Movie Review: Green Book

by Brad Nelson3/17/19
With parts of Beauty and the Beast, The Odd Couple, Driving Miss Daisy, and Goodfellas, Green Book was the winner for Best Picture in 2018.

The “Green Book,” which is more a prop than a central aspect of the film, is (was) an official guide for where Negroes could stay in the Democrat-Party-controlled South which still had whites-only establishments.

One supposes this is loosely based on actual events but one can suppose that the individual events portrayed in the movie happened often. Effete virtuoso, Donald Shirley, (played with effective strangeness by Mahershala Ali) has decided to take his classical-oriented Don Shirley Trio on the road. He’ll hit all points in the Democrat-Party-controlled South of 1962 and needs a combination driver/security-man.

He finds this in Tony Lip (Viggo Mortensen) who is temporarily out of a job as a bouncer of a New York club. First off, I did like this movie and recommend it. But frontmost in my mind regarding any Academy Award winner is whether it’s been given an award because it’s artistically good or because it virtue-signals all the right liberal points.

My suspicions firmly set, this movie does start off firmly as a sort of “Magic Negro” story of the refined and intelligent black man (who, in this case, hails from Pensacola, Florida by way of Jamaica, not Detroit’s inner city) who is going to teach the crude, ignorant white man how to be a descent human being.

Indeed, there are likely several themes in this that caused it to be voted as Best Picture (including sympathy toward homosexuality) rather than the merits of the picture itself. Still, those merits are firmly there, no matter the reason the Academy singled this movie out.

Had the movie stayed where it was in the first 20 minutes — implicit virtue-signally by the Libtards — I likely would have turned it off. But it didn’t stay there. Despite two strikes against this film (Best Picture Oscar and Viggo Mortensen), it eventually portrays both principals (Shirley and Tony Lip) as people rather than stereotypes.

The “Magic Negro” turns from the sophisticate who can do no wrong to a deeply troubled human being who can actually learn a thing or two from the more Italian-mob homespun Tony Lip. The reverse is true as well with Shirley helping Tony write letters back home to his wife.

Shirley and Tony certainly do meet villains and danger in the Democrat-Party-controlled South, including many scenes of great poignancy. Shirley is allowed to play for rich whites in the Democrat-Party-controlled South but can’t eat with them in the same restaurant.

It’s almost certain that 99% of liberals who watch this will not get the universalist points underlying the film. If you look at today’s Democrat Party which squelches free speech, enforces conformity while speaking empty chants of “diversity,” and is as dogmatic and authoritarian as any regime since the Democrat-Party-controlled Old South, you can tell they didn’t quite get the message of this film even though the Academy, overwhelmingly liberal, voted for it.

In the end, both Don and Tony are individual men, more than their skin color or ethnicity. Shirley is thoroughly out of place wherever he goes, neither being a “street negro” (or the kind of black musician popular at the time that everyone expected him to be). Nor did he fit in with the rich whites who were his main audience for his classical works and yet with whom he could not (at least in the Democrat-Party-controlled South) share a meal.

Today, any black man who strays from the narrow vision of authentic “blackness” that Democrat-Party activists require is called an Uncle Tom, or worse. Refreshingly, in this film we glimpse the struggle of people against stereotypes. And it’s hard to imagine modern liberals in the Academy seeing or understanding this film as anything other than “flattering to the black man,” a general sentiment that is payment for their collective white guilt.

But who knows? What we can say is that director Peter Farrelly and the writers have fashioned something much more than could have come out of the narrow and bland minds of liberal dogma. Aside from the human elements, this film is a wonderful visual flashback to the sites and styles of 1962. Filmed in a sort of faded Kodachrome palette, it’s a beautiful film.

Although it takes some time to get used to the Dr. Donald Shirley character (one isn’t sure if this will be a one-note performance or not early-on), Mortensen as Tony Lip is surprisingly effective. He hasn’t been this good since Lord of the Rings. They overdo his love for food (in no way is he as large as he should be for the amount of food he eats). But whereas you’d expect his character to be a repository for constant virtue-signaling (if only as a Falstaff-like buffoon), he is instead more complex than this or even than his Goodfellas persona.

