Were those necessary? I liked the film. And maybe it was just consistent with Ronan's character (although she didn't seem very interested in politics otherwise), but why take the shots? I hate to think it's because you know it'll play better with the Academy. I don't want to be that cynical. And I like Greta Gerwig. (Absolutely loved "Frances Ha.") But I just don't see why it was necessary to take those shots. What did they add to the film? Why stoke today's political flames? What's that going to accomplish?
Reasoning? This isn't photojournalism -- she doesn't have to be impartial. If she wants to express herself by putting in a mild jab or two, she can because it's her film.
Surely you can't think of a few films than lean the other way, all because of the writers or filmmakers political bent.
Hi. Yes, I'll defend to the death her right to express herself. I'm not questioning that a bit. No, she certainly does not have to be impartial. You and I agree on all of that.
I respect the how. I'm still puzzled over the why.
Because taking pot shots at conservatives is trendy and Oscar bait. It is somehow seen as "profound" and "enlightening" to act as grade school children now.
Have fun ignoring the context and underlining the ridiculous LIE bit. If this current Joker-in-residence isn't the poster child for Liar, I don't know what planet either of us are on.
Have fun on Planet Trumpland, where to Lie in the service of Venality is Honor. The guy lies everyday. And all your LIEberals and DKKK stuff is about as old and funny as Phyllis Diller's dead carcass. And Vampires? We know what Kool-Aid water you've been drinking. Kooky.
I apologize for going overboard and edited the post.
where to Lie in the service of Venality is Honor
Sounds like the Clintons, Soros, etc. You're of course familiar with the Clinton Foundation. Look into it unbiasedly sometime.
As for the "Planet Trumpland" comment, I'm an Independent, although I support our kick-axx President and think it's amusing how he absolutely refuses to dance to the tune of the Left-wing media/"academia" (etc.). But my life doesn't revolve around what party is in executive office or any office. All political parties & people are flawed. It's just that modern Dems are so far off it'd be hilarious if it weren't so sad and harmful to the nation.
RE: "Kooky"
The Libs/Dems can't even figure out the function of the male/female sex organs or what bathroom to use, not to mention they think that mentally dubious people can identify as whatever they want and demand everyone else must honor it (e.g. an adult identifying as an infant and wearing a diaper; an obviously white person insisting they're black or AmerIndian), and you call me kooky?
Wake up to reality, my friend.
The real reason you call me "Kooky" is because I don't fall in with the herd you're used to hanging with; I refuse to drink the Lib/Dem Kool-Aid and this apparently troubles you because you live on Planet Clinton/Obama/Democrat. See how easy it is to turn your own ad hominem non-arguments against you?
reply share
Fine. If my arguments aren't lucid enough for you, it must be my shortcoming. But seriously, your world view seems to be shaped by a lifetime of white privilege and religious indoctrination. You think life is supposed to be simple and conform to your views. I think the world is complicated and people don't fit into easy boxes. I don't ascribe an anti-progress stance to all Republicans, and I avoid name-calling. I cannot fathom how people support this ignorant, reality personality, boorish person. He's made a mockery of the US and our political system. And people like you enjoy his sort of personality. If it brings down the standing and functioning of the US, enjoy it.
From what I hear, Trump funnels every donation dollar into his own coffers to the point where his own children are barred from participating in it. Tax returns, please? Bragging about fondling women and shooting someone on a NY street and not losing any votes? The man is so damn corrupt, you can have him.
You think life is supposed to be simple and conform to your views.
Wow, assume much? While some issues are simple, most are complicated, especially the further you go beneath the surface.
RE: "your world view seems to be shaped by a lifetime of white privilege and religious indoctrination"
Tow the liberal line much? Talk about indoctrination.
