HBO Movies

[LUH 3417]

I wouldn´t call watching TV „passively consuming TV“. Because people have the ability to think symbolically. The can use what they get in other areas in life. They can also do the opposite they see on TV. I don´t think it breeds passivity in life if you aren´t already passive. It can be used very well for resting and I find it a great tool for it. Problems are elsewhere if TV starts dictating your actions. If you get confused about something important on TV you should research it, not blame the TV for it. The media definitely influences the masses but so does ignorance. Avoiding media doesn´t cure ignorance.

The way media is stylized is the problem which is what I wrote about. I truly don’t enjoy watching most tv, I don’t find it relaxing and never have, especially newer shows with short cuts and constant action shots. It feels like an adrenaline dump. There are some quality documentaries. There is little creative effort that goes into watching tv, except maybe conversing with people about what you watched afterwards. I prefer reading books or talking to people who have read a lot of books.

 

[ShotTrue]

Women are so lucky, just get knocked up and be safe from radiation

 

[Max23]

The way media is stylized is the problem which is what I wrote about. I truly don’t enjoy watching most tv, I don’t find it relaxing and never have, especially newer shows with short cuts and constant action shots. It feels like an adrenaline dump. There are some quality documentaries. There is little creative effort that goes into watching tv, except maybe conversing with people about what you watched afterwards. I prefer reading books or talking to people who have read a lot of books.

I consider literature to be the greatest art form. Still when I could read books, I didn´t want to do so in the evening because TV was more relaxing. I didn´t want to lose beautiful written constructs due to fatigue. I guess people are different in that way. There are great TV shows that I consider art, some remind me of books. "Chernobyl" was also something I think suited very well to be a TV show. Mainly because it showed the aweful beauty of destruction. It is not so easy to picture the nuclear halo, powerplant on fire and brave people trying to fix it in a book. Although skilled writers can make fiction more beautiful than reality.

 

[Max23]

This article (Chernobyl is now a hugely important wildlife refuge | Cosmos) just blows my mind:

"But today, 33 years after the accident, the Chernobyl exclusion zone, which covers an area now in Ukraine and Belarus, is inhabited by brown bears, bisons, wolves, lynxes, Przewalski horses, and more than 200 bird species, among other animals."

"First, wildlife could be much more resistant to radiation than previously thought. Another alternative possibility is that some organisms could be starting to show adaptive responses that would allow them to cope with radiation and live inside the exclusion zone without harm. In addition, the absence of humans inside the exclusion zone could be favouring many species – big mammals in particular."

"Over the past 33 years, Chernobyl has gone from the being considered a potential dessert for life to being an area of high interest for biodiversity conservation."

 

[tankasnowgod]

Notice the trend in Madeleine McCann’s and Michael jackson’s pedophilia series on HBO and pizzagate and child sex rings being a hot topic on alternative news sites. The influencers seem to subdue actual issues with surface level stories that are more newsworthy and have a cute face or celebrity victim to plaster the newspapers with. Almost hard to believe this was once front page news in America.

I wouldn't call it the Michael Jackson Pedophilia series, more like the slander Michael Jackson series. HBO never would have dared to air the so called documentary "Leaving Neverland," if Jackson were still alive, as they would have easily been sued for slander, and Jackson likely would have won (just like he won against Victor Gutierez). If you really get into any of the allegations against Jackson, they are all simply extortion attempts. But libel and slander laws do not apply to the dead. So, Jackson's Estate can't defend against these allegations.

There is only accusations from two men in that movie, both who made sworn statements under oath that Jackson never did anything inappropriate to them. Robson even volunteered to testify in Jackson's defense in the 2005 trial. Why would Jackson bring him into a trial if he had been molested? Why would attorney Tom Meserau allow that either?

That movie offers no direct evidence, no circumstantial evidence, and the story of Robson and Safechuck don't even match up with publicly available facts, like the claim that he took one of the accusers to Euro Disney in 1988, when Euro Disney didn't even open until 92. There is no medical evidence, either physical or mental, that either Robson or Safechuck have ever been molested by ANYONE, let alone Jackson. It's clear that neither them nor the film director nor HBO checked any of their stories..... maybe because there is no penalty for them to air a bunch of lies about a dead man. This should certainly call into question any "documentary" that HBO decides to air.

 

[milk_lover]

Women are so lucky, just get knocked up and be safe from radiation

They explained it that the kid absorbed most of the radiation, which made her survive. It was interesting theory, but I would say the high amounts of progesterone in pregnant women could be protective against radiation. Vitamin D can mimic the effect of progesterone and it is shown to be effective against both EMF and low level of radiation from nuclear facilities.

 

[ilikecats]

.

 

[sunraiser]

I agree. I can’t watch tv, it’s become a problem with my partner because he likes to watch tv. Seems silly but the preference for passively consuming media seems to breed passivity in life in general. I watched one episode of “when they see us” about the Central Park five. It was clearly divisive and imparting a black vs white rhetoric. Most popular media, even if it appears progressive or stimulating, seems to promote racial division and completely excludes delving into the deeper issues of classism, access to right information, truth and reality. I’m noticing a trend where it’s cool or hip to be political, and consume media that is on the surface level politically oriented. What this does though is it imparts a sort of anger without action. People get riled up because of the way these shows are stylized - usually extremely dramatic and with a clear enemy who is often ignorant and represents the worst qualities of human nature - but they have no where to transform their anger into political action. Just more helplessness and mutism. You’re cool if you watch certain shows, stand for certain things, virtue signaling as they say, be vaguely mad about everything but have no clear stance on anything in particular. But as for becoming an active, engaged individual, good luck doing that watching tv.

Well said.

I absolutely agree that passive consumption can breed passiveness in life in general - though I think there's a place for art forms like film to creatively spread messages or awareness.

It's definitely something that has to be kept in balance. It's so much more rewarding that way too.