smart people

there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots), but
why no movies for smart people?

Gravity

"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
> but why no movies for smart people?
>
> Gravity
>
fugues are boring and repetetive

"justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>
> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>
>> Gravity
>>
> fugues are boring and repetetive
>

it's polyphonic. how the hell is that repetitive?

what do you listen to? most likely some repetitive homophonic crap like
rock or country.

Gravity

"justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>
> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>
>> Gravity
>>
> fugues are boring and repetetive
>

that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in 1812
or something?

Gravity

"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
news:452a6866$0$97250$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>
> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>
>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
>>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>>
>>> Gravity
>>>
>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>
>
> it's polyphonic. how the hell is that repetitive?
>
> what do you listen to? most likely some repetitive homophonic crap like
> rock or country.
>
Hindustani Classical at present, asshole

thats why he's called "Baaaawwwwwwwwwccckkkkkkk"

"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>
> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>
>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
>>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>>
>>> Gravity
>>>
>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>
>
> that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
> 1812 or something?
>
> Gravity
>
I was always more a Beethoven fan
fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
Grieg...........and others

gravity wrote:
> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots), but
> why no movies for smart people?
>
If you are indeed as smart as you claim, then you would realise that
the quality of music, books and movies is subjective and each
individual makes the judgement on merit according to their cultural
basis. And besides, peoples taste in culture changes over time and
life experience. If you are intellectually stimulated by fugues than
so be it, enjoy. If I listen to Modest Mouse or Wire because i find
them interesting than as a reasonably intelligent person i will enjoy
their music. As for movies, there are a multitude of films for 'smart'
people they're just harder to find. Besides, sometimes films can be
too 'smart' and disregard plot, characterisation and coherence. You
will never enjoy anything if you standards for excellence are too
high..........

styrofoamboots wrote:
> gravity wrote:
> > there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots), but
> > why no movies for smart people?
> >
> If you are indeed as smart as you claim, then you would realise that
> the quality of music, books and movies is subjective and each
> individual makes the judgement on merit according to their cultural
> basis. And besides, peoples taste in culture changes over time and
> life experience. If you are intellectually stimulated by fugues than
> so be it, enjoy. If I listen to Modest Mouse or Wire because i find
> them interesting than as a reasonably intelligent person i will enjoy
> their music. As for movies, there are a multitude of films for 'smart'
> people they're just harder to find. Besides, sometimes films can be
> too 'smart' and disregard plot, characterisation and coherence. You
> will never enjoy anything if you standards for excellence are too
> high..........





listen to how a nature a birds cry or singing out,
or
listen to a sound of Phill Grass,
ride on nature
make me feel a smart just know about it

In message <a8uWg.8863$TV3.7661@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> , justabeing
<just.a.being@gmail.com> writes
>"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.read freenews.net...
>> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots),
>>>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>
>>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>>
>> that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
>> 1812 or something?
>>
>> Gravity
>>
>I was always more a Beethoven fan
>fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
>Grieg...........and others

Modern stuff.

--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

In message <452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreen ews.net>,
gravity <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead.?.invali d> writes

>there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots), but
>why no movies for smart people?

You want smart movies, ignore Hollywood and the odds go up.

--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

"Alan Harding" <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Y0M9b3KI0rKFFwOZ@harding.demon.co.uk...
> In message <a8uWg.8863$TV3.7661@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> , justabeing
> <just.a.being@gmail.com> writes
>>"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.rea dfreenews.net...
>>> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>>> (lots),
>>>>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>>
>>>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>>>
>>> that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
>>> 1812 or something?
>>>
>>> Gravity
>>>
>>I was always more a Beethoven fan
>>fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
>>Grieg...........and others
>
> Modern stuff.
>
in a manner of speaking, yes
however
i am now studying hindustani classical on sitar and hope to be able to
perform a bit of dhrupad on surbahar eventually
Dhrupad is very old indeed

gravity wrote:
> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people (lots), but
> why no movies for smart people?
>
> Gravity


there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like Antonioni,
Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of escapism...
the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on deep
emotions, but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is
really happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an
experiance then pulls you in completly...


-"Jordy"

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:45:00 -0700, Icnh wrote:

> gravity wrote:
>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>
> there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like Antonioni,
> Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
> smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
> movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of escapism...
> the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on deep emotions,
> but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is really
> happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an experiance then
> pulls you in completly...

Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
psudo-intellectuals.

I enjoy a good Bergman film... I also like it when the coyote takes an
anvil to the skull.

