Silent Wedding

Probably one of the best Romanian movies of all time. I will try to find a subtitled version in the future.



From New Zealand Herald:

Silent Wedding
Rating: * * * *
The goofy and the grim in a single polished package.

Little seen in the English-speaking world outside the festival circuit, this short but potent Romanian feature is old-fashioned, even quaintly dated, but that's a strength, not a weakness. Writer-director Malaele, making his first film, is a revered comedian and theatre director in his homeland and there's an intensely theatrical quality to the way he tells his fable-like story: we're reminded of pantomime or the allegories of travelling players (a troupe of whom appear in the film) and as in all the best theatre, comedy and tragedy exist side by side.

The story, tellingly remembered for a present-day documentary crew who never really get it, is set in 1953 in a small village - a backwater of Soviet-ruled Romania untouched by electricity or internal combustion. Malaele delicately assembles a portrait of the gruff but loving relations between the unkempt villagers in a series of sequences that seem to channel everything from commedia dell'arte through silent-era slapstick to Pier Paolo Pasolini.

The very public amorous exertions of a young couple are causing strife between their respective families until they soothe the troubled waters by announcing their decision to wed. But just as the village is sitting down to the nuptials, a hatchet-faced Russian soldier arrives: the sudden death of "the leader of all peoples" Josef Stalin has ushered in a week of national mourning and all celebration is banned.

There's a clue to how the village deals with this in the title, but nothing quite prepares us for what follows. It's worth warning that the film moves sharply from the goofy to the grim, but the director's command of these emotional shifts is confident and assured. The film has the feel of a folk tale that is dealing with a dark episode in the national history and stylistically it's more traditional than innovative. But there's great skill on display, from a large ensemble cast and from a director who knows much about visual storytelling: the arrival of a circus in town has an eerie, Felliniesque quality and a 60-second montage that depicts the wedding preparations is the work of a maestro. Recommended.

Hi, Come In! Please No Blacks, Hispanics And Gays

The Brady blog is celebrating this article written by longtime anti-gunner Mark Morford over at S.F. Gate.
Morford's tripe is basically a hit piece against Starbucks (the coffee shop chain) who recently refused to bend over to the Brady center pressure and forbid law abiding gun owners peacefully exercising Second Amendment rights from entering their stores.
Here is a sample of Mofo's idiocy published in the S.F. Gate:

Hi! Come in! Please, no murdering

Hello and welcome to our store! Please, feel free to look around, make yourself comfortable, enjoy our fine offerings and, oh yes, by the way? Please, no murdering.

Also, no raping, gang-banging, popping off, stabbing, mauling, stealing stuff, or walking around in a confrontational macho huff, ready at a moment's notice to harass any of our normal patrons with a snarl and a vague threat of violence because you feel it is your God-given right, given how you are a card-carrying member of a pro-gun "Open Carry" sect that likes to strap unloaded handguns to your Wranglers, walk around in public places and freak people out. Thank you so much!

I'm sorry, I see you are still wearing your little weapon and strutting about like you are the rather doughy, bad-skinned king of the sand castle. Perhaps we were not clear? Shall we try it again?

Clearly, you are not a police officer. Therefore, the management, our employees and pretty much everyone within a 100-mile radius would very much appreciate it if you would put away that ego-fluffing man-toy that is designed solely to kill other living creatures and induce fear and ignorance as it regresses every hesitant advancement in the human soul back to caveman grunting lunkishness. Thank you again!
--------------------
Again, we mean no offense, you jingoistic lump of mancrazy. You are indeed well within your rights to be a thoroughly paranoid coward who has no real inner strength, confidence or social skills, to a degree that you feel you must carry a deadly weapon around to feel like you even exist. We understand your thinking completely. It's basic psychology. Very, very basic. Childish, even.
--------------------

the tripe continues here

Truth is the people like Moford and the Bradyites who hate guns are right. I see their point when they talk about feeling "scared and uneasy" (as a liberal wrote in the comments to the article) when when they go in a coffee shop and see people who are showing their guns.

I too feel "scared and uneasy" when I go into a coffee shop and see black people or latinos sitting at the tables and minding their cup of Joe. Sure I agree, the overwhelming majority of them are not murderers, rapists and child molesters but since statistics are showing 85% of the prison population in the US is black or hispanic, why risk going in a coffee shop and get killed by one of them?

