Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Tom Cruise explains how people's preconception affected Stanley Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut" (1997) "Cruise: People had a preconception about 'Eyes Wide Shut' (1997). And I see how that affected the picture. I think they expected some big s€x movie. As opposed to— and Stanley was very specific about it—... s€xual obsession and jealousy. It’s not about s€x. And there were rumors out there about how Stanley was going to make a p0rn0gr@phic picture. But that wasn’t the movie he was making. You can see that they didn’t quite grasp what the movie was, even when they saw it, because they carried the baggage in. They read [screenwriter Frederic] Raphael’s ridiculous book [which portrayed Kubrick as a self-serving collaborator]. And they kind of reviewed it based on that. Interviewer: Do you think the teaser trailer had something to do with the expectation of a more p0rn0gr@phic movie? Was he toying with those expectations? Cruise: Probably. That [trailer] was the first stage for him. You have to understand: it’s Stanley Kubrick. It’s not going to be what you think it is. And he’s not going to tell you everything. So even the people who think they know Stanley Kubrick’s movies... missed it. Because whatever preconception you have, you’ve got to take it on its own merits and not the surrounding elements. In the same way, when I look back at 'Ryan’s Daughter' (1970) and I hear and read the stuff that David Lean went through ... It’s a very painful, lonely, desperate picture. [Shakes head.] And a great one. (Tom Cruise's interview with Cameron Crowe, Vanity Fair, 2000)show more

DepressedBergman

232,521 subscribers

42,868 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

"It's a superhero movie that is for adults and has adult ideas in it. You don't have to think about it any harder than that. It goes way deeper. If you want to, you can tear it apart like a giant onion and keep peeling it until you're at its core. "But I think that it's cool to experience it just like when I read the comic book for the first time and I didn't know. No one was telling me what it's about or the why of it. You come to it fresh. And sometimes I wish I had that experience because I would love to see the movie or read the book for the first time again because that feeling was for me awesome. "Especially when you go into something with this anticipation that it's just a Hollywood superhero movie which is what a lot of people will think because they don't know. They see some guys fighting and then when you see the film you actually have this experience of it being taken apart. "Those archetypes, those mythological shapes, whether they be Batman or Superman or any of superheroes and how they're just turned around. Whether it's through sexual fetish or fighting, actually killing guys they fight. "Stuff like that or whether it's the end of the movie and there's this moral dilemma that is the end of the movie is also challenging on all those levels."

"It's a superhero movie that is for adults and has adult ideas in it. You don't have to think about it any harder than that. It goes way deeper. If you want to, you can tear it apart like a giant onion and keep peeling it until you're at its core. "But I think that it's cool to experience it just like when I read the comic book for the first time and I didn't know. No one was telling me what it's about or the why of it. You come to it fresh. And sometimes I wish I had that experience because I would love to see the movie or read the book for the first time again because that feeling was for me awesome. "Especially when you go into something with this anticipation that it's just a Hollywood superhero movie which is what a lot of people will think because they don't know. They see some guys fighting and then when you see the film you actually have this experience of it being taken apart. "Those archetypes, those mythological shapes, whether they be Batman or Superman or any of superheroes and how they're just turned around. Whether it's through sexual fetish or fighting, actually killing guys they fight. "Stuff like that or whether it's the end of the movie and there's this moral dilemma that is the end of the movie is also challenging on all those levels."

Zack Snyder Film

22,225 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

John Waters on his obsession with "The Wizard of Oz" (1939) & his thoughts on the movie being considered a "Gay classic": "Interviewer: Do you remember how old you were and where you saw it? Waters: I probably saw it at the Senator Theater in Baltimore the first time, which I still have my movie premieres in. I probably saw it there and then on TV every year. But certainly I saw it at the movies as a kid. I don’t remember how old I was, and it wasn’t the first movie I saw, but it was close to it. It was a complete, complete obsession from the very, very beginning. Now, today, you have video. We couldn’t do that, so you had to wait once a year to see it. That’s that sadness about the magic of movies: you can watch it over and over, and you can rewind it, see how everything is done. Still, is there a better tornado scene? To me, all these really expensive digital effects are very uninvolving. That tornado scene is as good as 'Twister' (1996) to me, and I think it’s done with a nylon stocking Interviewer: It’s a great surrealist scene, too. Waters: And how radical—the black and white to color is almost like an LSD effect. It is a drug movie almost. (...) Interviewer: Why do you think it’s become associated with the gay community, as being a “gay classic”? Waters: See, to me, I don’t think it’s that much of a gay movie. Judy Garland is, but I don’t think so much of that movie. Of course, this is her first one, but she wasn’t tragic in that movie, except later they found out she was on diet pills when she was singing. I think it’s only a gay movie, if it is, only because of Judy Garland’s later suffering in her life and melodrama. I love Judy Garland, but did she ever marry a straight man? I don’t know. Did anyone in the family? It’s a tradition. But basically, I don’t think of it as a gay film. I know “Friends of Dorothy,” but I think it’s because of Judy Garland’s later career. Well, it might be a gay children’s movie. I don’t think it’s a gay adult’s movie. I know drag queens do the Wicked Witch, but I never saw one. It’s not a drag role." ("The Film that Changed my Life", Robert K. Elder, 2011)

