Kubrick's The Shining Analysis - What he wanted us to Know — Page 2

zombie84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Warbler said:

zombie84 said:. It strikes me as similar to the likely scenario of how the Beatles started playing on the Paul-is-Dead theory

I just did a quick internet search to find out what the Paul-is-Dead theory was.   I had never heard of it before.    So let me get this straight,  some people actually believe that Paul McCartney died in 1967 and a look-a-like has been posing as McCartney ever since?    So they believe that the guy performing at Olympics opening ceremony was not Paul McCartney, but a look-a-like?   My god, people are crazy. 

If I'm not mistaken, people don't really believe this anymore. I think it was just a side-effect of Beatlemania - some people looked for meaning in the songs, and a select few thought what they found meant that Paul was dead. I'm also pretty sure that it quickly became little more than a joke after the Beatles heard of it.

Yeah, this has faded away now, but even in the 1980s it was at least remembered seriously, even if not taken that way. In 1998, my grade 8 teacher gave us a Beatles lecture shortly before we moved on to high school. He did this with every graduating class, a bit of a tradition for him, which speaks to how much the Beatles impacted the baby boomers. And at the end of it, he would walk us through every single Paul-is-Dead easter egg that had been identified. I really doubt he believed any of it himself, but it made for an entertaining presentation, complete with "I buried Paul!" sound clips and such. I already knew about it all though. I was really into paranormal stuff and cryptozoology in the early 1990s--almost assuredly due to the X-Files being popular--and would read a lot of books relating to stuff like that at the local public library. A lot of them would go on about the Paul-is-Dead theory. So it was a pretty big part of baby boomer culture and Beatlemania history. I don't know who actually believed in it at any point, but I'm sure there were enough who at least for a time recognized it as a real possibility. With all the JFK murder theories, moon landing hoaxes, Area 51 and Rosewell, etc. circulating at the time, and with stuff like Watergate coming out and all these crazy stories about Vietnam (agent orange) and stuff like Manchurian Candidate, it wasn't so unbelieveable. Plus the Monkees were still around, so you could see how easy it was to get a Beatles substitute.

Even today there are still some people who believe Tupac is alive and there are many books proposing Kurt Cobain was murdered, just as people years ago refused to believe Elvis died, so this isn't so out of left field. I mean, a significant proportion of Americans even believe 9/11 was staged. Heck, Dave Mustain, of Megadeth, thinks Obama staged the Aurora DKR shootings to impose gun control. Dave Mustain! People will believe anything. My parents to this day still believe JFK was killed by the CIA, even though it's been shown multiple times how a single gunman inflicted the damage from that vantage point through re-creations (wasn't there a Myth Busters episode about this?). My university had an entire course about rational thinking, where the semester-long example was a total deconstruction of the JFK theory showing how implausible it really was when you consider how unlikely it was to go off without anyone blowing the whistle, aside from the physics simulations. Yet lots of Americans, and even many non-Americans, will hear nothing of it. Like I said, people will believe anything. The Paul-is-dead connections actually hold together better than most conspiracies!

I sat across from one of those "Tupac is alive" guys on a train once. Just mind boggling what people will believe in the cold light of reality. Dave Chappelle did a great skit on his show where Tupac's lyrics were a little too up to date.

Aren't there some people who think Jim Morrison faked his death?

I'm pretty sure Eddie Wilson faked his death, but have no real proof. ;)

All of these to me are more interesting for the what-if's people come up with than the possibility of it actually occurring.

Silver, even Ray Manzarek wrote a what-if book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Poet-Exile-Ray-Manzarek/dp/1560253592 It's quite silly.

I think Stanley wold have found this supposed hidden meaning hysterical. Then he would have looked over things and gone, "hey they could be on to something here...and I thought it was just a movie."

I'm surprised there isn't a "Kubrick is still alive" crowd.

After all, someone had to have scuttled that Eastman House screening of "The Shining" last October, with the legendary lost ending intact, and given their blessing to "Fear and Desire" getting a legit DVD/Blu Ray release this year. ;)

What Kubrik didn't want us to know :P

How we know the moon landings happened: It was impossible to fake

Anyone here who believes in any of this moon landing hoax hogwash, might be interested in some prime Florida property I have for sale. ;)

Not sure about moon landing hoax stuff, but this still creeps me out:

BmB said:

 

SilverWook said:

Anyone here who believes in any of this moon landing hoax hogwash, might be interested in some prime Florida property I have for sale. ;)

You're still not making an actual point, just ridiculing opposing beliefs. This is not logic.

 

Any thoughts on the link I posted?  

BmB said:

 

SilverWook said:

Anyone here who believes in any of this moon landing hoax hogwash, might be interested in some prime Florida property I have for sale. ;)

You're still not making an actual point, just ridiculing opposing beliefs. This is not logic.

 

My father worked at NASA and JPL in the glory days. It's the one thing in the complicated relationship I had with him I was always proud of. (And one of the few things in a long career that wasn't classified, though I could barely get him to talk about those days.)

When I stood looking up at what's left of the Apollo 1 launch platform last summer, it really hit me that it would have been hard for him to talk about the astronauts that died. He had met them many times in the course of his job. My mom told me quite a bit about that awful day in 1967.

So, when I feel the urge to throttle these moon hoax guys, it's because they piss on the graves of brave men, and insult everyone who ever worked to put Americans on the moon and bring them home safe.

Warbler said:

BmB said:

"Cold Logic", "Cold Reality". Hah. Try using actual logic and observation instead of blanket statements and we might get talking. What you probably really meant to say was "I don't believe it".

Personally I don't know. Kubrick obviously was trying to say something. There's a lot of good points in favour and a lot of good points against. What seems to be likely is some sort of hybrid answer, i.e. they faked the first one or two to "win" the space race and then went on to actually go.

At any rate, if anybody could fake it, t'was Kubrick.

if you actually believe any of the moon landings were fake, you're nuts.  Did you watch the video that timdiggerm posted?   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wcrkxOgzhU

 

Do not mess with Buzz! I actually cheered the first time I saw that on the news.

Bingowings said:

Warb, as someone who constantly reminds us of his Christianity you really should be careful about calling people with beliefs different than you own nuts.

Yes, the evidence available points in the opposite direction but if that makes lunar landing conspiracy ladies and gentlemen nuts it makes most people on the planet nuts to some degree, including the atheists.

Now, I agree Warbler gets over-eager in his descriptors. He also sometimes shuts down the possibility of debate by insisting something is obvious, thus making those who disagree nuts or blind or what-have-you....but I think it unfair to make any connection to his religious belief in this case.

1) In a colloquial sense "nuts" isn't that bad a descriptor. For instance, a jurisdiction in Ireland is now seeking to permit people to drink and drive. I wouldn't blame a person for calling those pushing for the law "nuts." As an emotional reaction it's not that bad.

2) Seriously, any time Warbler doesn't give due deference to an opposing viewpoint, it is fair game to invoke his religion?

3) Comparing religious belief to conspiracy theories is nuts :P Conspiracy theories are based on physical phenomena - usually involving making things up and assuming things that are demonstrably wrong. Religion is based on faith and on operations outside of the physical world. We can debate the real-world effects: evidence for a worldwide flood, why Kangaroos are only in Australia, etc but all of that is of a different quality.