Bubi

Hello, When I write, the Android crushes its eyes in the sockets, until it kills it. This scene is symbolic because it refers to the test to which the Replicants are subjected, to be identified... I neglected to mention that it also symbolizes the son killing his creator; in this case, one could metaphorically liken Tyrell to God. Furthermore, an owl is often framed, which traditionally represents wisdom. Deckard is a replicant. The crucial proof confirming this is the origami unicorn that Gaff leaves in front of his door at the end of the film. Gaff could have known about Deckard's unicorn dream only by accessing his mind. The chess game between Roy and Tyrell was played in 1851 between Adolf Anderssen and Kieseritzky; it's called "the immortal." The last scene in which Deckard leaves with Rachael, the only one where a landscape is visible, was taken from those that Kubrick discarded in the opening scene of Shining. Roy represents Lucifer... and so on. I couldn't write everything, so I've included some additional things in this comment.

You know how it was translated: Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean... The Man with Seven Hanged. If someone writes a review and gets it published, it means they want people to read it, but if it’s not clear what it’s about... Hello.

A beautiful western, in the style of "credible western films," let's say. I went to check the review just because I saw it's by Altman... but why didn’t you write I compari? That name in English doesn’t mean anything to anyone.

I saw the first A sangue freddo (the black and white one), in my opinion, it's one of the greatest thrillers of all time. A perfect film from every point of view, Capote's book about that massacre is equally stunning. Unfortunately, I haven't seen the one you reviewed. But I would really like to watch it.

Dear Fidia, I completely agree with you about what you wrote concerning Africa, a continent that we "good guys" Europeans have pillaged, completely uprooting their cultural roots. Until a hundred years ago, Africa was self-sufficient; after being colonized, they no longer have an identity... they still have not recovered. Beautiful as well is the quote from Fallen: "Whoever saves a life, saves the world entire."

A "cover" CD made me want to listen to it.

My father told me that he took part in the encirclement of Viasma-Briansk, in which, according to him, hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers were taken prisoner. What do you think? Is there a reliable historical basis for this?

Dear donjunio, I absolutely share your opinion; I even wrote it in my previous comment. I don’t feel any animosity either; in fact, I enjoy discussing topics like these as long as we maintain mutual respect and don’t start with insults, which unfortunately often happens on DeBaser. My knowledge of that period comes from my father's stories, who fought both in the Russian campaign and in France, but more than anything from the dozens of documentaries and reports I've watched over the years on television. I've read only a few books, one by Albert Speer, and another very sycophantic one about Stalin. Clearly, it had been written by one of his lackeys. Instead, it seems to me that you have a deep knowledge of the subject. Bye.

So I take back the word "cretin," which I casually tossed out in my first comment to close the discussion with a joke; I never expected such a vehement reaction from others. Skoiz, you say he entered the war knowing he could sustain it, but that only applies as long as he was up against England and France. However, he continued to think he could win even after attacking the Soviet Union, which is a sign that he at least lacked foresight. When he entered the war, he was 50 years old and was not an old fool, as good donjunio writes—of which I agree with much of what he said (aside from him being senile). I still believe he did not have strong political stature even before the war, because shortly after becoming chancellor, he began his reckless racist propaganda, blaming the Jews for the Treaty of Versailles, while the excessive reparations that the Germans were obliged to pay were primarily desired by the French. Since the space for comments on the review has turned into almost a forum, I want to add that anyone who advocates the superiority of one race over another cannot be an insightful person. When Einstein moved to the United States and filled out the immigration form, when asked what race he was, he wrote "human." So even back then, it was understood that races do not exist; one can only say there are differences in physical structure and culture among peoples. (In this regard, I remind Fidia that there is less difference between Germans and Austrians than between a Lombard and a Tuscan.) No, no, I remain absolutely convinced that Hitler was not intelligent, but rather someone who, among other things, had great difficulty relating to others... Stalin was also skilled in gaining power, but in my opinion, he wasn't all there either.

Without animosity, I want to clarify for the last time that... Not understanding that it was madness to wage war against the French, the English, the Poles, to attack the Soviet Union, to declare war even on the United States, making a myriad of mistakes such as wanting to hold Stalingrad at all costs, and failing to realize that the war was already lost in '42, can only be attributed to someone who understands little and late, with a decline in their mental faculties, to sum it up... idiot. I just wanted to summarize.