"eoygeo" <eoygeo@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160416387.711338.72260@i3g2000cwc.googlegrou ps.com...
> styrofoamboots wrote:
>> gravity wrote:
>> > there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>> > (lots), but
>> > why no movies for smart people?
>> >
>> If you are indeed as smart as you claim, then you would realise that
>> the quality of music, books and movies is subjective and each
>> individual makes the judgement on merit according to their cultural
>> basis. And besides, peoples taste in culture changes over time and
>> life experience. If you are intellectually stimulated by fugues than
>> so be it, enjoy. If I listen to Modest Mouse or Wire because i find
>> them interesting than as a reasonably intelligent person i will enjoy
>> their music. As for movies, there are a multitude of films for 'smart'
>> people they're just harder to find. Besides, sometimes films can be
>> too 'smart' and disregard plot, characterisation and coherence. You
>> will never enjoy anything if you standards for excellence are too
>> high..........
>
>
>
>
>
> listen to how a nature a birds cry or singing out,
> or
> listen to a sound of Phill Grass,
> ride on nature
> make me feel a smart just know about it
>

Grassworks is good. so is Lowmower Symphony and Mowing the Lawn in 26
parts.

i love minimal lawn care. that's why i leave a big uncut patch for the
rabbits, heh.

Gravity

"justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8uWg.8863$TV3.7661@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>
> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
> news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>
>> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>
>>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>
>>>> Gravity
>>>>
>>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>>
>>
>> that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
>> 1812 or something?
>>
>> Gravity
>>
> I was always more a Beethoven fan
> fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
> Grieg...........and others
>

although i recognize the good in those composers' works, i am into
Prokofiev, Bach, Glass, Reich, Adams, Barber, etc. i do love parts of
Saint-Saaens organ symphony. it has some 16 hz (low!) pedal notes in most
recordings.

Bach fugues can have serious bass, down to 8 hz on the right organ. (this
is lower than most electronica or rap lol.)

i would like to try the "moderns": Xenakis, Penderecki, Ligetti, and so on.

i don't listen to much classical anymore outside of stuff from 1960 to
present.

Gravity

"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead>

In message <pan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now>, Ivan Marsh
<annoyed@you.now> writes
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:45:00 -0700, Icnh wrote:
>> gravity wrote:

>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>>
>> there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like Antonioni,
>> Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
>> smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
>> movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of escapism...
>> the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on deep emotions,
>> but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is really
>> happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an experiance then
>> pulls you in completly...
>
>Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>psudo-intellectuals.
>
>I enjoy a good Bergman film... I also like it when the coyote takes an
>anvil to the skull.

The coyote is a human substitute, demonstrating our ability to carry on
however stupid our ideas are.

--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

In message <HjzWg.11355$GR.1818@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> , justabeing
<just.a.being@gmail.com> writes
>"Alan Harding" <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:Y0M9b3KI0rKFFwOZ@harding.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <a8uWg.8863$TV3.7661@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> , justabeing
>> <just.a.being@gmail.com> writes
>>>"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>>news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.re adfreenews.net...
>>>> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>> "gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>>>> news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readf reenews.net...
>>>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>>>> (lots),
>>>>>> but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>>>
>>>>> fugues are boring and repetetive
>>>>>
>>>> that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
>>>> 1812 or something?
>>>>
>>>I was always more a Beethoven fan
>>>fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
>>>Grieg...........and others
>>
>> Modern stuff.
>>
>in a manner of speaking, yes
>however
>i am now studying hindustani classical on sitar and hope to be able to
>perform a bit of dhrupad on surbahar eventually
>Dhrupad is very old indeed

I like what I've heard, but that's not as much as I'd like.

--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

x-no-archive: yes

gravity wrote:
> "justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a8uWg.8863$TV3.7661@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m...
>
>>"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>news:452a6962$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.rea dfreenews.net...
>>
>>>"justabeing" <just.a.being@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mGtWg.8843$TV3.4590@newssvr21.news.prodigy .com...
>>>
>>>>"gravity" <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead> wrote in message
>>>>news:452a50c6$0$97246$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.r eadfreenews.net...
>>>>
>>>>>there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>>>(lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>>
>>>>>Gravity
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>fugues are boring and repetetive
>>>>
>>>
>>>that's just backwards, don't be so crabby. do you prefer the canon in
>>>1812 or something?
>>>
>>>Gravity
>>>
>>
>>I was always more a Beethoven fan
>>fond of Chopin, Mozart, Tchaichowsky, Saint-Saaens, Schubert,
>>Grieg...........and others
>>
>
>
> although i recognize the good in those composers' works, i am into
> Prokofiev, Bach, Glass, Reich, Adams, Barber, etc. i do love parts of
> Saint-Saaens organ symphony. it has some 16 hz (low!) pedal notes in most
> recordings.
>
> Bach fugues can have serious bass, down to 8 hz on the right organ. (this
> is lower than most electronica or rap lol.)
>
> i would like to try the "moderns": Xenakis, Penderecki, Ligetti, and so on.
>
> i don't listen to much classical anymore outside of stuff from 1960 to
> present.
>
> Gravity


I like Thalia.

