- Sep 22, 2013
- 4,956
- 250
- 85
How smooth is government and the society it presides over? Is it like a gel or like sand? Such a question reveals the right attitude towards the governance over martial instincts and military investments.
When I read comic books about valiant superheroes vying with nefarious villains and exhibiting great strength and agility and acumen, I am intrigued by how fascinated humanity is by strength control and muscular intelligence (and imagination).
We criticize the military for being martial/violent, but we condone our children buying comic books about vigilantism or video games about street fighting.
I remember the strength-paranoia Hollywood (USA) movie "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991) which presented the story of a time-traveling cyborg trying to protect a mother and a son (who are instrumental in a great future machine-man apocalypse) from a mercury-composition super-killer creature-robot simply called T-1000 (portrayed nicely by the talented actor Robert Patrick).
The T-1000 is a movie avatar representing our social curiosity about strength contours and martial intentions. How do social leaders in our modern age of computerize and nuclear warfare present pop culture avatars such as T-1000 in terms of a democratic marketing of military intelligence?
When you go to a candy store, you might purchase some jellybean candies for your kids. When you scratch your ear, you might notice how the soft cartilage makes that part of your body more pliable than bone. People are curious about 'touching sweetness.'
How do relevant militarization-fantasy Hollywood (USA) movies such as "WarGames" (1983) capture our interest in strength accreditation? How much do we talk about the materials used in war?
T-1000
When I read comic books about valiant superheroes vying with nefarious villains and exhibiting great strength and agility and acumen, I am intrigued by how fascinated humanity is by strength control and muscular intelligence (and imagination).
We criticize the military for being martial/violent, but we condone our children buying comic books about vigilantism or video games about street fighting.
I remember the strength-paranoia Hollywood (USA) movie "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991) which presented the story of a time-traveling cyborg trying to protect a mother and a son (who are instrumental in a great future machine-man apocalypse) from a mercury-composition super-killer creature-robot simply called T-1000 (portrayed nicely by the talented actor Robert Patrick).
The T-1000 is a movie avatar representing our social curiosity about strength contours and martial intentions. How do social leaders in our modern age of computerize and nuclear warfare present pop culture avatars such as T-1000 in terms of a democratic marketing of military intelligence?
When you go to a candy store, you might purchase some jellybean candies for your kids. When you scratch your ear, you might notice how the soft cartilage makes that part of your body more pliable than bone. People are curious about 'touching sweetness.'
How do relevant militarization-fantasy Hollywood (USA) movies such as "WarGames" (1983) capture our interest in strength accreditation? How much do we talk about the materials used in war?
T-1000
