The Ides of March and Human Centipede II

A political thriller from George Clooney, a horror flick from hell

The Ides of March

Surely there can be few people by now who are unaware that politics is a scummy business. Nevertheless, this is the news that director George Clooney brings us in his carefully paced semi-thriller, The Ides of March. As the title indicates, the movie is an examination of betrayal, on several levels. The stars—Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Evan Rachel Wood, and especially Ryan Gosling, the film’s central presence—are so good they almost make the picture work. But they’re let down in the end by the movie’s under-powered style—it’s almost too tastefully done—and by the facile implausibilities and familiar political tilt of the script (a collaboration by Clooney, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon, who wrote the play on which the film is based).

The story is set in wintry Ohio, during the final week of a Democratic presidential primary. Pennsylvania governor Mike Morris (Clooney) is in the lead, but one of his opponents is catching up. Morris’ campaign is being run by veteran political operative Paul Zara (Hoffman), capably assisted by hotshot up-and-comer Stephen Myers (Gosling).

The opposition mastermind is wily Tom Duffy (Giamatti). Both Duffy and Zara realize that their candidates will need the endorsement of a powerful senator named Thompson (Jeffrey Wright) in order to prevail. But in exchange for the hundreds of delegates he controls, Thompson wants major payback: a promise to be appointed secretary of state in the administration of whichever candidate will meet his demand.  

Myers is a young idealist. He believes Morris “can make a difference in people’s lives” and he resonates to the older man’s smoothly reiterated beliefs. Morris is a doctrinaire liberal. He wants to save the planet and wean the country off oil (he promises to institute regulations that would ban internal-combustion engines within 10 years after his election). He also wants to fight terror by making nice with the country’s enemies, and he’s outraged that the rich “don’t pay their fair share,” and cry “socialism” whenever it’s suggested they should do so. This is the standard progressive agenda, of course, and there’s no countervailing critique of it. (The term “GOP” is mentioned maybe twice, but there are no pesky Republicans actually in view.)

I think we can assume that the movie reflects Clooney’s own political convictions. (Amid the media fixtures passing through the film are Charlie Rose, Chris Matthews, and Rachel Maddow.) And so it’s interesting that his character, a sleek charmer in the Mitt Romney mode, is slowly revealed to be a duplicitous hypocrite, a man who’ll say or do anything to win office. If this is a slap at the present-day Democratic Party, as opposed to politics in general, Clooney deserves cranky-idealist props.  

In any case, Morris is almost a peripheral character here. The real star is Gosling, who once again gives a performance of captivating restraint. His Myers is a naive man ripe for schooling by the grizzled dissemblers all around him. (“None of this is about the democratic process,” one of them informs him.) Myers’ ideals begin to crumble when Duffy attempts to lure him away from the Morris campaign and into the rival camp; and they threaten to implode after a hot young campaign intern named Molly (Wood) enters the scene, and fatefully complicates everyone’s life. This element of the plot, which also enables a rote jab at Catholics, struck me as distractingly melodramatic and far-fetched, for reasons I won’t go into.

But the actors—including Marisa Tomei as a pushy reporter nipping around everyone’s heels—are all exceptionally good. (Wood, especially, exudes an air of erotic calculation that’s unlike anything I’m aware she’s ever done before.) And Clooney, a fine director by now, maintains solid control of the film’s somewhat somber tone. He also stages at least one memorable scene. It’s a long shot in which we see Hoffman summoned into an unexpected meeting in a parked van; the camera holds on the van in silence, and when Hoffman finally emerges, we can read the weight of betrayal, even from a distance, in his eloquently slumped shoulders. It’s too bad the movie’s well-constructed but predictable conclusion can be seen coming from even farther away.

The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)

The 2009 Human Centipede (First Sequence) elicited understandable opprobrium. Outside of the ravening torture-porn cult, it was felt to be vile, inhuman, and, if nothing else, a caution to topless actresses everywhere. Now, however, with the release of The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence), the outline of something more—an extended, deadpan provocation—begins to take shape.