John Waters on his obsession with "The Wizard of Oz" (1939) & his thoughts on the movie being considered a "Gay classic": "Interviewer: Do you remember how old you were and where you saw it? Waters: I probably saw it at the Senator Theater in Baltimore the first time, which I still have my movie premieres in. I probably saw it there and then on TV every year. But certainly I saw it at the movies as a kid. I don’t remember how old I was, and it wasn’t the first movie I saw, but it was close to it. It was a complete, complete obsession from the very, very beginning. Now, today, you have video. We couldn’t do that, so you had to wait once a year to see it. That’s that sadness about the magic of movies: you can watch it over and over, and you can rewind it, see how everything is done. Still, is there a better tornado scene? To me, all these really expensive digital effects are very uninvolving. That tornado scene is as good as 'Twister' (1996) to me, and I think it’s done with a nylon stocking Interviewer: It’s a great surrealist scene, too. Waters: And how radical—the black and white to color is almost like an LSD effect. It is a drug movie almost. (...) Interviewer: Why do you think it’s become associated with the gay community, as being a “gay classic”? Waters: See, to me, I don’t think it’s that much of a gay movie. Judy Garland is, but I don’t think so much of that movie. Of course, this is her first one, but she wasn’t tragic in that movie, except later they found out she was on diet pills when she was singing. I think it’s only a gay movie, if it is, only because of Judy Garland’s later suffering in her life and melodrama. I love Judy Garland, but did she ever marry a straight man? I don’t know. Did anyone in the family? It’s a tradition. But basically, I don’t think of it as a gay film. I know “Friends of Dorothy,” but I think it’s because of Judy Garland’s later career. Well, it might be a gay children’s movie. I don’t think it’s a gay adult’s movie. I know drag queens do the Wicked Witch, but I never saw one. It’s not a drag role." ("The Film that Changed my Life", Robert K. Elder, 2011)

DepressedBergman

31,006 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨President Trump announced that there might be a high-level meeting with Zelenskyy as early as this weekend, but didn’t specify if he would participate, and once again reiterated that UA should hold elections right now (note: it’s against the constitution to hold elections during the martial law, also it’s simply not safe, and UA society is widely opposed to the idea). TRUMP: “They would like us to go to a meeting over the weekend, in Europe, and we’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with. We don’t wanna be wasting time. Sometimes you have to let people fight it out, and sometimes you don’t. But the problem with letting people fight it out is you’re losing thousands of people a week. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Q: “And when you say that the European leaders want to have a meeting over the weekend, are you talking about with Zelenskyy or with them?” TRUMP: “With Zelenskyy and us.” Q: “And you said in an interview yesterday that you think it’s time for Zelenskyy to start accepting things. What things are you talking about?” TRUMP: “Well, I think he has to be realistic. And I do wonder about how long is it gonna be till they have an election. You know, for a democracy, it’s a long time. They haven’t had an election in a long time. There was a poll that came out, 82% of the people are demanding a settlement be made, Ukrainian people. They wanna see a settlement be made. I understand that. They’re losing thousands and thousands of people a week. They wanna see it ended. And I do say at what point, when do they have an election in Ukraine? That’s not casting aspersions on anybody, but they do have a massive corruption situation going on there… People are asking this question, ‘When do they have an election?’ Are they gonna have an election, or are they gonna just keep it going like this? So, I think it’s time to get that war settled, and I think it’s a war that can be settled. But it takes two to tango.”

🚨President Trump announced that there might be a high-level meeting with Zelenskyy as early as this weekend, but didn’t specify if he would participate, and once again reiterated that UA should hold elections right now (note: it’s against the constitution to hold elections during the martial law, also it’s simply not safe, and UA society is widely opposed to the idea). TRUMP: “They would like us to go to a meeting over the weekend, in Europe, and we’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with. We don’t wanna be wasting time. Sometimes you have to let people fight it out, and sometimes you don’t. But the problem with letting people fight it out is you’re losing thousands of people a week. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Q: “And when you say that the European leaders want to have a meeting over the weekend, are you talking about with Zelenskyy or with them?” TRUMP: “With Zelenskyy and us.” Q: “And you said in an interview yesterday that you think it’s time for Zelenskyy to start accepting things. What things are you talking about?” TRUMP: “Well, I think he has to be realistic. And I do wonder about how long is it gonna be till they have an election. You know, for a democracy, it’s a long time. They haven’t had an election in a long time. There was a poll that came out, 82% of the people are demanding a settlement be made, Ukrainian people. They wanna see a settlement be made. I understand that. They’re losing thousands and thousands of people a week. They wanna see it ended. And I do say at what point, when do they have an election in Ukraine? That’s not casting aspersions on anybody, but they do have a massive corruption situation going on there… People are asking this question, ‘When do they have an election?’ Are they gonna have an election, or are they gonna just keep it going like this? So, I think it’s time to get that war settled, and I think it’s a war that can be settled. But it takes two to tango.”

Kateryna Lisunova

10,801 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Trump: I think it’s very sad, actually. I’m surprised that it wasn’t—you know—the public wasn’t notified a long time ago, because to get to stage 9, that’s a long time. I just had my physical. You saw that. You saw the results of that particular test. I think that test is standard to pretty much anybody getting a physical—a good physical. We had the doctors at the White House and over at Walter Reed, which is a fantastic hospital, do it. I did a very complete physical, including a cognitive test. I’m proud to announce I aced it. I got them all right. You proud of me? Your husband would be proud of me for getting them all right. It’s a little risk. If I didn’t get them all right, these people would be after me. It would be not a good situation. But I think, frankly, anybody running for president should take a cognitive test. They say it’s unconstitutional, but I would say in that particular case, having a cognitive test wouldn’t be so bad. But when you take tests—medical, as a male—that test is very standard. I don’t know if it’s given to everybody, but it’s given just about. And it takes a long time to get to that situation… to get to a stage 9. I think that if you take a look, it’s the same doctor that said that Joe was cognitively fine, there was nothing wrong with him. If it’s the same doctor, he said there was nothing wrong there. That’s been proven to be a sad situation. And the autopen is becoming a very big deal. You know, the autopen is becoming a big deal because it seems that maybe it was the president—whoever operated the autopen. But when they say that was not good, they also—you have to look and you have to say that the test was not so good either. In other words, there are things going on that the public wasn’t informed [about], and I think somebody is going to have to speak to his doctor—if it’s the same or even if it’s two separate doctors. Why wasn’t the cognitive ability—why wasn’t that discussed? And I think the doctor said he’s just fine, and it’s turned out that’s not so. It’s very dangerous… this is dangerous for our country. Look at the mess we are in. You talk about all these questions on Ukraine and Russia. That would’ve never happened, as an example, if I were president. It would’ve never happened. The other thing—you have to say: Why did it take so long? I mean, this takes a long time. It can take years to get to this level of danger. It’s a very, very sad situation. I feel very badly about it. And I think people should try and find out what happened. Because I’ll tell you, I don’t know if it had anything to do with the hospital. Walter Reed is really good. They’re some of the best doctors I’ve ever seen. I don’t even know if they were involved. But a doctor was involved in each case. Maybe it was the same doctor. And somebody is not telling the facts. That’s a big problem.

