Alien and Star Wars of course.

Me too. The worst I’ve seen from him is average/meh, never shit. I liked the much maligned “Ghosts of Mars”, a kick ass action movie with a twist on his usual anti-conformist work; now a couple of polar opposite archetypes must act together.

I hated ghost of mars and prince of darkness.

I saw that movie when it came out, and it did not gratify my intellectual curiosity.

> Anything that "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" is on-topic on HN :)

Yeah — sure. But I’m with the parent comment to which you replied. Sometimes I’m not sure if I’m just coming across one of todays “lucky 10,000” [0] or if there’s another reason why something old has resurfaced and, if it’s the latter, it’d be nice to know the context.

[0] https://xkcd.com/1053/

Y’know, I see these random Wikipedia articles come up every day or so on the front page and wonder what is going on.

I thought they were organic at first but then I got skeptical and wondered if it was some vestige of the early days of HN where it was automatically injecting a random article to bolster content.

The other thing I thought could be happening was that there is an article on the front page in a particular topic, someone reads it finds a novel topic and then thinks to themself: “I know! I can post a Wikipedia article on that topic and farm some karma”.

Who knows.

I've posted this and nothing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40106956

I mean assuming the articles are well chosen that seems like a public service

Dumb question. What advantage is there to having hn karma?

Roddy Piper has passed. Apparently, many professional wrestlers die early.

How would you argue they're inverse?

I have to roll my eyes at someone who thinks critieking a 30 year old movie is somehow 'spoiling' it.

The Arrival[0] (not Arrival) was like that.

[0] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115571/

Haha, it should be! If it is, "Landscape with Invisible Hand" is certainly one of the genre's best!

No, like every other category it's made up.

Another of my favourites in this category is Save the Green Planet!, though it's not as family friendly as Carpenter's take on it.

Not sure what you mean. Could you name the capitalists to whom that revenue was so important?

Yes, Carpenter made it to be about yuppies and unrestrained capitalism in 1988, however, art from the viewer's perspective 36 years later, can mean something different for that viewer or any other. Personally, I don't see the neo-Nazi and Jewish control of the world angle, but the way the media has sold the Palestine-Israel conflict, the passing of the redundant, free-speech-limiting, Antisemitism bill recently, and with thousands of Jews in the US and Israel protesting for a cease fire, and the thousands of police unleased on US college campus protestors, it can have a different interpretation. In 1985 Columbia students occupied the same hall for 3 weeks, and it led to Columbia's divestment from South Africa's apartheid regime, but most Americans under 35 or so, don't have historical depth. They sway in the wind of the media's hot air. For me, putting the glasses on or being red pilled, today makes the film applicable to a host of viewpoints, and not the cliche yuppy / capitalist trope even if that was sincerely John Carpenter's intention as an auteur. Sure, the acting is bad, and the late 80s coloring makes it seem a dinosaur to today's high-tech, SFX, CGI-addicted, chop-editing audience. I guess I am old. I love it. I also loved watching Wood Allen's 1973 film "Sleeper" for about the 7th time last month.

To be fair, when asked he had to say that. Many people think it's obviously about Jews, seeing as how the 'aliens' are in control mainly of banks and the media.

Had he answered any other way, his career would have been over and he might have been killed.

I said it reminds me personally.