The first film, as you’ll surely recall, introduced us to the rogue surgeon Dr. Heiter (unforgettably played by skull-on-a-stick German actor Dieter Laser) and his mad dream of suturing together a group of captive human subjects, mouth-to-anus, to form an entomological monstrosity. It was a big dream, and—since bodily wastes could only pass from one subject to the next through their conjoined orifices—an unprecedentedly disgusting one. Heiter’s demented chant (“Feed her!”) must echo in the ears of anyone who saw the picture.

Unfortunately, apart from brief flashbacks on a laptop screen, the good doctor is absent from this even more abominable sequel. The laptop belongs to an enormously fat, sweaty asthmatic named Martin (Laurence R. Harvey), a security attendant in a London parking garage. Martin is obsessed with the first Centipede movie (very meta), and yearns not only to replicate its foul horrors, but to expand upon them. Once again, we get to watch.

After some scenes set in the cramped apartment Martin shares with his mother, in which we learn that he was abused by his now-imprisoned father, the movie focuses almost exclusively on the most gruesome torment. Wielding a crowbar, Martin overpowers various customers in his parking establishment—one of them a pregnant woman—and transports them to a grimy warehouse he has rented, where he hogties them and cuts off their clothing. He’s aiming for an even-dozen victims, and when he manages to lure Ashlynn Yennie—one of the pitifully abused actresses in the first Centipede—to London with the promise of an audition for a Tarantino movie (!), his quota is filled, and he gets down to business.

Out comes the kit full of alarming implements—hammer, knives, stapler, pliers, meat cleaver—followed by a grisly checklist of tongue-yanking, teeth-bashing, tendon-slicing, and face-to-butt stapling. (There’s also an unexpected interlude of sandpaper masturbation, which does little to lighten the mood.) Finally, with his human-centipede segments connected into one long gastric system, Martin brings out the king-size jug of laxative.

HCII fails as a horror movie. There are no rousing frights, only blood and agony. So what is it then? A knowing poke in the eye aimed at torture-porn fanboys, daring them to salivate over this jacked-up depravity? A social commentary about the low estate of popular culture? Or are these possibilities part of some encompassing goof? The Dutch director, Tom Six, seems too skillful a filmmaker to confine himself to such a grotesque genre. But we won’t know his full intent until the “concluding” installment of the series (what, a globe-circling string of victims?) arrives in our midst. Yes, The Human Centipede (Final Sequence) is already in development.

Kurt Loder is a writer living in New York. His third book, a collection of film reviews called The Good, the Bad and the Godawful, will be out on November 8th from St. Martin’s Press. Follow him on Twitter at kurt_loder.


Find this and hundreds of other interesting books at the Reason Shop, powered by Amazon.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Tim||

    A conga line of sewn together pols, that would be a great movie.

  • The Other Kevin||

    Your ideas intrigue me. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  • Death Urge||

    Premise Ten: The culture as a whole and most of its members are insane. The culture is driven by a death urge, an urge to destroy life.

    ~Derrick Jensen
    Endgame
    http://www.endgamethebook.org/.....emises.htm

  • derpers derp party||

    The idiocy of White Indian: http://reason.com/archives/201.....nt_2503582

    "Now that the doctor says I can use my body again physically to preserve and improve soil, to garden and nurture Mother Earth, it's time before winter approaches. Again, thanks folks, for allowing a former Fibertarian to test the integrity of his newfound ideas."

    So what happened White Idiot? Had to go back on the teat of modern medical science? I really love all your "impending nuclear war" psycho-babble. What will you do when it doesn't happen? That will be a sad day...

  • Guess who's back||

    Guess who's back
    Back again
    Injun's back
    Tell a friend
    Guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back
    guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back...

    Eminem - Without Me
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVkUvmDQ3HY

  • yup||

    So what happened White Idiot? Had to go back on the teat of modern medical science? I really love all your "impending nuclear war" psycho-babble. What will you do when it doesn't happen? That will be a sad day...

