The most powerful drug in the world? - The Rum Diary (2011) Discussion

[–] Womby314 13 years ago

I believe it was actually LSD. This movie took place during the 60s when LSD was first being introduced to the populace, and Mulberg's comments about the CIA using it on communists seems to support that.

reply

[–] Coolkyle 13 years ago

Thanks for the reply. Yeah that would make sense I guess! I suppose the eye-drop application method threw me off a bit...

reply

[–] nalimxxxx 13 years ago

I'm guessing LSD.
Most powerful drug in the world is a slight overstatement though.
In Fear and Loathing andrenichrome is mentioned as a superdrug but that substance is fictional (or rather it exists but is not a halucinogen or any other type of recreational drug for that matter). My point would be, Hunter took some artistic freedoms when depicting these things, not everything happened in the same manner as he described in the books.

reply

[–] jensbob 10 years ago

Depends really. Looking at dose potency it might well be, as the dosage are measured in micrograms, an effective dose being something between 75 an 300. Compare to heroin where an effective dose for an average user might be 100 milligrams, that is a thousand times more. 1 gram of LSD would be enough to make 5-10 thousand people high. Also, considering effects, a psychedelic, of wich LSD might well have one of the strongest effects, are a very profound experience, much more so than drugs like heroin or cocain. Not stronger per se, but definatly stranger. Not more enjoyable, but more memorable in alot of ways.

reply

[–] rockin_metal_baz3310 13 years ago

Clearly it was acid, however to my knowledge acid cant be taken as an eyedrop to the eye. Ive done acid a bunch of times (sugar cube) and liquid, but never heard any1 take it like that.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SawyerVsSylar 13 years ago

You can definitely put it in your eye. I never did it, but I know people who put liquid acid in their eyes.

"A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan

reply

[–] tragicomicusk8 13 years ago

Hell, I have put blotter under my lower eyelid... Definitely possible.

reply

[–] Temptresstoo 13 years ago

Not that I'm an expert, but my ex-boyfriend used to drop it into his eyes. It's almost instant "enjoyment."

reply

[–] Questoid 13 years ago

Ah, it most certainly can.

reply

[–] thewood 13 years ago

adrenachrome .... or el
habanero de mucho gusto
__________________
it frequently gets
too -weird- for me
RIP HST 1937..2005

reply

[–] Coolkyle 13 years ago

Wow that looks really interesting never heard of that... i don't think that's what was the one in the film though its still cool regardless!

reply

[–] crejk 13 years ago

That "Fear and Loathing..." type of scene should never be in this movie. Those wasted 10 minutes were never in the book, and they should have used it to make better connections in the plot.
This scene was made just for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas fans, so they don't be disappointed.

reply

[–] Coolkyle 13 years ago

Yea I also found it unnecessary to the plot and character development though as viewers we can only watch what they show us and therefore it wasn't really bad or uninteresting to me (I understand it may be very different to others)

reply

[–] crejk 13 years ago

The scene was far from being bad. It was just unnecessary, because lots of great stuff was cut off, so this scene, as coq fight and the terrible ending could be inserted.

reply

[–] Coolkyle 13 years ago

Good points... if only they didn't make movies to please specific people and make them for how they should be!

reply

[–] rockin_metal_baz3310 13 years ago

Well, a pretty awesome quote came out of it :) "human beings are the only creatures on earth whom claim a god, and the only ones which act like they dont have one"

reply

[–] home0006 13 years ago

This quote was in the book without that scene. The scene in general had no point and was only there to appease preconceived notions of what Thompson books are about. The whole tone of this book didn't fit the same type of Fear and Loathing vibe that is given in the movie. I read the book more as watching a man spiral down into alcoholism, and the scenarios that he gets in become worse in worse as he goes further into the bottle. Culminating 3 major events in the book fold, 1 the arrest of Sala, Kemp and Yeamon in which Sala refused to pay his bill so the bar owners beat all 3 of them. Kemp never blew fire onto any cop, and it was a scene written to show how the American's are still outsiders. 2 in the clear as day rape scene in the dance club that was cut way too short in the movie, and 3. the beating/death of Lotterman at a party which wasn't included at all in the movie.

Drugs had nothing to do with the book at all.

reply

[–] i_am_switch 13 years ago

I'm not sure why they put the scene in, other than for the F&L fans.

It certainly didn't exist in Kemp/HST's life. His first experiment with LSD was at Ken Kessey's place when he had the Hells' Angels invited over for BBQ.

He took acid because he had lost control of the situation and thought things couldn't get any worse (he thought he would do something violent). He actually thought that the Angels were going to beat people up and rape them.

But the Angels were cool and the Pranksters were too weird to let anything bother them.

reply

[–] emptyspaces153 9 years ago

Just for the record, "adrenochrome" in reality is epinephrine (pure adrenaline) and thats what EpiPens contain. Its def not a fun experience.

The "most powerful (known and used) drug in the world" based on potency* by WEIGHT would be LSD, because a single dose is 1/10th of a grain of sand (100micrograms...1/10th of a milligram). Its invisible to the human eye.

