CTs and Mental Illness

[Cleon]

I wonder how much mental illness has to do with CTists.

As some know, I have been involved in the anti-war movement here in Atlanta. There's a guy, whose name I can't recall, who occasionally shows up at events handing out pamphlets about the Royal Normans. This guy is convinced that virtually every powerful person on the planet is descended from some feudal family called the "Royal Normans" who pull the strings in our daily lives. George Bush, Bill Gates, Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro--according to him, they're all part of the conspiracy. The Illuminati, Knights Templar, the Masons (of course), are all part of the Royal Norman conspiracy.

Now, you talk to this guy for a few minutes, and you get the distinct impression he is seriously ill. (He occasionally admits that he doesn't work, but lives on disability for mental illness.)

So I wonder how many of the CTers suffer from paranoid schizophrenia or other illnesses. Delusions are a large component of schizophrenia symptoms, and a lot of CTs certainly fall into the category of "delusions."

The reasons people buy into CTs are many, I'm sure, and I know very well you can't chalk it all up to mental illness. (Say what you will about Killtown, but there's no evidence that he's ill.) But I imagine there's also considerable overlap there.

[twinstead]

I think the more unstable mentally one is, the more one tends to start connecting otherwise disparate conspiracy theories (like the person you mentioned).

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I think there are several categories:
* mentally ill: ex. Christophera, Sir Knight
* stupid: geggy
* malicious: killtown
* uninformed: ? (I know they're out there, but prolly not real vocal)

[defaultdotxbe]

add nesnyc to the mantal illness list

when he said the WTC was built with explosives right in the concrete for its planned destruction 35 years in the future my first though was "what amount of childhood trauma is needed to cause someone to fabricate the fantasy world he currently inhabits"

[Dog Town]

That chic, Temp has a whole team of psychiatrists if she has one. Mental ill, and need of attention issues!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I have a family member with schizophrenia. As well as quite a few hours of volunteer work with the mentally ill. I don't have any formal training in the field, so these are simply a laymans observations.

It's my experience that actual schizophrenic delusions are more random and nonsensical. For example, I knew one victim of the disease who claimed to be a fighter pilot with the indian air force and a former viet cong. He would routinely inform us every day how many enemy aircraft he had shot down the night before. Why india and vietnam? Who knows? It lacked rhyme or reason. He wasn't even of asian descent.

I knew another victim who claimed he was the angel Gabriel and he would spew the strangest gibberish with absolutely no sense and logic to it.

The 9-11 CTs may be absurd on thier face, but they posess an internally consistent logic to them. There is an A to B to C progression to them that is founded on a kind of evidence, albiet that wich is a gross misinterpretation of the evidence. They don't have the random "out of left field" quality of actual schizophrenic hallucinations.

The CTer worldview strikes me as one clouded by emotional desire and ignorance but not madness.

This doesn't rule out the prescence of mentally ill people in the "truth" movment. I just don't see them as the driving force or even a significant minority among the truthers.

[Dog Town]

I knew another victim who claimed he was the angel Gabriel and he would spew the strangest gibberish with absolutely no sense and logic to it.

Sounds like the bible to me!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

add nesnyc to the mantal illness list

when he said the WTC was built with explosives right in the concrete for its planned destruction 35 years in the future my first though was "what amount of childhood trauma is needed to cause someone to fabricate the fantasy world he currently inhabits"

I don't think Nesnyc is mentally ill. I think he's like a Fred Phelps type personality. Blinded by a raging hatred. An extreme character flaw, not an actual psychosis. Basically a negative attention junkie from hell.

I would put him and Killtown in both the "stupid" and "malicious" categories that Arkan described.

[ghost707]

I think some of the of the CT people entered into the conspiracy thought process knowing full well that the conspiracy is false. Their primary goal is to make money any way they can by duping the less intelligent. The same way some people scam old folks with various schemes to relieve them of their pension checks.

[T.A.M.]

SOT:

Great comments, and very astute observations.

I do have extensive training and experience with patients that suffer from mental illness.

My observations on most CTers are as follows:

1. Very few, if any are likely to be Schizophrenic. It is hard to deduce whether they have any actual visual or audio hallucinations, without personally interviewing them directly. Very few exhibit Tangental thought or "word Salad" often seen in the acute schizophrenic.

2. I think possibly a few of them could be Bipolar, with Paranoid symptoms. I haven't seen enough evidence to label any particular CTer this way, although NESNYC comes close.

3. I think the biggest form of mental illness that is rampant in that movement are the "Personality Disorders". In particular, we see "Passive Agressive" and "Borderline" Personality traits in many of those we encounter. A couple of them might even fit into the Sociopath/Psychopath catagories.

4. I also think that Depression probably pops up more often in that group, than in the general populus.

5. In general, most are just caught up in the "importance" of the "movement" and a sense of "belonging" to something that is "Rebelling" against the status quo. It is the perfect recruiting structure for alot of 20 something single men without good social networks or supports.

My Expert Opinion.

[Loss Leader]

I'd have to agree with T.A.M. and SoT. Schizophrenia and psychosis are rarely if ever focussed enough to create the 9/11 conspiracy theories. "Disordered" or "loose" thinking is one of the hallmarks of those illnesses. Borderline Personality Disorder and just plain neurosis is more than enough to explain the observed behavior of most CTers.

But we should not ignore the fact that the psychological phenomena that make conspiracies attractive are well-known and well-distributed throughout "normal" individuals. The desire for big effects to have big causes is so strong, people will "remember" having observed causes when it is known they only observed effects. The overestimation of one's own importance in the world is the reason why CTers think they have some special insight that they have to get out to the public; but it's also the reason why people bother to vote.

We don't need abnormal psychology to explain most of this. Plain old psychology will do.

[defaultdotxbe]

i feel alot of the CTers dont suffer from "full blown" schitzophrenia, but perhaps they are just imbalanced enough for it to cause problems, while remaining undiagnosed

[sat556]

Borderline Personality Disorder and just plain neurosis is more than enough to explain the observed behavior of most CTers.


I know somebody who has Borderline Personality Disorder. I hadn't thought about it before you mention this, but a certain poster on here seems to dsiplay very similar traits to my friend. It's always the same few subjects that set him off, never just somethign random, although something that appears random to me he will link to his main topics. That whole connecting the dots thing fits in well.

[T.A.M.]

Histrionic is another one of the PDs that fits in with alot of those in the CT community.

[Pardalis]

I think there are several categories:
* mentally ill: ex. Christophera, Sir Knight
* stupid: geggy
* malicious: killtown
* uninformed: ? (I know they're out there, but prolly not real vocal)

Don't forget:

* cute: Childlike Empress

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Don't forget:

* cute: Childlike Empress

*shrug* I'd put CE in with geggy myself.

[Pardalis]

Don't CTs attract alot of chicks?

[Dog Town]

uninformed: ? (I know they're out there, but prolly not real vocal)

Yes, they exist under the watchful eye of their denmother, JDX at LC!

[Pardalis]

I think the "uninformed" Cters are the most common. They are just regular people with a justifiable but misdirected grudge against the Bush administration. They are so angry at them that they can't think it through critically.

[defaultdotxbe]

I think the "uninformed" Cters are the most common. They are just regular people with an justifiable but misdirected grudge against the Bush administration. They are so angry at them that they can't think it through critically.

i think most of them will lose interest in 2008, leaving only the "core" of super devotees

[Big Les]

Agreed T.A.M. - I'm no expert, but I have dated a borderliner and my maternal family has a history of full-blown mental illness, and your average...enthusiastic CT seems to me more on the personality disorder side.

