The Folk Prophet

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by The Folk Prophet

  1. I'm not sure what it is you think I'm saying that you're trying to counter.
  2. The idea that concerns me is your proposal that God leads people away from His church in order to lead them back to Him in the future. Whereas God can and does work with our weaknesses to turn them to strengths, he doesn't, that I've ever learned or heard, inspire us to be weak, foolish, sinful, lazy, carnal, devilish, or anything other than Godly, humble, and righteous.
  3. I'll just leave this here for consideration. “Happiness is the object and design of our existence; and will be the end thereof, if we pursue the path that leads to it; and this path is virtue, uprightness, faithfulness, holiness, and keeping all the commandments of God.” - Joseph Smith
  4. Since these two things are synonymous I'm having difficulty parsing out your thought here.
  5. God doesn't bring anyone into the fold. He invites all to follow and obey and they either come to Him or they do not, based on their own free will and choice. Edit: I know "bring" is a subjective idea, but the point remains... it is upon our agency.
  6. I kind of figured that might be the case.
  7. You think In the Heights and The Wizard of Oz are in the same class of well known?
  8. Right. And I think it would be key that censorship is not part of the proposed solution. There are cases where censorship is appropriate, of course. But for the most part, free speech should reign. In point of fact, that should be the primary directive of any disinformation board. Making sure ALL sides have a voice. There are cases where straight up censorship should exist, but they should be pretty rare, overall.
  9. I'm not suggesting it's possible. I'm simply saying that in a perfect world we'd have it because it is sorely needed. There is, clearly, a great deal of mis and disinformation that's wreaking havoc on the world and our country. It's really bad. But,'s not going to work to deal with the real mis and disinformation.
  10. Of course. It could, still, theoretically. But it won't. We are headed into the end times. Things will get worse.
  11. This board is sorely needed. No, I'm not being sarcastic. Of course it needs to be run by non-political, intelligent, rational people who have our country's best interests in mind.
  12. This makes it a much bigger deal, of course. 'Exacerbated' is, perhaps, not strong enough a word. Edit: I might add also, that the social media "trendiness/craze" of it is false. feels like the whole world has gone crazy. But they haven't. It's just that anyone who isn't crazy is censored on social media. It's a serious part of the problem. (Which is why I brought up Elon Musk earlier.)
  13. I am so distraught at what's going on with this stuff. It's SO terrible and having a daughter just breaks me heart. Up to a year or so ago it hadn't hit too close to home, and I hadn't even realized how much of an epidemic it is, even in happy valley Utah, even in the Church, even everywhere. Now I have extended family (a close cousin's daughter) who had decided they're Trans. And I've heard of example after example from friends and family in their wards, schools, etc. We have to protect our children from this! Thanks @Just_A_Guy for the resource on it. We need even more. The insanity is beyond. Beyond beyond. And it's going to get worse. Elon Musks purchase of Twitter is helpful. It also won't be enough.
  14. I'm not sure I'd call them "failures" as much as "not successes". 😀 Okay...failures to succeed then, I supposed. My point wasn't a "failure" of a movie, per se. It was okay. It just could have been much better. I would say it was a "good" film, but not a great one. I enjoyed it okay. Didn't hate anything in particular. But, yeah....I won't be too bothered if I never see it again... Hmm. Maybe that does make it a failure. It wasn't like some of the movies I've legitimately disliked. Like Pixar's The Good Dinosaur. FAILURE!
  15. No, not the effeminate one with the lisp!! I can't believe it!
  16. Another thought: I'm totally torn on West Side Story flopping. I want all "woke" content to flop. But I want musicals to succeed and lead to more musicals. So... Hollywood is stupid. That's all I know for certain about them. They're stupid.
  17. I remember hearing that now that you mention it.
  18. My understanding (I haven't seen it, just what I've heard) is Star Trek is WAY worse on this. I wouldn't say West Side Story, overall, sacrificed plot for the woke. It just emphasized the one line in a weird way that weakened it. Otherwise, the story (and I mean even Anybodys story) wasn't weaked by making her (him? it?) trans. It was the same story. A girl that desperately wanted to be a part of the boy's club, but wasn't accepted, and then found a bit of acceptance when she (he? it?) stepped up and helped. Exactly the same as the original. It was just turning the "buddy-boy" from a meaningless slang to a meaningful, dramatic, "hey, he said, BOY!" moment that was so lame.