Trump: I think it’s very sad, actually. I’m surprised that it wasn’t—you know—the public wasn’t notified a long time ago, because to get to stage 9, that’s a long time. I just had my physical. You saw that. You saw the results of that particular test. I think that test is standard to pretty much anybody getting a physical—a good physical. We had the doctors at the White House and over at Walter Reed, which is a fantastic hospital, do it. I did a very complete physical, including a cognitive test. I’m proud to announce I aced it. I got them all right. You proud of me? Your husband would be proud of me for getting them all right. It’s a little risk. If I didn’t get them all right, these people would be after me. It would be not a good situation. But I think, frankly, anybody running for president should take a cognitive test. They say it’s unconstitutional, but I would say in that particular case, having a cognitive test wouldn’t be so bad. But when you take tests—medical, as a male—that test is very standard. I don’t know if it’s given to everybody, but it’s given just about. And it takes a long time to get to that situation… to get to a stage 9. I think that if you take a look, it’s the same doctor that said that Joe was cognitively fine, there was nothing wrong with him. If it’s the same doctor, he said there was nothing wrong there. That’s been proven to be a sad situation. And the autopen is becoming a very big deal. You know, the autopen is becoming a big deal because it seems that maybe it was the president—whoever operated the autopen. But when they say that was not good, they also—you have to look and you have to say that the test was not so good either. In other words, there are things going on that the public wasn’t informed [about], and I think somebody is going to have to speak to his doctor—if it’s the same or even if it’s two separate doctors. Why wasn’t the cognitive ability—why wasn’t that discussed? And I think the doctor said he’s just fine, and it’s turned out that’s not so. It’s very dangerous… this is dangerous for our country. Look at the mess we are in. You talk about all these questions on Ukraine and Russia. That would’ve never happened, as an example, if I were president. It would’ve never happened. The other thing—you have to say: Why did it take so long? I mean, this takes a long time. It can take years to get to this level of danger. It’s a very, very sad situation. I feel very badly about it. And I think people should try and find out what happened. Because I’ll tell you, I don’t know if it had anything to do with the hospital. Walter Reed is really good. They’re some of the best doctors I’ve ever seen. I don’t even know if they were involved. But a doctor was involved in each case. Maybe it was the same doctor. And somebody is not telling the facts. That’s a big problem.

Acyn

656,690 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

#TAEYONG WEVERSE LIVE 🌹: "And there is one thing I’ve realized, that now when I’m alone, I don’t want to talk about the members anymore. Because I felt this even when I was in the military. Of course, I did do it a lot, but I think I came to think that talking about someone else when they aren’t around isn’t polite, no matter how much they are team members". 🌹: "We’re close and like brothers, but still, if you hear what you want to hear directly from the people involved, it’s much more comfortable for me, and I think it would be more comfortable for you all and the person involved too. (I’m trying not to talk about even that member’s TMI anymore. Actually, I did talk about it during the last interview. There was talk about the members, but because the other members might feel uncomfortable. I said that I wouldn’t talk about it. 🌹: "I asked for your understanding. So I hope you all understand. They did that for me . I hope you all understand, too. I think I regretted those things. Talking about the members' TMI or things like that in the past. They might have wanted to talk about it too, you know". 🌹: "And rather than just finding it fun for me to talk about, the people involved need to have something to say when they come. If I tell them everything, what are they going to talk about when they turn on the live stream again? If I tell them everything, they probably won't turn on the live stream at all. They won't even talk". *Pat pat* 🌹: "You all understand, right? Thank you" * Taeyong, I respect your decision. I hope those people who always do that can understand and respect your decision as well.

#TAEYONG WEVERSE LIVE 🌹: "And there is one thing I’ve realized, that now when I’m alone, I don’t want to talk about the members anymore. Because I felt this even when I was in the military. Of course, I did do it a lot, but I think I came to think that talking about someone else when they aren’t around isn’t polite, no matter how much they are team members". 🌹: "We’re close and like brothers, but still, if you hear what you want to hear directly from the people involved, it’s much more comfortable for me, and I think it would be more comfortable for you all and the person involved too. (I’m trying not to talk about even that member’s TMI anymore. Actually, I did talk about it during the last interview. There was talk about the members, but because the other members might feel uncomfortable. I said that I wouldn’t talk about it. 🌹: "I asked for your understanding. So I hope you all understand. They did that for me . I hope you all understand, too. I think I regretted those things. Talking about the members' TMI or things like that in the past. They might have wanted to talk about it too, you know". 🌹: "And rather than just finding it fun for me to talk about, the people involved need to have something to say when they come. If I tell them everything, what are they going to talk about when they turn on the live stream again? If I tell them everything, they probably won't turn on the live stream at all. They won't even talk". Pat pat 🌹: "You all understand, right? Thank you" * Taeyong, I respect your decision. I hope those people who always do that can understand and respect your decision as well.

🌹Nyo

134,738 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Damon Wayans Was Supposed To Play Richard Pryor But Ex Wife Ruined It “I don’t think it’s his life—I think it’s his ex-wife who wants to make it her story. Because I read her book, A Fallen Angel, which was a good book, but Richard was abusive, and she wants it to be more about that. And I met with Jennifer, and I was like, ‘Look, Richard Pryor is like Malcolm X with punchlines—that’s how Black people see him. They would lose their minds if they made this movie about you.”

Damon Wayans Was Supposed To Play Richard Pryor But Ex Wife Ruined It “I don’t think it’s his life—I think it’s his ex-wife who wants to make it her story. Because I read her book, A Fallen Angel, which was a good book, but Richard was abusive, and she wants it to be more about that. And I met with Jennifer, and I was like, ‘Look, Richard Pryor is like Malcolm X with punchlines—that’s how Black people see him. They would lose their minds if they made this movie about you.”

