Films that reflect America's essence...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
1,807
Location
Ca
Did you know that cannibalism is strictly prohibited and punishable by up to 14 years in prison in Idaho?
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
3,748
Location
Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: R80RS
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
We in the GWN are far away and of little consequence to Putin.
Seriously? Don't sell yourself short. Putin's quite interested in the entirety of the "GWN", and Canada and the Nordic nations of Europe know it.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
He'd be launching nukes your way far before he even considered lobbing something at beaver land.
If he launched them our way it would be of little consolation to you.
Certainly, I'm not saying it would be "good news, they nuked the states not us!" time up here, simply that we would not be the likely target of aggression IMHO. He's quite interested in the NWT and what that represents (and the soviets before him) but the rest of Canada, I doubt as much.
Yea He could roll in with what? A half dozen tanks or so and take the whole thing. Then they'd be butting right up against us and you guys would be put to work digging his ditches. Or you could join us as 3 or 4 states, send 6 or 8 senators to congress and more reps than any of our existing states and become the most influential voting block. Drive the thing and affect the future of the world rather than being that annoying mother in law providing input from the back seat. Convinced?
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
50,161
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: R80RS
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
We in the GWN are far away and of little consequence to Putin.
Seriously? Don't sell yourself short. Putin's quite interested in the entirety of the "GWN", and Canada and the Nordic nations of Europe know it.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
He'd be launching nukes your way far before he even considered lobbing something at beaver land.
If he launched them our way it would be of little consolation to you.
Certainly, I'm not saying it would be "good news, they nuked the states not us!" time up here, simply that we would not be the likely target of aggression IMHO. He's quite interested in the NWT and what that represents (and the soviets before him) but the rest of Canada, I doubt as much.
Yea He could roll in with what? A half dozen tanks or so and take the whole thing. Then they'd be butting right up against us and you guys would be put to work digging his ditches. Or you could join us as 3 or 4 states, send 6 or 8 senators to congress and more reps than any of our existing states and become the most influential voting block. Drive the thing and affect the future of the world rather than being that annoying mother in law providing input from the back seat. Convinced?
No. That's why we have coalitions and things like the UN. The same reason Austria is still Austria and not part of Germany. How many EU countries have little to next to no military might? Yet they continue to persist on their own. We have no desire to become a state. The last time that was forced was 1812 and it didn't go well then and wouldn't go well now. The very fact that we are having this conversation and you seem to be confused as to why Canadians wouldn't want to become a part of the US confirms the difference in thought process between our similar yet surprisingly different nations.
 
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
1,974
Location
Stamford, CT
Originally Posted By: Cujet
I was also going to suggest "Idiocracy" as the film that comes closest to depicting the current population in the USA. The United States is still chock-a-block full of capable individuals. It's just that they've been hammered-down a bit too much lately.
The capable ones are being overwhelmed with hordes of not only those whom are incapable, but also those that create more drag on the few left who are still worthwhile. The US is more and more like a third world country, and it is only getting worse.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
993
Location
Wisconsin USA
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Certainly, I'm not saying it would be "good news, they nuked the states not us!" time up here, simply that we would not be the likely target of aggression IMHO
I never meant to imply that. No one, least of all Canadians, would consider a nuke good news. My point was that the collateral effects of a nuclear attack on the U.S. would have unthinkable catastrophic effects up your way too.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
He's quite interested in the NWT and what that represents (and the soviets before him) but the rest of Canada, I doubt as much.
Russia has conflicting off-shore territorial claims with Canada and other nations. The NWT borders those claimed areas. Considering the NWT (a place I've been to by the way) is an integral part of Canada, how much of your country would you be willing to write off before "the rest of Canada" could breathe easy?
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
50,161
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: R80RS
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Certainly, I'm not saying it would be "good news, they nuked the states not us!" time up here, simply that we would not be the likely target of aggression IMHO
I never meant to imply that. No one, least of all Canadians, would consider a nuke good news. My point was that the collateral effects of a nuclear attack on the U.S. would have unthinkable catastrophic effects up your way too.
thumbsup
Originally Posted By: R80RS
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
He's quite interested in the NWT and what that represents (and the soviets before him) but the rest of Canada, I doubt as much.
Russia has conflicting off-shore territorial claims with Canada and other nations. The NWT borders those claimed areas. Considering the NWT (a place I've been to by the way) is an integral part of Canada, how much of your country would you be willing to write off before "the rest of Canada" could breathe easy?
We wouldn't be willing to write any of it off, I just doubt that this would become "significant" when compared to what a full-on war with the US would bring. We've had some interesting interactions with the ruskies quite recently in the arctic circle actually, them "testing the boundaries" so to speak, something they've done on and off but recently more aggressively. I believe this has to do with our PM's stance on the Ukraine situation and things that he said regarding Putin and his actions. Anyways, I can only see hostility targeting Canada in respect to them trying to secure territory to get closer to their targets south of the border, in which case they'd be getting your attention anyways due to our existing relationship and position in the UN. Canada's significance is more the strategical positioning rather than a target of aggression IMHO, which was all I was trying to say.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
9,780
Location
Saskatoon canada
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: Koz1
[ LOL!!!! You clearly dont Understand the Name of your Country.