[chipmunk stew]

I think there are several categories:
* mentally ill: ex. Christophera, Sir Knight
* stupid: geggy
* malicious: killtown
* uninformed: ? (I know they're out there, but prolly not real vocal)
I think the "uninformed" Cters are the most common. They are just regular people with a justifiable but misdirected grudge against the Bush administration. They are so angry at them that they can't think it through critically.
* blinded by agenda: Brumsen?

[T.A.M.]

I agree Pardalis, provided, which I think likely, that the Democrats win. If Republicans win again, it will remain the same loony bin, unless Condaleeza Rice is President, then maybe things will settle down, even with REPS in power...

[Dog Town]

I agree Pardalis, provided, which I think likely, that the Democrats win. If Republicans win again, it will remain the same loony bin, unless Condaleeza Rice is President, then maybe things will settle down, even with REPS in power...

Yet they will still be under the power of the illuminati! Hmmm!
I'm thinken by then most of the current crop will realise how silly they have been! Then go over to the UFO crowd! It does poll better. IMHO.

[Loss Leader]

I think the "uninformed" Cters are the most common.

Please. Do you know how many people I encounter who still think that 9/11 was caused by Saddam Hussein? My secretary refuses to believe that no Iraqis were among the terrorists. Lack of information coupled with undeserved trust in the government is just as dangerous as lack of information coupled with undeserved suspicion of the government.

[T.A.M.]

You are absolutely right, which is why it is important for those who post here, and on Debunking sites, to make sure the information, and its presentation, is paramount, and opinions and debate, second...

[Brainache]

i think most of them will lose interest in 2008, leaving only the "core" of super devotees


At the rate people are getting banned over at LC I doubt they will last another six months. They banned Killtown because he dared to ask questions.
I don't know if it is mental illness, but it sure looks like Fascism.
Dissent will not be tolerated!!
How they have the hide to call the gov. Fascist is beyond me.

[Belz...]

Don't forget:

* cute: Childlike Empress

Not sure her avatar was representative of the person.

If it IS, then I'll have a vested interest in turning her to the side of light and truth!!

[Shaun from Scotland]

Looking through a lot of the threads on here I would say there is a lot of "look at me I'm special, I know something you don't, I know whats REALLY going on" types amongst the CTers. It's like people who think they are psychic. The corpse at every funeral and the bride at every wedding.

Some are just loopy-loo though......

[Pardalis]

Not sure her avatar was representative of the person.


You mean... You're not the devil? :eek:

[Pardalis]

Please. Do you know how many people I encounter who still think that 9/11 was caused by Saddam Hussein? My secretary refuses to believe that no Iraqis were among the terrorists. Lack of information coupled with undeserved trust in the government is just as dangerous as lack of information coupled with undeserved suspicion of the government.

Yeah, but those people don't rally and post BS all over the web.

But you're right, people like you described tend to blindly support politics they know nothing about, and without understanding the real implications.

[gumboot]

Great comments, and very astute observations.

I do have extensive training and experience with patients that suffer from mental illness.

My observations on most CTers are as follows:


Interesting post TAM. Just wondering, do you think some of the more extreme cases could possibly be suffering from schizotypal personality disorder?

-Andrew

[T.A.M.]

Gumboot;

That is a very astute observation actually. Schizotypal PD is relatively new, in terms of acceptance in the mainstream of medicine, but since then we have come to believeit is one of the more common PDs.

You can look up the exact DSM IV Criteria, yourself, I am sure, but in general, a Schizotypal PD patient would fit the following example:

J.D. is a 25 y man who presents to you, with his mother. Through her history, for he gives very little, she reveals that J.D. hasn't been able to hold down a job for very long. He constantly buries himself in his computer activities which tend to consist of online Role Playing Games, and Web sites on the Fantastical and Paranormal.

Now all that in itself, does not seem that abnormal, but J.D. seems to have become obsessed with this, claiming that witches really, did exist, and still do today. As well, he claims that since he has been online, and looking into the actions of the government, strange things have been happening around him, and he now feels the CIA and FBI are "hot on his tail".

Even more odd, is J.D.'s appearance. He is dressed in all black, including black gloves, and he holds a black beanie in his hands...


Now that is just an example, and one would have to get more history, to confirm he meets the DSM IV Criteria, before diagnosing this guy, but he is not far off one particular case I encountered, about 2 years ago...

[Loss Leader]

:

J.D. is a 25 y man who presents to you, with his mother.


As J.D. are my actual initials, I take great insult in your case study. There are 26 letters in the alphabet, meaning that you would have just a 1 in 676 chance of choosing my initials. This is so low as to be negligible, meaning that you must have chosen those letters to refer to me.

Furthermore, I will have you know that I have never been conclusively diagnosed as mentally ill by an American-trained doctor.

[brumsen]

* blinded by agenda: Brumsen?
Explain yourself.
Also, I'd be really interested as to why I should be classified as a CT'er. On the basis of which posts, for example?

[Twilek]

I think it's possible to have schizophrenia and then pick up CT's in the process of trying to understand the world through paranoid eyes, especially if the person spends a lot of time twiddling a mouse on the internet.

My sister's delusion incorporates a variety of CT topics such as a shadowy all-controlling government, chemtrails, mind control and weather control, all woven together to explain her hallucinations.

In the process, she has created her own quite sophisticated "Evil Government Performing High-Tech Medical Experiments On Us Against Our Will via Remote Sensing/Radiowave Technology" CT that is damn near impossible to reason with, because a lot of her "evidence" is real and factual information. She just interprets it in a completely upside-down and paranoid manner.

[T.A.M.]

Loss Leader;

your lack of smilies has me worried...you were joking right. I had no idea what your initials were...

And us Canuck MDs are just as good eh.:)

[Loss Leader]

Loss Leader;

your lack of smilies has me worried...you were joking right. I had no idea what your initials were...

And us Canuck MDs are just as good eh.:)

I guess I'm not established enough around here for people to know my sense of humor. I just liked the idea of arguing that 1 in 676 is exactly the same as zero. I will use emoticons from now on. Unless you really were talking about me in which case, it's on, buddy. Oh, it's on. :)

[chipmunk stew]

Explain yourself.
Also, I'd be really interested as to why I should be classified as a CT'er. On the basis of which posts, for example?
Sorry. Didn't see this here before.

Based on your posts expressing suspicion about the omission of a detailed analysis of NIST's rejection of the explosives hypothesis, starting about here
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1818776#post1818776
I get the distinct impression that you're actively seeking information that would validate an Inside Job theory.

Since you seem rational and skeptical for the most part, I suspect that you dislike and distrust the Bush adminstration to the degree that you regard anything remotely connected to it with suspicion, clouding your judgment.

It's only a suspicion, though--I recognize that I could be wrong, thus the question mark.

[Darth Rotor]

I wonder how much mental illness has to do with CTists.

Gordon the Aggie needs only emotion, or hatred, to play that game. This thread's premise smacks of "attack the arguer, not his argument."

"You must be crazy to be in disagreement with me" or "you must be mentally ill to hold that opinion." Leave it at misinformed, or wilfully misinformed due to a strong emotional motivation (hatred or envy) and leave it at that.