Club Shay Shay

578,116 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Salma Hayek took her parents & brother for the premiere of Robert Rodriguez's "Desperado" (1995), but when the sex scene played, she made them leave the theater with her as she didn't want her family to watch that scene. Here is Salma Hayek explaining how the scene was filmed: "Interviewer: Do you remember how Carolina was described in the script? Hayek: No. I mean, usually, [it’s] the age. They’re beautiful and sexy, probably. Mexican. It sounded like me. Interviewer: [Laughs] It is perfect casting. Today, there are often intimacy coordinators to help provide safe spaces for actors. How did you feel about doing a major sex scene in this movie at such a pivotal point in your career? Hayek: It was a very difficult thing for me. It was not in the original script, I have to say. I think it was one of the notes that came after they showed the screen test, which made it harder for me. I was already like, “No, that was not in there the first time.” Interviewer: But you went through with it. Hayek: They were amazing. What I can tell you is that I was very lucky because they set up the lights and the sound. [It was] Robert, Antonio, Elizabeth and I. Robert was operating the camera. I think there was no sound. Elizabeth was moving cable. [There] was not even a [monitor]. And I flipped out. I wouldn’t do it. They were very patient. It was two hours, and I was still not [working] up the courage. Then it was very, very nice. They closed the set. They did everything that could possibly be done. But it was one long scene with dialogue and… it was different. There were little moments before I would flip out again. I walked out of the premiere when they played it and I took my brother, father, and mother with me. I didn't want any of them to see it. They were happy to walk out right away and then we came back again. I don't think they noticed anything." (Salma Hayek's interview with Candice Frederick, Elle, 2020)

Sensitive content

Salma Hayek took her parents & brother for the premiere of Robert Rodriguez's "Desperado" (1995), but when the sex scene played, she made them leave the theater with her as she didn't want her family to watch that scene. Here is Salma Hayek explaining how the scene was filmed: "Interviewer: Do you remember how Carolina was described in the script? Hayek: No. I mean, usually, [it’s] the age. They’re beautiful and sexy, probably. Mexican. It sounded like me. Interviewer: [Laughs] It is perfect casting. Today, there are often intimacy coordinators to help provide safe spaces for actors. How did you feel about doing a major sex scene in this movie at such a pivotal point in your career? Hayek: It was a very difficult thing for me. It was not in the original script, I have to say. I think it was one of the notes that came after they showed the screen test, which made it harder for me. I was already like, “No, that was not in there the first time.” Interviewer: But you went through with it. Hayek: They were amazing. What I can tell you is that I was very lucky because they set up the lights and the sound. [It was] Robert, Antonio, Elizabeth and I. Robert was operating the camera. I think there was no sound. Elizabeth was moving cable. [There] was not even a [monitor]. And I flipped out. I wouldn’t do it. They were very patient. It was two hours, and I was still not [working] up the courage. Then it was very, very nice. They closed the set. They did everything that could possibly be done. But it was one long scene with dialogue and… it was different. There were little moments before I would flip out again. I walked out of the premiere when they played it and I took my brother, father, and mother with me. I didn't want any of them to see it. They were happy to walk out right away and then we came back again. I don't think they noticed anything." (Salma Hayek's interview with Candice Frederick, Elle, 2020)

DepressedBergman

31,706 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

.Naval: There was a story that I read about Elon Musk that really affected me, which was when he was talking to Bill Gates, and Bill Gates had just taken out some huge short on Tesla. It was like a billion dollar short or something. And, Elon was like, “Why would you do that? Why would you short Tesla?” And Bill goes, “Well, you know, I talked to my financial advisors and I looked at the math and there’s no way it’s overvalued. And so I’m going to make money on the short.” And Elon goes, “What do you care about making money? I thought you were into electric cars and climate change and saving the world. What are you doing trying to save a few bucks and betting against Tesla?”. And he just walked away in disgust. And I think he never talked to Bill Gates after that. And that’s when I realized, like, Elon’s a purist. He means what he says. The money is a tool for him to get what he’s trying to do. And so I take him at face value, which is the crazy thing, because a lot of people who set these audacious goals to inspire people, you kind of know they don’t really mean it. Elon, I take at face value. So I really do think he intends to get to Mars. I don’t think he’s joking about that. And I think he means to get there within a defined window of time. And I don’t think it’s just like an inspirational, faraway goal. I think he’s very, very concretely going to do whatever it takes. Because Elon doesn’t want to go down in history as the electric car guy or even the guy who saved America guy. He wants to go down as a guy who got humanity to the stars. Again, I’ll give him more credit than that. I don’t even think he wants to go down as the “I got humanity to the stars” guy. He’s just like, “I want to get to the stars, and so I have to make it happen in this lifetime. The only way that I get to experience the science fiction world in my head is if I get to the stars.” And so that’s so inspirational. I think that drives everything. So I think the government was just a thing that got in his way.

.Naval: There was a story that I read about Elon Musk that really affected me, which was when he was talking to Bill Gates, and Bill Gates had just taken out some huge short on Tesla. It was like a billion dollar short or something. And, Elon was like, “Why would you do that? Why would you short Tesla?” And Bill goes, “Well, you know, I talked to my financial advisors and I looked at the math and there’s no way it’s overvalued. And so I’m going to make money on the short.” And Elon goes, “What do you care about making money? I thought you were into electric cars and climate change and saving the world. What are you doing trying to save a few bucks and betting against Tesla?”. And he just walked away in disgust. And I think he never talked to Bill Gates after that. And that’s when I realized, like, Elon’s a purist. He means what he says. The money is a tool for him to get what he’s trying to do. And so I take him at face value, which is the crazy thing, because a lot of people who set these audacious goals to inspire people, you kind of know they don’t really mean it. Elon, I take at face value. So I really do think he intends to get to Mars. I don’t think he’s joking about that. And I think he means to get there within a defined window of time. And I don’t think it’s just like an inspirational, faraway goal. I think he’s very, very concretely going to do whatever it takes. Because Elon doesn’t want to go down in history as the electric car guy or even the guy who saved America guy. He wants to go down as a guy who got humanity to the stars. Again, I’ll give him more credit than that. I don’t even think he wants to go down as the “I got humanity to the stars” guy. He’s just like, “I want to get to the stars, and so I have to make it happen in this lifetime. The only way that I get to experience the science fiction world in my head is if I get to the stars.” And so that’s so inspirational. I think that drives everything. So I think the government was just a thing that got in his way.

