Part 21 can be found here:
http://www.guba.com/watch/3...
Disclaimer: YouTube took down part 21. It was NOT my decision. It was a hassle to upload it to a different site, but I did it so everyo...
Disclaimer: YouTube took down part 21. It was NOT my decision. It was a hassle to upload it to a different site, but I did it so everyone could see the rape scene somewhere, because the movie does not make sense if Lawrence's actions are not explained. I will not answer any more comments asking where part 21 can be found, it is in the summary (of course if you're reading this you've already figured that out, bravo. A lot of people don't read summaries which is ridiculous... Educate yourselves people! And if you are, then yay :D) In fact, I will delete any comments asking where the next part is or accusing me of 'hustling' for another site. I don't 'hustle' for anything. I am making no money off of posting videos to YouTube, I am only trying to provide people with something they want to watch. 'Lawrence of Arabia' deserves to be seen. And believe me, I was pissed when they took down part 21, I still am. I do not hustle for other sites, even if YouTube does suck the sewer pipes of the corporations they hustle for.
Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
What Lawrence is getting at is that he doesn't know who he is. That is a motif throughout the film. Like when the man on the motorcycle (who is David Lean the director) yells "Who are you?" and Lawrence doesn't answer, because he can't. The whole film is really asking the question "who is this man?" and there is no definite answer other than, like Rousseau, he could say that he is "Toujour Lawrence!" if nothing else
I just want to interject into this debate the fact that Magpie08AA5 and RavynneRune are assigning the same overtone to this relationship as David Lean and Robert Bolt were when they made the film. Bolt stated clearly that he thought Lawrence was homosexual and Lean was convinced that Ali was Lawrence's S.A. My sources for this are the books David Lean: A Biography and he book about the making of the movie also titled Lawrence of Arabia
heart :3 He wanted Lawrence to come back with him to the desert, but Lawrence is disgusted with the way things turned out and he feels he failed the Arabs. He's exhausted and has lost hope, and convinces himself that he should return 'home', to England. But Auda knows that Lawrence belongs with them in the desert, that his heart will never be content elsewhere.
you shouldn't slash them! it belittles their friendship to bring it down to a sexual level. it's supposed to symbolically show how the gap between british and arab can be bridged. those two did it and it wasn't homosexual.
how do you know? and i really dont see how it belittles their friendship at all. if they were lovers it only means their friendship was at the deepest level possible. Sex, like all things, can be misused and abused; but if they loved each other and shared a sexual relationship then it would be sacred. You claim that cultures cant be bridged by love? Love bridges everything and if it happens to include a sexual element it makes no difference. interracial love :P they're beautiful together
Oh Really? Friendship can be just as deep as any other relationship. Making it sexual belittles their friendship. It's like saying two men can't be freinds without being phyiscally attracted to each other. Which I don't agree with. I also think men and women can be impenetrable friends without having to have sex with each other. Their reasons for being friends with each other was out of respect for each others personalities. It isn't like they were physically attracted to each other.
and cultures can be bridged by love, that's what I was getting at. Do you think having sex is the only way to express love? Friendship is one form of love and its probably equivalent to the lover form. However, they're in different categories of human relationship (or animal relationship).
How do you know Lawrence and Ali weren't attracted to each other? And why do you think a physical element to their friendship belittles anything? You completely ignored the point Magpie was trying to make. She was not saying that the only way to express love is through sex, but love with sex in their case makes their friendship sacred and beautiful, not belittled.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
What Lawrence is getting at is that he doesn't know who he is. That is a motif throughout the film. Like when the man on the motorcycle (who is David Lean the director) yells "Who are you?" and Lawrence doesn't answer, because he can't. The whole film is really asking the question "who is this man?" and there is no definite answer other than, like Rousseau, he could say that he is "Toujour Lawrence!" if nothing else
My sources for this are the books David Lean: A Biography and he book about the making of the movie also titled Lawrence of Arabia
or i know ur heart? what did he want to go to?
Friendship can be just as deep as any other relationship. Making it sexual belittles their friendship. It's like saying two men can't be freinds without being phyiscally attracted to each other. Which I don't agree with. I also think men and women can be impenetrable friends without having to have sex with each other. Their reasons for being friends with each other was out of respect for each others personalities. It isn't like they were physically attracted to each other.
Friendship is one form of love and its probably equivalent to the lover form. However, they're in different categories of human relationship (or animal relationship).