If you don't think minorities have obvious privileges you're blind. How does Sarah Jeong, a "journalist" for the NY Times, get away with her outrageous racist op-eds/tweets? Asian privilege. How does Farrakhan get away with his constant racist blather? Why are severe black-on-white crimes swept under the rug by the lamestream media? How come the liberal media doesn't denounce black politicians in South Africa legally taking measures to seize the property of white citizens without compensation? Black privilege. How come Academia and modern films don't acknowledge the atrocities AmerIndians committed against white & black settlers, like the Dakota War of 1862 where Santee Sioux went on the warpath and murdered between 600-800 European settlers, which constituted the largest death toll inflicted upon American civilians by an enemy force until 9/11? AmerIndian privilege. (Notice, btw, that I don't call them "Native" because they're not native, their ancestors emigrated from Asia via Beringia several thousand years ago. They're just Older Americans).
I could go on and on, but you obviously turn a blind eye to these kinds of realities.
Yes, Trump foolishly puts his foot in his mouth now and then, but he's boldly, prudently and tenaciously steering the country in the right direction. Obama was the personification of eloquence and he steered us over a libertine cliff of corruption and lunacy (e.g. the IRS scandal and legally allowing mentally ill men to use the ladies restroom; get real).
You're a respectable, intelligent person and we'd get along just fine if we met face-to-face.
reply share
I think your examples of non-white privilege are far-flung and self-serving. I don't know Jeong. Who brings up Farrakhan these days? Black-on-white crime? Lamestream liberal media? Same old specious rhetoric from the extreme "wrong" wing. South African Black privilege? What are you even talking about, and why here and now? I'm sure American Indians committed atrocities, and settlers were invaders. Whatever this Beringia business is, I would think emigration to an empty land several thousand years ago gives them a solid claim.
What is this "right direction"? What is the aftermath of being steered "over a libertine cliff of corruption and lunacy"? What IRS scandal? Trump ignores pleas to release his taxes. Sounds scandalous to me ! "(L)egally allowing mentally ill men to use the ladies restroom; get real." What's this about? Hasn't affected my life any, and I don't see it going on.
Thank you for your diplomatic and pleasant denouement. I don't have public rows with anyone, and don't bring up sensitive subjects with people I don't know. Have a great holiday and best of luck in the New Year.
Your stereotypical argument about "white privilege" suggests that only whites have privileges. I was pointing out obvious privileges of minorities off the top of my head. Farrakhan is still conveying his loony racist drivel; the reason YOU don't hear about it is due to liberal black privilege -- the lamestream media refuses to report it. Imagine if it was a white conservative saying the things Farrakhan espouses? There'd be mass outrage and denouncement.
As intelligent as you are, you're not aware of what's going on in South Africa and the black racism against white citizens? Again, the media blocks these things out. It's liberal black privilege.
You don't know what Beringia is? Maybe because "Academia" wants you to think AmerIndians are native. I don't know, I'm just guessing.
If people simply living somewhere gave them the absolute right to stay there forever in centuries past, why did the Lakota Sioux conquer other tribes to acquire "their" land in the Black Hills? It often went back-and-forth from one tribe to another. So AmerIndians themselves committed this very crime that you say settlers from across the ocean supposedly committed. (I'm part Abenaki, btw).
The "right direction" is moving away from idiotic libertine policies, like Big Government & the corresponding over-regulation, open borders, supporting illegal aliens, unbalanced trade practices, absurdly giving Iran $1.7 billion and gross corruption, like the IRS targeting conservatives.
If there was no IRS scandal, why did Lois Lerner plead the fifth? Innocent people don't plead the fifth.
Trump's tax returns of when he wasn't in public office is a matter between him and the government. It's not my concern, just like my tax records aren't your concern. When his tax returns were eventually made public it turned out to be a big nothing burger and LIEberals mysteriously shut up on the matter.
Are you saying you don't remember Obama's executive order to allow mentally ill men who dress up as women to use the ladies room? The reason you don't see it going on is because Trump cancelled the lunatic order.
I have to admire that you address the topics mentioned. I never expected to convince you of anything but I did want to attempt to expose your haphazard methodology for supporting your argument. This paranoia over the Mainstream Media having an agenda against Trump is silly and absurd, and speaks to how loony the Trump supporting Far Wrong has become.
Trump will feather the beds of whoever he chooses, especially if it benefits him financially. But you don't see it this way, so I wish you a Good New Year. Cheers !
Like most Leftists you deviate from the topic when facts are presented that don't support your erroneous theses, like the faddish idea that only whites have privileges (rolling my eyes). This explains your curious silence when presented with the fact that AmerIndian tribes committed the very same acts that you accuse Euro settlers of practicing, like forcibly taking other tribes' lands, and way worse, speaking as part-Abenaki.
I have no paranoia over the lamestream media, but I do see the obvious, which is that it strongly leans Left. You'd have to be blind to not see it. Why was Herman Cain reviled and Obama given a pass? How come the accomplishments of female conservatives -- including minorities -- are ignored while female liberals are hailed? Why is the striking Melania (an immigrant) loathed while the Grinch-looking Michelle Obama was constantly gushed over? (I'm not being "racist," btw, as there are gazillions of beautiful black women; Michelle just ain't one of 'em).
Earlier you claimed that you don't lower yourself to juvenile ad hominem practices, but your two initial posts spoke of the "Joker-in-residence" and "Planet Trumpland," which are pretty puerile and insulting. This explains my original overboard statements but, since you toned it down, I did as well ("you get what you give"). Now you're back to these condescending ad hominem tactics with the "Far Wrong." I'm not Far Right, btw; I'm an Independent who simply has no tolerance for Far Left lies and lunacies.
As far as taxes go, Trump has paid more in taxes than you could in fifty lifetimes, probably a hundred. So, the argument that he doesn't support the government is laughable. Like any smart businessman before becoming president, he wasn't going to pay more than he had to.
Here's another fact that the lamestream media ignores which might send you into convulsions: Donations from Russia to the Trump foundation: $0.00. Donations from Russia to the Clinton Foundation: $145,600,000. Gee, it looks like it's the Dems who are guilty of "Russian collusion."
Those cliche insults were there to show how immature and superficial Christine "Lady Bird" is in her thinking... She's just a teen who has a dream to go to a top East Coast school despite her middling grades...
Also, she is rebelling against her background, against her religious school, etc... so in that context is rebelling against conservatism at least in the sense of that school and it's association with a parochial sensibility... She starts dating a guy in a band who has anti-establisment views, even though he is upper middle class, etc...
It's there as part of how she is characterised... A large part of the movie is painting a portraite of what she is like, how she thinks and what she wants and is going through... This is just one brushstroke in that portraite... No one is just one thing... Later in the movie, at college she is put off by the dismissiveness of the idea of god by another student... If anything the whole point of the movie is the idea that part of growing up and maturing is to be able to look at things with more nuance and to put yourself in other people's shoes, to empathise with people who do not share your opinions or your positions...
Also, her comment about republicans wasn't exactly a scathing political polemic, rather it was a throwaway remark by a teenager...
It's a coming-of-age movie. I saw a lot of posturing from kids who weren't quite sure of where they fit in. It's common for insecure people to dump on whoever they perceive as outsiders. They get to affirm the idea of themselves as part of the "in group" & assert their superiority over outsiders.
This is exactly what Lady Bird did to the nuns. It's interesting is how the sister handled it. If Gerwig was making a point about politics, I think that was it.
The funny thing is that California Democrats have controlled the legislature for over 40 years. I grew up in NorCal and saw what my classmates got for free lunches and how my parents property taxes climbed and climbed until the property tax bill was bigger than the mortgage every month till prop 13 was voted in.
I hear ya. That is precisely why I left the Bay Area. I moved to another Democrat leaning state so it's not even a partisan thing. It's more that California's just too large a state to permit face-to-face, retail politics. We viewed every issue through the prism of television. So elections became more about signaling "tribe" membership than quality of life.