  • Psychobabylon||

    "impending nuclear war" psycho-babble

    Yeah, luckily, all nuclear weapons have been eliminated since Martin Hellman wrote that nuclear war is inevitable. Or haven't they?

    On the Probability of Nuclear War
    Martin E. Hellman
    http://ee.stanford.edu/~hellma.....ility.html

  • derpers derp party||

    Wow, that's really convincing: "While the imminent danger of an all-out nuclear war that would destroy civilization has greatly diminished in the post-Soviet era, there are processes at work that make nuclear war much more dangerous than might first appear. Nuclear proliferation is creating more and more nuclear tinder that could set off a global fire, with India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea being the most obvious possible flash points. Secondly, America now tends to treat Russia as a has-been superpower which need not be consulted before we take action that might bring us into confrontation. This is very dangerous behavior toward a nation with thousands of nuclear weapons. During the 1990's I was very concerned that American military action in the former Yugoslavia might bring about a situation similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis, where both Russia and the US found themselves dragged, reluctantly but inexorably, toward full scale nuclear confrontation. And as I update this in 2008, the danger is increasing rapidly as explained on part of my current project's website.

    So, while this op-ed at first may seem inapplicable in the post-Cold-War world, it has many elements of long-term truth that demand our attention. Given that a process of ending war will take decades, a long-term view is appropriate."

    There are far less nuclear weapons globally than in the 1980s. His 2008 prediction of another Cuba-style situation has yet to appear, and looks less likely than it did in 2008 now that the Russia-Georgia dust has settled.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Wait...this deep ecology Derrick Jensen motherfucker writes books? Using paper? From TREES?

  • DeepGreen||

    Ever hear of a backfire? Why not use the the technology of the agricultural city-State to bring it down? Some would call that hypocrisy, others would call it good tactics.

    But what you really hate is that I'm here proving how intellectually bankrupt libertarianism is. Totally confused.

    Against the state....but for the agricultural city-State.

    Against regulation....but for the most extensive regulation the planet has ever seen - nearly all fertile land invaded and occupied by the biggest government Land enTitlement program ever, privation property.

    LOL

    I came back here for the giggles.

  • Yawn||

    yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn

  • hahaha||

    Translation: I'm a stupid Aspergers poodle who would cry to his mommy/careworker if I ever got too sunburnt, so I stay indoors and on agri-city[STATE] computers all day, while simultaneously consuming the culture of that society (as evidence through his posting of faggoth Hot Topic bands, NIN and System of a Down).

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    HA! HA! Yeah and I also like to read fucktard rants by "trolls" that aren't even intelligent, to be a "troll" you have to be a moron. I just laugh at you people, you in no way piss me off, your pathetic, you shit and piss in your pants and your mom has to clean you up. HA! HA! Keep the comments coming fucktards I'll just be rolling in my seat laughing. Statists are the dumbest rocks in the box.

  • Joe M||

    Wow, so the actress from the first movie plays herself in the second? A tiny bit mind-bending, but sounds like it's all in service to pure gore. The first wasn't really even that gory either.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Loder, you humorless scold. Splatterpunk is a well established genre. You probably think Hellraiser also 'fails as a horror movie' as well.

  • The Sarcastic Pimpernel||

    The nerve of him! Doesn't he know Heebeegeebies and Oogeyboogey are highly praised and well known genres? Pfffttt and he calls himself a media critic.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Nice try, Loder.

  • Esteban||

    Comparing Hellraiser to this mess? Nope.

  • ||

    Eli Roth is personally responsible for ruining horror movies for the last decade. I love a good gore flick, but his torture porn crap is worse than useless.