"Mentally Ill" is a slur, just as "Kike", "Nazi", "Flaming Liberal" "Cracker" or "Anti Semite" is a slur, a label, and a deliberate attempt to paint the person you disagree with as something inferior to you.

So, what is your motivation for demonizing your opponents in this matter? Is it emotional? By the way, mea cupla, I have done this sort of thing any number of times myself, both here and on other forums.

To see where I am coming from, try reading some of kurios_kathy's posts in the Bumper Sticker thread over in the Religion forum. She fumes with frustration that some folks don't "get" why she believes in God.

Your frustration with the CT crowd is manifesting in a similar fashion.

A person can be wrong without being crazy.

*Brushes shoulder repeatedly*

"Get 'em offa me!" :eek:

DR

[Cleon]

Sorry, didn't mean to post the OP and just leave it. I'm not a mental health professional, and not particularly qualified to diagnose mental illness, so I'm really just interested in reading people's thoughts on the matter.

[Cleon]

"Mentally Ill" is a slur, just as "Kike", "Nazi", "Flaming Liberal" "Cracker" or "Anti Semite" is a slur, a label, and a deliberate attempt to paint the person you disagree with as something inferior to you.

So, what is your motivation for demonizing your opponents in this matter? Is it emotional? By the way, mea cupla, I have done this sort of thing any number of times myself, both here and on other forums.

Sorry, it wasn't my intent to paint all CTers as mentally ill or "inferior." Not at all. And I really am uncomfortable with the way some posters began trying to "diagnose" certain CTers right off the bat.

But some of the CTs out there are simply beyond any element of rational thinking, and given my interaction with the gentleman I mentioned, I wonder if certain mental illnesses might make one more willing to accept CTs, or if it might play a role in some of the CTs people come up with that border on the fantastic.

[T.A.M.]

The term "Mentally Ill" is not a slur, as it refers to a medical condition. It is like saying "your a diabetic" and someone taking it as a slur. Now it is certainly a little more toxic, in terms of its connotation, but to call it a slur is incorrect IMO.

I would agree that these days alot of people misuse the term in a way as to put down someone, such as...

"...why don't you just go screw your self ya mentally ill moron." In this context it is slanderous, and perhaps a slur.

[T.A.M.]

Darth;

I think it is a legitimate question to wonder if CTers suffer from mental illness. From my encounters with them, limited as they may be from internet chat and postings, i see a much higher degree of paranoia then one finds in the average population. That coupled with an unusual amount of refusal to listen to reason or logic, does make me seriously consider if there is an abnormally high level of mental illness in that group of individuals, in particular, in terms of Personality Disorders, as we were discussing earlier.

Certain, to flippantly throw the words at a CTer "you're mentally ill" is in por taste, and perhaps even slanderous, but I think the possibility is seriously there.

[sat556]

Studies have been done on people with strong beliefs before now, I don't see why the CT crowd can't be looked at in the same way. It's not necessarily an 'illness', but I didn't take the OP really to just mean that, I took it as meaning a different set of mental processes to 'the rest of us', lol. And when I say that, it is not as slur in any way. I think I mentioned one of my friends is Borderline, and I have had some issues myself that are yet to be resolved. I'm not one for slurring, unless drunk :boggled:

[Darth Rotor]

Darth;

I think it is a legitimate question to wonder if CTers suffer from mental illness. From my encounters with them, limited as they may be from internet chat and postings, i see a much higher degree of paranoia then one finds in the average population. That coupled with an unusual amount of refusal to listen to reason or logic, does make me seriously consider if there is an abnormally high level of mental illness in that group of individuals, in particular, in terms of Personality Disorders, as we were discussing earlier.

Certain, to flippantly throw the words at a CTer "you're mentally ill" is in por taste, and perhaps even slanderous, but I think the possibility is seriously there.
TAM

In my opinion, it is extraodinarily bad tactics to go down that road, given the well made points in response to me regarding the comon misuse of label "mentally ill" when spray painted on another: that is the connotation and usage of the term I was referring to in the first place.

Why get down into the mud to wrestle with the pig?

You aren't going to be able to cure anyone of mental illness over the internet, and while pursuing this line of attack on the CT crowd, one is wasting one's time where a more objective, and hard-to-misattribute-as-malice dismemberment of the CT'ers points and assumptions completely avoids any accusation of you, the skeptic, not being fair handed and holding a modestly defensible "moral high ground," or at least an integrity of position.

Or is this an exercise in pre emption, the aim of writing off as crazy those whom you disagree with on this point?

Off the high horses, gents, it does not become you as rational and objective critics of their position, which tends to have sufficient flaws that insanity need not enter the discussion.

DR

[sat556]

How about this?

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2589

Shows how the topic is relevant. From there:

People with high levels of dopamine are more likely to find significance in coincidences, and pick out meaning and patterns where there are none.

It's only because you are seeing this as an attack on CTs that you find it wrong. Maybe if the topic was in the science and medicine section?

[T.A.M.]

Darth:

Personally, in the context of this current thread, I was giving my expert opinion, based, as I have alluded to, on very limited data, as to what, if any, mental illness might be found within the CT group.

It is not my point, or purpose, to use this against anyone, but merely to point out that there does seem to me, on first and brief analysis, to be a greater incidence of paranoia in the group. I have also noted that in general, people with antisocial and schizotypal (thanks to gumboot for triggering my brain on that one) Personality Disorders seem to be attracted to Conspiracy Theories, The Fantastic, and the paranormal.

I certainly would not label the entire group. I would not even "label" an individual, unless I conducted a personal interview with that person. You are right that to label any individual CTer as Mentally ill without an experts confirmation, is slanderous.

I hope this clears up where I am coming from...

TAM

[Darth Rotor]

Darth:

I hope this clears up where I am coming from...

TAM
Indeed, and thanks. Since Cleon opened this can of woarms, I should have ensured I was directing my remarks, and reservations regarding this tactic, toward him. The reason I was a bit more general in my remarks, or at least intended to be, was to make a stand for "don't devolve into sneering at the CT in any debate." Such an approach weakens a stronger position taken simply on the merits of any point in discussion.

So, in a general sense, it doesn't matter if a CT'er has a personality disorder or not. Being wrong, and using garbage to back up his/her position is sufficient ammunition to discredit it, and to let the audience arrive at their own conclusions regarding mental capacity, or lack thereof. :D

DR

[jskowron]

I've worked with 100's of severely mentally ill individuals, including paranoid schizophrenics. I don't recall any conspiracy theorists in the group. I've actually encountered more woo coming from fellow therapists and trainees than from the patients!

[T.A.M.]

I've worked with 100's of severely mentally ill individuals, including paranoid schizophrenics. I don't recall any conspiracy theorists in the group. I've actually encountered more woo coming from fellow therapists and trainees than from the patients!

I too have worked with hundreds of mentally ill, and do so daily (not hundreds daily, but I see about 3-4 everyday who fit the term "mentally ill").

(1) CT movement wrt 9/11 truth is still a very small movement.
(2) As I have said before, the chances of any true "Schizophrenics" being amongst the movement is slim, simply because true Schizophrenia would not allow enough focused, trained thought for most if not all Schizophrenics to actually follow the ideas and support them.
(3) I think the conclusion, at least from my pov, is that if there is any surplus of mental illness in the CT group, it would be in the form of Personality Disorders, in particular Borderline, Antisocial, and Schizotypcal.