BUT that does not make it the "strongest" in terms of experience. The most intense, but still frequently used drug is probably DMT, which exists in all of us and is thought to be responsible for dreaming. (Theres a whole bunch of interesting info on DMT)

Also, its worth noting that dropping L in a person's eye is not only super risky, it does *nothing* that taking it sublingually wouldnt already do. And since its a black market substance, better let it absorb through the many vessels below your tongue. Not your eye. It still would work but would not actually be any faster. And if its impure (not everything is needlepoint), could leave a person blind

reply

[–] starsykaaaa 13 years ago

I've heard of people taking acid through the eye via dropper, but it's kind of pointless I guess. It is supposed to change what you would normally see on acid and basically *bleep* up your vision for a bit, it's also supposed to hit you harder. The things druggies try. If you're going to do acid, take it in a sugar cube or something like a normal person lol.

Signature.

reply

[–] tim5049 13 years ago

Normal people don't use drugs

reply

[–] jsohlx-9-788177 13 years ago

Define normal? If you look up statistics most people have tried drugs. Are you not normal?

reply

[–] tim5049 13 years ago

What statistics are you looking at? Maybe most people in the USA have tried drugs but I doubt if the same applies in a lot of other countries. I have never tried LSD nor Heroin nor Cocaine. I smoked a bit of cannabis years ago but I am not an illicit drug user now.

BTW I worked as a Substance Misuse support worker for some time so I do have a knowledge of drugs and their usage and effects. Anyone who wants to put LSD into their eyes obviously has no concern for their eyesight or physical and mental well-being. However, it's not rare for people to use their eyes for drugs and alcohol - especially vodka.

To define normal is quite difficult I suppose but we must take the average person as being normal and I would guess - without the use of dubious statistics - that the average person in Europe does not use drugs. Cannabis is nowhere near as common here as it is in the States and other more toxic substances are probably more difficult to obtain here. I have to admit that the drug problem is growing rapidly but I still stand by my definition that "normal" people don't use drugs.

If you take mind enhancing drugs, surely that makes you "ab" normal anyway.

reply

[–] Coolkyle 13 years ago

The statistics are probably even greater in other countries I can assure you. I was raised in South Africa which is a massive cocain export/importer as well as other cheaper drugs-and thats just the tip-most of Africa is of illegal substance from my experience. Also in Australia where I live, weed is a extremely common practice-my christian school I went to had about 5-10% of drug users in every grades and thats little in comparison to other places. Thats just as example of how common it is. And can I just add-it is both normal and abnormal to abstain/use drugs as there are millions who do and don't-its a personal choice.

reply

[–] lvrepoman 13 years ago

Hence the burst of creativity after his trip. Just like the Beatles, and countless other artists.

I've never partaken, but I'm almost jealous of those who have. The 60's would not have been the 60's without it.

"He was running around like a rooster in a barnyard full of ducks."--Pat Novak

reply

[–] EggJacket 13 years ago

creativity does not arise from drug use. the beatles were musical geniuses who HAPPENED to smoke weed/ingest LSD. it merely gave them inspiration. the creativity was always there.

(besides, LSD IS the most intoxicating chemical. sadly i know this from experience.)

reply

[–] lvrepoman 13 years ago

The individual members of the Beatles have stated categorically that LSD fueled their creativity.

I'd agree with you that they were musical geniuses at heart, with or without the drugs, but the drugs were part of the mix that produced much of their music. And I'm not advocating drug use, by any means. I simply think it's a mistake to ignore it as a factor, an ingredient in the recipe.

"He was running around like a rooster in a barnyard full of ducks."--Pat Novak

reply

[–] shurbanm 13 years ago

check out Jimi Hendrix live with LSD soaked bandana on and without. You will see the difference.

Most bands do their best work when they were heavily into drugs.

reply

[–] ariel-caliban 13 years ago

LOVE! and nothing more

reply

[–] ILikeDirt420 13 years ago

it was LSD

reply

[–] flo116 13 years ago

Absolutely love that scene...especially when Paul is talking to the lobsters.
I know this scene was not in "the book" but to me it is a great scene.
Lots of drugs will break down the wall people put up and let the creativity flow.
But I heard LSD was one of the best.

It is not so much the destination as the journey!!!

reply

[–] valis1984 10 years ago

"The most powerful commonly available drug is d-Lysergic Acid Diethylamide tartrate (LSD-25, C20 H25 N3 O) first produced in 1938 for common cold research and as a hallucinogen by Dr. Albert Hoffmann on 16-19 April 1943. The most potent analgesic drug is Etorphine or M-99, announced in June 1963 by Dr. Kenneth W. Bentley and D. G. Hardy of Reckitt and Sons Ltd. of Hull, with almost 10,000 times the potency of morphine."

Guinness Book of Records 26th Edition 1979

"Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects". Will Rogers (1879-1935)

reply

[–] wab-3 9 years ago

And actually, DMT isn't a heavier trip than LSD. It's just the onset that is intense. In a finger snap, demons are climbing out of the walls, so only for the experienced tripper. It's like a drag race to Le Mans, DMT versus LSD. See, you drop the hammer on DMT, instant hallucinations. Heavy stuff. But it's over in half an hour. Three good mikes of LSD and you're seeing the same stuff, only for twelve hours at a minimum.

The real crazy stuff was termed "STP." That stuff was bad news. Never got my hands on any, not sure I'd drop it if I did. Scared the hell out of Kesey.

That "adrenochrome" bull was just an HST legend.

reply