Arjun Khemani

2,736,337 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I think it’s safe to say that 2025 was a very interesting year. And I think I see it very differently than most. You probably saw a lot of headlines about AI and tech stocks. While that was a big story, I don’t think it was the most important thing. The big story in the investment world was the depreciation of the value of fiat money and how that impacted the price of gold. That’s how 2025 looked through my eyes, at least. I’m curious to hear if you see things the same way.

I think it’s safe to say that 2025 was a very interesting year. And I think I see it very differently than most. You probably saw a lot of headlines about AI and tech stocks. While that was a big story, I don’t think it was the most important thing. The big story in the investment world was the depreciation of the value of fiat money and how that impacted the price of gold. That’s how 2025 looked through my eyes, at least. I’m curious to hear if you see things the same way.

Ray Dalio

150,009 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Nicky Butt: “I never played against Messi.” Paul Scholes: “Well, you were lucky.” Nicky Butt: “I was very lucky, yes. I would not go anywhere near him. How good was he?” Paul Scholes: “Well, look, it wasn’t just him. You think of the three in the midfield. They must have played both times in that Champions League: Iniesta, Xavi and Busquets, and then you’ve got Messi with that. When you are up against a midfield player and they are coming at you one-on-one, you hope you don’t get in that situation. With some players, you would be able to read them. You know where they are going and sometimes you can take it off them. But with Messi, I did not have a clue. I had absolutely no idea what he was going to do. I didn’t know if he was going to the left, to the right, or if he was going to go through my legs. He could have done absolutely anything. You just had to guess. If you missed the ball, you had to try and get him. I actually did it here once at Old Trafford. It should have been a penalty. If VAR had been around, it would have been a different story because it was the night when we won 1-0. But that team, as a whole, was incredible. I would say after those first 10 minutes in Rome, they just totally outplayed us.”

Nicky Butt: “I never played against Messi.” Paul Scholes: “Well, you were lucky.” Nicky Butt: “I was very lucky, yes. I would not go anywhere near him. How good was he?” Paul Scholes: “Well, look, it wasn’t just him. You think of the three in the midfield. They must have played both times in that Champions League: Iniesta, Xavi and Busquets, and then you’ve got Messi with that. When you are up against a midfield player and they are coming at you one-on-one, you hope you don’t get in that situation. With some players, you would be able to read them. You know where they are going and sometimes you can take it off them. But with Messi, I did not have a clue. I had absolutely no idea what he was going to do. I didn’t know if he was going to the left, to the right, or if he was going to go through my legs. He could have done absolutely anything. You just had to guess. If you missed the ball, you had to try and get him. I actually did it here once at Old Trafford. It should have been a penalty. If VAR had been around, it would have been a different story because it was the night when we won 1-0. But that team, as a whole, was incredible. I would say after those first 10 minutes in Rome, they just totally outplayed us.”

M 🇦🇷

63,285 Aufrufe • vor 17 Stunden

Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich: “Given how the Iranians have been behaving, do you have any regrets about lifting the naval blockade or giving the sanctions waivers?” President Trump: “N, no. I gave them a chance. I wanted to give them a chance at making a deal. You know, we had a deal two days ago. It was done, and then all of a sudden they couldn’t do it. They didn’t like something about the deal, they couldn’t do it, and they shot first, and that was a big mistake that they shot first, because we have been knocking the hell out of them. They’re very difficult people. 47 years we put up with it the USS Cole, you go back all the way. Thousands of people, thousands of Americans were killed. A lot of soldiers were killed. A lot of soldiers are walking around or not walking around. I mean, they’ve been so badly injured. The arms, the legs, the face with the Soleimani, with the bomb. A — they call it the roadside bomb. Most people call it the roadside bomb. It’s a disaster, and I killed him in my first administration. Had I not, it might be a different story today. He was a mad genius. He was a mad — probably a mad man. But he was a general and he had total control over the country, and I actually think the leaders of Iran were afraid of Soleimani. But I killed him. And by the way, with him went a very bad person, also. They happened to be meeting each other at the airport, and a very bad person from Iraq — happened to be a leader of Iraq — happened to be killed in that same incident. So, I don’t know if I did you a favor or not. I’ve never asked you that question. You probably would know better than me. But no, I think — I think that — I think that what we’ve done to Iran is we’ve taken away all of them, almost all of their military capability.”

Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich: “Given how the Iranians have been behaving, do you have any regrets about lifting the naval blockade or giving the sanctions waivers?” President Trump: “N, no. I gave them a chance. I wanted to give them a chance at making a deal. You know, we had a deal two days ago. It was done, and then all of a sudden they couldn’t do it. They didn’t like something about the deal, they couldn’t do it, and they shot first, and that was a big mistake that they shot first, because we have been knocking the hell out of them. They’re very difficult people. 47 years we put up with it the USS Cole, you go back all the way. Thousands of people, thousands of Americans were killed. A lot of soldiers were killed. A lot of soldiers are walking around or not walking around. I mean, they’ve been so badly injured. The arms, the legs, the face with the Soleimani, with the bomb. A — they call it the roadside bomb. Most people call it the roadside bomb. It’s a disaster, and I killed him in my first administration. Had I not, it might be a different story today. He was a mad genius. He was a mad — probably a mad man. But he was a general and he had total control over the country, and I actually think the leaders of Iran were afraid of Soleimani. But I killed him. And by the way, with him went a very bad person, also. They happened to be meeting each other at the airport, and a very bad person from Iraq — happened to be a leader of Iraq — happened to be killed in that same incident. So, I don’t know if I did you a favor or not. I’ve never asked you that question. You probably would know better than me. But no, I think — I think that — I think that what we’ve done to Iran is we’ve taken away all of them, almost all of their military capability.”

