WALL-E

By -
I was nonplussed by this movie. Granted, I missed the last 10 minutes because Clark wisely decided it was time to go. (This is a great way to beat traffic, by the way: Just skip the last 10 minutes of the movie. Few others think of this clever strategy.)

Notwithstanding my incomplete viewing, I don't understand why Tyler Cowen likes this movie so much. (Then again, he has a crush on Will Wilkinson; if I knew Latin I'd put in that famous phrase about no accounting for tastes.)

Don't get me wrong, Pixar is awesome; within 10 minutes you are rooting for the little guy. But other than that, I think the message was wrong. Sure, Westerners are lazy and overweight and there are problems with commercialism. (Incidentally, why does Tyler Cowen of all people like this movie?!) But I really don't think we are destroying the earth. I don't endorse his unmerciful tone, but I think my former student makes some good points--especially at the end when he says that he's seen firsthand what a lack of capitalism looks like.

Also, just a minor quibble, but there's no sound in space! Only the people involved in 2001 and 2010 had the courage to do this right.

Comments

  1. Anonymous10:59 PM

    Wow. Check out the user contributed tags on the mises.org article you linked to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous1:10 AM

    Two comments:

    1) Isn't it amazing to think that one of the most massively cataclysmic events in the universe, the explosion of a star in a supernova, would be completely silent to any observer?

    2) Based on the mostly-critical user-generated tags for that WALL-E article and many critical comments in most discussion threads, is anyone else a little impressed by how many non-libertarians read the articles and blog posts at Mises.org? I mean, most of them are hopeless socialists, but if y'all keep at it you'll attract a few of them to the good side.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob Murphy9:27 AM

    Good points John. I am glad that the critics of Mises.org articles cannot make sounds (as far as this observer is concerned).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more