Mahershala Ali plays a mildly-unlikable character, at least at the beginning. He’s a perfectionist snob. I’m not sure how the Academy gave a nod to a film wherein Mortensen says something like “I’m blacker than you are.” But, regreshingly, it’s a point well made by his character and humorous at the same time. And that is a central point of the appeal of Green Book. This is not a 130 minute harangue of bad white people in the Democrat-Party-controlled South. There’s a a lot of humor in it, a thing in itself that sets it outside the narrow confines of liberal artistic dogma where if you’re not overly “serious” you’re being insulting.

And although the role is not large, Linda Cardellini simply sparkles as the wife of Tony, proving that there are no small parts, only small actors. Her role is also telling in regards to the general tone of the film. Stereotypes and movie cliches would require the wife of Tony Lip to be a nagging, bitter, angry anchor-like weight on his life that he can’t wait to spend eight weeks away from. Instead, she is just the opposite. She’s happy in her role as wife and mother.

In the end, this is not a bitter or contemptuous film. It is a hopeful one.

Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author  Author Archive  Email • (138 views)

Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Movie Reviews. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Movie Review: Green Book

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    I wonder if they ever pointed out which party imposed Jim Crow on the South. After all, if America is irredeemably evil because of slavery and Jim Crow, then the Demagogues who supported both must be the heart of that evil and equally irredeemable.

    Incidentally, this sort of racial segregation wasn’t unique to the South. Brown v. Board of Education deal with segregated schools in Topeka. Chicago was considered the most segregated city, as George Wallace pointed out to Chuck Percy in a 60s debate. And the 1919 Chicago race riot began when a black kid out swimming in Lake Michigan came back to a whites-only stretch of beach.

    One incidental advantage of Green Book‘s Oscar was that it led Spike Lee to make a total fool of himself. Maybe I should see Driving Miss Daisy sometime when I get the chance. And Jessica Tandy was so memorable in The Birds.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I wonder if they ever pointed out which party imposed Jim Crow on the South.

      Oh, absolutely, of course not. This is the most dishonest aspect of the film. I think most indoctrinated Snowflakes would see all those rich white people who paid to see the Don Shirley Trio as Republicans. But neither political party is mentioned in the film.

      One incidental advantage of Green Book‘s Oscar was that it led Spike Lee to make a total fool of himself.

      I wasn’t aware of that. But given that he is a fool, that’s like noting that the crow will caw.

      I haven’t seen but a small portion of Driving Miss Daisy. I think I rented it one time (or started watching it on TV) and was bored by it. But maybe I should give it a try sometime as well.

      One reviewer captured the essence of the film:

      I believe the performances of these two fine actor made the show. There is a subtlety to this movie that transcends many others of its type. Yes, there are Southern cops; yes, there are men’s rooms that are off limits; yes, there are simplistic views of racism by white New Yorkers. But what I got was a realistic presentation of an evolving friendship. Shirley is abrasive and self-centered; Lip is clueless most of the time. And I believed in them. See this film.

      One could say that this wasn’t an explicit “message” film although it contained many messages. And don’t overlook the word “subtlety.” For a general-audience movie, it had that — the prime example being (one must view it in context) Shirley sitting down at a piano in a black restaurant to play. He first removed the glass of whiskey from the piano.

      I can easily predict that director Peter Farrelly will never be able to remain at this level of the Capraesque. This movie has everything that has basically been disallowed by authoritarian Leftist dogma. It has subtlety, humor, and breaks with stereotypes (whether good or bad stereotypes). The wind of fame should naturally blow him to the inane. Let’s hope not though.