  • Gynocidal Culture||

    Objectification is a critical reason why an abuser tends to get worse over time. As his conscience adapts to one level of cruelty—or violence—he builds to the next. By depersonalizing his partner, the abuser protects himself from the natural human emotions of guilt and empathy, so that he can sleep at night with a clear conscience. He distances himself so far from her humanity that her feelings no longer count, or simply cease to exist. These walls tend to grow over time, so that after a few years in a relationship my clients can reach a point where they feel no more guilt over degrading or threatening their partners than you or I would feel after angrily kicking a stone in the driveway. http://www.endgamethebook.org/Excerpts/24 - Abusers pt2.html

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    I like Roth as an actor and filmmaker. However, as writer or director he never event attempts to depict (as far as I know) the more insidious psychological horror that entails, say, a 'conversation' with White Indian.

  • Yawn||

    yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn

  • Paul||

    Clooney ends up speaking at a podium in a lot of his movies. Anyone notice?

    Intolerable Cruelty
    Up In The Air
    The Ides of March

    Am I forgetting any?

  • ||

    "Team America"?

  • Paul||

    I remember Baldwin at the podium on that one, was Clooney?

  • Joe M||

    Wait, those are different people?

  • ||

    Yeah, my bad. Clooney is featured in "Smug Alert!" - he does have an appearance in "Team America" but Baldwin is the main guy. In my defense, what Joe M. said. I'm going to retire to the corner and chastise myself for mis-representing the "South Park" universe.
    -K

  • ||

    MAAAATTT DAAAAMON!

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    MATT DAMON!

  • asdf||

    "Wood, especially, exudes an air of erotic calculation that’s unlike anything I’m aware she’s ever done before."

    You probably haven't seen her "Christmas Tree scene" in Running With Scissors.

  • Paul||

    OH, and when did Ryan Gosling become the mega star? Was it that little indie-film where he sang and played the Ukelele?

  • ||

    There is a large segment of the female movie-going population that like gay guys that sleep with women.

  • Paul||

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    "Lars and the Real Girl", "Half Nelson" and that one where he plays the Jewish Neo-Nazi are real dope, ya'll.

  • Rock Hudson||

    Tell me about it!

  • Paul||

    and by the facile implausibilities and familiar political tilt of the script

    Nice. I'ma start using that when describing NPR segments.

  • Paul||

    But the actors—including Marisa Tomei as a pushy reporter nipping around everyone’s heels—are all exceptionally good.

    When isn't Marisa Tomei good?

  • ||

    When she's clothed.

  • Paul||

    While I am apt to agree that she's especially good in movies like The Wrestler, she is, despite her natural assets, a fine actress.

  • Bill||

    My Cousin Vinnie she was great in as well.

  • PantsFan||

    Tomei made the Lincoln Lawyer almost watchable, despite being clothed.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Now I know I'm not going to watch that. Thanks for the tip.

  • Gojira||

    FINALLY. I was so sick of the lack of critical attention given to HC II by the mainstream critics!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    When will Clooney run for office? He's so dreamy.

  • ||

    Don't even

    Don't give him ideas -- have mercy, oh friend of liberty!

  • PantsFan||

    I nominate him for President of South Sudan

  • cynical||

    At least he'll put the hippies into slave labor camps.

  • ¢||

    what, a globe-circling string of victims?

    A globe-orbiting face-to-butt-stapled digestive ring whose epic peristaltic counter-rotation, turbo-charged by a laxative-filled Madison Square Garden with a really long straw in it (the bad guy yells "DRINK!" really loud up at the sky), will TEAR THIS WORLD APART.

    Then poop comes out.

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    [starts slow clap]

  • ||

    Did you know that Kenneth Branagh was considered for the role of young Kenobi? In some alternative universe, he acted in and directed the prequels.

  • ||

    As if they weren't too long already.

  • ||

    I'd rather see long, good films, than shorter, bad films.

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    Branagh and McGregor were both good options.

  • Old Mexican||

    Morris is a doctrinaire liberal. He wants to save the planet and wean the country off oil (he promises to institute regulations that would ban internal-combustion engines within 10 years after his election). He also wants to fight terror by making nice with the country’s enemies, and he’s outraged that the rich “don’t pay their fair share,” and cry “socialism” whenever it’s suggested they should do so. This is the standard progressive agenda, of course, and there’s no countervailing critique of it.


