Re: [californiadisasters] Re: 1953 Rattlesnake Fire, 7/9/2014, 10:00 pm

Fact not represented in evidence.  ;o)  There's a lot of crap on movies and TV these days, apparently there are no limitations anymore, nothing is left to the imagination (like a good Hitchcock thriller, which is more scary by suggestion than being shown).  Most folks that 'claim' shock, aren't; those that are, don't talk about it.  That's upside down logic.

You forget the movie that came out a decade or so ago... title like "faces of Death" or similar...  no holds barred, brutal.

I don't tend to watch that tripe as real life can be far scarier than any movie has considered (although Catch 22 and Apocalypse Now come pretty close, there's humanity in the insanity).  Man's inhumanity to fellow man is substantial (and tends to overshadow the good things we rarely hear about).  For example, zombie (used to be vampire/monster movies) shows like the Walking Dead (bleah, so NOT interested) has nothing on dealing with the walking wounded (or worse) at a real MCI.  Most people don't have the stomach for truth so they fall back on Hollywierd nonsense.  They know it's safe, making it easier to compartmentalize it (they can feel good, it isn't real).  Reality can be harsh or it can be a blessing (watching a fawn aborning).

John Norman McLean, is that the son?  I haven't read the books, but loved (own) the movie "A River Runs Through It", a great period piece.  Melancholy, even sad in parts, but a great window into a simpler time when most folks carried guilt and maintained their reputation, because that is ultimately all they owned.  That certainly can't be said today but that is a disaster farther reaching than CA.  ;o)

Again, that sense of reputation is held in the mind, a place screen writers have forgotten and can easily be darker and scarier than a CG image.  Different times I suppose and a different value set...

Rick

On 7/11/2014 1:24 PM, Kim Noyes kimnoyes@gmail.com [californiadisasters] wrote:

 

More info in my previous post last night "The Man Who Played With Fire" including a death scene image such as you would never see published in this day and age.

Are we more sensitive now and weren't then or are we more namby-pamby-ish now and were less so then or a bit of all of the above? I don't have the answer to that.