Enrico_sw

I noticed that you addressed zero of my points, except the questions on what you want, whose answer was that you can read ppl's minds. I addressed all your points except this one, but I have zero problems answering any questions (which doesn't seem to be the case for you ), so here goes: Wayne playing Genghis Khan was ridiculous. Liz Taylor's Cleopatra was somewhat better though perfectible. But those are two examples, not enough to make a generalization. In any case, whether your generalization is true or not doesn't matter: past producers' inaccuracies doesn't justify today's producers inaccuracies. I want some levelling up, not levelling down (one of my points you never addressed BTW, but I'm sure you will this time )

Prosecuting someone doesn't mean he's guilty. Ever heard of the presumption of innocence? It's a key part of our democracies. The only places it's been scratched are totalitarian countries. Maybe China and Khmer rouge's Cambodia are your models, but not mine

You're right, there's some antisemitic BS in what she said and I disagree with that part (it's obviously BS). But apart from that she's right. Look at Sandrine Rousseau, Alice Coffin and Pauline Armange: toxic feminism. The real feminists are in Iran, not in Paris or New York.

I love her music.

^ are you sure it's her?

She's an interesting actress.

BTW, the worst Stalinist purge was against Tukhachevsky. This guy was a military genius and Stalin (who was an extremely bad military strategist) coldly executed him, because he was jealous of him (and Stalin miserably failed in Poland). The Stalinist purges weakened the red army A LOT, just before WW2

She's really becoming a superstar now.

Hey, congrats friend! You deserve it

Statements like that are very interesting. I can try a few ones: - I abhor Stalinist show trials and much prefer honesty. - I abhor levelling down and much prefer levelling up - I abhor shifting the blame and much prefer blaming the instigators. - I abhor billionaires distorting reality and much prefer historical accuracy. etc.

You read people's minds, do you? You know what they think even if they don't say it, now? Come on, you're smarter than that. You read Hannah Arendt's books on totalitarianism, haven't you? Accusing people of things they never said is the premises of totalitarianism. Most of western justice systems are based on facts, proofs and statements, to protect us from the arbitrary of the judges. Claiming to be the "good guys" doesn't give you the rights to judge people on what they never said. That's not justice, that's inquisition.

BTW, what you seem to propose is a levelling down, while I propose a levelling up. Civilization is here to by level us up, not down.

I shall add that these new inaccuracies are not innocent, they are a fuel for the politicization of fictions. This is poison. The fact that people fight over these things is a proof. But don't shift the blame. Hollywood is the ones that introduced this race/gender obsssion. They are the predators in all this.

Who is this strawman you're talking about? This person you manufactured is a mirage, a chimera. The very real and influential problem is producers who consistently do race-swapping and gender-swapping as part of a submission to a political cult called Woke. Just like producers did everything to please Mccarthy's goons during the witch hunts. The woke embodied McCarthyism in the past years. It's a fact. The Woke are obsessed with gender and race. You can't shift the blame on people who want to clean fictions from ideology. So, there are many inaccuracies already. You think that's a justification to allow new ones? My proposition is to tackle ALL the historical inaccuracies. It would be a progress. That would be "progressive", literally.

Remember this? Of course, it's a fiction... but as we say over here "la réalité dépasse parfois la fiction"....

You know Schopenhauer's "Postulate What Has to Be Proved", right? That's what I see here. What's your legal proof that he broke the law? He sent illegal immigrants (who broke the law in the first place - that's not judgemental, it's a fact) to a place that self-labels as "safe haven for migrants". You have a funny definition of breaking the law Was it legal for MV's people to call the army to exfiltrate the migrants? (But it's OK when the left does it, right?) BTW, it doesn't mean that all this isn't a tragedy for these immigrants. The debate on immigration is not black and white. In any case, American politics are annoying and I dunno all this story's details, but the false outrage made by the media owned by billionaires (like the WaPo or NY Times) is preoccupying. It seems so easy for predators to download information in the mind of people whose critical thinking has been shattered.

This is going to be legendary! https://www.instagram.com/p/CjQtMQmjOvt/

Yep, not surprising. Emilia has a great personality, she just seems like a very sweet person. And she's a great actress (like Lena) because her on-screen personality is very different from her real one. I'm not surprised Momoa read them. I like this actor as well (he was in Stargate Atlantis, do you remember this show?)

Magda Kuffel (aka Maria Magdalena Kuffel) is a Polish model. - Height: 179 / 5'10'' 1/2 - Bust: 80 / 31'' 1/2 - Waist: 61 / 24'' - Hips: 89 / 35'' - Shoes: 38 / 7 1/2 - Eyes: Blue-green - Hair: Red

This looks pretty good. Of course, I'm extremely cautious when I hear the name Betheseda, after what they've done to Fallout... but I admit it looks good.

You know, let's forget about all the argument, etc. Let me ask you this: what is your goal when you rebuke other people's voice and shift the blame like this? You're an educated, cultivated guy, so what's your goal? I can tell you what my goal is: depoliticize movies and make them for everybody, like they were ten years ago. What's yours really and what does this culture war bring? Do you think people's lives will be affected by a movement that distorts reality to please a cult that promotes a tainted and twisted vision of justice?

You can't hope for your movement to be credible if you're not logical with its definitions. You can convince fanatics or fearful people. But not rational people.

^ And the argument saying "oh, it's not racist when we scratch white people" is racist. And the argument saying "oh, it's not sexist when we belittle men" is sexist. By definition. There shouldn't even be a debate on this. Racism is racism whoever is the target. Sexism is sexism whoever is the target.

BTW, race swapping a character is racist. Gender swapping a character is sexist. Period.