A funny thing happened to me on the way to the cinema.....
I arrived early, so I was sitting on the steps opposite the cinema eating an
ice cream. A beggar came up to me, holding his hand out to ask for money. In
an attempt to be sarcastic I held my hand out to ask him for money. He gave me
three cents, and then he threw the rest of his money on the floor and stormed
off in a rage, saying something I didn't understand. What was he doing? If it
was an attempt to give me a bad conscience, it didn't work. As soon as I
finished my ice cream I gathered up his money from the floor, another 12
cents. It's possible that it was more money, because the coins might have
rolled away. The net result of this encounter is that I became 15 cents
richer.
I said it was an attempt to be sarcastic, because I don't understand sarcasm.
It's happened several times in my life that someone said something to me, I
replied, and then the person said "I was being sarcastic". So I
gave the wrong reply. I should have interpreted the statement as meaning the
opposite of what was said. But how was I to know that it was a false
statement?
I've looked up definitions of sarcasm online, but I still don't get it. In
order to understand sarcasm, I've tried to be sarcastic myself. If I
understand correctly, I have to tell a lie, but it has to be a lie that the
other person knows is a lie. Should that make people laugh? For instance, I
told a friend that I like Donald Trump. She knows that I don't like him, so
she should have laughed. Instead of that she just said
"I thought you didn't like him". I replied,
"I was being sarcastic", and she just looked at me as if I was being
crazy. That's the same way that I react when people are sarcastic with me. Is
that the intention? Is sarcasm supposed to be a joke that nobody understands?
So what's the point of it?
Today I pretended to be a beggar. That was my way of being sarcastic. Was it
successful? It made the man angry, so yes, maybe that is what sarcasm is
supposed to achieve.
So I proceeded to Gloria, where I was greeted by Indiana Jones himself. That
was my first impression. A closer look told me it was my fellow film fan
Thomas Daake dressed up as Indiana Jones. It's an amazingly accurate costume.
The only inaccuracy is that there's no gun in his holster. Thomas told me that
he has a fake gun as part of the costume, but he chose not to wear it because
it looks too genuine. I understand. He's standing in front of a poster of
Barbie. I wonder if he'll dress up as Ken next week.
The film starts in 1944, when Indiana Jones is attempting to steal the
Antikythera, the Dial of Archimedes, from the Nazis. It's rumoured to be able
to predict fissures in time and allow limited time travel. In 1969, a former
Nazi who's become an American wants the Dial so that he can go back in time
and change the result of World War Two.
The film is an enjoyable adventure romp, despite not being directed by Steven
Spielberg. It's supposed to be the last film in the Indiana Jones series.
Never say never.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tick the box "Notify me" to receive notification of replies.