Blog

Quiz Show did not tell the truth about key historical figures. Did this break the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness’? 

America had a quiz show named “Twenty One”. Queens-born Herbie Stempel (John Turturro) won this game show and became famous. The network then decided to  take a more telegenic contestant, the WASP-ish Charles Van Doren (Ralph Fiennes), Stempel tries again and announces that the game is rigged. Congressional investigator Dick Goodwin (Rob Morrow) came in to look into the claim that the winners were given the answers. Then he wrote a book on why the claim was true. 

Quiz Show did not tell the truth about key historical figures. Did this break the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness’? the “Bear false witness” is to lie. Obviously to not tell the truth is to lie. the question asks “did not tell the truth” which in other words was lie. So in other words-Quiz Show lied about key historical figures. Did this break the commandment, ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness’? Then the answer is yes. 

In what ways are both movies about grace: gifts unearned by the recipient? These two movies are Tender Mercies and Driving Miss Daisy. 

According to Wikipedia “Tender Mercies is a 1983 American drama film directed by Bruce Beresford and written by Horton Foote. It stars Robert Duvall as singer-songwriter Mac Sledge, a former country music star whose career and relationship with his ex-wife and daughter were wrecked by alcoholism. Recovering from his affliction, Sledge seeks to turn his life around through his relationship with a young widow and her son in rural Texas.” 

Driving Miss Daisy, according to Google, “Daisy Werthan (Jessica Tandy), an elderly Jewish widow living in Atlanta, is determined to maintain her independence. However, when she crashes her car, her son, Boolie (Dan Aykroyd), arranges for her to have a chauffeur, an African-American driver named Hoke Colburn (Morgan Freeman). Daisy and Hoke’s relationship gets off to a rocky start, but they gradually form a close friendship over the years, one that transcends racial prejudices and social conventions.”

I Tender Mercies, Mac was shown grace by Rosa the widow. She gives him money, even though he is not very trustworthy. In Driving Miss Daisy, many people show Daisy grace. She is an old grouchy woman, but everyone is nice to her and puts up with her until years later whenever she finally becomes nice to everyone. 

In both these movies, the recipients do not deserve the grace that they are being given. Mac doesn’t deserve the money and Daisy does not deserve to be put up with for so many years. Nobody cares though. They give grace and love those who need it. 

Do import quotas benefit most voters economically? According to Wikipedia “An import quota is a type of trade restriction that sets a physical limit on the quantity of a good that can be imported into a country in a given period of time.” So import quotas give limits on how much of an item can be imported into a country over a period of time. this doesn’t really effect voters economically. Voters are those who vote, but import quotas don’t really effect how they vote. Import quotas effect businesses and how much a business can buy of a product in order to sell it. So there are a few voters that are economically effected by import quotas. Those who own businesses, or need to buy items from another country. 

To what extent was I pulled into each movie as a participant rather than as an observer? The movies are called “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “In the Heat of the Night”. According to Google, “Scout Finch (Mary Badham), 6,and her older brother, Jem (Phillip Alford), live in sleepy Maycomb, Ala., spending much of their time with their friend Dill (John Megna) and spying on their reclusive and mysterious neighbor, Boo Radley (Robert Duvall). When Atticus (Gregory Peck), their widowed father and a respected lawyer, defends a black man named Tom Robinson (Brock Peters) against fabricated rape charges, the trial and tangent events expose the children to evils of racism and stereotyping.” That is the first movie, but what about the other one? According to Google, “African-American Philadelphia police detective Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier) is arrested on suspicion of murder by Bill Gillespie (Rod Steiger), the racist police chief of tiny Sparta, Mississippi. After Tibbs proves not only his own innocence but that of another man, he joins forces with Gillespie to track down the real killer. Their investigation takes them through every social level of the town, with Tibbs making enemies as well as unlikely friends as he hunts for the truth.”

To what extent was I pulled into each movie as a participant rather than as an observer? I can’t say that I was ever pulled into either of these movies. Meaning, I never felt that I could have been a part of it, or a side character. I always thought that I was an observer. there are movies where I am pulled into them, but these two were neither one. The movies could have been better, but I can’t change it, so I just didn’t really feel into the movies. 

Why do voters accept the riches of movie stars, but resent the riches of businessmen? Businessmen and movie stars are both rich, but people love movie stars and hate businessmen. why do they love movie stars? Well a lot of people feel like they connect to the part the actor plays. They think it’s amazing how they can act and make a movie they love. Many people might have a crush on famous movie stars. But why do they hate businessmen? Many businessmen lie and cheat for their money. They trick people and do things that no one likes. Not every businessman does this, but that’s what businessmen re remembered for. It is unfair to many people, but they can try to change it if they want to. The people can also be jealous of the businessmen that they have a lot of money, but for some stupid reason not movie stars. They might change their minds if businessmen started doing things the right way and showing people that they are. 