      Most liberal movies are easily seen as being such because the characters are paper-thin and exist only to espouse liberal talking points. And I must say while watching this film that it was so refreshing not to have Oprah Winfrey or Whoopi Goldberg in it. I don’t know why that thought occurred. But it tells you what kind of film it is…or isn’t.

      It is, of course, entirely possible that a younger generation of film makers is starting to take over from the Alec Baldwins of the world. This could be a trend. You never know. Imagine a modern film receiving great acclaim with one of the central characters portraying a black man who fits none of the usual stereotypes. Whether this is an authentic portrayal of Don Shirley, I don’t know. But this isn’t yet another awful performance by an angry Morgan Freeman.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Incidentally, this sort of racial segregation wasn’t unique to the South. Brown v. Board of Education deal with segregated schools in Topeka. Chicago was considered the most segregated city, as George Wallace pointed out to Chuck Percy in a 60s debate…


      I wonder if they ever pointed out which party imposed Jim Crow on the South.

      These facts do not work with leftists. They simply say that those Southern Dims migrated to the Republican Party which has taken over the mantle of racism.

      This is one of the things which is so precious about the left. They are willing to twist every fact, every piece of information to their further their aims. I still wonder that conservatives still don’t get this, but listening to those railing against Trump’s emergency decree re the border, it is clear many don’t.

  2. pst4gop says:

    I will have to give it a look Brad. You keep using the phrase “Democrat-Party-controlled South”. Have you not heard Brad, those are all Republicans now? The parties flipped as Mr Zu points out, at least that is what Dumbocrats say, and they would never lie, right?

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Actually, of course, the old Dixiecrats died out. Some, such as Strom Thurmond, did indeed switch parties. But most remained Demagogues until they were gone. GOP gains came from younger voters. And their takeover of the South wasn’t completed in some cases (such as Arkansas and West Virginia) until the past decade. The Demagogues, as usual, ignore these facts in order to blame the GOP for their own misdeeds. But of course you already knew that.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Have you not heard Brad those are all Republicans now?

      I’ve heard, Pat. And here we must give full credit to Satan for having a remarkably effective re-branding marketing campaign.

      Small spoiler here, but not a game-changer. One of the better scenes is when John Candy and Steve Martin (oops….was thinking of “Planes, Trains & Automobiles”…another movie that resembles this) are at their last destination for a gig before they return home for Christmas. I think it’s a Christmas party deep in the old Democrat-Party-controlled South.

      It’s a swank affair at some huge mansion or hotel. Everyone is excited to see Dr. Don Shirley and his Trio play. It’s quite the spelndid night with everyone in fancy dress. Tony and Don walk into the restaurant where people are eating dinner before the event. They are told by the very apologetic maitre d that Mr. Shirley can’t be seated. Oh…nothing personal, of course. It’s just the rules in place at the time.

      You’re not sure if Mr. Shirley is going to go ape-shit and start launching chairs through the plate-glass windows a la Al Pacino taking a flamethrower to the place, sit down at a table and defy them to haul him out in handcuffs, or something else.

      I kept waiting for “something else.” There are a room full of people there sitting at their dinner tables who can hear and see everything that is going on. I kept waiting for a Pat Tarzwell to stand up and come up to the confab they’re having with the maitre d and say, “Mr. Shirley, we’d be pleased if you would join us at our table.”

      Cue the warm-fuzzies. But this is the Democrat-Party-controlled South where indecency has been codified (just as they do today) and made moral cowards of everyone. You watch a film like this and you’ll have no question why the Mad and Dirty Dog of the Old South had to be crushed and put out of its misery.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        There is a story (it gets repeated in Burdick’s The 480) about a black man, who was involved in developing the use of plasma transfusion, dying after a car crash in the South. The nearest hospital that would accept blacks was too far away. The story apparently is apocryphal, but it theoretically was possible. Indeed, the possibility (and there are many similar if less severe harms, such as running out of gas in an area with whites-only stations) illustrates why separate-but-equal facilities (even if they lived up to the name, which rarely if ever happened) were inherently unequal.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        It’s quite the spelndid night with everyone in fancy dress. Tony and Don walk into the restaurant where people are eating dinner before the event. They are told by the very apologetic maitre d that Mr. Shirley can’t be seated. Oh…nothing personal, of course. It’s just the rules in place at the time.

