I’d say it’s a pretty general phenomenon. Expertise and entitled consumption of it as a service. Even in a professional setting, with a service/support dynamic, it can be abused through entitlement pretty often.

I wish i could put a finger on what the movie was missing.

Yep. That’s the thing … It’s hard to work out, but I think there’s something missing from Eggers. Like he needs to work with a few great writers just learn some master craftsperson skills.

I mean, that doesn’t necessarily help the point if that drop is driven by the practical reality of the 5% threshold being more relevant come voting time.

Interesting! I haven’t seen Murnau’s, but Herzog’s and Coppola’s (if that counts). Interestingly, I don’t remember much of Herzog’s at all apart from enjoying Kinski.

Which forces me to wonder if it isn’t that great a story, or at least not worth remaking. I’m not convinced that the whole “he’s coming” thing, after having literally been in his castle for a whole sequence, really works. I think in the three tellings of the story I’ve seen (including Eggers’), I’ve probably felt a let down from that structure.

Good Will Hunting comes to mind as one that hasn’t already been mentioned.

As one of his non comedic roles, I’d say he kills it and kinda steals the show.

Awesome. I don’t know how, but I’m thinking the unsafe block isn’t necessary? What was causing borrow checker issues?

No worries at all!

Also, I didn’t know at all about the Barbary Wars (and was quite surprised to hear of such a far flung US military engagement so early)

Let me know what you think of it!

Yes they seem like reasonable metrics to me. But like you I don’t really know how to answer the question. But relative economic strength and influence are likely factors. So the post civil war gilded age would also been a likely point, which was the origin of my 150 yrs estimate. For 100 years, I figured post WWI was a pretty clear moment of relative strength.

In recent times, boomers have had a notable hold on the presidency. Not just boomers, but those born in the summer of 1946. Clinton, Bush Jr and Trump were all born between June and August 1946, a window of 3 months, but spanning over 3 decades of the White House. And the same more or less holds for the losing candidates too, with Harris and Obama being the major exceptions IIRC. Indicates to me some real oligarchical forces beyond what’s normal in the rest of the west.

Sometimes it slipped a little into a parody of the original

Yea, there was definitely a ridiculousness to the tone at times. I read one critic say that they thought they could hear Eggers laughing in joy behind the camera.

Thanks!

It certainly is effective! Interesting that you found the castle sequence to drag! For me it captured a heightened but still realistic/grounded horror feeling very well. Like I could imagine being in that situation and just believing that you’re having bad dreams when really you’re in a demonic lair, with that realisation haunting you in the periphery of your mind.

“Feeling” long is a good way of capturing what I’m saying I think. Thanks! The way I put it to someone else was that it lost its momentum too easily and readily and too often. To the point where it feels like a once over in the writing or editing could probably elevate the whole film.

Ha yes, thanks … though, without knowing, I’d wonder how early you can push the global power part (thus the question mark). Post-war (your 70 years) is clearly a “the global power” status. But how early could you say the US was at least one of the major powers?

You’re the “Old World” now.

It’s basically been 350 250 (edit: correction) years now since US independence, and a decent while now at being a global power (~100-150 years?). These are timelines akin to that from the European Renaissance to the US Revolution (~1400-1800) and the UK emerging from the 1500s to being the “super power” in the war of independence.

Now, with the world’s oldest constitution, and probably, depending on who you talk to, an increasingly critical mass of antiquated ideals and systems, the Presidency is more like the Monarchs of past revolutions than what remains of those monarchies, and the US’s ideals and cultural influence something which most would rather move on and upgrade from.

Generally, I’d say it’s one of the weirder and subtler historical events happening right now: the dissolving of the old lines between the “old” and “new” worlds. For me personally, this was once made clear when visiting Hannover, Germany, and its tourist attraction, the “New Town Hall”, where someone who lives in British Columbia, Canada pointed out the similarities with their Parliament Building. The thing is though that the Canadian building is about 15 years older (both being just over 100 years old). Colonialism is long enough ago and Europe (and likely any other “old” culture, such as China) rebuilt enough and recently enough, that like X-genners and Millennials, the whole “young, hip, cool rebel” thing just doesn’t mean anything anymore.

Yea, I’ve noticed this too I think. You could probably expand the scope and ask how much modern media is about questioning the status quo. There seems to have been a moment around the late 90s that was openly criticising the life that modernity had created.

Well I’m not talking about general conditions or labour rights, which certainly make any historical comparisons in this particular issue difficult or meaningless. But rather how an ordinary office job was managed and conceived. And the nature of work too.

Edit: specifically “knowledge” work, which has always been around. Generally though, I’m probably thinking of mainly boomer knowledge work, probably 60s-90s, as a historical comparison. I’ve just heard a few too many stories of someone totally checking out of their job, due to personal difficulties or whatever, and it being fine on a way that feels difficult to fit into todays “hustle culture” world.

Any one with insight on how this compares with recent or even not too recent times?

My immediate thoughts on this are that business may have become simply more active and noisier. That is, there’s always something to tend to, whether it be an immediate demand or working towards something in the future. Basically business practice growing and accelerating without accounting for what limitations people may have. I’d also wager it’s also noisier, as in full of meaningless stuff. Communications that mostly fluff, planning that isn’t actually thought through but closer to empty ambitions, requests for help or explanation due to not trying hard enough to work out them selves.

But then they get into a positive feedback loop. Too distracted to do anything well? Then just forward the cruft and minimally viable product down the line, or, produce an easy to make communication or plan that looks like productivity but really isn’t.

In the end, we run into Kessler syndrome, but for time and concentration rather than space. Everyone is burnt out and so passes along some distraction to the next person and so on until no one can get anything meaningful done as that would require uninterrupted time and concentration. What’s more, people adapt to their environment. If you expect to be interrupted, then you’ll never bother to work in a way conducive to longer periods of work. Instead, to seem productive, you’ll come up with our look for small and easy pieces.

Which gets to productivity culture. How mindful are we all of having to constantly prove our worth and productivity? If so, and given the above, how much are them inclined to do something that signals productivity rather than something that actually is productive? And much distraction is that likely to cause for others, both short term and long term? How much is that then going to encourage others to signal? Seems like Kessler syndrome again to me.

I’d wonder if in the recent past there was more of a sense that you had your job and that was that. It was fine. Don’t fuck it up and everything will be fine. Nothing urgent to do right now, go to the doctor it will be fine.

The problem with this answer is that you go from your anecdata to a sweeping statement about the relevance of public health information.

Plenty of people would really prefer to not get covid and for very good reasons. If you’re having basic cold symptoms, great, not everyone finds it that minimal. Just like how some have bad hay fever and some don’t get the news sometimes reports on pollen levels.

Eh, shifts on the stock market and pretty random political moments make the news all the time. Not to mention the weather and sports.

A little, “hey, contagions are about at the moment, if you’re vulnerable or just not keen, act accordingly” wouldn’t be misplaced at all.

Bottom line is we have a cultural problem with general illness. Something something capitalism something something.