It does not surprise me that you see more Woo coming from the therapists etc... they have the "focused" train of thought to actually forumulate strong opinions and then support or propagate them...as do most of the non-schizophrenic population.

Of course, a well treated Schizophrenic, would be able to do so, if remaining on their meds long enough...which is always an issue.

[gumboot]

(2) As I have said before, the chances of any true "Schizophrenics" being amongst the movement is slim, simply because true Schizophrenia would not allow enough focused, trained thought for most if not all Schizophrenics to actually follow the ideas and support them.


Can it vary? When my father was CO for all new recruits into the RNZAF he had two incidents of schizophrenia. One of them had created a rather elaborate yet internally sound story. Basically, he was a spy for the Russians. He stole some "secret" information from the base (it wasn't secret, but it was sensitive), along with some other stuff, and headed out into the Marlborough Sounds to rendezvous with a Russian submarine. When the Russian sub didn't turn up he did what any good soldier would do and executed an escape and evasion plan.

He was in full combat gear with face paint and everything. Bear in mind airforce recruits are not issued any of this stuff. He was eventually picked up by the local police after someone spotted him.

Like any good captured spy, he refused to give any information, and once put in a cell he killed himself.

The point of this over-long story is, it appears, from my own limited understanding of the case, that his actions were totally logical given his version of reality.

-Andrew

[T.A.M.]

Hallucinations are only one element of Schizophrenia. You are right, that there is variation, which is why I said "most". In my clinical experience, I can't remember ever coming across an "unmedicated" Schizophrenic who was able to function completely normally. There are such cases, but they are far from the norm.

They do spend time not in complete psychosis of course, and in these times it tends to be the "paranoia" that predominates.

Let me restate, that I have never encountered a CTer whose train of thought and actions is in keeping with a Schizophrenic.

[jskowron]

I concur with T.A.M. The CTers I have encounterd did not appear to be schizophrenic. I also have not encountered any schizophrenics who have been able to function for very long without medication. It is, IMO, the most evil and destructive of all mental illnesses. It may develop in individuals with no history of mental illness, and can be quite insidious. It destroys the lives of the individuals it effect, and can take families a friends with it.

CTers share some of the characteristic, such as thought that they possess secret information and are at risk of persecution. However, schizophrenia is a very isolating illness. In contrast to CTers, schizophrenics are usually alone in their delusions/hallucinations. Shared delusions (aka folie a deux) is extremely rare.

[Dave1001]

I wonder how much mental illness has to do with CTists.

As some know, I have been involved in the anti-war movement here in Atlanta. There's a guy, whose name I can't recall, who occasionally shows up at events handing out pamphlets about the Royal Normans. This guy is convinced that virtually every powerful person on the planet is descended from some feudal family called the "Royal Normans" who pull the strings in our daily lives. George Bush, Bill Gates, Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro--according to him, they're all part of the conspiracy. The Illuminati, Knights Templar, the Masons (of course), are all part of the Royal Norman conspiracy.

Now, you talk to this guy for a few minutes, and you get the distinct impression he is seriously ill. (He occasionally admits that he doesn't work, but lives on disability for mental illness.)

So I wonder how many of the CTers suffer from paranoid schizophrenia or other illnesses. Delusions are a large component of schizophrenia symptoms, and a lot of CTs certainly fall into the category of "delusions."

The reasons people buy into CTs are many, I'm sure, and I know very well you can't chalk it all up to mental illness. (Say what you will about Killtown, but there's no evidence that he's ill.) But I imagine there's also considerable overlap there.

Those who have a propensity for believing in irrational conspiracy theories have something in common with those who have a propensity for religious believes such as Xianity and islam: they want to believe that there's a supremely powerful intelligence controlling everything in their universe. I think you're onto something, but I'm not sure if mental illness always causes the belief. Mental illness itself can be frightening and destabilizing -I can understand the need of someone experiencing something like that to want to cling to a concept that there is someone at the top firmly in control -either to ask for help or to blame for all that's wrong.

[Dave1001]

Studies have been done on people with strong beliefs before now, I don't see why the CT crowd can't be looked at in the same way. It's not necessarily an 'illness', but I didn't take the OP really to just mean that, I took it as meaning a different set of mental processes to 'the rest of us', lol. And when I say that, it is not as slur in any way. I think I mentioned one of my friends is Borderline, and I have had some issues myself that are yet to be resolved. I'm not one for slurring, unless drunk :boggled:

By "the rest of us" you may be describing a minority of the people in the world. Unless your lumping critical thinkers in with people who don't go for CT because they're authority dependent (wouldn't question the dogma of the Church, wouldn't question the 9/11 explanations of the Bush administration) rather than because the facts don't suppport the CTs.

[jskowron]

The work of Richard McNally (and others) on "alien abductees" is somewhat related to the topic of this post. You would think that people who believe they have been abducted by aliens would be pretty crazy. However, he found that while they were more likely to possess certain other characteristics, such as magical thinking and fantasy proneness, they weren't usually clinically diagnosable with mental illness. I suspect CTers would be also be more likely to possess certain personality traits than non-CTers, yet be no more likely to suffer clinically significant symptoms of mental illness than non-CTers. If you're interested in a more clinical/scientific approach to explaining specific weird beliefs than you find in Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things, I would recommend any of McNally and colleagues articles or books.

[sat556]

By "the rest of us" you may be describing a minority of the people in the world. Unless your lumping critical thinkers in with people who don't go for CT because they're authority dependent (wouldn't question the dogma of the Church, wouldn't question the 9/11 explanations of the Bush administration) rather than because the facts don't suppport the CTs.

Hence my 'lol' after the comment. I couldn't think of a way to put it. I was thinking of those that don't hold with any subjects that require a belief element. I can't recall what the criteria was for the study I mention at the top, I'll see if I can find it, I know there's quite a few. Some are subscription only, so I'll have to see what I can find online.

Edit: Actually no, scrub that top bit. The phrase was utter rubbish. In my defense, I did sit looking at it for some time thinking "that's not looking quite right" before I hit send.
I was just meaning sceptics, and since this is mainly a sceptics forum... :)

[valis]

I don't think Nesnyc is mentally ill. I think he's like a Fred Phelps type personality. Blinded by a raging hatred. An extreme character flaw, not an actual psychosis. Basically a negative attention junkie from hell.

I would put him and Killtown in both the "stupid" and "malicious" categories that Arkan described.

Malicious I agree with; stupid I don't think is accurate in the case of Killtown and some of the others. I would say instead un-educated; they want to be educated and be knowledgable about something, but they don't want to do the work, so they invent their own field of expertise. A field where the intitial idea is all you need; no hard work of research or testing. And certainly none of the hardest task of all; admitting when you are proven wrong and adjusting your ideas accordingly.

[Dog Town]

Off the high horses, gents, it does not become you as rational and objective critics of their position, which tends to have sufficient flaws that insanity need not enter the discussion.

Darth while I love your "do the right thing posts"! Some of them seem as if you have just been awakened from a deep sleep. Judging by the time slot, I might have to call BS! Insane is the root( pardon the unintentional pun) If it is not insane, it is a desire to seem so! How do you draw your line of demark--asian?
Where I come from,"Dallas TEXAS", we call a spade, a spade,(Nothen racial there)! Either they wanna act as such, for some reason, or don't! So In MHO I beilieve they wear the cape,of the insane, for a reason! Much too proud, for my taste! I do respect you DR, don't get me wrong. I just don't agree here.

