Waching daily Sep 20 2017

THE SO-CALLED ALT-RIGHT WHICH I LIKE TO CALL WHITE SUPREMACISTS

BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE APPARENTLY HAVE A BEEF WITH

JENNIFER LAWRENCE WAS A WHITE ACTRESS.

WHAT IS THE

ISSUE HERE?

IT TURNS OUT THAT THEY THINK SHE IS ATTACKING THEM WHEN IN

REALITY, SHE IS NOT.

THE LATEST ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH A MOVIE THAT SHE STARS IN

CALLED MOTHER WITH AN EXCLAMATION MARK AT THE END.

IT IS AN EXPERIMENTAL FILM.

A PSYCHOLOGICAL THRILLER AND THERE ARE A LOT OF

REFERENCES TO RELIGION THERE.

THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IN THE COUNTRY HAS AN ISSUE WITH

THAT BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT THEIR RELIGION IS BEING

UTILIZED TO SEND A POLITICAL ANTI-CLIMATE CHANGE MESSAGE.

TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF THE CRITICISM THAT JENNIFER

LAWRENCE HAS FACED BECAUSE SHE IS IN THIS MOVIE, A BREITBART

EDITOR BY THE NAME OF JOHN NOLTE WRITES:

EVERY TIME I HEAR SOMEONE FROM THE SO-CALLED ALT-RIGHT TALK,

ALL THAT REALLY COMES OUT IS, LOOK AT THESE ATTRACTIVE

WOMEN WHO WON'T HAVE SEX WITH ME.

I'M SO FRUSTRATED.

INCEL.

INVOLUNTARY CELIBACY.

IT'S A WHOLE SUBGENRE OF GUYS LIKE

THIS.

SHE WON'T BANG YOU EVER.

IT FEELS LIKE THEY ARE TRYING

TO RUN UP TO HER AND PULL HER HAIR ON THE PLAYGROUND AND

SAY, I DON'T LOVE YOU AT ALL, AND RUN AWAY.

JENNIFER LAWRENCE TALKS ABOUT THE FILM AND THIS

DOESN'T REALLY GIVE YOU ANY SPOILERS, BUT IT KIND OF

EXPLAINS WHAT THE MEANING OF THE FILM IS AND LIKE I SAID,

THERE ARE A TON OF RELIGIOUS REFERENCES THERE.

ACCORDING TO JENNIFER LAWRENCE:

SO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT, UPSET.

DON'T TOUCH OUR RELIGION, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE

TRYING TO MAKE A POLITICAL POINT ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE.

THAT IS WHY NO ONE SAW THE MOVIE.

WHAT SHE JUST SAID THERE IS BECAUSE IT'S SO LADEN

WITH SYMBOLISM AND IT GETS, DISAPPEARS SO FAR UP ITS

OWN ASS WITH TRYING TO CREATE AN ALLEGORY THAT NO ONE

LIKED THIS MOVIE.

IT DID NOT DO WELL.

CINEMA SCORE GAVE IT AN F. BEFORE SHOWING AT THE LATEST

FESTIVAL,

ARONOFSKY HE SAID YOU ARE GOING TO HATE ME IN AN HOUR AND A HALF

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS IT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

HE DID BLACK SWAN AND IT WAS ACCESSIBLE BECAUSE IT WAS

ENJOYABLE FROM BOTH A NARRATIVE AND A SYMBOLIC PERSPECTIVE,

BY ALL ACCOUNTS, MOTHER IS A BAD MOVIE BECAUSE IT HAS NO

REDEEMING NARRATIVE.

IT IS ALL YOU HAVING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT DOES HER HAIR

SYMBOLIZE?

WHAT DOES THE COLOR OF THE BACKGROUND SYMBOLIZE?

THAT IS WHY NO ONE SAW THE MOVIE.

THAT IS WHY IT MADE, WHATEVER, $3 MILLION OR $7.5 MILLION

GLOBALLY AND IN THE BOX OFFICE, BECAUSE IT'S THE KIND OF

MOVIE WHOSE TITLE IS LOWERCASE WITH AN EXCLAMATION MARK.

AT THE END.

THAT IS WHY PEOPLE DIDN'T SEE IT.