Dear Mr. Moford: since you seem to consider all gun owners as being potential murderers and gangbangers, maybe in the future you should consider writing a similar piece about blacks and hispanics. Oh, and gays. Since they represent over 80% of the people infected, gay people can kill you with AIDS. And just like with gun owners who scare the shit out of you only by being present in the same room you are, gay people can give you AIDS only by breathing the same air as you do. You see Mr. Mofo, gays just like the gun owners you hate so much have a lifestyle and values different than yours, Mr. Moford so... they must be dangerous, right?
Maybe it is time we should at least consider putting some pressure on the owners of dinners and coffee shops to make them post signs with "No Blacks, Hispanics and Gays" at the entrance in their establishments.
Looking forward to read your next article. Cheers!

"From My Cold Plastic Fingers"

More proof gun hating liberals are sick in the head

LEGO my gun: S.I. Boy Faced Suspension Over Tiny Toy

A fourth grade New Dorp boy faced the prospect of suspension after the principal at his South Beach school saw him playing with an action figure carrying a toy machine gun.

Patrick Timoney, a 9-year-old student at PS 52, and friends were playing with LEGOs during their lunch period when the principal took him into her office over the two-inch toy gun carried by a standard policeman figure.



Margie Feinberg, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, told the Staten Island Advance that there is a no-tolerance policy for toy guns in schools.

Therefore the principal, Evelyn Matroianni, deemed the pinky-sized toy gun suspension-worthy. Matroianni told Laura Timoney, the boy’s mother, that she would check with a DOE security administrator.

But Ms. Timoney told the Advance that the DOE administrator said no other action was necessary after the toy gun is confiscated and returned to the parents at the end of the day.

According to Ms. Timoney, while another child had an action figure holding an ax, her son was the only one to be approached by the principal.

"It's crazy," Ms. Timoney told the Advance, "He's missing class time, all for silly toys. The boys are just trying to relax. If there's a real threat, why not call the Police Department?"

Complete story here

Well, at least the little dangerous batstard wasn't taken out of his class in handcuffs or (God forbid) shot in the head by a SWAT team member. I think he should be very thankful for that.

City Of Oakland Wants To Ban Guns And Ammo Sales; Calguns Foundations Fires Back

Because they have too much time in their hands and a burning desire to take feel good but useless measures to reduce the number of murders perpetrated by gangs within city limits (over 600 last year), the Oakland City Council voted to pass a city ordinance prohibiting the sales of firearms and ammunition to law abiding citizens within city limits.

Never mind there is not a single firearms or ammunition dealer open for business in Oakland (yep, that's right - their number is zero) ; never mind the drug gangs responsible for the murders don't buy their guns and ammo in gun stores but out on the streets. And never mind regulating out of existence gun stores that don't exist in the first place will not inconvenience hardened criminals.
All these arguments are such insignificant details for the geniuses who voted for the ban measure; you see, the most important thing is to show their constituents they are doing something - no matter how useless and laughable about the out of control violence making their city the murder capital of the U.S.

But the California gun owners are fighting back. And who would have thought? California, long regarded as a lost cause because of the most restrictive gun laws passed an imposed over the years against its law abiding citizens is nowadays on the forefront of the fight to restore the Second Amendment rights for the entire country. These days a grassroots organization of gun rights enthusiasts formed around the hugely popular Internet forum Calguns.com is spearheading the counterattack. The name of the organization: The Calguns Foundation.

Here is a news report of what happened at the Oakland City Council meeting. Please note the reporter is mentioning the possibility of Calguns Foundation suing the City of Oakland.


And here is the MUST READ official letter sent by the Calguns Foundation to the City Council, threatening with a million dollar lawsuit if the Councilmembers are voting to pass the ordinance with a second vote on February 16th.

Will the Oakland City Council members come to their senses and vote down the measure? Or will they follow the example of the Mayor of San Francisco who persisted into trampling on the Second Amendment rights at a cost of millions of dollars paid by the tax money of its constituents?
We'll soon find out.

Update: NRA & CRPA (California Rifle And Pistol Assn.) submit their own letter threatening Oakland City Council with a lawsuit