DT

Besides I like the word CRAZY For them! Much kinder, ....but still!
" They brought this sheee-Ite on themselves" Right?

[Lonewulf]

I've ran into someone who believed a couple things.

1) The Kennedy assassination was a coup d'etat, and Oswald didn't pull the trigger.

2) The human race was completely and entirely peaceful a long time ago (in our neanderthal days). When asked for evidence, she said I "have to keep an open mind"... i.e., buy whatever she says without being skeptical.

She was sound of mind in all other arenas, and was a nice lady; she's a friend of my mother's, though I haven't talked with her very often afterwards (I can be somewhat intolerant at times...)

I don't think that you need to be mentally ill to believe a conspiracy theory; you just have to consider the basic tenets of the conspiracy to be logical. I mean, for instance, many consider it far more logical to think that Kennedy was killed by a group of conspirators than it was to fake the moon landings... for rather obvious reasons. So yes, in many cases, it's a simple matter of ignorance, and those exposed to the actual facts of the case become more enlightened.

Anyways, I think that you're far more likely to run into the "True Believers" on this forum for two reasons. First, "True Believers" almost always tend to be a bit more pushy about their beliefs than the more moderates. Second, those that are simply ignorant or unsure are probably more likely to read arguments and discussions before jumping in.

[Dog Town]

Anyways, I think that you're far more likely to run into the "True Believers" on this forum for two reasons. First, "True Believers" almost always tend to be a bit more pushy about their beliefs than the more moderates. Second, those that are simply ignorant or unsure are probably more likely to read arguments and discussions before jumping in.

Yes but they still look past MOUNTAINS of fact, to find their contradictions!
That is not of sound mind!

DT

[Lonewulf]

Yes but they still look past MOUNTAINS of fact, to find their contradictions!
That is not of sound mind!

"They" being the True Believers? If you're talking about the True Believers, then I'd agree; people like Hoagland are not of sound mind. Sibrel, however, I would debate... he seems to be in it to make a buck more than anything else. Those are two names for examples.

Also, I might add, that I was personally very ignorant on many things involving the moon landings, the JFK assassination, and 9/11 until I sifted through much information available on the Bad Astronomy website, the BAUT forum, and various other forums. I came into the James Randi forums pretty late, but I've even learned one or two things here.

The main problem is knowing who to listen to. I've been able to keep a sound mind in my head, and have been able to tell, through logic and reasoning, who had the actual facts, and who could support their facts with actual documentation and evidence. Now, I admit, I came into the scene already believing that the Moon Landings were perfectly legit, and only having a minor amount of doubt with the JFK assassination (I have no doubt now, however).

But still, you have to admit that there are some that find it harder to tell who portrays the truth with more honesty; and honestly, which website do you really trust? For some, it's easier to be pulled in by a flashier website, and people are far more unwilling to actually verify what they read. Then there's the "rebellious factor"... quite frankly, it's cool to believe something that's unpopular, including that 9/11 was a government conspiracy. It makes some people feel special at having "special knowledge", and they can rationalize all they want, even though it's perfectly illogical outside of their beliefs.

Then, there's the simple fact that many CTists just don't bother looking at all arguments in depth. They focus on soundbites and things other CTists bring up... which is really something that's not new. Many people do that. Sometimes it's with politics, sometimes religion, sometimes with news... but "soundbites" always are far more comprehensible, easy, and simple for the public to deal with, as opposed to scientific and academic analysis. It's really common sense that there will be CTists, and I wouldn't call all of them insane.

In short, there's a lot of different mindsets out there with CTists, and "True Believers" should not be compared to "minor believers".

[Darth Rotor]

I do respect you DR, don't get me wrong. I just don't agree here.

DT

" They brought this sheee-Ite on themselves" Right?
Maybe if I put it this way: do you like the sheriff or Texas Ranger who simply handles the outlaw, or the sheriff who calls the outlaw names, taunts him, insults his family, and so on.

Put another way, do you prefer the style of Chuck Norris, or T.O.?

I am more impressed by the sheriff, who handles the outlaw while remaining gentlemanly in his actions.

"I'll stop talkin' and start shootin' now, mister, unless you put down yer guns." :cool:

DR

[delphi_ote]

3. I think the biggest form of mental illness that is rampant in that movement are the "Personality Disorders". In particular, we see "Passive Agressive" and "Borderline" Personality traits in many of those we encounter. A couple of them might even fit into the Sociopath/Psychopath catagories.
Dylan is all over the passive aggressive thing.

[gumboot]

I also wonder how much the internet has to do with these 9/11 CTs. A lot of the more odd CTers are basically just bullies online. They excrete arrogance and condescension out of ever pore.

Take Killtown's UA93 thread. He thought he was being incredibly clever leading us all by the nose to a point where he turned around and went "the grass isn't burnt you guys are so dumb LOLROTFLOMGHAHAHAHALOLOLOLLOLOLO!"

It's pretty obvious to me, Killtown is a teenager. He's using the internet to turn himself into a bully. And he's loving it. He really doesn't even appreciate the significance of what he's talking about.

I see two groups - the older ones who are serious about it - people like Alex Jones. And they're simply using these younger idiots who really don't appreciate the seriousness of all this, but are just being sucked into something they think is "cool".

I can easily imagine a likely scenario for Dylan Avery's story. Doing a fictional documentary about how some major event was a big coverup is a very film-student kind of thing to do. I suspect they never believed it was real, but they spawned a monster of a fan base, and now they HAVE to pretend it's real.

Don't forget we've all been young males... ;) Young males think they know everything. If DA and his friends back down they'll be made to look like fools, on a GLOBAL scale. In their youthful arrogance they actually think they can handle all this.

Note recent posts by DA saying he just wants to be left alone to make fictional films. It's veiled, but it's an expression of regret that he ever made Loose Change.Unfortunately for him it has pretty much destroyed any chance of him having a successful film career, and I suspect he's beginning to realise that.

-Andrew

[Brainache]

I can easily imagine a likely scenario for Dylan Avery's story. Doing a fictional documentary about how some major event was a big coverup is a very film-student kind of thing to do. I suspect they never believed it was real, but they spawned a monster of a fan base, and now they HAVE to pretend it's real.

Don't forget we've all been young males... ;) Young males think they know everything. If DA and his friends back down they'll be made to look like fools, on a GLOBAL scale. In their youthful arrogance they actually think they can handle all this.

Note recent posts by DA saying he just wants to be left alone to make fictional films. It's veiled, but it's an expression of regret that he ever made Loose Change.Unfortunately for him it has pretty much destroyed any chance of him having a successful film career, and I suspect he's beginning to realise that.

-Andrew

I think this could also explain the recent "we left some errors in the film intentionally" quote from whoever it was. I think they are planning to turn around and say it was all a big joke and:
"You all fell for it like the fascists you are!"[/Young Ones]
At which point Jennabell, Roxdog and JDX etc will rend them like savage dogs.

[T.A.M.]

Gumboot:

You hit the nail on the head again...

Adding even more to the Dylan Avery part fo your theory, is the fact that he was rejected by film school. Now he has this film which has millions of DLs...well can you imagine how that makes him feel. Young man told he didnt have what it took to get into film school, REBELS, and makes a film on his own, and what happens...it is a huge success...You can't compete with that kind of reinforcement.

