 Finally, a movie review. Movie review. Unfortunately, all my movie views lately have been negative and this one is not going to be any different. So I went to the theater to watch Uncut Gems. The critics are loving this movie. It's getting rave reviews. And I figure, well, my son encouraged me, let's go watch Uncut Gems. So I did. In the theater, on a big screen. And I have to say, within about four minutes of the movie starting. By the way, the movie is with Adam Sandler. Now, Adam Sandler, I do not like Adam Sandler because I don't like his comedies. Now, I was told this was a serious role. Indeed it is. And I have to say, Adam Sandler as a serious dramatic actor was quite good. It's the only good thing I can say about the movie. He was quite good. But I have to say that within about three minutes. Probably four minutes, maybe five. I was ready to leave the theater. I was ready to get up and walk out and leave. The music, the chattering, the noise. The camera work, which is somebody holding it on their shoulder, bouncing around, zooming into people, zooming out is enough to make you sick. It is naturalism at its worst. It is a roller coaster ride about the life of a scumbag. I don't know any other way to describe this guy. A scumbag. I don't think the movie is trying to make out. He's a guy who is in the jewelry business in New York. He owes everybody money. He constantly gambles, loses. He has a wife with a couple of kids in the suburbs. He has a mistress who works for him, who he has shacked up in an apartment in the city. His wife seems to know about the mistress and they're in the process of maybe getting a divorce. He is just a horrible, horrible person. And the whole movie is him being a horrible person, basically trying to get himself out of one jam. But because he's so irrational and stupid and second-handed and just a scumbag, he keeps getting himself deeper into problems, into worse and worse and worse and worse problems. I don't think he smokes pot in the movie, but I might be wrong. The camera work is awful. The sound is awful. It's noisy. It's shadowy. It's meant to be intense, but it grates on you. The sound of it, music in movies can be so impactful. I mean, this is why movies are the most complex of all art forms, because they entail writing, acting, cinematography. Movies are primarily of visual media. Cinematography, visual. They entail drama, but they also entail music. It's a complexity of all those elements have to be integrated. Here they were integrated into an obnoxious whole. It was an awful movie. And the one thing I'm glad about the movie is that people don't like it. The critics loved it, but the general public is hating it. I think people are going because it's Adam Sandler. But then they hate it. So you get reviews like on one tomato of the critics really high, and then actual people who view the movie really, really low, which is good. So the Americans have better taste than the critics, which is not overly surprising. But the whole, everything about this movie is, it fits into the Lenin-Pikov's dim hypothesis again. The movie is completely disintegrated. Now, there is an arc. The story leads somewhere. And in a sense, the end is inevitable. But it isn't, it doesn't integrate into anything. And in the end, the movie has no meaning. It stands for nothing. It has no purpose. It teaches us nothing about the world in any sense other than it's fragmented. It's distorted. Completely disintegrated. And this is the kind of art that conditions a consciousness to be disintegrated. It conditions a consciousness not to integrate, not to find common themes, not to see a connection, a causal connection over time. Great art, great art, conditions one's consciousness. To be, in a sense, a good thinker. To use your mind in the appropriate way to integrate, for example. Here it does the opposite. It is actually harmful to you to watch this movie. I think, by the way, a lot of modern music is like way. I think, and I know I'm going to make some enemies here. I think much of rap, much of, a lot of rock and roll is harmful. Because it exaggerates the simplest of, simplest of music. A beat, a beat, a constant beat. That is very primitive, epistemologically. Now I can't prove that. To a complex melody over time with sophisticated harmonies in between, where the beat is integrated into a whole complexity. That encourages consciousness, a complex response, a complex conscious response, instead of buh-bum, buh-bum, buh-bum, buh-bum. Which is primitive and low in terms of the conditioning it does to our consciousness. Instead of listening to better rap, listen to Brahms or Tchaikovsky or Mendelssohn or even Mahler or Rachmaninoff or Beethoven or Mozart. Then you'll see complexity and beauty and sophistication. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning, any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect. Not by feelings, wishes, whims or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist brought. Using the super chat, and I noticed yesterday when I appealed for support for the show, many of you stepped forward and actually supported the show for the first time, so I'll do it again, maybe we'll get some more today. If you like what you're hearing, if you appreciate what I'm doing, then I appreciate your support. Those of you who don't yet support the show, please take this opportunity, go to www.uranbrookshow.com slash support or go to www.subscribestar.com, you're on Brooke's show and make a kind of a monthly contribution to keep this going. I'm not showing the next...