        This got me to wondering about the question of “when, if ever, does an establishment have the right to refuse service to a potential customer?”.

        I ask, because this is something which has been in the news over the last few years. Can a bakery refuse to make a queer wedding cake? Can a restaurant refuse to have restrooms which are for transgenders and others who are confused regarding their sexuality? Can a bar refuse service to a man dressed in a low-cut Oleg Cassini evening gown and Jimmy Choo pumps?

        This is a serious question as the left, on the advice from “Rules for Radicals,” takes conservatives’ broad rules of good behavior and fairness to the extreme. The left ignores George Will’s “up to a certain point” philosophy on purpose.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          Many years ago, a Louisville restaurant refused to seat O. J. Simpson because of his legal situation. There was quite a stink over it from race-baiters looking for something to be outraged about.

        • Steve Lancaster says:

          Ah, but if you’re openly armed suddenly the rights of private property magically have preference. There is a truck stop in Rudy AR with a sign that encourages open and concealed carry among the customers. It has never been robbed.

          Down the street is another truck stop that prohibits open and concealed carry. It has been robbed three times in the last 5 years.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Funny how that works. Gun-free zones are an invitation to mass murderers. One would think even a leftist would notice that by now, but ideology trumps facts for them, and besides they don’t really care about the victims except as excuses for more gun control.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            I’ll choose the well-armed truck stop then.

            I can’t blame this movie for being slightly slanted. But it was a bit disappointing in regards to the honesty and realism of the film when Tony walks into a black restaurant/club with Shirley and all he gets are a couple stern looks. And maybe to the credit of the black patrons, that was typical….far more civilized and civil than the whites down in the Democrat-Party-controlled South.

            [Slight spoiler here, but nothing too big.] But they don’t completely cheat the situation. Shirley waves a wad of cash around at the bar and you know that’s going to be a problem. It was. Tony has to chase off a couple black guys who were waiting to rob them outside. Due to the plethora of home invasion alarm-system commercials all featuring white guys, most of you here probably weren’t aware that blacks also can engage in crime from time to time.

        • pst4gop says:

          One of the funniest cases I ever heard of, was when a home owners association, (which I detest), won their case where they were sued by a lawyer because they did not allow lawyers to live in there community. The court ruled that lawyers were not a protected class. 😉

          • Timothy Lane says:

            I heard of a female malpractice lawyer in Mississippi who made a habit of suing obstetricians. Then she got pregnant and needed one herself — but she had sued all of them anywhere within reach, and none of them would take her case. “My object all sublime, I shall achieve in time, to make the punishment fit the crime, the punishment fit the crime.”

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          People you should have the right to refuse service or seating (thinking particularly in regards to restaurants) to:

          + People who have not met the minimum dress code set by your establishment.
          + People who are rowdy or disruptive (including their children, if any).
          + People who won’t pay (or have proved themselves problematic in the past).
          + People who openly stink or are otherwise unclean.
          + People who loiter long long after their meal has been finished and paid for.
          + People with pets.

          Not serving people because the color of their skin is a no-no, as is their sexual orientation (unless they plan on doing it right then and there on the table…otherwise, how would one know what their orientation was?).

          For other services it’s a bit more complicated. I should have the right to refuse printing pornography, for instance (and I have, even though I have nothing against it, per se. It’s just that this is a scummy class of people and payment is iffy.) I haven’t refused work from homosexual groups. We used to do a homo newsletter way back when. They were fine people and paid their bills. But I would have thought it was well within my rights to refuse them.

          Being black isn’t a political thing. Nor is it an act. But homosexuality is a choice of how you act. And thus I don’t think a baker or anyone else necessarily must offer service. The same if they are Muslim. I would rather not do any work for Muslims because I believe theirs is a Nazi-like movement that is dangerous to our way of life.