Most of these people don't start off as bullies...just the opposite. Most of them were likely bullied in the real world, and then found a way to "fight back" online. They turn themselves into "experts" of the "9/11 Truth" information, and then try to bully anyone who doubts the Mantra.

TAM

[Dave1001]

Note recent posts by DA saying he just wants to be left alone to make fictional films. It's veiled, but it's an expression of regret that he ever made Loose Change.Unfortunately for him it has pretty much destroyed any chance of him having a successful film career, and I suspect he's beginning to realise that.

-Andrew

Why would Loose Change destroy his (or anyone's) chance to have a successful film career?

[Dave1001]

Gumboot:

You hit the nail on the head again...

Adding even more to the Dylan Avery part fo your theory, is the fact that he was rejected by film school. Now he has this film which has millions of DLs...well can you imagine how that makes him feel. Young man told he didnt have what it took to get into film school, REBELS, and makes a film on his own, and what happens...it is a huge success...You can't compete with that kind of reinforcement.

Most of these people don't start off as bullies...just the opposite. Most of them were likely bullied in the real world, and then found a way to "fight back" online. They turn themselves into "experts" of the "9/11 Truth" information, and then try to bully anyone who doubts the Mantra.

TAM

I don't see the bullying as being disproportionately on the CT side. It seems to me that a large segment of self-proclaimed skeptics (including CT-critical skeptics) on message boards are also bullies. But I think that's been complained on this website quite a bit. Calm, respectful discussion for the purpose of seeking mutual enlightenment seems less important to a surprising number of "skeptics" than seeking out mini-Gellers for which they can be mini-Randis, I suppose to boost their egos, manufacture hierarchies with themselves at the top, or to chase away ennui.

[gumboot]

Why would Loose Change destroy his (or anyone's) chance to have a successful film career?


Well there's a number of reasons. If he wants to be funded by Hollywood, it's very political. Now it's fine when you're a big name like Mel Gibson who can pull $200 million in sales to a film - you can get away with saying pretty much anything.

But if you're just starting out it's a different story. And the people who make the calls - the Studio Executives - a lot of them are Republican. Having made a documentary promoted as fact that was full of lies and false information, that spat on the memories of nearly 3,000 victims of terrorism, that's not exactly great publicity material for a major studio.

Worst of all, it's a documentary that has a copyright infringement list as long as your arm. That may even be worse than disrespecting the victims. Violating copyright can burn you for good.

Worse still, all he has to show with LC is editing skills and ability to write narration - and they're not exactly sparkling in LC. The editing is so-so and his VO scripting is awful.

Everything else is ripped straight from other footage. He didn't actually shoot ANYTHING.

Structurally, the documentary is poor. The opening material has no narrative connection with the rest of the story.

In short, by making loose change, all he has as bargaining power is one poorly made documentary that doesn't even showcase the skills most important to a feature film director. And on the down side the political/moral position LC has put him in, plus the legal position (copyright) has burned him badly.

7 million film students graduate from film schools globally every year. A large percentage of them have complete fictional films which they created themselves, that show real talent. And many of those students won't be tarred by the politics of LC.

The makers of LC are just too big a risk for most financiers.

-Andrew

[delphi_ote]

The makers of LC are just too big a risk for most financiers.
And yet, The History Channel. Sometimes all you have to do is walk in the door and have the audacity to pretend you know what you're doing. I'm cynical enough to think this guy could make a career off cheesy digital editing effects. He could do a few more conspiracy theory "documentaries" and then maybe even retire to punditry as the The Ann Coulter of the Left. The more people feed his ego, the worse he's going to get.

[Dave1001]

Well there's a number of reasons. If he wants to be funded by Hollywood, it's very political. Now it's fine when you're a big name like Mel Gibson who can pull $200 million in sales to a film - you can get away with saying pretty much anything.

But if you're just starting out it's a different story. And the people who make the calls - the Studio Executives - a lot of them are Republican. Having made a documentary promoted as fact that was full of lies and false information, that spat on the memories of nearly 3,000 victims of terrorism, that's not exactly great publicity material for a major studio.

Worst of all, it's a documentary that has a copyright infringement list as long as your arm. That may even be worse than disrespecting the victims. Violating copyright can burn you for good.

Worse still, all he has to show with LC is editing skills and ability to write narration - and they're not exactly sparkling in LC. The editing is so-so and his VO scripting is awful.

Everything else is ripped straight from other footage. He didn't actually shoot ANYTHING.

Structurally, the documentary is poor. The opening material has no narrative connection with the rest of the story.

In short, by making loose change, all he has as bargaining power is one poorly made documentary that doesn't even showcase the skills most important to a feature film director. And on the down side the political/moral position LC has put him in, plus the legal position (copyright) has burned him badly.

7 million film students graduate from film schools globally every year. A large percentage of them have complete fictional films which they created themselves, that show real talent. And many of those students won't be tarred by the politics of LC.

The makers of LC are just too big a risk for most financiers.

-Andrew

This reads to me like a kitchen sink approach at supporting the idea that Loose Change hurts its maker's ability to have a successful film career (ironic, since their own kitchen sink approach undermines the propagandistic power of their own film -at least to me).

For example, I don't think the makers of Loose Change "spat on the memories of nearly 3,000 victims of terrorism" -they're promoting a CT about how the 3,000 died. That's certainly not literally spitting on the memory portions of the brains (or vaporized remnants thereof) of the victims, nor does that seem to be their intent in any sort of figurative sense.

However, some of your criticisms may be strong. For example if their work "has a copyright infringement list as long as your arm" I'm sure that may cause them problems in the media community. As for all the other criticisms on technique, etc. I think that matters less to the media community than the demonstrated ability to draw eyeballs, which I think the makers of Loose Change have proven that they can do.

[Dog Town]

By DR
Maybe if I put it this way: do you like the sheriff or Texas Ranger who simply handles the outlaw, or the sheriff who calls the outlaw names, taunts him, insults his family, and so on.

You are right again. I should not get near these things when drinking, I make less sense than normal. I think I have little patience with these things, most of the time. Even less then. Mental illness is no laughing matter. They just get under my skin sometimes, thinking about the Crud they spew.

Agreed Gum, hollywood won't get near them now. In the begin maybe.
Now NO F'en Way! The Joos run this town! That whole movement has shown their lack of respect to the Gate Keepers in H Wood.Face it Mel Makes them a Billion every few years, him they can forgive.

DT

[T.A.M.]

Dave1001:

First of all, I would agree that there are bullies on both sides of the argument. Perhaps my view of where more are is tainted by what side I am on...however.

Here at JREF, if you say something, you better be able to back it up, or you will be argued extensively on the point, and you will be called out on your lack of proof. If this is bullying, than yes they are guilty of it...

Over at Dylan's Site, the Loose Change Forum, they (1) Ban any user who questions the truthfulness of the film or the segments within it. This includes blocking their IP so they cannot even view the site, let alone post in their own defense. This never occurs here at JREF, with exterme exception. (2) They abhore all evidence that does not promote their story. (3) They belittle any view outside of there own, REGARDLESS (that is the key) of what evidence is or isnt there. JohndoeX is particularly notorious for all the above, but Chucksheen, Merc, and all of the so called "responsible Mods" are guilty of this, sometimes more so than the non-moderators.

Fascism might be another word to describe their tactics, but I thought it a little more harsh than bullying.

Oh, and wrt to mocking the dead...If you force the point i will refer you to the MarkyX video where he has audio recordings of Dylan and his gang, as well as others in the CT Truth movement mocking the calls made by Mark Bingham and others. Now since all of us over here, as well as the vast majority of the world believe that Bingham and the others on flight 93 were killed by terrorists that day, Dylan and crowd ARE MOCKING THE DEAD!!!

TAM

[delphi_ote]

This reads to me like a kitchen sink approach at supporting the idea that Loose Change hurts its maker's ability to have a successful film career (ironic, since their own kitchen sink approach undermines the propagandistic power of their own film -at least to me).

For example, I don't think the makers of Loose Change "spat on the memories of nearly 3,000 victims of terrorism" -they're promoting a CT about how the 3,000 died. That's certainly not literally spitting on the memory portions of the brains (or vaporized remnants thereof) of the victims, nor does that seem to be their intent in any sort of figurative sense.

However, some of your criticisms may be strong. For example if their work "has a copyright infringement list as long as your arm" I'm sure that may cause them problems in the media community. As for all the other criticisms on technique, etc. I think that matters less to the media community than the demonstrated ability to draw eyeballs, which I think the makers of Loose Change have proven that they can do.
This reads like the kitchen sink approach to trying to "rise above the argument" by "not taking a side." Sorry, but you're wrong to defend Dylan. He has admitted at this point that he intentionally put mistakes in 'Loose Change.' He fabricated events in a film about 9/11, and then dedicated his lies to the victims. If that's not spitting on their memories, I don't know what is.

Are you sure you want continue trying to stand in the middle of this debate? You're going to have to defend some awful statements (http://911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf).

[delphi_ote]

I also wonder how much the internet has to do with these 9/11 CTs. A lot of the more odd CTers are basically just bullies online. They excrete arrogance and condescension out of ever pore.
*cough* Roxdog *cough*

[Stellafane]

I think this could also explain the recent "we left some errors in the film intentionally" quote from whoever it was. I think they are planning to turn around and say it was all a big joke and:
"You all fell for it like the fascists you are!"[/Young Ones]
At which point Jennabell, Roxdog and JDX etc will rend them like savage dogs.

If he were smart, Avery would be shooting a documentary even as we speak, "The Rise and Fall of a CT Movement." When he's done, he'd claim Loose Change was a hoax all along, he just used it as a prop to make his real movie about human gullibility and delusion. In fact, he'd claim he deliberately made LC as ridiculous and full of errors as he could, jut to show how people can fall so readily for a total piece of crap. He'd stand a good chance of becoming an instant hero with skeptics (a la "Carlos" perhaps), and would probably gather a lot of publicity, maybe even resurrect his film career.

Whaddya say, Dylan? Oh sure, you'd be betraying your legion of "fans," but let's face it, it's not like you're gonna build a real career catering to that crowd of losers, is it? You can justify it by saying at least you gave them all a little temporary meaning to their otherwise drab existence. Of course, you'll probably get a few death threats, but all great art has its price, right? Seriously, dude, think about it...

[Stellafane]

As for the OP -- I don't know how many CTists would be classified as mentally ill in a clinical sense, and I'm certainly not qualified to make that judgement. But they sure are nuts.

[tsig]

Sounds like the bible to me!

You mean the koran.

[delphi_ote]

You mean the koran.
Were you trying to be clever there? It really didn't work...

[gumboot]

And yet, The History Channel. Sometimes all you have to do is walk in the door and have the audacity to pretend you know what you're doing. I'm cynical enough to think this guy could make a career off cheesy digital editing effects. He could do a few more conspiracy theory "documentaries" and then maybe even retire to punditry as the The Ann Coulter of the Left. The more people feed his ego, the worse he's going to get.


Getting broadcast on a pay-for-view type broadcast channel down here really doesn't mean a lot. I'm not sure what it is called in Australia, but here in New Zealand it is Sky, and all the Sky Channels (including History Channel) are desperate for content. I have a lot of friends who got their own work broadcast on Sky Channels over and over again.

Of course getting it on The History Channel indicates stupidity on behalf of the programmers, but still...

You're right about him being able to make more of these "documentaries" but Dylan has repeatedly made comments that suggest he wants to make mainstream feature films. THAT is the career path that LC has hurt.

-Andrew

[gumboot]

This reads to me like a kitchen sink approach at supporting the idea that Loose Change hurts its maker's ability to have a successful film career.

I'm not sure what you mean...



For example, I don't think the makers of Loose Change "spat on the memories of nearly 3,000 victims of terrorism" -they're promoting a CT about how the 3,000 died. That's certainly not literally spitting on the memory portions of the brains (or vaporized remnants thereof) of the victims, nor does that seem to be their intent in any sort of figurative sense.

I did not speak of intent, and I'm pretty sure a normal human would realise I was speaking figuratively, not literally. The attitude of DA and his team is one of people that totally disregard the victims. As Gravy has previously pointed out - the passengers on the planes are the Looser crowd's biggest obstacle. Their entire CT just falls apart because of those passengers. As such they really resent it.

When you deny that events happened how they did - in particular when you make remarks about the passenger revolt on UA93 being a fabrication, you are spitting on the memory of those people. Those people TRIED to do something. They SUCCEEDED in preventing the terrorists hitting another target. Denying that is spitting on their memories.



However, some of your criticisms may be strong. For example if their work "has a copyright infringement list as long as your arm" I'm sure that may cause them problems in the media community. As for all the other criticisms on technique, etc. I think that matters less to the media community than the demonstrated ability to draw eyeballs, which I think the makers of Loose Change have proven that they can do.

Most people find it hard to accept, but even the Hollywood studio system won't back a director unless they show they have talent. Sure, there's a lot of garbage made (usually because of a lame script) but there's rarely films coming out of there that are actually technically poor, and almost without doubt the failed director in question has a previous track record of good quality work.

-Andrew

[delphi_ote]

You're right about him being able to make more of these "documentaries" but Dylan has repeatedly made comments that suggest he wants to make mainstream feature films. THAT is the career path that LC has hurt.
I'm not disagreeing with your post... you basically hit the nail on the head.

But I'm cynical enough to think that, if he finds the right ear, LC could also launch a career in feature films. He just has to find someone dumb enough and with enough money. With the rate that he whores himself out and tries to get attention, it's bound to happen sooner or later.

[delphi_ote]

Sure, there's a lot of garbage made (usually because of a lame script) but there's rarely films coming out of there that are actually technically poor, and almost without doubt the failed director in question has a previous track record of good quality work.
Or had a cult following. As much as I love him, Kevin Smith is a perfect example of this. Or look at Snakes on a Plane. It opened at number one at the box office just from internet in jokes.

[gumboot]

Or had a cult following. As much as I love him, Kevin Smith is a perfect example of this. Or look at Snakes on a Plane. It opened at number one at the box office just from internet in jokes.

But Kevin Smith also displayed, from the outset, a unique style and particular talent.

Thousands of films like "Clerks" are released every year.

As for "Snakes On A Plane", to be fair David Ellis not only has previously directed successful films, but has a very long and successful career as a Second Unit Director (particularly in stunt/action work - he started in stunts). His credits include very high profile films, and he was 2nd Unit Director on 27 films in the decade before he switched permanently to directing. Including films like The Perfect Storm, The Matrix Reloaded, Master And Commander, Harry Potter, Rock Star, The Negotiator, Sphere, The Devil's Own, Waterworld... the list goes on.

He comes off the back of 32 years experience in Hollywood.

And I think a lot of "Snakes On A Plane"'s success came purely from the title of the film - it is so ludicrous and yet so direct and honest.

-Andrew

[Dog Town]

But Kevin Smith also displayed, from the outset, a unique style and particular talent.

Ya it was called no cam movement. He has since adapted. Not to mention his dialogue was only second to Tarentino! There will be no great script in the hands of DA, not from his hands. He has no style to fall back on either. Unless bad music and jump cuts become a style.I see him getting his shot in the quick and dirty world of Music video! Blue flame heat that goes out quick!
He's had his 15 minutes. To tear him down is all that is left!Not soon enough, IMHO!

[delphi_ote]

But Kevin Smith also displayed, from the outset, a unique style and particular talent.
And got a little lucky. He'd be the first to admit it.
As for "Snakes On A Plane", to be fair David Ellis not only has previously directed successful films, but has a very long and successful career as a Second Unit Director (particularly in stunt/action work - he started in stunts). His credits include very high profile films, and he was 2nd Unit Director on 27 films in the decade before he switched permanently to directing. Including films like The Perfect Storm, The Matrix Reloaded, Master And Commander, Harry Potter, Rock Star, The Negotiator, Sphere, The Devil's Own, Waterworld... the list goes on.

He comes off the back of 32 years experience in Hollywood.
You're absolutely correct. And bless your researching, sir. My hat is always off to you for that.
And I think a lot of "Snakes On A Plane"'s success came purely from the title of the film - it is so ludicrous and yet so direct and honest.
But that's my point. Weird things can rocket to the top of the box office. There are plenty of documentaries in the world. Why Al Gore's or Michael Moore's? It wasn't necessarily so much that the content was anything special, it was just that the timing was right. That was what the people responded to. To quote Tolstoy:
But what is chance? What is genius?

The words chance and genius do not denote any really existing thing and therefore cannot be defined. Those words only denote a certain stage of understanding of phenomena. I do not know why a certain event occurs; I think that I cannot know it; so I do not try to know it and I talk about chance. I see a force producing effects beyond the scope of ordinary human agencies; I do not understand why this occurs and I talk of genius.

To a heard of rams, that ram the herdsman dries each evening into a special enclosure to feed, and that becomes twice as fat as the others, must seem to be a genius.

[Dog Town]

But that's my point. Weird things can rocket to the top of the box office. There are plenty of documentaries in the world. Why Al Gore's or Michael Moore's? It wasn't necessarily so much that the content was anything special, it was just that the timing was right.

Large add budgets and name recognition.Except for Rger n me. That took 5 years of pushing, still had a good distribution deal. Those are hard to come by. Holl Wood still cont that for now. Blair witch still had to have that! Even w/all the internet buz.You are right , never underestimate luck! I think DA has rubbed his rab foot raw! The end is near!

[gumboot]

But that's my point. Weird things can rocket to the top of the box office. There are plenty of documentaries in the world. Why Al Gore's or Michael Moore's? It wasn't necessarily so much that the content was anything special, it was just that the timing was right. That was what the people responded to. To quote Tolstoy:


That's true, chance has something to do with it. But I've never seen someone who lacked any talent get lucky. Okay once, the guys that made Dungeons And Dragons - they got lucky when they got the film rights.

But generally... out of a bunch of talented people, one gets lucky.

As for documentaries, much as I utterly despite Michael Moore's documentaries, he is a very talented propagandist. Something like Bowling for Columbine and Loose Change are in the same genre, but putting them side by side reveals just how poor Loose Change really is.

-Andrew

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Kinda, off topic here yet strangely on topic as well.

Kevin Smith tells the sad yet bizarrely hilarious tale of the the "Superman Lives" debacle. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk)

Hollywood wasted 50 million dollars and only narrowly averted a hideous atrocity on the Superman mythos. Avery's 9-11 atrocity cost only a few thousand and has netted spectacular returns for such a meager investment.

There's no doubt in my mind that Dylhole Al-Avery has the right combination of ignorance and arrogance to make it in Hollywood.

He'll fit right in.

[T.A.M.]

I doubt he could make it in hollywood. I mean he obviously has the ability to mislead without guilt, and he clearly knows how to market to a certain subset of the population.

What I see his truely lacking is TALENT. What did he even shoot, for LC...is ANY of the footage his? What does he know about Lighting, or Camera shots. Does he even know what a Dollie or a jib are? Does he know the difference between 16mm, 35mm. Does he know about "Crossing the Line" wrt movie making...I DOUBT IT.

He would make a good pool boy for a few of them I suppose.

[Dog Town]

Hollywood wasted 50 million dollars and only narrowly averted a hideous atrocity on the Superman mythos. Avery's 9-11 atrocity cost only a few thousand and has netted spectacular returns for such a meager investment.

Who, and how many have really been bought? What is the oft used quote?
"LC the film sooo good they have to give it away"!
An evening with K Smith's DVD is hysterical. Prince and and Superman are Priceless! Bwahhhhh!

[Sword_Of_Truth]

What I see his truely lacking is TALENT. What did he even shoot, for LC...is ANY of the footage his? What does he know about Lighting, or Camera shots. Does he even know what a Dollie or a jib are? Does he know the difference between 16mm, 35mm. Does he know about "Crossing the Line" wrt movie making...I DOUBT IT.

And how much talent and actual knowledge does a hairdresser with a carnivore fixation have? yet who has the big mansion and so much money that he can pay people to do his reading for him?

[Dog Town]

Hey guys further off topic! Is there a way to search threads here, by phrase or words?

[gumboot]

And how much talent and actual knowledge does a hairdresser with a carnivore fixation have? yet who has the big mansion and so much money that he can pay people to do his reading for him?


Who?

-Andrew

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Who?

-Andrew

Watch the vid. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk)

[gumboot]

Watch the vid. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk)

;) I am. My connection is appalling at the moment so it's taking FOREVER to load. I just reached the bit about Jon Peters so I know who you're talking about now. :)

-Andrew

[T.A.M.]

I havent watched the vido, but i assume you are speaking of Ziegfried and Roy.

Ok, I will restate...

Dylan lacks the talent to make it in Hollywood as a LEGITIMATE FILMAKER.

He would make an interesting side show for the two boys and their tigers though.

Edit: Kevin SMith...now you have lost me with the hairdresser and tiger and Kevin smith thing...lol

[gumboot]

And how much talent and actual knowledge does a hairdresser with a carnivore fixation have? yet who has the big mansion and so much money that he can pay people to do his reading for him?


Kevin Smith's story is highly amusing, but I imagine it involves plenty of embelishment. As for Jon Peters, well it wouldn't surprise me if he was a bit of a nut. But he has been a rather successful producer, and before that he was a film hair stylist, not a hairdresser. Minor difference, but an important one - he was in the industry, and not only that but he was working on big projects.

Lastly, Jon Peters is a producer. Dylan Avery said he wants to be a director. While a producer can succeed just by being a good organiser and people-person, a director who doesn't have the technical skills will fail miserably.

I wouldn't like to make any assertations about DA's knowledge in film, because I don't know. But I do know that after 3 years of film school I still had a whole **** load to learn about filmmaking when I got to work in the industry.

(Incidentally, I believe the reason Jon Peters gets people to read for him is because he's semi-illiterate - a fact that would support his claim of being "from the street")

-Andrew