate of greed been created?

Did DreamWorks, the megacorporate entity co-owned by Steven Spielberg, consider paving over the last remaining wetland in Southern California to create a studio? Does Steven Spielberg feel comfortable emasculating the natural? Is climbing the Alps, or is riding the Matterhorn rollercoaster in Disneyland, more attractive to Steven Spielberg? Is the theme park mentality of our culture, which is made to feel "right" and "moral" by the propagandizing movies of Steven Spielberg, helping to destroy individual thought processes and emasculate what remains of the earth?

Is it possible that the Columbine shootings would have not occurred if Steven Spielberg had never wafted his putrid stench upon our culture, a culture he helped homogenize and propagandize?

Would the culture benefit from Steven Spielberg's murder, or would it be lessened by making him a martyr? Or would people then begin to realize their lives had become less banal and more interesting due to his departure? Because I think it is possible a beautiful piece of non-lingual music could well be written by an angry victim once Steven Spielberg becomes a corpse. It could be that this angry victim of banal and ruinous propaganda will have written an anthem signaling a new era, a new thought process, a new music, and a new culture that is desperately needed in the coming days, and forevermore.

The one question lingering before this new utopian culture may very well be:

What is it?

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:47 pm
by barracuda
Oh man, that's tasty.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:49 pm
by 82_28
^^^ There's your Denver again right there -- Columbine. Thanks for the Glover Bruce. . .

McFly. Time to get back in time. Holy shit that was good.

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:50 pm
by vince
Drew was also in "Confessions Of A Dangerous Mind".

Re: An observation on Drew Barrymore -- rabbit hole ahead!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:54 pm
by sunny
Thanks Bruce. "Strange" is not really the word I was looking for, was it?