    It's the liberal version of a chick-flick. Or the chick's version of a lib-flick.

    I'll stay home. By the way, 'doctrinaire' is the perfect adjective for libs - their beliefs have less thought behind them than the Heaven's Gate cult.

  • Tony||

    Why can't conservatives make good movies? Or even passable movies?

  • Paul||

    I've wondered about this myself. Libertarians (when they do) make excellent movies, though.

    I'm thinking someone could refute this by pointing out some cinema classic from the 30s or 40s that was made by what we'd agree is a "conservative".

  • ||

    Planet of the Apes?

  • Paul||

    actually Apocalypto was pretty good. Not as good as the critics made it out to be, but definitely good. And well beyond "Passable". By the way, what's the verdict on Mel, is he a "conservative"? I don't keep up.

  • ||

    He's a racist, right? Then he's conservative, QED. Or so I understand such things.

  • Paul||

    Anti-semite if I recall. Something about a DUI, screaming in a jail cell etc. You're right. Bonda-fide conservative.

  • ||

    Same thing.

  • Passion of Christ Gay Porn||

    Isn't the Jesus fetish a huge horror success?

  • Jonas Grumby||

    "The Incredibles"

  • Paul||

    Libertarian movie. See above.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Brad Bird's a libertarian?

  • Paul||

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    The Iron Giant rocked.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Stoopid In Amerika,

    Why can't conservatives make good movies?


    Because they lack humor.

    Why can't Progressives make good movies? Theirs stink to high heaven, from "Wilson" (Oscar-winner bomb) to "Red State."

  • Old Mexican||

    "The American President" was a shit-fest full of Progressive political ideas, including AGW mythos. I would've never hated the image of Michael Douglas so much if I have been spared from seeing that piece of shit.

    "Avatar" had every lib cliche in the book. I saw that movie exclusively for the 3D effects, because when I tried to watch it at home (the rental version) I realized it's mind-numbingly boring.

    So libs make fuckingly-bad movies as well.

  • Old Mexican||

    I would've never hated the image of Michael Douglas so much if I have had been spared from seeing that piece of shit.

    Fixed. Sorry.

  • Bill||

    Thanks. That really bothered me and I couldn't figure out what you meant.

  • A Serious Man||

    Really, just compare the films of Clint Eastwood to Sean Penn. No contest.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: A Serious Man,

    Really, just compare the films of Clint Eastwood to Sean Penn. No contest.


    Indeed! "Grand Torino" is a great work of art, in my humble opinion. Eastwood is a genius, many times underappreciated.

    Sean Penn, on the other hand... well, he's Hugo Chavez's little bitch.

  • marlok||

    I definitely don't get the Sean Penn admiration. He seems to play the same snearing character in every movie, except the one where he played a guy with mental retardation.

  • PantsFan||

    don't forget Spicoli

  • marlok||

    Yeah, I guess I'll give him that one.

    Another "great actor" who's been playing the same character for 20 years is Al Pacino. Obviously the man has talent, but they might as well name all of his characters "Al Pacino". I think he had a hit with Scent of a Woman, and just kept on doing the same part.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Never go full retard.

  • LarryA||

    "The American President" was a shit-fest full of Progressive political ideas, including AGW mythos. I would've never hated the image of Michael Douglas so much if I have been spared from seeing that piece of shit.

    The big problem I had with The American President was the idea that a romance between a straight, widowed, liberal, single-parent, hunky president and a straight, divorced, liberal, kid-friendly, gorgeous woman was somehow a political PR problem. I kept wanting Michael Fox's character to rush in and bubble, "We've got it made. We won the last election because your wife died, and we'll win this one because you're in love." The fact that the plot dreck bothered me more than the gun control BS indicates just how bad it was.

  • Darwin||

    The problem with Aaron Sorkin's movies is that the climax is always some liberal finally having the courage to demand that the people do everything he knows to be right! Might as well call it the Will To Power.