          Jews? Bring them on. But like Asians, it may be difficult to make any money off of them because they tend to be pretty tight. My active personal threshold regarding who I serve is whether or not they will A) Pay the bill and B) Not be a pain in the ass kind of customer. There are some people so difficult to work with, they’re just not worth it.

          One of the things to note (which is nothing new to anyone here) is that free trade tends to be an equalizing force. What happened in the South (and not just in the south) was not a social thing, per se. Money talks. Bullshit walks. People may be thick in their ideology but when it comes to getting something done that they need, they generally don’t care what someone’s religion, sexual orientation, or color of skin is.

          But that all changes when the state encodes discriminatory laws. That ramps it up. It tilts market forces away from free cooperation. And it just tends to make dicks of people who, generally speaking, don’t need all that much help to be dicks in the first place.

          • Steve Lancaster says:

            It is funny and weird. If you refuse to serve one legged nuns on bicycles, suddenly the world is filled with them, however if you only serve one legged nuns on bicycles then you will go broke waiting for even one to show.

            I suspect the same is true in all service businesses. If Brad only printed porn he would starve but let him refuse to print it and suddenly the world is filled with offended porno addicts

            Call it a twisted form of supply and demand.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              I think you’ve written a new Murphy’s Law, Steve.

              Businesses that are open to the public, and primarily via walk-in, are really on the front-lines in all this. It’s tougher for them to filter.

              It doesn’t happen often, but no type of “whites only” sign is needed at my establishment. When you run across someone who is a gigantic pain in the ass, you just price them out of it. Last time that happened was to a white guy. He was such a pain in the ass to work with. He just became too disruptive and he wasn’t worth it.

              Obviously to be in business you have to be willing to eat a lot of shit. You smile and say “Yes, sir” or “Yes, ma’am” to the person writing the checks. Not everyone is having their best day. Not everyone has the personality and manners of Mr. Rogers. You can’t (or at least I can’t) run an ongoing business and be particularly picky.

              But everyone has standards and needs to. We aim to be professional and treat the fellow with the five-dollar copy job with the same respect as the professional with the $2000.00 order. It’s sort of like the idea of not lying. If you tell the truth, you never have to worry about covering your lies and remembering them all. (And you never know if that guy with the five-dollar job might run a multi-million dollar business.)

              Same with how you treat people. It’s just easier (and better) to treat everyone with respect….until like that smelly socialist Snowflake yute from Sweden who I kicked out of my office a couple years ago. There is always a line where it is this far, but no farther.

              Ooh, and I’m equal-opportunity in regards to who I throw out of my office. A black fellow, who I used to work with years ago and had remained passing friends with ever since, came into my office one time and started talking the most outrageous Leftist victimhood trash. He was a friend (and still is) and I tried to keep the conversation friendly. But I had had enough and told him to leave (just short of shouting at him). We still see each other now and then around town and we always shake hands and shoot the breeze. This is a guy thing. Guys don’t hold grudges like women. Women are just pure poison in that regard.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                I once saw a masquerade skit at RiverCon on Mr. Rogers. It featured a Rogers character noting that people wondered why he acted that way. Was he a Vulcan, for example? His answer was to pick up a giant seed pod, asking, “Can you say ‘pod people’? Mr. Rogers found one of these in his garden one night. Now everyone in the neighborhood talks just like Mr. Rogers. Would you like to visit me? Would you like to be my neighbor? Can you say, ‘I will not fall asleep at night’?”

              • Steve Lancaster says:

                I don’t know how Murphy would feel about it. I personally believe Murphy was an optimist.

                In my time, I have run restaurants of all types, fast food to full service, bakeries and bookstores, even spent 6 months as a real cowboy in Montana.

                Brad has hit the nail on the head. You try to please every customer to the limit of your ability if you desire to be successful. To do otherwise is a very short road to bankruptcy. However, there is a line and it moves some times on a daily basis.