Curtis Houck

13,939 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

‘It’s not clear Trump even READ the Memorandum of Understanding he signed with Iran.’ —Doug Bandow, former Special Assistant to President Reagan ‘The Iranians do have to be careful not to overreach. They hold the Strait. That gives them enormous leverage, but they need to be prepared to make a deal when they can. I think what they were worried about here was that it was pretty clear Trump was violating the MOU in terms of the Strait as well as the issue of Lebanon. Now, it's not clear that he actually read the MOU before he signed it. Did he actually know what was in it? It was somewhat ambiguous. You send over a couple of real estate developers, a childhood friend and your son-in-law and expect them to work out negotiations with Iran? What could possibly go wrong? The point is that I think he realised he was in trouble, he got a lot of flak for it and thought that he could force the Iranians to back down. They are holding firm. I think the danger here is they have to be prepared at some point, I think, to make a deal. And the question then is, how do you communicate that to Trump while indicating he's got to make the real concessions… but that they're willing to let him, in a sense, get away with some of his victory claims at home, as long as they get the substantive wins in the Middle East?’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

‘It’s not clear Trump even READ the Memorandum of Understanding he signed with Iran.’ —Doug Bandow, former Special Assistant to President Reagan ‘The Iranians do have to be careful not to overreach. They hold the Strait. That gives them enormous leverage, but they need to be prepared to make a deal when they can. I think what they were worried about here was that it was pretty clear Trump was violating the MOU in terms of the Strait as well as the issue of Lebanon. Now, it's not clear that he actually read the MOU before he signed it. Did he actually know what was in it? It was somewhat ambiguous. You send over a couple of real estate developers, a childhood friend and your son-in-law and expect them to work out negotiations with Iran? What could possibly go wrong? The point is that I think he realised he was in trouble, he got a lot of flak for it and thought that he could force the Iranians to back down. They are holding firm. I think the danger here is they have to be prepared at some point, I think, to make a deal. And the question then is, how do you communicate that to Trump while indicating he's got to make the real concessions… but that they're willing to let him, in a sense, get away with some of his victory claims at home, as long as they get the substantive wins in the Middle East?’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below👇

Going Underground

19,000 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Baier: I just got off the phone with the president…. I asked, “what you are saying is you know there is somebody on the ground in Iran that is going to rise up?” He said, “yeah, I feel there is. I feel that and some of them are no longer with us to be honest because it was 49 leaders that were taken out. That was going to take four weeks we thought to get rid of the Iranian leadership and it is always, you know, if they hide, it is a lot longer than four weeks. They would have been hiding. We were shocked when we heard what was going on. We knew exactly what was happening… they are talking about using people now that nobody ever heard of—even they don't know. They are using people, studying people to be the leader that even they don't know who they are. Can you believe that?” I said it's a tough succession plan in Iran. He said, “49 leaders is deep. It's very deep. When they met, they met for breakfast. They assumed it was good for a lot of reasons. Number one they didn't think we knew. You never attack in the morning having to do with wind and sun and a lot of things. It was amazing that we knew everything we knew.”

Baier: I just got off the phone with the president…. I asked, “what you are saying is you know there is somebody on the ground in Iran that is going to rise up?” He said, “yeah, I feel there is. I feel that and some of them are no longer with us to be honest because it was 49 leaders that were taken out. That was going to take four weeks we thought to get rid of the Iranian leadership and it is always, you know, if they hide, it is a lot longer than four weeks. They would have been hiding. We were shocked when we heard what was going on. We knew exactly what was happening… they are talking about using people now that nobody ever heard of—even they don't know. They are using people, studying people to be the leader that even they don't know who they are. Can you believe that?” I said it's a tough succession plan in Iran. He said, “49 leaders is deep. It's very deep. When they met, they met for breakfast. They assumed it was good for a lot of reasons. Number one they didn't think we knew. You never attack in the morning having to do with wind and sun and a lot of things. It was amazing that we knew everything we knew.”

Acyn

1,065,464 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Trump: “I watched that pass that Messi made, not knowing as much as the people in this room, but I know about sorts and I know a little bit about soccer but I watched Messi, and he was well guarded, right? And all of a sudden he is standing on the right, you understand what I'm talking about? I don't know – I just noticed it. Nobody talked about it, I just noticed it. I said, he is too well guarded by a great player. And then he moved to the right and the other player was just standing there. "And he had plenty of time. He kicked it…. You have a great player in England, who I play golf with, you know that, right?… I think they perhaps made a mistake when they made him a defensive player, what do I know about soccer?…we've got to be a little offensive, right? But no, I'm not going to call it. Look, what do I know about coaching? But that was a little unusual."

Trump: “I watched that pass that Messi made, not knowing as much as the people in this room, but I know about sorts and I know a little bit about soccer but I watched Messi, and he was well guarded, right? And all of a sudden he is standing on the right, you understand what I'm talking about? I don't know – I just noticed it. Nobody talked about it, I just noticed it. I said, he is too well guarded by a great player. And then he moved to the right and the other player was just standing there. "And he had plenty of time. He kicked it…. You have a great player in England, who I play golf with, you know that, right?… I think they perhaps made a mistake when they made him a defensive player, what do I know about soccer?…we've got to be a little offensive, right? But no, I'm not going to call it. Look, what do I know about coaching? But that was a little unusual."