THESE ALT-RIGHT GUYS ARE COMING IN OVER THE COURSE OF THIS

FAILED BLOCKBUSTER ATTEMPT SAYING, THAT WAS US, BUT

THE TRUTH IS, NO WASN'T AT ALL.

THAT IS LIKE YOUR RIVAL LOST A FOOTBALL GAME AND YOU ARE

SAYING, IT IS BECAUSE I WAS ROOTING AGAINST THEM.

NO, IT WAS A BAD TEAM, BAD GAME.

THE MOVIE HAS GOTTEN A LOT OF CRITICISM, BUT YOU ARE RIGHT.

THE ALT-RIGHT IS KIND OF LATCHING ONTO IT AND SAYING

IT IS BECAUSE OF OUR BOYCOTT, BUT IT IS NOT.

IT WAS, BASED ON WHAT I READ FROM THE CRITICS, JUST A BAD

FILM AND TOO OVERLY ARTISTIC TO THE POINT WHERE A LOT OF

PEOPLE WERE LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME

INTERPRETING WHAT IS GOING ON.

IT IS LIKE THE DOUBLE DILDO SCENE FROM HIS OTHER

MOVIE.

WHAT WAS THAT ONE?

WITH JENNIFER CONNELLY.

WHAT WAS IT CALLED?

WE NEED BART.

HE KNOWS IT.

REQUIEM FOR A DREAM.

DOUBLE DILDO SEEN.

THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

I DIDN'T SEE MOTHER, BUT FROM OF ALL ACCOUNTS OF WHAT I'VE READ.

THE OTHER THING IS, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SEE MOTHER, SO I

CAN SAY THAT TO YOU.

NO ONE'S GOING TO GO SEE IT.

IT IS ALMOST TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S GOTTEN SO UNIVERSALLY BAD

RATINGS, YOU MIGHT BE PLEASANTLY SURPRISED.

THERE WAS THE MOVIE SITUATION AND THEN IN MY OPINION, THE

FUNNIER SITUATION HAD TO DO WITH A VOGUE COVER THAT JENNIFER

LAWRENCE WAS ON.

BY THE WAY, WHO HAS TIME TO THINK ABOUT THIS KIND OF STUFF?

IF I SAW THAT ON A NEWS STAND, I WOULD BE LIKE, OKAY.

TYPICAL VOGUE COVER.

THE ALT-RIGHT FELT LIKE THIS COVER WAS AN ASSAULT AND AN

ATTACK ON THEM.

WHAT?

OBVIOUSLY.

NOW THAT I LOOK AT IT, IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS.

LET ME GIVE YOU THE DETAILS REAL QUICK.

BREITBART EDITOR JOHN CARNEY, WHO HAS TOO MUCH TIME ON HIS

HANDS, SAYS:

THAT SENTENCE IS LOOKS LIKE IT WAS CREATED BY SOME AUTO

SENTENCE GENERATOR OF ALT-RIGHT WORDS.

PROBABLY.

HERE'S WHAT THEIR THEORY WAS.

DO YOU GUYS REMEMBER WHEN STEPHEN MILLER, THAT'S HIS

NAME RIGHT?

STEPHEN MILLER WAS HAVING THAT DEBATE WITH JIM ACOSTA ABOUT THE

STATUE OF LIBERTY AND IMMIGRANTS AND SO ACOSTA WAS LIKE HEY,

BRING ME YOUR TIRED, YOUR POOR.

THAT'S WHAT THE STATUE OF LIBERTY SAYS.

THEY GOT INTO A DISAGREEMENT.

STEVE MILLER SAID, NO, THAT WAS ADDED LATER, AS IF THAT'S

RELEVANT, AND SO THE ALT-RIGHT THOUGHT THAT VOGUE, THIS IS

HOW CRAZY THEY ARE.

THEY THOUGHT VOGUE DID THAT COVER AS SOME SORT OF LIKE,

ATTACK AGAINST THE ALT-RIGHT AND IT WAS SOME SORT OF

COMMENT ON IMMIGRATION.

LITTLE DID THEY KNOW THAT THEY ACTUALLY SHOT THAT COVER A

MONTH BEFORE THAT EXCHANGE OCCURRED.

YOU GUYS ARE INSANE.

YOU GUYS ARE CRAZY AND THAT IS WHY NO ONE WANTS TO

SLEEP WITH YOU.