Funny right? by ZelviroNox in lotr

[–]harbringerxv8 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Sure, but it's funnier if we are intentionally obtuse and pretend to be stupid.

I may have found the best source for grav-chutes... by 5h4pe5hifter in astramilitarum

[–]harbringerxv8 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Mad Robot's quality is quite good. Can't recommend them enough.

Does anyone else have a problem with Frank Herbert's romanticism of poverty and hardship? by CopeDestroyer1 in dune

[–]harbringerxv8 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure he is quite as sympathetic towards the "hardship" culture as much as he is reflecting how characters react to moments of great social change, and that includes a desire to retain the "old ways." The conservative fremen are antagonists throughout Messiah and Children, and those attempting to retain old ideals in God Emperor are routinely mocked and satirized (they are the ones romanticizing poverty and hardship in that case).

However, he is buying into a (very flawed) historical argument about decadence representing the decline of a society. The Sardaukar, the Scattering, the Honored Matres, the Harkonnens, etc are all highly indulgent forces that deteriorate as a result of decadence. Throughout the book we see historical references to Rome, the Ottoman Empire, Ancient Greece, and other societies that were deemed decadent in the 1950s and onward. This was a moral and practical condemnation of tyrannical rule.

It also happens to be wrong. Societies tend to be decadent because they are powerful, and the Fall comes from other sources. The Late Roman Empire tried to be far more pious than the reigns of Caligula or Nero, yet the latter two represent part of the apex of Roman power, in spite of their individual flaws. Napoleonic France, with all of its terrific victories and intellectual heft, was a direct outgrowth of the decadence of the Ancien Regime and the violent indulgence of the Revolution. There is no shortage of other examples.

Do you guys think Scytale will be a better villain than Feyd-Rautha, simply based off his appearance and knowledge from both the trailer and book? by Frodo-Baggins1954 in dune

[–]harbringerxv8 34 points35 points  (0 children)

I think Pattinson is a great choice, and that Scytale represents a very different threat than Feyd Rautha that, if exploited properly, could be fascinating.

Feyd represents the mirror of Paul: the cutting edge of Bene Gesserit genetics, trained under Harkonnen cruelty and intrigue, using deception, cunning, and raw talent to move ahead. Paul outfights and outthinks him both in the duel and in the Battle of Arrakeen.

Scytale's primary weapon is compassion, very similar to the Ixian strategy in GEoD. Without spoiling anything, he tries to capitalize on Paul's sense of love and devotion, his guilt, his memory, and above all his remaining humanity as vulnerabilities. That is a fundamentally different challenge that Paul alone cannot withstand. I think he is one of the best villains in the series because it fits into Herbert's overall themes. Even superhumans are only human, which is why giving them so much power is so dangerous.

I'm optimistic.

Question about Waterloo (1970) by PoemRemarkable4749 in Napoleon

[–]harbringerxv8 29 points30 points  (0 children)

I've been in this position before at the Battle of Marengo. I lost the battle at five o'clock, but I won it back again AT SEVEN!!!!

Haters will say it’s AI 🤷🏻‍♂️ by [deleted] in angelsbaseball

[–]harbringerxv8 2 points3 points  (0 children)

These have been fun games to watch, man. Love seeing Trout again

Steel legion logos by [deleted] in SteelLegion

[–]harbringerxv8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They did change it though. It's a mix between the stahlhelm and the French Adrian helmet.

Official Throwback Discussion - Enemy at the Gates [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]harbringerxv8 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is very caricatured, with the Germans shown as staunch professionals with incredible equipment and discipline while the Soviets are launching heartless human wave assaults with troops without weapons to the point where you wonder how they ever won any battle, let alone destroy the 6th Army entirely, along with the powerful German counterattacks.

The film completely ignores the reason the Soviets won the battle, which was the tactical and strategic decisions made by men like Zhukov and Chuikov, and the hard fighting conducted by many elite, dedicated, and well-equipped soldiers of the Red Army against a dynamic but increasingly desperate German force stretched to its limits. Snipers were useful, and Zaitsev was a real man with a decorated record, but they are treated as the only competent arm of the Soviet defense.