  19. So I finally saw Stephen Spielberg's West Side Story. Here's my thoughts. So first, the SJW elephant in the room...the change of the character Anybodys from a tomboy to a trans character. Did it hurt the show? Yes. Conversely, did it improve the show? No. Did it destroy it? Well....yes....ish.... in the current state of culture it would be something that I'd steer clear of generally. Outside the culture, could it have been an interesting idea to have a female character that thinks she's a boy and to deal with some of the conflict around that? Sure. But in today's world, it came across as pandering to the left and forced. And, of course, anything right now that pushes that kind of narrative is harmful. But even taking those critiques out of the was still handled badly. Particularly in once scene. Spoilers moving forward, if anyone cares. So in the original movie (1961), Anybodys runs off to look for Tony and the line is, "Hey. You done good buddyboy." She replies, "Thanks, daddio." In this version it's the same line, but handled: "Hey." Big pause....melodramatic camera zoom in for the line.... "You done good.......buddy-boy!" Anybodys nods dramatically and turns to exit. The camera zoom is SO bad. Like just terrible. A perfect example of ruining something for "THE MESSAGE". In the 1961 movie the lines worked great. came across as cheesy and terrible. Just bad directing and camera work, acting choices and everything, right in the middle of what was, overall excellent directing, camera work, acting choices, etc. Just terrible. that's out of the way. Now putting that "woke" garbage aside, what did I think of the movie, overall? Well, it's West Side Story. It's great. So the question is: did it improve on things? Yes in some ways. No in others. The overall... I'd say the 1961 version is better on the whole. This version had some things that were better, but on the whole, it wasn't as good. Obviously the directing, camera work, lighting, etc., were superior. No question on that. The other big changes were in the order of the songs and additions or changes to the story. Some of those worked. Some didn't. Some were just meaningless changes that didn't add or subtract, but were fine. For example. the west side is having the slums torn down to build the Lincoln Center. So the street gang's worlds are ending anyhow one way or another. Did this story change hurt anything? No? Did it help? Not really. It was fine. Interesting I guess. Fine. They moved One Hand, One Heart to earlier in the show and had them sing it while visiting a church. This worked. It was cool. It was better placement for the song. Some of the other changes to the song order were worse, but not terribly so. Specifically, they put Cool earlier in the show and changed it so Tony was telling Riff to be Cool and not have the rumble. This....kind of....worked. Sort of. But it wasn't better. It was, in my opinion, worse. But it was...fine. Like I said. Not terrible. And the choreography was fun. Just didn't quite work. Now for the terrible... they moved I Feel Pretty from the start of the 2nd Act to immediately following the rumble. This was terrible. It absolutely killed the emotions and tension from the rumble. I had noted that they hadn't done I Feel Pretty earlier. And partly I thought they'd cut it. And I wasn't sad. I Feel Pretty is, and always has been, the worst song from the show. It's a throw away song. And I dislike it.'s popular. So I would have been surprised if they'd actually cut it. But in the 1961 version it comes at a point where having a throw away song is acceptable. It's kind of before the story really starts moving again, and before the second Act drama really starts to build. So it's always been fine. But putting it right after the rumble was not fine. It was really bad. I'm actually shocked that such a horrible decision was made with it. Some other things that were improvements: the singing was great! Like really, really good. I was very impressed, overall. Particularly Maria. I really loved her voice, and I typically don't like sopranos. Tony was great. Anita was great. But the giving of Somewhere to Rita Moreno to sing.... okay...fine again. It worked. I got it. But I missed it for Tony and Maria (even more so since I enjoyed their singing performances so much), and even more so...that means the reprise in the end scene was Tonight instead...and that just felt wrong somehow.... but I'll admit that might be sentiment talking. So I'll give that change a pass overall. And it was nice to have Rita Moreno sing it as a solo. In point of fact, a broader overall critique I have of West Side Story as a musical is that Maria doesn't have a solo. She sort of has I Feel Pretty...which I hate...but doesn't have a good aria to sing. She should. But I digress. Officer Krumpke was one of the weaker entries in this version. Not terrible. But not as entertaining as the older movie (primarily because of the performances). The rest of the musical pieces were all pretty good. Some of them played better than the 1961 versions (Tonight, Maria, One Hand, One Heart, A Boy Like That/I Have A Love). Some of them were just as good (Jet Song, Something's Coming, America), and some, as mentioned, were not as good. Actually the performances were all at least as good with the exception of Officer Krumpke. Even when they were not as good in the show because of placement (like I feel Pretty), the performances were as good or better, mostly. Maybe not Cool. It was fine. But the 1961 version performance is pretty killer. The choreography? It was fine. It was good. I liked it. Was it better than the 1961 version? No. But it was enjoyable. The rumble was....meh. It was fine. In some ways it was stronger than the other...but in some ways not. For some reason they had Tony actually fist fight Bernardo. In the 1961 version Tony takes a fighting stance at one point but stops immediately. I thought that was stronger. And the way Tony went from totally chill to fighting Bernado didn't feel very realistic here. And the lead into the usage of knives wasn't as cool or emotional. Etc. It was fine. Not as strong. Let's see. I think that basically covers it. Probably more detail than anyone cares to read. But if you made it through, those were my thoughts. Will I purchase it? I..........don't................think so...... I mean I would in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the trans thing. Does that bother me enough to keep me from buying it? I have such strong feelings about the matter in the current political and social climate that I don't know if I can separate that from it. Which basically means I'll default to not buying it. But is it because I really was bothered by what they did there? I can't say for sure. I can say, however, that unlike some other things, that if someone I knew purchased it I wouldn't judge and scorn their decision to do so. So overall, it was a good version. Not as good (overall) as the 1961 version. Hurt by some woke stuff and some weird decisions. But still, quite good.
  20. Here's the latest song I wrote for my Joseph Smith musical if anyone's interested:
  21. Of course we have no obligation to be morally consistent with our bans and boycotts.
  22. I don't believe anyone thinks they'll bring Disney to their knees. Enough bad press and profit loss though and maybe they'll go a bit more politically neutral. That's the best we hope, I think. And yet you'd likely immediately see how conservatives tend to judge all liberals only by the extreme wackos. Disney's full power, ultimately, stems from their customer base though. They are an example of free-market capitslism (mostly). And they're dumping sugar in their own gas tank and still expecting to win races. Ditto.
  23. We agree on that point I think we may differ in our understanding of joy and what sort of thing kills it. I have seen a few views implying this, but by and large I think most conservative parents are more reasonable than that. I'm not going to burn my copy of Cinderella. But I'm not buying any more Disney product without reviewing it first. And anything with that sort of "woke" content loses my money. I also won't, generally, pay for services like Disney+ because that content permeates it. As for going to the parks... I dunno. If I expect to see princesses in drag there's no way in stink I'm taking my family. And I wouldn't put that past Disney. So...??? I think you're seeing this parental response as a formal call for boycott... but that is not what it is. There will be some of that. But go to any ad, for example, for Disney+ on Facebook and read the comments. People aren't calling for boycotts. They are simply declaring they will not consume product from a company that's going after their kids. Disney has alienated their core Market. That is just bad business any way you cut it. Most of Disney's customer base (outside of Marvel or Star Wars) is families, not millennial SJWs. At least half (likely more based on polling) of that customer base is now being motivated to turn elsewhere for entertainment. That's not good for Disney. And I think you're seriously underestimating how bad this will be for them. But time, as you said, will tell. None of these things have anywhere near the family customer base as Disney, or the outraged negative publicity going on. Not even close. And finally... good! If only we could, as a society, be more puritanical! Sure, there's going TOO puritanical. But society has swung SO far the other way that we sorely need this.
  24. Disney seems to be targeting children directly. Buying a car doesn't directly teach your children about sexuality. Watching a Disney show very well might. I doubt if Disney simply kept supporting leftist things behind the scenes that many would say much. Because they say they will intentionally put such things in their children shows as an agenda, it brings everything to the forefront and puts people into defense mode. People worry about taking their children to Disneyland and getting drag princes and princesses. It's a direct attack. Parents who are worried about their children being taught leftist sex and gender ideaologies are killjoys?
  25. Of course I know you're right. And I feel guilt over the feelings of fear and whatnot that I have. My children don't need to ever experience Disneyland. But boy howdy that makes me sad. If you don't hear from me again I suppose I've been turned into a pillar of salt.