Alan Harding wrote:
> In message <pan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now>, Ivan Marsh
> <annoyed@you.now> writes
> >On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:45:00 -0700, Icnh wrote:
> >> gravity wrote:
>
> >>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
> >>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
> >>
> >> there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like Antonioni,
> >> Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
> >> smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
> >> movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of escapism...
> >> the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on deep emotions,
> >> but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is really
> >> happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an experiance then
> >> pulls you in completly...
> >
> >Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
> >psudo-intellectuals.
> >
> >I enjoy a good Bergman film... I also like it when the coyote takes an
> >anvil to the skull.
>
> The coyote is a human substitute, demonstrating our ability to carry on
> however stupid our ideas are.
>
> --
> The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
> just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?





In the movie the Sixth Sense, exactly when had you notice "I see a
dead people~" all through a movie to the end, if anyone seen the
movie for example.

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:04:08 +0100, Alan Harding wrote:

> In message <pan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now>, Ivan Marsh
> <annoyed@you.now> writes
>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:45:00 -0700, Icnh wrote:
>>> gravity wrote:
>
>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>>>
>>> there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like
>>> Antonioni,
>>> Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
>>> smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
>>> movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of
>>> escapism... the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on
>>> deep emotions, but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is
>>> really happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an
>>> experiance then pulls you in completly...
>>
>>Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>>psudo-intellectuals.
>>
>>I enjoy a good Bergman film... I also like it when the coyote takes an
>>anvil to the skull.
>
> The coyote is a human substitute, demonstrating our ability to carry on
> however stupid our ideas are.

He was a metaphor for Buddha Nature... All suffering is caused by desire.

"Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
newsan.2006.10.10.14.59.36.937944@you.now...
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:04:08 +0100, Alan Harding wrote:
>
>> In message <pan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now>, Ivan Marsh
>> <annoyed@you.now> writes
>>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:45:00 -0700, Icnh wrote:
>>>> gravity wrote:
>>
>>>>> there is music for smart people (fugues), books for smart people
>>>>> (lots), but why no movies for smart people?
>>>>
>>>> there are- they're called "art movies"... Directors like
>>>> Antonioni,
>>>> Resnais, Bergman etc for example... Of course, there are some really
>>>> smart people who love great books, yet they seem to like stupid
>>>> movies... I guess they look at movies as a pleasent form of
>>>> escapism... the best movies, I think are those that not only touch on
>>>> deep emotions, but also make you feel that that what you are seeing is
>>>> really happening, where the movie is more then a movie, it's an
>>>> experiance then pulls you in completly...
>>>
>>>Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>>>psudo-intellectuals.
>>>
>>>I enjoy a good Bergman film... I also like it when the coyote takes an
>>>anvil to the skull.
>>
>> The coyote is a human substitute, demonstrating our ability to carry on
>> however stupid our ideas are.
>
> He was a metaphor for Buddha Nature... All suffering is caused by desire.

thats interesting to me
i used to live where there were umpteen coyoties and quite frankly i didn't
think an awful lot of them sometimes
they were pretty chickenshit

"Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
newsan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now...

> Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
> psudo-intellectuals.

you can kiss your "intellectual" career goodbye, until you learn to use a
spell checker.

Gravity

In message <452c862a$0$97258$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreen ews.net>,
gravity <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead.?.invali d> writes
>
>"Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
>newsan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now...
>
>> Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>> psudo-intellectuals.
>
>you can kiss your "intellectual" career goodbye, until you learn to use a
>spell checker.
>
I have noticed the occasional blooper from you, Gravity, but I've not
commented since spelling wars are considered the one of the lamest
things to do on Usenet.

--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?

x-no-archive: yes

Alan Harding wrote:
> In message <452c862a$0$97258$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreen ews.net>,
> gravity <gravity@send_emails_to_Persent_instead.?.invali d> writes
>
>>
>> "Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
>> newsan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now...
>>
>>> Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>>> psudo-intellectuals.
>>
>>
>> you can kiss your "intellectual" career goodbye, until you learn to use a
>> spell checker.
>>
> I have noticed the occasional blooper from you, Gravity, but I've not
> commented since spelling wars are considered the one of the lamest
> things to do on Usenet.


For starters, it's "soccer", not "football". "Center" not "centre".
And for God's sake, learn how to pronounce "schedule". But yeah,
generally speaking, spelling flames are lame, IMO.

gravity wrote:
> "Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
> newsan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now...
>
>> Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>> psudo-intellectuals.
>
> you can kiss your "intellectual" career goodbye, until you learn to use a
> spell checker.
>
> Gravity
>
>

It's a fork of the sudo project you twit.

psudo offers far better granularity of access control. psudo also is a
great tool for use with those who think a hidden "e" is quite the gem.

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:50:36 -0500, gravity wrote:


> "Ivan Marsh" <annoyed@you.now> wrote in message
> newsan.2006.10.09.21.55.24.292940@you.now...
>
>> Which brings me to question whether we're talking about smart people or
>> psudo-intellectuals.
>
> you can kiss your "intellectual" career goodbye, until you learn to use
> a spell checker.

I know how to use a spell checker... I choose not to.

Besides... it's spelled correctly from a Unix point of view.