Glad you do as it won't be long before we make you state 51.
Highly doubtful, that sounds like some of the unfortunately typical threatening/chest thumping that has resulted in Canadians being liked far more all over the world than Americans. Mexico would be closer to becoming the 51st state than Canada ever would. Heck, they even speak your second official language wink
Yep. I remember there was a guy selling "canada kits" that was all the rage for travelling Americans. You get a hat with a Canadian flag,and a shirt with a Canadian flag. The basic premise is that in order to insure the safety of the American traveller they had to pretend to be Canadian. American pride only exists in America. The rest of the world isn't let's say fond of America and her politics. Once you wade thru the mire and see past this nonsense that terrorists are to fear and you realize that without terrorists who would America fight. It's like the war on drugs. All that money fighting drugs yet there's more now than ever. Without drugs the agency and all those dollars wouldn't be spent. Kinda like the war on terror. They need each other to exist. It's a fact the state has funded these now terrorist organizations like al quaeda. Weren't they terrorists then too. Without an enemy there's nothing to fear. Without fear people think different With different thinking comes change.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,504
Location
Delaware
Do people who live in N or S America non USA countries ever in their day to day life call themselves Americans? I doubt it but would be interested to hear examples.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
993
Location
Wisconsin USA
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Yep. I remember there was a guy selling "canada kits" that was all the rage for travelling Americans.
Nope. There may have been "a guy" selling something like that but it was never "the rage" for anyone to buy it. I've been all over the world over four decades and never had any problem anywhere representing myself as anything other than what I am.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
American pride only exists in America.
Well, yeah, why would it be any different? Do you think "Canadian pride" exists in, say, Denmark, or "Chinese pride" is rampant in Brazil? The rest of it is not worth a response.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,728
Location
SE PA
Found this. Saved much typing. Logically, it makes perfect sense to use "America" and "Americans" for this country. The name of the country is "United States of America". Why would it be strange to shorten this? It is common to shorten the official name of a country — most people don't even know the official names for the various countries. For example, the official name of Mexico is "los Estados Unidos Mexicanos", which means "the Mexican United States"; nobody is surprised that it is referred to as "Mexico". People would be surprised if you called them the "EUM". (Also, this example shows that even "United States" is not a unique term to one country.) Australia is officially known as "the Commonwealth of Australia", but we are happy to simply call them "Australians", even though it is also the name of a continent. Depending on how you do your geography, the Australian continent also contains other countries aside from the "COA". Lastly, there is no single continent called "America". There is one called "North America" and another called "South America", which are sometimes collectively referred to as "the Americas".
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
13,485
Location
Middlesex County CT
Quote:
Mexico would be closer to becoming the 51st state than Canada ever would. Heck, they even speak your second official language
Difference is, our second language speaking residents are trying to get to our country whereas yours are trying to leave.... j/k.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
1,981
Location
Greatest Earth on Show, UT
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
OK, but China is part of a continent called Asia, not China. You are part of a continent called North America, which is one of the Americas, not quite the same thing. People from Asia are Asian, people from the Americas are American. Subsequently Canadians and Mexicans are "American". The same goes for Europe and things/people being "European". China has always been China. Canada was upper/lower Canada before it was the entire landmass we are now. Confederation joined the provinces together as a country. Canada is the name of the country, not the continent. The confusion with the USA is that the continent the country occupies is of the Americas and unless it went by "America" as a country before the states were united, it is likely a continental reference. An interesting topic though.
Applying that logic, people from the Americas are either North Americans or South Americans, just as people from Europe are Europeans and those from Asia are Asians and they are not collectively referred to as Eurasian, even though the supercontinent is sometimes referred to as Eurasia. And China has always been China despite it not always being united under one government. "China" could refer to a greater landmass in which various governments have existed. If the PRC changed its name tomorrow to something without a reference to China, people would not be chastised for continuing to call The Great Wall (it's official name) by its common name The Great Wall of China. If you, as a Canadian, traveled to Romania (for whatever reason), would you ever refer to yourself as American? And if you did, would the common understanding of the Romanians with whom you are conversing be that you are from the country of the United States of America or are from one of the two American continents? And as far as
Quote:
The confusion with the USA is that the continent the country occupies is of the Americas and unless it went by "America" as a country before the states were united, it is likely a continental reference.
, I do not follow your logic. Wouldn't the name of the country then be "United States of North America" or "United States of the Americas"? The US founding fathers referred to the young nation as simply "America", which seems to invalidate the continental reference theory. But you are right about it being an interesting topic, especially when dealing with the "New World", as country-of-origin nomenclature was probably as much a cultural identifier as a national identifier as recently as a few centuries ago.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
7,161
Location
Atlanta,GA
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
IDIOCRACY A closing piece might be Eisenhower's farewell address warning us about the MIC. Not a movie but very real and very relevant.