Compare and contrast the attitude of each movie regarding guns. The two movies which I will compare are “High Noon” and “Shane”. These are two western classics made around the same time. First a little bit of info about each. 

High Noon was a western classic made in the year 1952. According to Google, “Former marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper) is preparing to leave the small town of Hadleyville, New Mexico, with his new bride, Amy (Grace Kelly), when he learns that local criminal Frank Miller has been set free and is coming to seek revenge on the marshal who turned him in. When he starts recruiting deputies to fight Miller, Kane is discouraged to find that the people of Hadleyville turn cowardly when the time comes for a showdown, and he must face Miller and his cronies alone.”

Shane was also a western classic made in the year 1953, one year after High Noon. According to Google, “Enigmatic gunslinger Shane (Alan Ladd) rides into a small Wyoming town with hopes of quietly settling down as a farmhand. Taking a job on homesteader Joe Starrett’s (Van Heflin) farm, Shane is drawn into a battle between the townsfolk and ruthless cattle baron Rufus Ryker (Emile Meyer). Shane’s growing attraction to Starrett’s wife, Marian (Jean Arthur), and his fondness for their son Joey (Brandon de Wilde), who idolizes Shane, force Shane to realize that he must thwart Ryker’s plan.”

Both movies are westerns, so they both have a big gun fight at the end, but neither of the main characters wants to use their guns. In High Noon, Will Kane was former marshal and there are times when he needs to use his gun, but his new wife  does not want him to shoot anyone so he tries not to. In Shane, the main character Shane was a former gunslinger who did not want to kill anymore. Both did not want to kill, but for separate reasons. 

What would you miss the most if you had to go back to 1955? What would you miss the least?  

Well, it would depend on if it was just me, or if it was the entire world going back in time, but lets just say that it was me. I would miss my friends and family the most. I would also miss the technology because things are so much easier nowadays with it. I would also miss the music and food. 

What would I miss the least? All the idiotic things that people are doing today. Having affairs more often, abortion, etc. 

If there is no ‘price level,’ how could anyone prove that monetary inflation raises prices? According to Wikipedia, “The general price level is a hypothetical measure of overall prices for some set of goods and services, in an economy or monetary union during a given interval, normalized relative to some base set. Typically, the general price level is approximated with a daily price index, normally the Daily CPI.” This says that there is no such thing as a price level. If there was a price level, then everyone would pay the same amount for different things. There is no set price because of inflation, so the prices just keep rising. 

Is it easier for skilled authors to manipulate movie viewers or book readers? When I watch a movie, I am looking for things that I will like. There are different themes that I like. Comedy, action, most others. If I watch a movie with things in it that I like, then I will want to watch that movie again. I won’t watch it again if there isn’t something in it that I like. I am involved in a movie if I like it. this is manipulation. When you are involved in a movie, then you are being manipulated. The authors of the movie want the audience to watch their movie again. they will put things in it that the audience will like. they try to manipulate the audience into watching the movie again. If nobody wants to watch the movie again, then the author did a bad job, so they do their “best” to put things in it that the audience will love. 

It is very easy to manipulate a movie viewer. the viewer can see all that is happening. the setting is clear and you can hear what is happening. You feel like your a part of the movie. Everything is explained and there usually no cliffhangers, unless the viewer is watching a season of a show. the viewers do not have to use their imagination, unless they need to because everything is already explained. You don’t need imagination when you watch a movie. 

This is different from when you read a book. You have to use your imagination to picture what is happening. You don’t know what the setting looks like, so the author will do their best to escribe it so that you can picture it correctly. It is much more difficult to manipulate a book reader that a movie viewer. 

I enjoy reading more that watching a movie, but much more people love watching movies more that reading books. That is why it is important manipulate the viewers, so that they will watch more of your movies. 

Is tax-funded education inherently bureaucratic? Tax-funded education are things like public schools, because they receive money from the government to continue their teaching. In return, they have to teach what the government wants then to teach. Private schools are not tax-funded education because they don’t receive money from the government to continue teaching. According to Wikipedia, “Bureaucracy is a system of organization where decisions are made by a body of non-elected officials. Historically, a bureaucracy was a government administration managed by departments staffed with non-elected officials.” Non-elected officials are officials (or people in a place of authority) who were not voted to where they are. In America, we vote for president and governor. There are other people above us who are not voted and they are just put there by someone. Like the vice president. We don’t vote for him/her, the president picks whoever he wants. 

Is tax-funded education inherently bureaucratic? Yes, tax funded education is inherently bureaucratic. We don’t vote for it, but it happens anyway. In fact, it is what we pay for with out taxes. We fund schools with the money the government robs from us. The school system used to be a monopoly. Kids had to go to school, so the government taught the kids whatever they wanted to. Thankfully, now we have private schools and homeschools. These are not tax-funded and safe to teach kids the truth.