Please label movie review postings with "spoiler" so that those of us who haven't seen the movie yet don't mistakenly read the plot. Go Frodo!
(I'm joking, of course: I already saw The Two Towers.) On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 11:40:26PM -0000, lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote: > > Blah blah blah wrote... > > "My hunch is that the new towers will never be filled and will turn out to be a >business catastrophe" > > Who gives a crap? Despite the fact that the original towers were as ugly as hell, >they were a giant "Fuck You" to the rest of the world and we New Yorkers loved 'em. >(I still say to NJ-based relatives that "All of you" conspired to knock down the >towers...I refuse to distinguish between bin Laden, gov Florio (or whoever), and >George Bush. All I know is that it was you non-New-Yorkers who did it 'cause you hate >us and all our cool food, culture, filth and crime.) And until I stop paying taxes >entirely, I might as well SEE something my tax $$$ may have been used to build, as >opposed to stealth buildings and giant storage "schools". (I always used the same >argument to support the superconducting supercollider....) > > > > > "oops, I said "business," when in fact it is the Port Authority, a weird melange of >jurisdictions which is probably constitutionally invalid)." > > The PA is certainly one of the more lecherous groups in these parts, including the >mob. They were supposed to dissappear after the tolls paid for roads and bridges to >be built. But using that ole' loophole (something to do with refinancing), they've >maintained their incpometant and corrupt stranglehold on most of our major >thoroughfares for lo these many years (increasing the pollution like crazy, too). > > > > "I wasn't sorry to see those Bauhaus boxes go." > > Bauhaus? I guess. More like that 70s warmed over post-Bauhaus fascist crapola. >Nobody in NYC really thought they were beautiful, but we do miss 'em (see above!). > > And Peter Trei wrote... > > "One thing I liked in particular was that most of the designs > weren't afraid to go high into the sky this time around. Building > high is an expression of confidence." > > This I more or less agree with. And it's not a government thing, not a business >thing, just a New York thing. We need replacement towers for sure, and that design by >David Rockwell & Co (with those odd empty tower-structures) might be good. They have >the additional advantage of not casting such a dark shadow over downtown and Brooklyn >Heights. > > > PT wrote... > "The WTC was a landmark > for a huge part of the city; you could see it easily from most > of midtown and downtown." > > but Blah Blah Blah wrote... > > "Hideous boxes." > > Again, you miss the point. We New Yorkers navigated by them, and when traveling out >in th'sticks (ie, New Jersey and west of the hudson) those ugly boxes would come >popping up over the horizon welcoming you home, just like your ugly ole' Mom. > > > Somebody wrote, and I really don't remember or care who. Hell, let's say Tim May >wrote it just to piss him off... > > "My own initiial idea was to rebuild the towers as they were, but in > goldtone instead of silver. Now, I'd like to be a little more respectful > of the pre-WTC street grid (If you weren't actually going to the WTC, > it was a huge obstacle to get around, either driving or on foot). But I > still want towers which rise far above the skyline." > > That original twisty-towers design brought forward in response to how shitty the >original official designs were by that Amalgamated Architects was the best design, >but for some reason it didn't make it into the official final round. > > > "One hopes not a single fucking dime of taxpayer money will go into rebuilding >anything on that site. (Oh, I won't scream if $25,000 is allocated to hire that >Chinese architect to replicate her Vietcong wall with the names of the dead so that >the weepy ones can do their tracings and all. But nothing more should be spent out of >the taxpayer's pocket.)" > > Like I said, you can either SEE your tax dollars build something (even if its >useless), or else they'll just dissappear up some buereucrats (I can never spell that >word) nose. Unless you pay zero taxes of course. > > > "(Ayn Rand loved the Twin Towers, ironically, and typically, and disgustingly. But, >then, she thought cigarette smoking was a symbolic affirmation of Man's control of >fire and his striving to reify A or Not-A through purity of essence!" > > A read through a couple Ayn Rand books and none of this should be suprising. As far >as I'm concerned she wasn't exactly von Neumann. > > Tyler Durden