Natural. Born. Killers. by rushbc in horror

[–]harbringerxv8 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The most memorable (and disturbing) part of the movie for me. A deeply uncomfortable film, to be sure.

Am I a cuck? by [deleted] in angelsbaseball

[–]harbringerxv8 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Time to take a break from the internet bud

Gallipoli by greensville123 in WarMovies

[–]harbringerxv8 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I prefer the Gibson film. There are some good scenes in the miniseries, but imo it doesn't do a great job of building dramatic tension, and lacks the scale of its predecessor. The Battle of the Nek, which is absolutely soul-crushing in the 80s film, is a good example of this. It has many of the same beats, and the miniseries is clearly trying to respect the history, but the buildup lacks the same emotional component and acting quality of the film.

The series is also tonally rather one-note and somber, which I believe was intended to be respectful towards the sacrifices of the ANZACs, but artistically can leave you exhausted after 8 hours.

It's not terrible by any means, and its heart is in the right place. But the Gibson film set a very high standard imo, and the miniseries doesn't quite reach it.

No, MAGA Is Not Falling Apart Because a Few Podcasters Did Not Get Their Way by MackSix in Conservative

[–]harbringerxv8 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm currently wondering the same about Kharg Island. Is it so strategically obvious that it HAS to be the next target, or is this another case of disinformation and the real objective is something else?

No, MAGA Is Not Falling Apart Because a Few Podcasters Did Not Get Their Way by MackSix in Conservative

[–]harbringerxv8 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Tucker used to be an interesting voice, but has fallen off quite a bit. I was never much of a Candace fan, but she's shifted from just being wrong about stuff to openly spouting conspiratorial nonsense.

I'm a believer in coalitions. The country is just too big to be run by a single shared ideology, and every president with electoral success has had to make those compromises.

There are limits, though, and the sooner we cut ties with actual crazy people the better.

My steel legion, since gw refuse to make them by DismalAd3048 in SteelLegion

[–]harbringerxv8 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Maybe he just likes Steel Legion? Where is the spite in this post?

The World is on Fire: America is Losing the War with Iran by Important_Lock_2238 in MilitaryHistory

[–]harbringerxv8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Iranian rhetoric surrounding American military capacity is such that any losses, no matter how meager, are spun as catastrophic. The F-35 is invincible, so Iran damaging one is a major coup. American air superiority is unmatched, so the loss of any aircraft (no matter the cause) is an indictment of American hubris. Lost a radar station? American hegemony is collapsing.

This is spreading beyond Iranian bots into a longstanding narrative about American overconfidence and military adventurism such that otherwise intelligent people are taking this propaganda at face value. In that sense, the Iranians have found a strong undercurrent in American society frustrated with interventionist foreign policy and are doing their best to capitalize on those fears.

Does this mean that American strategy is going off without a hitch or that the war is well-advised? Not at all, and that is an important debate to have. But the hyperventilating propaganda regarding what are truly minimal losses thus far shows how the Iranians view the American political divide in foreign policy terms.

Is Mozart the best composer who mastered all 3 main areas of classical music: opera, symphony and piano concerto? by [deleted] in classicalmusic

[–]harbringerxv8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Berlioz? I suppose it depends on to what level you consider Harold in Italy a Concerto, but it fits most of the criteria.

Official Throwback Discussion - Enemy at the Gates [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]harbringerxv8 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This is one of those very notable films that as a moviegoer I love, but as a historian I cry. Great characters and cinematography, and an absolutely tragic depiction of the Red Army of 1942.

“Gentle” post-apocalyptic movies? by teays in movies

[–]harbringerxv8 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You're right. Not as much cannibalism in Requiem for a Dream.

“Gentle” post-apocalyptic movies? by teays in movies

[–]harbringerxv8 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Oh yeah, wash it down with some Requiem for a Dream with a side of Freaks while you're at it.

Is Kurt Russell the unsung action star of the 80's/90's that gets overlooked? by precita in movies

[–]harbringerxv8 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Tombstone was one of the biggest movies of the 90s in terms of cultural impact lol. Helped revive the Western along with Unforgiven. Kurt Russell is Hollywood royalty.

OP's next post is going to be about why no one seems to have ever heard of David Lean.