Republicans against Trump

763,158 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

James Cameron on spending his 40th birthday with Stanley Kubrick explaining to him how "True Lies" (1994) was made: "Meeting Stanley Kubrick was my 40th birthday present to myself. I was on vacation in Europe, and I called him up and said, "I'm coming over," and went to his house in England. My wife at the time was freaked out that I wasn't going to be back home for my birthday. But I said, "I'm going to meet Stanley Kubrick. There's no present, no surprise party, no nothing you could give me that would supersede that." So I went to see this reclusive guy knocking around this big house and he just totally wanted to know how 'True Lies' (1994) was made. He had a print of it on his KEM down in his basement, and made me sit there and tell him how I had done all the effects shots. So I spent the whole time talking about my movie with Stanley Kubrick, which was not where I thought the day was going to go. But I want to be like Stanley, I want to be that guy. When I'm 80, I want to still be the guy trying to figure it all out." (James Cameron's interview to Jeffrey Resner, DGA Quarterly, 2008) P.S: On this day, 32 years ago, "True Lies" (1994) premiered in Westwood, California, USA.

James Cameron on spending his 40th birthday with Stanley Kubrick explaining to him how "True Lies" (1994) was made: "Meeting Stanley Kubrick was my 40th birthday present to myself. I was on vacation in Europe, and I called him up and said, "I'm coming over," and went to his house in England. My wife at the time was freaked out that I wasn't going to be back home for my birthday. But I said, "I'm going to meet Stanley Kubrick. There's no present, no surprise party, no nothing you could give me that would supersede that." So I went to see this reclusive guy knocking around this big house and he just totally wanted to know how 'True Lies' (1994) was made. He had a print of it on his KEM down in his basement, and made me sit there and tell him how I had done all the effects shots. So I spent the whole time talking about my movie with Stanley Kubrick, which was not where I thought the day was going to go. But I want to be like Stanley, I want to be that guy. When I'm 80, I want to still be the guy trying to figure it all out." (James Cameron's interview to Jeffrey Resner, DGA Quarterly, 2008) P.S: On this day, 32 years ago, "True Lies" (1994) premiered in Westwood, California, USA.

DepressedBergman

970,771 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut had a lot of secret truths hidden in it. Eyes Wide Shut was not the movie Kubrick intended audiences to see. The studio cut 24 minutes from the film, and just a few days later, the legendary filmmaker was dead... What was in those 24 minutes? And what happens at the real masked parties? The director was found dead on March 7th, 1999, at his home in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, just six days after screening the final cut of Eyes Wide Shut to Warner Brothers executives. As a result, he was unable to control the release of what was to be his final film... Considering the theme of Eyes Wide Shut, the fact Stanley Kubrick had first thought of casting actor Woody Allen as the lead actor in the movie only hyperbolizes the so-called conspiracy theories about the film. The director also considered Dustin Hoffman, Warren Beatty, Alan Alda, Alec Baldwin, Albert Brooks, Bill Murray, Sam Shepherd, and Tom Hanks for the leading role. What was Stanley Kubrick trying to tell us in this movie from 1999?

Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut had a lot of secret truths hidden in it. Eyes Wide Shut was not the movie Kubrick intended audiences to see. The studio cut 24 minutes from the film, and just a few days later, the legendary filmmaker was dead... What was in those 24 minutes? And what happens at the real masked parties? The director was found dead on March 7th, 1999, at his home in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, just six days after screening the final cut of Eyes Wide Shut to Warner Brothers executives. As a result, he was unable to control the release of what was to be his final film... Considering the theme of Eyes Wide Shut, the fact Stanley Kubrick had first thought of casting actor Woody Allen as the lead actor in the movie only hyperbolizes the so-called conspiracy theories about the film. The director also considered Dustin Hoffman, Warren Beatty, Alan Alda, Alec Baldwin, Albert Brooks, Bill Murray, Sam Shepherd, and Tom Hanks for the leading role. What was Stanley Kubrick trying to tell us in this movie from 1999?

illuminatibot

48,483 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Howard Hawks on his meeting with Al Capone & what Capone and another famous Chicago gangster thought about 'Scarface' (1932) when they saw the film: "Interviewer: Did you have any contact with Al Capone while making the picture? Hawks: While we were making 'Scarface' (1932), five or six of them came out and said, “The boss wants us to see the picture.” And I said, “You go and tell him when it comes out, he can pay a dollar and buy a ticket. You don’t scare me. Why the hell don’t you come out and just ask to see it?” They reported to Capone that it was just great, and they invited me to Chicago to see him. They met me at the train, and they were late. One of the fellows said, “There was a killing last night and we had to go to the funeral.” I said, “Do I have to ride with you if there was a killing last night?” They said I could ride in a different car. But when we went into a café, they would sit with their backs to the wall, and I had my back to the door. We had some damn good-looking girls with us, a bit brassy but very pretty. When I saw Capone, we had tea, and he was dressed in a morning coat, striped trousers, a carnation, being a very nice man, saying how much he liked the picture. I was with him two, three hours. Then he asked me to come again, and I stopped by there. But there was a shooting in Chicago, so they said that he couldn’t come because he was hiding out in Atlantic City or something. Then he came to see me when I was working in Hollywood, and the cops came and arrested him right on the set. Interviewer: So he did see 'Scarface'? Hawks: Five or six times. He had his own print of it. He thought it was great. He’d say, “Jesus Christ, you guys got a lot of stuff in that picture! How’d you know about that?” I said, “Look—you know how somebody can’t testify if he’s a lawyer? Well, I’m a lawyer.” And he laughed. He didn’t give a damn. Another famous gangster brought two very lovely daughters out to watch the movie and introduced himself to me. He said, “Where’d you get that stuff in that killing?” I asked him, “Why? Are you mad?” He said, “No, I’m just curious.” I told him, and he laughed, and he said, “That’s the way we did the shooting. Why hasn’t the picture played in Chicago?” I said, “They won’t let me.” He said, “Do you want it to play?” I said yeah. And he said, “Can I use your phone a minute?” When he finished he said, “You can play it any time you want.” ('Hawks on Hawks', Joseph McBride, 1982) P.S: On this day, 94 years ago, 'Scarface' (1932) premiered in New Orleans, Luisiana.