                I once pulled a gun a an asshole who would not leave my office. He had the chutzpah to come back a few days later and ask I really would have shot him. I smiled and pointed to the door. To myself I said probably not.

                To a baker in Colorado it means not setting up a cake for a gay wedding. Totally his right to do so and it should have nothing to do with his religion. It’s his business let him run it as he see fit. If not serving one group of customers helps insure his success then the market will have spoken with force. If he goes broke the market will have spoken with equal force. For all who operate their own business the only judge that matters is the market and in the long run it is impartial but brutal.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            I think your list is theoretically pretty good. I agree immutable characteristics like color should, generally, not be reason for refusal of service.

            Unfortunately, there are always exceptions to rules where someone is an asshole because he is an asshole, not because of his color or other characteristic. We see this fairly often, humans being what they are.

            A good example of this is the scumbag transvestite/transgender (I don’t recall which) lawyer who kept harassing the Colorado baker even after the Supreme Court found in his favor. As I recall, the pervert specifically chose the baker to make cakes shaped liked penises and I believe some satanic celebratory cakes and the Colorado Civil Rights Commission went along with it.

            A variation on this is the idiot who wears clothing which is provocative, often with profanity printed on it, who demands to be seated in a restaurant.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              Some of these can be handled by Brad’s first 2 points, concerning minimum standards of dress and disruptive behavior. Ultimately, it comes down to discrimination on the basis of what people are as opposed to what they do. The latter should just about always be legal.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              There’s a real truism or fact here: People of good will don’t need a whole ton of rules to get along. Most rules are in place to deal with the dishonest assholes….like that dick with the dick cake.

              • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

                Yup. Unfortunately, with a growing population, there is a growing number of dishonest or just downright obnoxious assholes. And they seem to congregate, mostly, in cities.

              • Timothy Lane says:

                Misbehavior can be anonymous more easily in cities. People in small towns are more likely to be aware of odd people in their midst. And there are many forms of misbehavior that are accepted in urban areas in a way that they aren’t in small towns.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    even spent 6 months as a real cowboy in Montana.

    Steve, there is so much material out there for good stories and so much we don’t know about people. Perhaps you should tell a couple of them before telling cowboy stories is considered so right wing that they will be banned.

    I once pulled a gun a an asshole who would not leave my office. He had the chutzpah to come back a few days later and ask I really would have shot him. I smiled and pointed to the door. To myself I said probably not.

    That’s a great scene that would either fit with Jesse Stone or Bosch. “To myself I said probably not.” Maybe a little more Bosch-ish.

    Upon further review, the answer to the Christian baker who was asked to make a dick-cake is easy. Bake the dick-cake. But put it either on a plate shaped like a cross or put little pastry-piped crucifixes as a marquee all along the sides. Pipe a big bright red “Jesus Saves” at the base of it. “There’s your cake, sir.” You baked the cake. If the customer doesn’t like your artfulness, well, there’s no accounting for taste.

    Fortunately I’m not stupid enough to have swallowed down the “All homosexuals are just like a nice, clean-cut Ken doll.” The reality is, this is an unhealthy lifestyle paired with a culture that is, in general, perverted and horrible. But, sure, there are some Ken-and-Michael homo relationships that do fit the ideal. I know one of them (or think I know one of them….who knows what really goes on?).

    I support Jews and Christians (even stupid liberal ones) because they are on the true right side of history….right side of eternity, if you will. To attack them in the way this dick-cake faggot did is reason for contempt, not “tolerance.” Eff them.

    • Steve Lancaster says:

      OK, one cowboy story

      When I was 16, about 1964, my dad decided to send me for a summer to live with one of his buddies just outside of Missoula MT. They had served together in Korea and he had a ranch called; of course, Semper Fi Ranch. I thought it was a great idea. I got out of school in early May and did not return until late October, six months as a cowboy on a cattle ranch! The romance of the idea was enough to make me want to go. I traveled by bus by myself and yes, I carried a weapon all the way. My dad had taught me how to use it, and how to carry it, never had a problem. Dad’s friend met me at the bus station and we traveled a couple of hours to his ranch. I do not remember his last name, but his first name was Tom. I was told I could call him Gunny.

      I went to work the next day learning to ride rope and generally not be the laughing stock of the entire state. My skills improved and the blisters on my butt from 12 hours in the saddle ended. We worked cattle the entire summer. It was hard work, harder work than any I have ever done, and I have no wish to repeat it.

      My epiphany was when we were testing cows to discover if they are pregnant. For the squeamish, beware, let it be said that you have to reach inside the cow from behind and feel the fetus with your hand. In those days there were no plastic gloves just a bare arm up the rear. It was at that moment the romance of the cowboy died. I am sure that my dad would have whooped it up to see me doing that, and today I do also, but it sure wasn’t funny then.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        six months as a cowboy on a cattle ranch!

        Holy smokes. What a neat adventure.

        let it be said that you have to reach inside the cow from behind and feel the fetus with your hand. In those days there were no plastic gloves just a bare arm up the rear. It was at that moment the romance of the cowboy died.

        LMAO. Thus ended the adventure. But, boy, that must give you some experiences of life that can give you a much wider perspective. No, it doesn’t sound as if being a cowboy is particularly for everyone. For a day on a dude ranch, sure. But that’s not quite the real thing. The real thing sounds very hard.

        And if you watch “Rawhide,” you certainly get the idea that these cowboys don’t think they’re living out some big romantic story. They’re doing a job. And a gritty job it often is. Thanks for the story, Steve.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          This is why they’d drink so much and play so hard and wild when they got to town. And that’s why the townsmen didn’t really like the cowboys they exploited. The Clantons and their friends were all too typical of cowboys in the opinion of many in Tombstone and elsewhere.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        you have to reach inside the cow from behind and feel the fetus with your hand

        Reminds me of a scene I saw in some movie or TV show where the vet stuck his arm up the rear-end of a cow in order to untwist the cow’s intestine. Had I entertained any thoughts of becoming a vet, that would have erased all such thoughts from my mind.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Had I entertained any thoughts of becoming a vet, that would have erased all such thoughts from my mind.

          I think the thing to keep in mind is that cow crap is not the same as dog crap. God only knows what dogs eat. But cows eat grass and so you’re basically dealing with a kind of fermented grass mass. You don’t necessarily want to make earrings out of it, but anyone who’s spent any time on the farm is as unexcited about stepping in cow dung as on a daisy. But you certainly want to wipe the dung off first before entering the house.

          My problem with reaching up so far wouldn’t be the contents of the colon. It’s about getting to know the cow that well. And I really don’t want to get to know a cow that well. That might even be illegal in a few states.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            There is a story about a politician who visited an Indian reservation in his state. He spoke to them, interrupted periodically by calls of “Hoya! Hoya!” This encouraged him and rose to even greater flights of oratory, to receive the same encouragement.

            Later he took a tour, and finally found himself separated from his car by a pasture. His guide noted that no bulls were there at the time, so he could cross the field — “But be careful not to step in the hoya.”

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    One could say the message of “Green Book” is to treat people with respect and get over yourself. This broad scope gives me room to air my latest grievance:

    I was hiking up on Green Mountain on Sunday. We had some great weather and the trails were packed. But all was good. There was a little snow left on the trails near the top but certainly navigable.

    I got to the top and there were three guys on rather large motorcycles having a chat. The trails are open to hikers, bikers, horses, and motorcycles. But there is an issue with motorcycles. Some are trying to get them banned from these particular trails.

    And I can understand why. “Asshole” is not too strong a word for the chatty fellow holding court with the bikers who seemed nice on the outside but I sensed had a smoldering inside of jerk. But he greeted me kindly as I sat down next to them to catch my breath.

    I heard them steer their conversation about the hikers who were getting in this guy’s way. He was slightly outraged at the mother who let her young child just wander in the path instead of pulling him out of the way.

    These are the Cretans that have always been with us. I told this jerk, in a very nice way, that, yes, motorcycles were allowed here but this was a very crowded trail and you had to be careful. But to this jerk, it was the duty of a young defenseless child to get out of his way so that he could zoom as he would.

    Don’t pick fights when you’re outnumbered (or if you’re not much of a fighter). But if I had superhero-like powers, I would have bent this asshole’s Yamaha in half and walked off. Instead, I just told him to take it easy and, much like a car, not outdrive his headlights. Don’t go faster than you can see. And I left. If motorcycles can be bent by psychic waves alone, I’m sure this jerk’s motorcycles is in the shop even as we speak.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      In Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None (titled Ten Little Niggers in Britain until 1960 or so), the first of the murders involves a speedster who once ran over a couple of kids. (Lost his driver’s license for a year, too. Beastly nuisance.)

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        I watched one of the productions of “And Then There Were None.” I didn’t like it all that much. But I don’t specifically remember the motorcyclist.

        Some guys have “simmering jerk blowhard” written all over them. But you never know. So although you absolutely should judge a book by its cover (only fools do not), you should prepare to adjust that judgment at a moment’s notice.

        Well, this guy lived up to my intuition about him. A society that isn’t of a collective mind to at least protect the vulnerable is a society that has become coarse and evil. Our society is of the mind of “If they are in the way, run them down…or abort them.”

        • Timothy Lane says:

          He wasn’t a motorcyclist, he was a car driver. But he definitely was a big fan of speed. In the 2 movie versions I’ve seen, the nature of his crime (and the punishment) remained the same — though I don’t think they went into detail about his fondness for driving fast.

  5. David says:

    Brad – Thanks for writing this review. I was going back and forth about seeing this film; I really like the actors involved, but I was wary of another ‘white people racist’ bashing experience. Your analysis has helped to tip the scales in its favor, so I will give it a gander soon.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I really like the actors involved, but I was wary of another ‘white people racist’ bashing experience. Your analysis has helped to tip the scales in its favor, so I will give it a gander soon.

      There I go. Tipping another balance. Just who do I think I am? 😀 But, truly, my most sincere desire is to objectively analyze a movie for those whose religion is not Leftism. My reviews are for anyone who understands that winning Best Picture is generally a minus, not a plus, regarding quality. Best Picture Oscars are usually indicative of the dominance of a political message, not the quality of the movie in terms of actual entertainment value.

      In regards to Green Book, you won’t find it completely lacking in political correctness. And yet regarding the overall message of how awful white people could be in the Democrat-Party-controlled South, I don’t own that. You don’t own that. And thus I have no problem watching that. I don’t hope for a white-washing of the awful truth of Democrats and their White-Privilege-lackeys abusing people-of-color…as they continue to do today by trying to keep them on an ideological plantation.

      I don’t own that. I own none of that. I could (and did) watch the mini-series, Roots, without a blush. I didn’t do that. I’m not for treating people different because of the color of their skin….a lesson still lost on the Democrat Party and their wantonly confused Progressive lackeys who parse everything through color.

      I’m actually surprised this won Best Picture Oscar because otherwise it is not full of the usual Leftist baloney. But I do figure it won because of the “Magic Negro” aspect. I’m fairly sure that the Academy voted this picture tops because it portrayed blacks in a very good light. Donald Shirley was a very accomplished man. And his struggle against what was real White Privilege in the Democrat-Party-controlled South is a truth that meshes with the Left’s dreamy view of Selma being now and forever.

      But as a picture decided on its merits: It’s very watchable. As it turns out, Don Shirley was a complicated man — to the point of appearing quite human and real in this movie rather than a stereotype to prop of the delusions and evil ambitions of the Left. Remarkable.

      I hope you report back after watching it, David. I’m interested in your take on it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *