Here is another creation of mine, relax, make yourself comfortable and if you want to see how I made this by clicking on the link below:
Monday, October 25, 2010
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Soap Notes For Occupational Therapy
Soup leeks (or onions)
To view the movie click on the following link:
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Where Can I Get Gelmicin Cream
Everybody loves Gianni Canova!
" Sometimes even friends are wrong. In mid-July, in an interview published in La Stampa, Steve Della Casa commented enthusiastically the decision to devote Marco Müller retrospective of Venice to the Italian comedy film, hailed as an objective "clearance" of cinepanettoni and their vital comedy "fascennina" only criticism that "thoughtful" would not be able to understand and appreciate.
Time: I confess that I begin to really not be able to more in this country, flaunted contempt for everything that has to do with the thought . Speaking of critics, in particular, the thoughtfulness (ie the ability to reflect, connect, analyze, interpret ...) should be a constitutive quality. What do we want? A critical playful? Lust? Joyful? Troublemakers? Maybe. But to be, and at the same time continue to be "critical", the criticism itself should never renounce the exercise of thought. Even the risk of appearing boring to Müller and all'establishment that he wanted to drive to Venice.
Moreover, if and when it ceases to be thoughtful, critical errors in the risk of hitting it falls Steve Della Casa in his article. For example: in ancient Rome were fescennini the event of a vulgar comedy but plebeian, authentically working-class, which has little to do with our tradition of comic cinema. Which is instead largely an expression of a petty-bourgeois comedy with an objective substratum racist, sexist, patriarchal and conformist. It will not be chic to say and write, but I say it and write it the same. And I add that I find very questionable decision to dedicate a retrospective the exhibition of the Venice Film Festival is not the rediscovery of cinema research, experimental and disturbing, what the market has always been hostile and marginalized, but a film that-at least in Italy-coincides with the market and monopolize and he does his and that does not need a retrospective paid with public money to be known. But so be it. Would be truly transgressive, Müller should put it in competition, a cinepanettoni. Or a film by Tinto Brass. But it never will. Him would not do. What it does to pass the idea that there is no other film this and the other film is boring and communist. Indeed: thoughtful, vade retro. "
Vi segnalo per intero l'editoriale della rivista Duellanti diretta da Gianni Canova , famoso critico cinematografico, autore di una serie di testi di approfondimento su Lynch Cronenberg and of which they are jealous owner!
Apparently, the same Canova has the 'Eye Digger (and there's also the biggest of mine), digging very deep in the film industry which has always been one of the leading Italian .
" Sometimes even friends are wrong. In mid-July, in an interview published in La Stampa, Steve Della Casa commented enthusiastically the decision to devote Marco Müller retrospective of Venice to the Italian comedy film, hailed as an objective "clearance" of cinepanettoni and their vital comedy "fascennina" only criticism that "thoughtful" would not be able to understand and appreciate.
Time: I confess that I begin to really not be able to more in this country, flaunted contempt for everything that has to do with the thought . Speaking of critics, in particular, the thoughtfulness (ie the ability to reflect, connect, analyze, interpret ...) should be a constitutive quality. What do we want? A critical playful? Lust? Joyful? Troublemakers? Maybe. But to be, and at the same time continue to be "critical", the criticism itself should never renounce the exercise of thought. Even the risk of appearing boring to Müller and all'establishment that he wanted to drive to Venice.
Moreover, if and when it ceases to be thoughtful, critical errors in the risk of hitting it falls Steve Della Casa in his article. For example: in ancient Rome were fescennini the event of a vulgar comedy but plebeian, authentically working-class, which has little to do with our tradition of comic cinema. Which is instead largely an expression of a petty-bourgeois comedy with an objective substratum racist, sexist, patriarchal and conformist. It will not be chic to say and write, but I say it and write it the same. And I add that I find very questionable decision to dedicate a retrospective the exhibition of the Venice Film Festival is not the rediscovery of cinema research, experimental and disturbing, what the market has always been hostile and marginalized, but a film that-at least in Italy-coincides with the market and monopolize and he does his and that does not need a retrospective paid with public money to be known. But so be it. Would be truly transgressive, Müller should put it in competition, a cinepanettoni. Or a film by Tinto Brass. But it never will. Him would not do. What it does to pass the idea that there is no other film this and the other film is boring and communist. Indeed: thoughtful, vade retro. "
Sometimes an apology of thoughtful criticism is helpful to understand that this is the strata to which we must address seriously and to make critical criterion. At the movies are not the reviews, there are scores or scale of merit, need two eyes and a shovel to dig.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Toothpick Tower Blueprints
Incestuous - Il figlio bastardo di Freud e Nolan
articles do not usually like that, but this time I want to challenge the elements that make up the plot of a film that has made quite a stir (and very successful): Inception of Christopher Nolan .
I state that, overall, I liked the movie. I left satisfied by the projection. This is completely irrelevant to my analysis, however, for the few who do ask, they will not start from preconceived ideas.
A little 'as in Matrix, this film combines great action sequences with a very interesting theoretical discourse. Nolan builds a real architectural (element strongly present in the plot) of contemporary cinema, structuring the staging of a series of different levels, similar to the structure of human consciousness.
The plot is intriguing and the potential of a project such as Inception are endless, unfortunately, in my humble opinion, were not used to 100%. It feels very much the weight of advancing years. A film like this, if it was produced a decade ago, would have been revolutionary and deserved (perhaps ) the name that many critics continue to give it a hurry: masterpiece. Inception
is by no means a masterpiece. It 'an interesting experiment, a variation of a theme in recent years is taking several feet in the world cinema, especially Hollywood. Maybe the film will not make explosives come prima, avendo sfruttato fino all'osso il genere dell'action movie fino a renderlo una pagliacciata (consapevole) alla Expendables , per cui tra le esplosioni si cerca di inserire qualche elemento nuovo. Il film di guerra ha stufato, proviamo a trasportare la guerra su un differente piano.
Come abbiamo iniziato a vedere negli articoli precedenti, ma vedremo meglio sicuramente in seguito, i Wachowski con Matrix hanno costruito un ponte tra il mondo virtuale e quello reale . Molte esplosioni, effetti bullet-time e cazzotti, ma anche una solidissima struttura filosofica che abbraccia l'intera cultura occidentale degli ultimi 500 anni.
Recentemente, è stato similarly, the acclaimed film of James Cameron that, using the same ploy, has created a product more "family" plundering the plot of novels for children and animated feature films, but valuing the whole with a splendid series of technical virtuosity.
Inception has been produced too close to Avatar and Matrix. Seeing this film, I felt a constant sense of deja-vu. Even the car with the cables that allows you to enter and exit from a dream, as this idea may be frightening to a psychoanalytic point of view (but we'll get there), refers a lot to the famous "jack " that vengono utilizzati da Neo e compagni per collegarsi e scollegarsi da Matrix . 
Devo apprezzare il fatto che Nolan , a differenza dei Wachowski , non ha reso note le sue fonti di ispirazione. Non ha fatto la citazione furbona di Freud o parlato apertamente dell' Interpretazione dei Sogni , evitando qualunque tipo di riferimento alla famosa dottrina psicanalitica. Purtroppo, però, a meno che lo spettatore al cinema non sia A) ignorante totale o B) laureato in psicologia , il paragone nasce spontaneo. Ma dato che, neither A nor B are the norm at the cinema, no one is allowed to move comparisons.
start with a small, meticulous terminological clarification of that, however, annoyed me throughout the projection as a splinter in his finger. The character played by Leonardo Di Caprio and his colleagues very often speak of something called " SUBCONSCIOUS . Now, I do not have a degree in psychology, but I understand enough to know that the subconscious, in psychoanalysis as in every other possible theory of the dream, does not exist! It is simply a mistranslation of UNCONSCIOUS. The error, however, is not attribuire al povero Nolan che, nel suo piccolo, ha sempre parlato di “ subconscious ”. In inglese, infatti, il termine funge da sempre come un sinonimo povero di “ unconscious ”. Lo stesso Freud, però, ha dichiarato : " We shall also be right in rejecting the term 'subconsciousness' as incorrect and misleading ” poiché crea una gran confusione per nulla.
La critica più grande che voglio fare a questo film, però, è un'altra. Una critica strutturale .
Il film è intelligentemente organizzato a livelli , la messa in scena è coordinata millimeter and the spectacular action sequences taking us to a world that is different, like Chinese boxes. Indeed, it is assumed that one of the dreamers to act as architect dream material and shape at will, ordering, as well as a director (and the comparison is not entirely accidental) the imagination of people.
more you dive into the "subconscious " (...) and the more things change. Time expands and amplifies the magnitude of the effect of external agents on the dreamer himself. A droplet of water on the face may suggest to the mind and the stimulation of the wet dream of the rain, or a sea or a waterfall (or go to the bathroom). Andando sempre più in profondità si scoprono degli elementi, appunto, inconsci, come nel caso della moglie del protagonista che “ sedimentano ” nei suoi sogni da molti anni. L'elemento, veramente poco sfruttato, dei Totem .
Da questo si deduce che Nolan ha letto Freud , poiché già dai primi sogni analizzati si possono estrapolare queste nozioni.
Questi che ho appena riassunto sono, secondo me, i punti di forza dell'intera pellicola. Degli elementi sicuramente interessanti che hanno permesso al regista di creare una dimensione “ di sogno ” (And not "dreamy ) Hollywood. Are those things that are good for the film, in short, that make it enjoyable or .
Similarly, however, we suggest that the same Nolan arrabattato has a number of concepts from Freud's famous and he organized at his pleasure, forgetting all sense of the whole interpretation of the dream: that is, precisely interpretation. Hermeneutics, as it speaks Hegel, the owl of Minerva . You can not hold a dream in a conscious way and live by "wake up" because the only way for us to penetrate the Our unconscious is just in its interpretation in retrospect, after the dream occurred, for what little I remember. All with the help of a professional, as, indeed, a psychoanalyst .
Now, dear Nolan, you could create from scratch a dreamlike dimension as did many directors before you (see David Lynch firstly, that bell for many years with these things) or take the concepts Freudian but not interpret as you wish, by following the plan, as in the case of the master Alfred Hitchcock (and I quote Psycho Spellbound - Spellbound ).
Inception, I repeat, is a good movie, but is not a masterpiece because it has elements that characterize it as such. Great director, interpretations, special effects, the basic idea, but does not have much formal coherence.
I state that, overall, I liked the movie. I left satisfied by the projection. This is completely irrelevant to my analysis, however, for the few who do ask, they will not start from preconceived ideas.
A little 'as in Matrix, this film combines great action sequences with a very interesting theoretical discourse. Nolan builds a real architectural (element strongly present in the plot) of contemporary cinema, structuring the staging of a series of different levels, similar to the structure of human consciousness.
The plot is intriguing and the potential of a project such as Inception are endless, unfortunately, in my humble opinion, were not used to 100%. It feels very much the weight of advancing years. A film like this, if it was produced a decade ago, would have been revolutionary and deserved (perhaps ) the name that many critics continue to give it a hurry: masterpiece. Inception is by no means a masterpiece. It 'an interesting experiment, a variation of a theme in recent years is taking several feet in the world cinema, especially Hollywood. Maybe the film will not make explosives come prima, avendo sfruttato fino all'osso il genere dell'action movie fino a renderlo una pagliacciata (consapevole) alla Expendables , per cui tra le esplosioni si cerca di inserire qualche elemento nuovo. Il film di guerra ha stufato, proviamo a trasportare la guerra su un differente piano.
Come abbiamo iniziato a vedere negli articoli precedenti, ma vedremo meglio sicuramente in seguito, i Wachowski con Matrix hanno costruito un ponte tra il mondo virtuale e quello reale . Molte esplosioni, effetti bullet-time e cazzotti, ma anche una solidissima struttura filosofica che abbraccia l'intera cultura occidentale degli ultimi 500 anni.
Recentemente, è stato similarly, the acclaimed film of James Cameron that, using the same ploy, has created a product more "family" plundering the plot of novels for children and animated feature films, but valuing the whole with a splendid series of technical virtuosity.
Inception has been produced too close to Avatar and Matrix. Seeing this film, I felt a constant sense of deja-vu. Even the car with the cables that allows you to enter and exit from a dream, as this idea may be frightening to a psychoanalytic point of view (but we'll get there), refers a lot to the famous "jack " that vengono utilizzati da Neo e compagni per collegarsi e scollegarsi da Matrix .
Devo apprezzare il fatto che Nolan , a differenza dei Wachowski , non ha reso note le sue fonti di ispirazione. Non ha fatto la citazione furbona di Freud o parlato apertamente dell' Interpretazione dei Sogni , evitando qualunque tipo di riferimento alla famosa dottrina psicanalitica. Purtroppo, però, a meno che lo spettatore al cinema non sia A) ignorante totale o B) laureato in psicologia , il paragone nasce spontaneo. Ma dato che, neither A nor B are the norm at the cinema, no one is allowed to move comparisons.
start with a small, meticulous terminological clarification of that, however, annoyed me throughout the projection as a splinter in his finger. The character played by Leonardo Di Caprio and his colleagues very often speak of something called " SUBCONSCIOUS . Now, I do not have a degree in psychology, but I understand enough to know that the subconscious, in psychoanalysis as in every other possible theory of the dream, does not exist! It is simply a mistranslation of UNCONSCIOUS. The error, however, is not attribuire al povero Nolan che, nel suo piccolo, ha sempre parlato di “ subconscious ”. In inglese, infatti, il termine funge da sempre come un sinonimo povero di “ unconscious ”. Lo stesso Freud, però, ha dichiarato : " We shall also be right in rejecting the term 'subconsciousness' as incorrect and misleading ” poiché crea una gran confusione per nulla.
La critica più grande che voglio fare a questo film, però, è un'altra. Una critica strutturale .
Il film è intelligentemente organizzato a livelli , la messa in scena è coordinata millimeter and the spectacular action sequences taking us to a world that is different, like Chinese boxes. Indeed, it is assumed that one of the dreamers to act as architect dream material and shape at will, ordering, as well as a director (and the comparison is not entirely accidental) the imagination of people.
more you dive into the "subconscious " (...) and the more things change. Time expands and amplifies the magnitude of the effect of external agents on the dreamer himself. A droplet of water on the face may suggest to the mind and the stimulation of the wet dream of the rain, or a sea or a waterfall (or go to the bathroom). Andando sempre più in profondità si scoprono degli elementi, appunto, inconsci, come nel caso della moglie del protagonista che “ sedimentano ” nei suoi sogni da molti anni. L'elemento, veramente poco sfruttato, dei Totem .
Da questo si deduce che Nolan ha letto Freud , poiché già dai primi sogni analizzati si possono estrapolare queste nozioni. Questi che ho appena riassunto sono, secondo me, i punti di forza dell'intera pellicola. Degli elementi sicuramente interessanti che hanno permesso al regista di creare una dimensione “ di sogno ” (And not "dreamy ) Hollywood. Are those things that are good for the film, in short, that make it enjoyable or .
Similarly, however, we suggest that the same Nolan arrabattato has a number of concepts from Freud's famous and he organized at his pleasure, forgetting all sense of the whole interpretation of the dream: that is, precisely interpretation. Hermeneutics, as it speaks Hegel, the owl of Minerva . You can not hold a dream in a conscious way and live by "wake up" because the only way for us to penetrate the Our unconscious is just in its interpretation in retrospect, after the dream occurred, for what little I remember. All with the help of a professional, as, indeed, a psychoanalyst .
Now, dear Nolan, you could create from scratch a dreamlike dimension as did many directors before you (see David Lynch firstly, that bell for many years with these things) or take the concepts Freudian but not interpret as you wish, by following the plan, as in the case of the master Alfred Hitchcock (and I quote Psycho Spellbound - Spellbound ).
Inception, I repeat, is a good movie, but is not a masterpiece because it has elements that characterize it as such. Great director, interpretations, special effects, the basic idea, but does not have much formal coherence.
A great shame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)