Howard Hawks on his meeting with Al Capone & what Capone and another famous Chicago gangster thought about 'Scarface' (1932) when they saw the film: "Interviewer: Did you have any contact with Al Capone while making the picture? Hawks: While we were making 'Scarface' (1932), five or six of them came out and said, “The boss wants us to see the picture.” And I said, “You go and tell him when it comes out, he can pay a dollar and buy a ticket. You don’t scare me. Why the hell don’t you come out and just ask to see it?” They reported to Capone that it was just great, and they invited me to Chicago to see him. They met me at the train, and they were late. One of the fellows said, “There was a killing last night and we had to go to the funeral.” I said, “Do I have to ride with you if there was a killing last night?” They said I could ride in a different car. But when we went into a café, they would sit with their backs to the wall, and I had my back to the door. We had some damn good-looking girls with us, a bit brassy but very pretty. When I saw Capone, we had tea, and he was dressed in a morning coat, striped trousers, a carnation, being a very nice man, saying how much he liked the picture. I was with him two, three hours. Then he asked me to come again, and I stopped by there. But there was a shooting in Chicago, so they said that he couldn’t come because he was hiding out in Atlantic City or something. Then he came to see me when I was working in Hollywood, and the cops came and arrested him right on the set. Interviewer: So he did see 'Scarface'? Hawks: Five or six times. He had his own print of it. He thought it was great. He’d say, “Jesus Christ, you guys got a lot of stuff in that picture! How’d you know about that?” I said, “Look—you know how somebody can’t testify if he’s a lawyer? Well, I’m a lawyer.” And he laughed. He didn’t give a damn. Another famous gangster brought two very lovely daughters out to watch the movie and introduced himself to me. He said, “Where’d you get that stuff in that killing?” I asked him, “Why? Are you mad?” He said, “No, I’m just curious.” I told him, and he laughed, and he said, “That’s the way we did the shooting. Why hasn’t the picture played in Chicago?” I said, “They won’t let me.” He said, “Do you want it to play?” I said yeah. And he said, “Can I use your phone a minute?” When he finished he said, “You can play it any time you want.” ('Hawks on Hawks', Joseph McBride, 1982) P.S: On this day, 94 years ago, 'Scarface' (1932) premiered in New Orleans, Luisiana.

DepressedBergman

67,676 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Stanley Tucci says a Michelin-starred restaurant served his family carrots “like a steak,” microscopic radishes and refused to give them bread “I did go to a restaurant that is Michelin-starred, and I won’t name it. Some people love it. I didn’t. I’d been a number of times. This is in the New York area. Boy, am I vague” “We were with the older kids, but they were younger. You sit down, it’s just a gorgeous setting and everything, and then they say, ‘Tonight, carrots are on the menu.’ I’m not kidding” “And I was like, ‘Oh, okay. Anything else?’” “‘The chef is treating carrots like a steak.’ And I thought, ‘No.’ The kids go, ‘What does that mean? Is he going to milk them?’” “They were the biggest carrots I’d ever seen, all organically grown, of course. And that was the thing” “They brought out some radishes. They came from a long distance. They had a piece of slate, and there were these radishes. We were like, ‘What are they bringing? What is that?’” “As opposed to most things, where they get closer to you and get bigger, these got smaller. They put it down on the table and they go, ‘Radish.’ And the kids go, ‘Where?’ It was so terrible” “We asked for bread, and they said the chef does not like to serve bread because then you won’t eat your food. I’m not six” “I thought, it’s about you. It’s not about us. Not that you have to cater to us, but...”

Stanley Tucci says a Michelin-starred restaurant served his family carrots “like a steak,” microscopic radishes and refused to give them bread “I did go to a restaurant that is Michelin-starred, and I won’t name it. Some people love it. I didn’t. I’d been a number of times. This is in the New York area. Boy, am I vague” “We were with the older kids, but they were younger. You sit down, it’s just a gorgeous setting and everything, and then they say, ‘Tonight, carrots are on the menu.’ I’m not kidding” “And I was like, ‘Oh, okay. Anything else?’” “‘The chef is treating carrots like a steak.’ And I thought, ‘No.’ The kids go, ‘What does that mean? Is he going to milk them?’” “They were the biggest carrots I’d ever seen, all organically grown, of course. And that was the thing” “They brought out some radishes. They came from a long distance. They had a piece of slate, and there were these radishes. We were like, ‘What are they bringing? What is that?’” “As opposed to most things, where they get closer to you and get bigger, these got smaller. They put it down on the table and they go, ‘Radish.’ And the kids go, ‘Where?’ It was so terrible” “We asked for bread, and they said the chef does not like to serve bread because then you won’t eat your food. I’m not six” “I thought, it’s about you. It’s not about us. Not that you have to cater to us, but...”

sara

1,307,934 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

David Cronenberg on why "The Shining" (1980) is not a great film & the "Commercial-minded" nature of Stanley Kubrick: "I think I’m a more intimate and personal filmmaker than Kubrick ever was. That’s why I find 'The Shining' (1980) not to be a great film. I don’t think he understood the (horror) genre. I don’t think he understood what he was doing. There were some striking images in the book and he got that, but I don’t think he really felt it. In a weird way, although he’s revered as a high-level cinematic artist, I think he was much more commercial-minded and was looking for stuff that would click and that he could get financed. I think he was very obsessed with that, to an extent that I’m not. Or that Bergman or Fellini were." ("David Cronenberg at TIFF: Evolution, Mugwumps and Kubrick", Peter Howell, Toronto Star, 2013)

David Cronenberg on why "The Shining" (1980) is not a great film & the "Commercial-minded" nature of Stanley Kubrick: "I think I’m a more intimate and personal filmmaker than Kubrick ever was. That’s why I find 'The Shining' (1980) not to be a great film. I don’t think he understood the (horror) genre. I don’t think he understood what he was doing. There were some striking images in the book and he got that, but I don’t think he really felt it. In a weird way, although he’s revered as a high-level cinematic artist, I think he was much more commercial-minded and was looking for stuff that would click and that he could get financed. I think he was very obsessed with that, to an extent that I’m not. Or that Bergman or Fellini were." ("David Cronenberg at TIFF: Evolution, Mugwumps and Kubrick", Peter Howell, Toronto Star, 2013)

DepressedBergman

287,925 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten