Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sean Connery has died

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 261 posts

Re: Sean Connery has died

#191

Post by rob74 »

Someone wrote: post #45
hestefisk wrote: post #29

I love Red October. Fantastic movie. Also I will never forget his role as Indiana Jones’ father. The scene where he scares away the birds with his umbrella in order to take down a German Messerschmidt.

Nitpick: it wasn’t a Messerschmidt. It wasn’t even a German design ( https://indianajones.fandom.com/wiki/Pilatus_P-2 ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_P-2 says it first flew on April 27, 1945, so it must have time-travelled to be able to attack Indiana Jones in 1938.

Double nitpick: it's Messerschmitt, not Messerschmidt!

Re: Sean Connery has died

#192

Post by tartoran »

qubex wrote: post #181
ljm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any living person can hold a reprehensible point of view, and as much as I may disagree with it, I really can't stand this attitude of writing people off because of a flawed perspective. That doesn't mean I support spousal abuse by association, it means I recognise he has a shitty point of view amongst all of his other flaws, as well as his qualities. There isn't a single person in history that can meet this standard…

I hate the recent “Cancel Culture” thing (that the phenomenon you descrive is an instance of). Firstly, and beside the point, the term itself is wonderfully (though I suspect accidentally) ambiguous and self-defeating, as one can read it as “the culture of a cancelling” (as intended) or “this will cancel culure” (a possible side-effect). Anyway... yes, cancel culture... I criticised it here once previously and amongs…

I think people can vote with their wallets/feet if they don’t approve of someone, it’s their right. I am not sure whether that constitutes cancel culture or not. However, there are cases where the cancelled is abused, sent death threats and such and this is absolutely a bad thing and should not happen. Also some people are ‘cancelled’ before the complete news breaks out or the whole picture emerges and in the end it turns out they were setup or completely innocent. That is a big problem and seems to be a part of the cancel culture. An example of a guy coaxed to do the ok sign, filmed and posted everywhere had his life ruined for no reason. That is not okay and we should do something to stop it

Re: Sean Connery has died

#193

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

mam2 wrote: post #160
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is flagrantly misogynistic. This is a ridiculous interpretation and the mental gymnastics to try to distinguish “slapping” from abuse, or to do victim blaming by saying it’s qualified by the woman already abusing you (wtf?) - it’s really inappropriate and upsetting to see some on HN making this argument. If you aren’t realizing that your comment is sincerely amplifying misogyny, you need a sensitivity tr…

Its not misogynistic because it is not related to gender at all. His point is basically: "If some is already verbally abusing you, its fine to resort to light violence if nothing else works". Its actually a point that i disagree personally, because i would just go away. But if you cant understand that verbal abuse can be far far worse than physical, you are probably the one that needs a sensitivity training more than…

I’m sorry but this is in no way a fair characterization of his comments to Barbara Walters. It is specifically brought up in the context of slapping women, and he is quite obviously not talking about slapping in response being verbally abused, not at all. That is an attempt to completely whitewash what he said and the circumstances referring to his earlier quote from Playboy.

I am sickened to see this mental gymnastics and attempt to whitewash what he actually said. It’s absolutely misogynistic to try to reinvent the meaning of what he said so as to obfuscate the fact that gender played a dominant role in his suggestion and that it was specifically in reference to slapping women.

Re: Sean Connery has died

#194

Post by gabereiser »

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #53
Bluestein wrote: post #35

Merchant Navy, milkman, nude model, lifeguard, truck driver, bricklayer, boxer, bodybuilder, street brawler (he once beat a gang of four while hanging out with Michael Caine, and another time, he defeated six people in a street fight.) ... ... and, finally, backstage maintenance worker at the King’s Theatre in Edinburgh. The rest is history.- A 20th century icon.- RIP.-

Don’t forget he was also an unapologetic advocate of spousal abuse, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mzXkbJwrN38

So I have a problem with this. So his worldview differs from your own, even promotes a little violence against women. You never had to date him so what does his views on that have anything to do with you? Or anything to do with his work? I'm a supporter of social issues, but social justice advocates who dismiss someone's life's work because of their beliefs is a shallow, hypocritical, human being. So you don't have to like the guy. That's really only your problem. Stop trying to make it everyone else's. The guy was stuck in 1950s style misogyny, HE WAS JAMES BOND! His character was that to the extreme. But to take what someone said once, and forever label them that is wrong, immoral, and is completely unempathetic.

Re: Sean Connery has died

#195

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

Panoramix wrote: post #172
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, sorry, that is no excuse. He made these decisions. This is the legacy he intended, with his own volition. If you do something like go on national press and unapologetically endorse spousal abuse (which absolutely invites and encourages other abusers and leads to real harm), and you double down on this and never apologize or retract it, then you absolutely deserve for it to be constantly brought up as a defining…

We're honoring the fantastic actor, not his poor advice. You try to paint him as a monster but he was happily married for 40 years, not a small feat.

What a bad thing to do.

Re: Sean Connery has died

#196

Post by tartoran »

bborud wrote: post #81
eganist wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, they did. That's the implicit critique; it's a relic of a darker time at least in societies that try a bit better today to treat people as peers.

So the people we love get away with an implied critique (nudge nudge wink wink), but we hurl stones at anyone famous? Changing makes us better. Virtue signaling does not. Assuming we're monotonously moving towards tolerance and treating people better is also extremely arrogant. The comments to this post demonstrates that with great clarity. Sean Connery isn't even cold and already people line up to piss on his grave.…

They climb and they fall, that’s how it’s always been and probably won’t change anytime soon. The Overton window is sliding a bit faster and characters who did questionable things get in the spotlight in their lifetime not a few centuries later. That is okay as long as it doesn’t degenerate into violence, but that is easier said than done

Re: Sean Connery has died

#197

Post by ljm »

approxim8ion wrote: post #178
ljm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> innocents Not people? I'd hate to be referred to as 'an innocent'. --- To address the main point, history is full of this. I mean, try quoting Mother Theresa and see what people will say then. We _could_ try to cleanse history of all memorable quotes written or spoken by people who have don't have a clean track record in morality (whatever that actually is at a certain point in time) but I don't think we'd be left…

About 'innocent', I'm not sure why I went for that choice of word. I think an earlier version of the comment in my head had "killed" instead of "starved" but that would include war casualties which are more ambiguous so the innocent thing. Either way, it was incoherent and you're right that "people" was a better choice of word. English isn't my native language but it's no excuse because I've been speaking and writing…

> it is relevant to acknowledge the portions of someone's legacy that aren't clean

For sure. I think this gets complicated, especially in the middle of heated discussions or on the internet, when this stuff is brought up ad-hominem. Or close enough. It's why I don't want to bring anger into this discussion and create another pro/anti divide, because we're all going to see it different ways.

I challenge anyone to come up with a person who was a squeaky clean legacy. I contend that it is impossible, because the goalposts for 'cleanliness' change as the times do.

Re: Sean Connery has died

#198

Post by timmytokyo »

psychometry wrote: post #25
joe_momma wrote: post #6

The guy defined what it meant to be classy, hip, and bad ass all at the same time. Mere mortals can barely do just a single one of those.

Classy... except for when he talked about physically assaulting women and how that's no big deal.

Video of Sean Connery justifying hitting women:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzXkbJwrN38

Re: Sean Connery has died

#199

Post by rob74 »

molticrystal wrote: post #84

I was first introduced to him as Indiana Jone's dad, and I loved him in the screenplay of the Hunt of the Red October. Will miss you Sean Connnery! They say imitation and parody are the sincerest forms of flattery, in his honor here is one of the many great SNL Celebrity Jeopardy skits with Darrell Hammond playing Sean Connery: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVpt3erH7ms

Yeah, Connery and Harrison Ford were really hilarious in that movie! And I have the impression Connery thoroughly enjoyed not having to play the action hero for once...

Re: Sean Connery has died

#200

Post by ljm »

fao_ wrote: post #179
ljm wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree with you on the thing about reform and community. I don't want to sound unfair but 'community' this way reminds me of how 'family' is often used as a blunt instrument too. You're powerless against the larger group (or the mob) and their expectations, which are ever changing. Reform is quite a strong word (with strong authoritarian connotations) and I do wonder what the reaction would be if the pr…

Again, I find it amusing that you went straight to an authoritarian, and particularly uncharitable answer, when it is clear what my comment means in context of my previous comment. You know, the one that you read and responded to. It's interesting that you went to that place when the TL;DR of my post is: Can you really become a better person if you haven't attempted to undo harm you caused? If you have changed, part…

I'm sorry, but your response is far more uncharitable as you're making the case that I didn't read it and need a summary that isn't really that close to what you actually said. I thought we were having a conversation.

I don't know who you're arguing with, but it's not with me or what I wrote.

But let's address it: let's say that someone raped another person. The rapist serves a prison sentence for his crime and he comes out of prison as a rehabilitated man. Are you saying he has to go to his victim to specifically make amends to them? And if he doesn't, he's still a rapist? That, in my opinion, is one of the most toxic parts of the 12 step process in the US, where you make your victims responsible for your penance by requiring them to accept your apology, which by its very nature involves bringing up that trauma _again_.

And what even does it mean to 'undo harm'? What's done is done, for better or worse.

Post reply on HN