MovieChat Forums > The Untold History of the United States (2012) Discussion > GLADIATOR CLIPS W T F ?????? LMAO

GLADIATOR CLIPS W T F ?????? LMAO

posted 12 years ago by LTUM
10 replies | jump to latest

okay stone, you really had me for a minute. i was actually kinda getting into this episode tonight, i really was. the gorbachev and yeltzin stuff, and panama and clinton and nato and etc..... i am very conservative but i was taking in what you said, listening, considering it.....

until (LOL OMG) all of a sudden you say 'ironically gladiator won several ocsars in 2001...' and then you actually played CLIPS FROM IT LMAO LMAO LMAO

you played these clips to, i dunno, draw some kind of parallel to GW bush?

??????????

WTF!!! lol

you wanted to compare GW bush to commodus in the movie? lol

how is that in ANY WAY considered history?

that's totally, totally opinion based. i thought the damn series was a HISTORY DOCUMENTARY?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

huh?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

we don't insert personal opinions in history docs, you @sshole lol

wow. you really had me for a minute.

which is too bad because now i question the veracity and necessity/relevance of all the other 'facts' you presented in the series.

because, you see, by taking this cheap jab at GW bush, it shows you are not presenting anything objective, but rather a subjective (probably propagandist) view of the USAs history.

so, having discerned that posture of yours, why should i accept anything else you say in this series? why?

i'm waiting.... explain why i should trust anything else you say, when it's clear you have a platform to promote

ah hell enough of wasting time on this bull crap......

(disclaimer- i hate gw bush, and wouldn't p1ss on him if he was on fire)

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

[–] ActualSighs 12 years ago

Every episode of this series has used clips from Hollywood films to make a point. Did you not notice this before?

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

so that makes it okay?

even so, STILL not appropriate in a history doc. in a 'history' doc, maybe. (which this appears to be)

but to answer your question, no, i didn't. because haven't watched the other episodes.

but that's completely beside the point. comparing real history to gladiator, totally out of left field, is absurd in a serious analysis of history. it shows what this series is all about; that's my only point here

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

the answer to your question is in your question.

read your own post again.

thanks

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

and you are a p@ssy.

....for chickening out on telling me HOW my comments are stupid.

now go suck a d!ck or something.

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jpkrunch 12 years ago

The show should be listed as a comedy or a horror series. Definitely not a documentary.

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

definitely. great point.

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

[–] pieter1985 8 years ago

I think the point he was making there is that mainstream Hollywood usually reflects the current zeitgeist. During the Reagan administration, you could argue that common themes were nostalgia (Back to the Future) and military hero worship (Rambo, Commando, etc.)
According to Stone, Gladiator's popularity was ironic because it wasn't glorifying a mighty empire (like the US), but criticizing its corrupt leadership.
It's not a very important statement in this documentary series, but I can see why Stone left it in there.

[–] Quentin36 8 years ago

Your sentence structure make your comments unreadable