Comments on: NETWORK: the last great film about the news

By: Thisizwhack

Thisizwhack — Sun, 10 Nov 2019 20:33:44 +0000

+Michael Burns I never rec’d a notification for your reply (sorry!) & only happened upon your comment after checking webtracks. Both Blair and Orwell attended the elite Eton college. In fact, Huxley was one of Blair’s teachers at Eton. Both were members of The Fabian Society whose logo is literally a wolf camoflaged by wearing a sheep(!). I dk whether or not yk this, but The Fabian Society is similar to that of the Freemasons in that, it exists as an organization within an organization. They actively promote one world govt. The name ‘Fabian’ is derived from Quintus Favius Maximus Verracosus, the Roman general whose successes were in large part due to strategically planning his battles so that they were long/drawn out, not only to wear down his opponents, but to avoid absolute & decisive victory in battles to better *manage* their outcomes. This is precisely the same methods that are used on the people of earth as what we’re witnessing now on the world stage has been in large part decided upon long ago and is playing out before our very eyes. Nothing in politics happens by chance.

As for PKD, yes, I have read some of his work. The recurrent themes of drugs, mind control, implanting memories, synths/transhumanist agenda, pre-crime, A.I., etc..he was definitely privy to inside information as well. I haven’t actually researched his background. I know he attended Berkeley. I often have wondered of his possible affiliation with the CIA’s MK Ultra program or knowledge thereof. He’s a brilliant writer for sure!! But, back to Huxley and Orwell..there’s definitely a connection as I’ve listed above and you can research it further when you have time.

By: barn moose

barn moose — Mon, 03 Jul 2017 04:36:10 +0000

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budd_Schulberg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zzCQLyNnIg

“Upon its original release [1957], A Face in the Crowd earned somewhat mixed reviews, one of them from Bosley Crowther of The New York Times. Though he applauded Griffith’s performance (“Mr. Griffith plays him with thunderous vigor …”), at the same time, he felt that the character overpowered the rest of the cast and the story. “As a consequence, the dominance of the hero and his monstrous momentum … eventually become a bit monotonous when they are not truly opposed.” Crowther found Rhodes “highly entertaining and well worth pondering when he is on the rise”, but considered the ending “inane”.

“One critic who had only praise for the movie was François Truffaut; in his review in Cahiers du Cinéma, he called the film “a great and beautiful work whose importance transcends the dimensions of a cinema review”.” -wikipedia

By: Michael Burns

Michael Burns — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 19:30:24 +0000

Yes, Huxley for sure, he’s a blue blood. Eric Blair doubful, he had deep hatred of totalitarianism.
Phillip K Dick; it doesn’t get any more individual than Dick. Ahead of his time, have you read any of his works?

By: Michael Burns

Michael Burns — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 19:21:20 +0000

Trump the antagonist. In the script

By: thisizwhack

thisizwhack — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 18:48:33 +0000

It’s been clear to me for some time that one is able to glean factual information from movies labeled as ‘Fiction’ and have accepted that it’s no mere coincidence. When I was a teenager, I believed the works of Aldous Huxley, George Orwell and P.K. Dicks to be revolutionary..until I researched their backgrounds. That’s NOT to insinuate that these men weren’t highly intelligent individuals, just that they were working in concert with the carefully crafted system and that they were privy to inside information.

By: joe rorke

joe rorke — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 17:43:09 +0000

Thank you so much, Jon, for letting me know about this film.

By: amnesiaclinic

amnesiaclinic — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 08:40:04 +0000

Very, very important.

By: John Rigby

John Rigby — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 07:01:19 +0000

Hey Jon! That movie was apocalyptic and still failed. Your summary/commentary here today was top form, brilliant.
I used to worry that “They” might come for you one day, (think I did say so to you on line), but they won’t. This one sermon of yours today, coupled with that amazing movie distilled here by you, actually says it all.
Nothing is going to happen.
Nobody is going to know/notice what is being done.
Everybody now knows – none of it is real, it is just entertainment. But for whom?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

By: Ft. Nolan

Ft. Nolan — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 03:44:12 +0000

Interesting how the media pundits of today may have been high schoolers or just young when “Network” appeared. How many of us really saw the future and what it beheld with Howard Beale’s rants via Paddy Chayefsky?

The Earth is a plantation having “all boredom amused.”

By: truth1

truth1 — Sun, 02 Jul 2017 01:53:17 +0000

A great warning, Jon. Sadly, warnings often go unheaded and unnoticed as you even pointed out. but I do believe anyone would do well to automatically question (reasonably) what is going on around them. And here is what I mean. With humans being preprogrammed (instinct) to trust and obey mom and dad and because mom and dad do lots trusting, the child trusts who the parents trust. Its automatic! Its in our genes. Now if we were guided accurately from the beginning, we would learn to be critical and independent in our thinking. We don’t vote for who our parents might like but who seems to us in our own judgment to be right, right to join, right to believe, right to say.

But the trust routine runs deep. Instinct developed to make sure we had our legs underneath us before we tried to stand on our own. If everything is great, everything will continue to be great. But if there are traitors in our midst and among us, then what we receive from trusting should may not be enough to save us from social saboteurs. It is natural and automatic to trust. It can also be deadly. But the converse is true, too, that to throw out everything we inherited or learned, as we did in the 1960s, has brought to where were are now. Because we have choice, we have danger because our choices may be being made by our base immediate selfish instincts and not the careful contemplative mind that seeks to understand the forces and beliefs that guide our lives.

Too many are scared, even petrified, by what is inside us. Which is? The truth. Internal truth about what we really are and if we are good or bad, right or wrong, honest with ourselves or trying to fool our selves. Maybe we need to take the journey inside us and dare to find fault with ourselves and not just embrace free sex because it is fun, but ponder the many weaknesses of our natural instinct and if there might not be more needed than just instinct.

Our capacity for technology is amazing. But our capacity for examining our motives is not so good. It takes guts and courage to look in the mirror and determine that we are sadly lacking in too many ways and that we need some leverage against our base desires for fun and thrills. Ya know, just saying 😀