The question was about movies...never miss a chance, do ya.
IDIOCRACY is a movie.
 
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
3,120
Location
Tennessee
It's a Wonderful Life, Music Man, Gone with the Wind, Grapes of Wrath, Star Wars, so many others. American movies are like America itself, great and varied, representing the scope of humanity, like it was meant to be from the start. Twelve Years a Slave is really good as is Avatar and Dancing with Wolves I think, but only for the less easily offended by other views, even just movies about other views.
 
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
3,748
Location
Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Convinced?
Originally Posted By: overkill
No.
Good. I wasn't really authorized to make that deal anyway. I actually think there would be massive push back here from the southern states to ever bring you guys in. [censored] they think Mass and NY are communist countries.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
19,559
Location
NH
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
[censored] they think Mass and NY are communist countries.
They aren't?
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
50,161
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
If you, as a Canadian, traveled to Romania (for whatever reason), would you ever refer to yourself as American? And if you did, would the common understanding of the Romanians with whom you are conversing be that you are from the country of the United States of America or are from one of the two American continents?
I might refer to myself as North American, but probably Canadian, just like most people from Europe MIGHT note that they are "European" but would probably denote their country of origin and subsequently identify themselves as French or German...etc.
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
And as far as
Quote:
The confusion with the USA is that the continent the country occupies is of the Americas and unless it went by "America" as a country before the states were united, it is likely a continental reference.
, I do not follow your logic. Wouldn't the name of the country then be "United States of North America" or "United States of the Americas"? The US founding fathers referred to the young nation as simply "America", which seems to invalidate the continental reference theory.
Were North and South American defined at that point? Or was this whole landmass just referenced as the Americas or America then? It seems redundant to name a country after a continent, particularly when the continent being referenced is a subset of a larger group of continents that are collectively referenced by almost the same name shrug But that brings us to your next point:
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
But you are right about it being an interesting topic, especially when dealing with the "New World", as country-of-origin nomenclature was probably as much a cultural identifier as a national identifier as recently as a few centuries ago.
I think that, along with primitive geography and perhaps conflicts on how things were defined may be at play here. I mean the name Canada is actually either a misspelling of the Mohawk word for "village" (Kanata) or the Iroquois spelling for the same thing. We have a "Canadian Heritage Moment" skit on it where the guy translating between the tribe and the Europeans is adamant that it references the entire landmass whilst it actually was in reference to the village the man leading them was pointing to grin
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
1,981
Location
Greatest Earth on Show, UT
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Were North and South American defined at that point? Or was this whole landmass just referenced as the Americas or America then? It seems redundant to name a country after a continent, particularly when the continent being referenced is a subset of a larger group of continents that are collectively referenced by almost the same name shrug
Well, I found the following reference in a Wikipedia article (I am citing the reference, not Wikipedia):
Quote:
"America." The Oxford Companion to the English Language (ISBN 0-19-214183-X). McArthur, Tom, ed., 1992. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 33: "[16c: from the feminine of Americus, the Latinized first name of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci (1454–1512). The name America first appeared on a map in 1507 by the German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller, referring to the area now called Brazil]. Since the 16c, a name of the western hemisphere, often in the plural Americas and more or less synonymous with the New World. Since the 18c, a name of the United States of America. The second sense is now primary in English: ... However, the term is open to uncertainties: ..."
The italicized section (I added that emphasis) implies, as I have posited, that the term "America" is currently presumed to refer to the USA unless the context indicates otherwise and the word "Americas" is typically used when referring to the New World. And by extension, referring to someone as "American" implies that they are a citizen or resident of the USA. And the last sentance is where our discussion comes in. And in support of my reference to the American founding fathers (see what I did there?) referring to the USA simply as "America" I offer the following quote from George Washington, our first constitutional president:
Originally Posted By: George Washington
I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.
I'm pretty sure that's a reference to the United States of America, not the continent. And I doubt that the reference was an example of American hubris as although George was probably proud to be an American, the country of America made up a miniscule part of the Americas, pretty much wanted to be left alone at that point, and did not view itself as Britain's or any other nation's superior.
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
1,981
Location
Greatest Earth on Show, UT
And to put this off-topic discussion into perspective, let's go back to where it all started:
Originally Posted By: Koz1
Brazilians are American, its nice to know your inclusive of all the Western Hemisphere. But then those movies only represent the USA.
Koz1's passive-aggressive disagreement with the OP's use of the word "America" to refer only to the USA would have been more appropriate, based on the common vernacular of the English speaking world, if the title of the thread had been "Films that reflect the Americas' essence..." And why are we not up in arms about referring to Australia as Australia when Australia refers to a continent (including the land masses currently occupied by the nations of Papua New Guinea, East Timor, and parts of Indonesia) as well as the country of the Commonwealth of Australia? Is the name of the nation of Australia actually "Commonwealth" and "Australia" is simply the identifier of its continental location?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top