  • Bill||

    or Triumph of the Will ??

  • ||

    You mean like LOTR?

  • Old Mexican||

    Or "The Chronicles of Narnia."

  • A Serious Man||

    Peter Weir is one of my favorite directors and his movies generally celebrate individuality and freedom.

  • Paul||

    But libertarian or conservative?

  • A Serious Man||

    Both I'd say. Picnic at Hanging Rock, Dead Poets Society, and The Truman Show are about the individual searching for meaning in a world demanding conformity. Gallipoli and Master and Commander are anti-war but respectful of the ideals that motivate individuals to serve their country.

    His most recent film "The Way Back" is strictly anti-communist.

  • Paul||

    Both I'd say. Picnic at Hanging Rock, Dead Poets Society, and The Truman Show are about the individual searching for meaning in a world demanding conformity.

    In the old days (when I was a kid) those were solidly liberal ideas. Sometime (a couple of decades ago) liberals started to leave that party, and only the libertarians were left. Now my fellow liberals scold me about "not being on board", and "holding back progress with my fierce, selfish individualism".

  • cynical||

    I don't know, why didn't gay men run for office until recently?

    (while the obvious answer is my point, the slightly less obvious answer is also my point)

  • ||

    I'll see your "passable movie" and raise you one An American Carol.

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    When I read what you quoted from Kurt's review I couldn't help but laugh. That is every political Hollywood movie. Liberal politician with "utopian" ideals runs against people in his/her own party or against the other party their evil,evil, EVIL! They got rid of incandescent light bulbs, its quite possible they'll try to get rid of the very thing that built wealth and Western civilization, the internal combustion engine. That is their goal, it isn't that they actually want to "help" the environment they want to control people. The environmental agenda is to rope in stupid, naive people.

  • ||

    (he promises to institute regulations that would ban internal-combustion engines within 10 years after his election)
    -----------------------
    I just can't take this movie seriously now -- unless it's a spoof

  • Waggoneer||

    It's scary because that is what the "greenies" actually belive. It blows my mind that somthing once considered a triumph of technology ,which freed mankind from the era of animal-power labor, is now something to be banned.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Waggoneer,

    It blows my mind that somthing once considered a triumph of technology ,which freed mankind from the era of animal-power labor, is now something to be banned.


    It's not about controlling Global Warming. It was never about any of that. It's all about controlling YOU.

  • Officer, am I free to gambol?||

    Regulating the landed surface of mother earth, a concept I call privation property, is about controlling YOU.

    Officer, am I free to gambol across plain and forest?

  • Officer, am I free to gambol?||

    *gambol, from this:

    Why agriculture? In retrospect, it seems odd that it has taken archaeologists and paleontologists so long to begin answering this essential question of human history. What we are today—civilized, city-bound, overpopulated, literate, organized, wealthy, poor, diseased, conquered, and conquerors—is all rooted in the domestication of plants and animals. The advent of farming re-formed humanity. In fact, the question "Why agriculture?" is so vital, lies so close to the core of our being that it probably cannot be asked or answered with complete honesty. Better to settle for calming explanations of the sort Stephen Jay Gould calls "just-so stories."

    In this case, the core of such stories is the assumption that agriculture was better for us. Its surplus of food allowed the leisure and specialization that made civilization. Its bounty settled, refined, and educated us, freed us from the nasty, mean, brutish, and short existence that was the state of nature, freed us from hunting and gathering. Yet when we think about agriculture, and some people have thought intently about it, the pat story glosses over a fundamental point. This just-so story had to have sprung from the imagination of someone who never hoed a row of corn or rose with the sun for a lifetime of milking cows. Gamboling about plain and forest, hunting and living off the land is fun. Farming is not. That's all one needs to know to begin a rethinking of the issue. The fundamental question was properly phrased by Colin Tudge of the London School of Economics: “The real problem, then, is not to explain why some people were slow to adopt agriculture hut why anybody took it up at all.”

    ~Richard Manning
    Against the Grain

  • LarryA||

    Another of the major benefits of agriculture, civilization-wise, is that when people stay in one place they can keep records and maintain a written history.

    Gamboling about plain and forest, hunting and living off the land is fun. Farming is not.

    Summer, perhaps. Winter, not so much. Hunter-gatherers couldn't possess anything they couldn't carry, like stored food. There was a lot of starvation just before spring.

  • oncogenesis||

    Marisa Tomei as a pushy reporter nipping around everyone’s heels

    Someone's been reading my dream journal...

  • Paul||

    You have dreams about Marisa Tomei nippling around at your heels?

  • ||

    did someone say some thing about marisa tomei's nipples and heels?

  • ||

    I'm still waiting for: Human Centipede - The Musical

    *music swells*

    mphhh...mphhhhmmmmhhhpppp

  • Gynocidal Culture||

    Violence against women and violence against the Earth, legitimated and promoted by both patriarchal religion and science, are interconnected assaults rooted in the eroticization of domination. The gynocidal culture’s image of woman as object and victim is paralleled by contemporary representations that continually show the Earth as a toy, machine, or violated object, as well as by the religious and scientific ideology that legitimates the possession, contamination, and destruction of Mother Earth.

    Jane Caputi
    http://www.endgamethebook.org/Excerpts/23 - Abusers.html

  • Yawn||

    yaaawn

  • BWAHAHA||

    Oh yeah, those hunter-gatherer's sure did respect women.

    http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/facul.....11ajhb.pdf

    "Spousal Violence and Paternal Disinvestment Among Tsimane’
    Forager-Horticulturalists"

    "Results: Over 85% of women experienced physical wife abuse (n 5 49). Indicators of paternal disinvestment positively
    covary with indicators of marital strife and with rates of wife abuse.
    The wife’s age, matrilocal residence, and
    presence of joint dependent offspring decrease the likelihood of violence through direct and indirect routes."

  • BWAHAHA||

    I recommend page 69 of "Nisa The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman": http://books.google.com/books?.....P1&dq=Nisa The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman&pg=PA69#v=onepage&q=kick&f=false

    Kicking pregnant woman - TRUE FREEDOM!

  • ||

    Earth is a wet rock with photostynthetic slime growing around the damper areas. You are one of the mites that noses about in the slime.

    There is nothing female about the rock, the water or the slime.

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    You know the hunter-gatherer thing sounds appealing to me as one who believes in complete freedom. Who wants to be chained to a desk for 5 days out of the week? Who wants to pay taxes and follow stupid rules, laws, regulations etc.? Problem is it isn't realistic, again the past wasn't some golden utopia. If you want to die of starvation, a simple cough, a small cut, etc. be my guest. I sure is hell don't, we're hunter-gatherers free? Yeah sure but they weren't free from starvation, disease etc. Agricultural society, despite what some anarchists will tell you, actually advanced man. Their was a division of labor and talents we're better developed to help every individual involved.

  • PantsFan||

    and just because the new Charlie's Angels has Minka Kelly doesn't mean it's good TV

  • ||

    Beg to differ. What's your definition of good TV?

  • PantsFan||

    Haven't had a chance to watch it, is it really worthwhile?
    Of course, I enjoy Burn Notice more than just for Gabrielle Anwar

  • ||

    I haven't watched it either. But dude, it's Minka Kelly. And Drew Barrymore is executive director (for 2 episodes). Hate her politics, love the rest...

    How could it be bad TV?

  • ||

    executive producer...sorry...drunk

  • Tortillapete||

    So one movie is about an evil genius trying to form a coalition of people to eat each others shit and the other is a horror film?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    *Golf clap*

  • ||

    Myers is a young idealist. He believes Morris “can make a difference in people’s lives” and he resonates to the older man’s smoothly reiterated beliefs. Morris is a doctrinaire liberal. He wants to save the planet and wean the country off oil (he promises to institute regulations that would ban internal-combustion engines within 10 years after his election).

    Is the 'doctinaire liberal" going to repeal the 22nd amendment or just do away with elections altogether?

  • OuterSunsetAnthropologist||

    White Indian, I am wondering how much time you have ever spent gamboling about the forest and plain? From the tone of your posts it seems as if you haven't done very much. That's unfortunate because you seem to have some very strange version of the world of the hunter and gatherer. It betrays someone who hasn't spent much time at all in wilderness. I have. I've spent weeks at a time in the wilderness. Days of it alone. I've fished and hunted, not done much gathering, but that would be possible if you learned about edible plants. Making simple structures to live in is not that difficult to learn. There is plenty of national forest land and BLM land in Montana, Alaska or Canada. You could also try the Amazon. I'd recommend spending some time with the Huarani in the eastern forest of Ecuador. I'll give you directions to a tribe of hunter gatherers who live off the Rio Napo. Some of them have old Michael Jackson t-shirts, but they hunt and gather everything they eat. I have friends who bow hunt elk and deer every year in Western Montana, although I'd suggest bartering for a .308 from the People of the Grain before you head off. A deer would feed you for a while if you dried it right. You might want some metal tools as well, at least till you make your own out of stone. You could try it for a year and then report back here. The life of a hunter gatherer is amazingly difficult, I doubt if you could hack it for a week, let alone a year. There are people who actually do what you endorse as some kind of ideal. They still exist. You are not one of them and never will be because you could not stand it and you know it.

  • derpers derp party||

    Excellent post, I'll add to it!

    David Kaplan "The Darker side of the Original Affluent Society" http://www.jstor.org/pss/3631086

    "Who Is the "Original Affluent Society"? Ipili "Predatory Expansion" and the Porgera Gold Mine, Papua New Guinea"
    http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=.....lub01.html

    Also look into: Cashdan, Elizabeth, “Hunters and Gatherers: Economic Behavior in Bands”, in Stuart Plattner (editor), Economic Anthropology, Stanford University Press, 1989, pages 21-48. She notes that the research Sahlins relied upon was taken during the time of the season when the Bushmen generally worked the least.

    The "Original Affluent Society" is a long-disproven fraud, as is most of Sahlins' work.

  • BWAHAHA||

    I recommend Gurven:

    "Wealth Transmission and Inequality
    among Hunter-Gatherers"

    http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/facul.....010HGs.pdf

    "How much wealth inequality actually exists in these populations?
    The Gini coefficients listed in table 5 are low, compared
    to those of contemporary societies and even those of
    agricultural and pastoral populations (see other papers in this
    special section), but they are far from negligible. Excluding
    the low coefficients for weight, the Ginis range from ≈0.2 to
    ≈0.5, and even when weight is included the a-weighted average
    is 0.25 (table 5). This value is the same as the income
    inequality in contemporary Denmark (0.25), the country with
    lowest such value in recent years (UNDP 2009). Thus, to the
    extent that our measures for this set of foragers are representative,
    wealth inequality is moderate: that is to say, very
    low by current world standards but far from a state of “primitive
    communism” (cf. Lee 1988)."

  • Neu Mejican||

    The life of a hunter gatherer is amazingly difficult.

    Welllll, depends upon what you mean. In the proper family/group structure, raised with the cultural knowledge and skills, most hunter gathers feed, clothe, and shelter their families with many fewer hours work per week than a typical American. Now the standard of living ain't great, but...

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    Yeah, you'd definitely want to be in at least a small group, as you say. Trying to go solo sure sounds like a good way to die.

  • yup||

    Ugh, see my post above. That whole "original affluence" thesis is garbage. If you can find it, especially read the Kaplan article - he describes how African bushmen would spend 4-6 hours a day lying in the shade not because they were relaxing and enjoying life, but because to try and do "work" in mid-day heat would risk heat stroke, and cost a lot of caloric energy. Factoring in things like that, they easily reach 60+ hours a week.

  • شقة بجسر السويس||

    woooooooooow

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement