ashtoti25t

Many of the free videos being streamed are clips from newscasts - the weather report or an interview with a politician or celebrity. Movie and music companies also offer free streaming videos in the form of movie trailers and music videos. Sports websites offer free streaming videos of the day's sports highlights - the dunk from a basketball game or the grand slam homerun from a baseball game.

News and sports websites also have a portion of their webpage space dedicated for streaming advertisement videos. Internet users are treated to a whole array of commercials that they also see on the television.

A lot of educational organizations provide free streaming videos of lectures, presentations, and demonstrations. Other organizations even provide videos of documentaries.

Although most of the free videos flooding the Internet are considered mainstream, there are also a lot of free videos posted online by your average Internet user. There are a lot of websites that offer free video streaming services, allowing users to upload their "homemade" videos and share them with the entire Internet-surfing population.

Another type of content that currently takes up a large share of the free streaming video market is made by adult video companies. Internet pornography accounts for a large portion of Internet users' consumption.

So while there are advantages to having free access to streaming videos online, there is also a risk involved, especially with children who use the Internet.

Various on-demand movie and television services popping up the last few years have introduced some new terminology to many of us who are not technologically savvy, and who are just beginning to explore the vast, uncharted territories known as the worldwide web. One term that is practically a household term is streaming. The concept of streaming isn't new. Radio and television are streamed. Streaming is, in a nutshell, a delivery method for media. We can stream anything that can be digitalized, including music, movies, sports, and television shows.

One statistic that may surprise many people is that 30% of all internet traffic today is from Netflix streams alone. And over-the-top (OTT) media consumption from distributors like Netflix, Hulu Plus and SuperPass is projected to increase by 60% within the next two years.

To clarify, there are two types of video streaming - live and on-demand. Live streaming is viewed on the internet simultaneously as a camera captures and digitally encodes the event. Progressive streaming is the type of streaming that OTT streaming providers utilize. On-demand videos are compressed files that are delivered by a streaming server. When an end-user wishes to stream a movie, for example, they will select the film and click on a play button. The OTT vendor will then deliver the requested film through specialized software called a streaming server. The streaming server will assess what is happening on the end user's media player and make adjustments called buffering to ensure a good viewing experience. The streamed content is not saved on the end user's hard drive. Once the content is streamed, it cannot be accessed again unless the file is requested again from the streaming service provider.

Besides streaming, there is another delivery method for these compressed files, which is called downloading. When you purchase a movie, song or TV show, you download the file from a web server (instead of a streaming server), and you save the file somewhere where you can freehdmovieswatch access it whenever you wish - usually on your hard drive. Generally, at least a portion of the download must be complete before you can begin viewing the content without interruptions.

Downloads can either be rentals or purchases. If it is a rental, then the OTT provider generally gives a specified period of time from the time of rental in which to view the content before the file deletes itself. It's important to note that downloaded files can contain viruses and malware, so make sure that you trust any source from which you download a file.

Media players can take on many forms when you stream or view your downloaded purchase. If you watch the content on your computer, you will probably utilize the media player that came with your operating system, or you may download a free or premium media player that the streaming service provider recommends. If you wish to watch on your television, you will need to utilize a gaming console, Blu-ray player, internet-enabled television set, or a streaming media player that is connected to your television and your home wireless network. It's important to make sure that your intended media player is supported by your OTT provider.

Streaming is without a doubt here to stay as part of our entertainment options. Watch as the technology continues to improve and more options are available to consumers.

The sophisticated drawings and special content of Manga Hentai Comics such as Naruto, One Piece, The Bleach, Detective Conan, Astro Boy, Doraemon, .. have created a clear impression and identity of Manga Hentai. So what about Manhwa Webtoon? Will Webtoon make readers addicted to Japanese manga masterpieces?

Therefore, when it comes to comics, most viewers will remember the hentai manga from Japan. However, in today's modern world, the Japanese no longer occupy the upper hand and the gap is too large compared to other countries. One of the emerging countries in the genre of comic book creation recently is the neighbors of Japanese - Korean.

Unlike the Japanese who mainly compose manga and publish on comics in magazines before making them into comic books, Koreans produce their stories on the web. Therefore, Korean stories are mainly called webtoon and are released weekly to readers around the world instead of making viewers wait like Japanese.

Korean comics are also very attractive in terms of topic and genre. Not only exploiting traditional isekai, RPG or shounen themes, Koreans do not hesitate to put their own creations into manhwa works. Let's take a look at the manhwa works that have attracted the most attention from readers in the past time.

1. My Stepmom

My Stepmom is a funny, mixed love story about 18+, telling the young Jinwoo and his beautiful stepmother when Jinwoo's mother died and his father married this beautiful but mysterious woman. She loved Jinwoo and crossed the line between her stepmother and her husband's children. They fell in love with each other, Jinwoo had no idea of Ha-Yeon Song's past or what was waiting for him ahead.

My Stepmom is popular with attractive storylines, beautiful graphics, My Stepmom is still in the top of the most popular webtoon series in Korea. Even the author of this comic series is considering to be able to collaborate with studios to release anime versions and even games about this fascinating webtoon story.

2. Panter of the Night

Na-kyum is a poor painter, in order to earn money to live in him or to go to restaurants to paint, Na-kyum has a special talent that he can draw like taking pictures. Although he tried and published a few collections but failed, Na kyum decided to give up painting. Then, when he was drunk, he met Seungho, an extremely rich and powerful man. A notoriety with his insatiable desire, Seungho forced Na-kyum to become his own painter. However, Na-kyum cannot imagine what will happen. All his calculations and thoughts are completely opposite of reality.

From the launch until now, Painter of the Night has become a boys love phenomenon of the Korean manhwa webtoon village. Currently, this series has reached the second part with the plot is still very attractive and the fan base is extremely crowded.

3. My Friend's Dad

Unlike the usual romance between men and women, My Friend's Dad - is built on the complicated relationship between Annie and her friend Hellen and Annie's father. The main character is Kang, a widowed man who takes care of his young daughter when his wife dies. When his daughter grows up he cannot understand the world of the young girl and Hellen enters his life. , bring with you many incidents and surprises.

Like My Stepmom, My Friend's Dad has also been very popular recently with the family theme. It's a drama and comedy style, so it's worth paying attention to the manhwa webtoon hentai readers on this collection.

4. Sweet Home

Sweet Home is a series created by author Kim Carnby and drawn by Hwang Yeong Chan - the duo who make up Bastard. The story is about Cha Hyun Soo, a high school student who hates society, has a history of suicide, and is selfish. On a fine day, he lost all his relatives and had to support himself. However, things are not as simple as that. He realized that there were scary creatures existing and haunting himself.

If Bastard is a high-thriller drama, with Sweet Home, the two authors have done extremely well creating a story about people fighting against corpses. The plot of Sweet Home brings viewers the dramatic frame by frame, and the zombie monsters by Hwang Yeong Chan really make viewers startled with each mouse roll because they are too scared.

5. Close as Neighbors

Close as Neighbors is a work by author Ro Dong, adapted into a comic by Semi on Manytoon Comics from 2019. The story of Theo Son moitj young and handsome, he is always close to people the next door neighbor, the Min sisters. But what if they decided to get closer?

Close as Neighbors is exactly the Romance Drama motif but it is done in a very playful and Korean style. This has made many readers feel curious and love this series.

If you have to think about spending money to read these great webtoon sets, don't worry with Free Webtoon Coins offering you 1000 free coins. Please provide you with top 5 free websites to enjoy the wonderful works on.

1 -Free Webtoon Online

2- Manga Hentai

3 -Manhwa Hentai

4 -ManyToon

5- Freewebtooncoins.com

This man has traveled the world in search of a cure as he was wasting away to almost nothing, weighing just 80lbs at 19 years old. His doctor said that Rubin's case was the most extreme he had ever witnessed. Rubin tried many medical treatments in different countries but nothing seemed to be working- at least until he visited a nutritionist right in California who told him that his illness is due to his eating habits and that he wasn't "following God's plan".

Rubin did his best to read the bible and study what foods people ate at the time and decided to follow the same regimen. He ate only raw food and even ate a special form of soil along with other beneficial food and drinks. In 40 days, Rubin gained 29 pounds. He was on his way to recovery. Rubin has taken a personal oath to help others benefit from what he has learned. Rubin founded Garden of Life with his wife in 1999, a health organization dedicated to teaching others about the natural remedies and ways to maintain overall health as well as offering products for purchase online. He has written numerous books including The Maker's Diet, Perfect Weight America and the one that originally inspired me, Patient watchmoviesonlinefree18 Heal Thyself. I am looking forward to reading more of his books especially Great Physician's Rx for Cancer as cancer is such a deadly disease that seems to be growing.

Jordan Rubin has enriched people's lives in many ways with his books. He also has his own website dedicated to answering questions about health and wellness. His magazine Extraordinary Health offers advice on nutrition and priceless recipes. The recipes are focused on meals that are packed with nourishment. There is no need to flip through your Betty Crocker Cookbook and try to find the "healthiest" recipes or try to convert them to organic recipes hoping that the food cooks properly. His E-Newsletter is also packed with entertaining articles and more recipes that can be printed up and saved for your own collection.

There are many testimonials as to how Rubin has helped people live healthier lives here are a few that I found online:

"I feel like a new person, 15 years younger, and all I want to do is to share this message of health and wellness with other people! I want others to know that this change is for life – forever, and that this plan is really doable, unlike so many other diets I've tried in my life. On one diet, I used to save up a week's worth of points, just to blow them on a chocolate sundae. The only thing that did was to deepen my sugar cravings. I thank God that I found Rubin's books just in time, and I thank Jordan for the mission he has for empowering others with extraordinary health."-Melissa Gertz who lost 85 lbs. because of Rubin's healthy diet

"Hello Jordan,

Since I left Women of Faith I've lost contact with you. How are you? I'm well and cancer free. Again, thanks for the items you sent me. I'd like to be able to talk to you and keep our appointment when you are in my hometown. Please write to me at..."- Thelma Wells "After only one week on this diet I have more energy than I ever had in my whole life. Ridding my body of harmful toxins and eating the foods we are all meant to eat is the best thing I've ever done. I'm telling all my friends about it. Those that don't "get it" are just missing out."- A Customer (on The Maker's Diet) I'll leave you with these delicious recipes from Rubin's website:

Taco Lettuce Wraps (Raw vegetarian)

Yield: 8 servings Ingredients: Taco "meat": 2 cups walnuts, soaked 1/3-cup wheat-free tamari soy sauce 1 bunch cilantro 1-tablespoon cumin powder ½ tablespoon coriander powder Taco wraps and toppings: 1 head romaine lettuce 3 tomatoes, sliced 3 avocados, sliced Celtic sea salt to taste Equipment needed: food processor

Directions:

In the afternoon of the day before, soak walnuts overnight in filtered water. Process taco "meat" ingredients in a food processor until the mixture resembles ground taco meat. Stop to scrape sides. Remove and set aside. Wash and choose from crispy lettuce leaves for taco wraps. Prepare avocados and tomatoes. Fill lettuce cavities with taco "meat" and top with toppings. Serve two tacos on a white salad plate with a favorite Mexican seasoning on top. Herb Baked Salmon with Creamed Style Spinach

Yield: 4 servings

Ingredients: 4-6 oz. pieces of salmon 1 tablespoon Trocomare (seasoning) 1-teaspoon tarragon (dry) 1-teaspoon coriander crushed seeds Juice of 2 lemons 2 tablespoons of butter (I'm thinking this must be organic butter) Directions: Marinate fish in herbs, spices, and lemon juice for 1-2 hours. Sear in hot butter, 2 minutes on each side. Finish in oven 5 minutes at 385° F. Creamed Style Spinach Ingredients: 3 cups spinach, rough chopped 1-cup herbed goat's cheese sauce ½ cup yogurt 2 tablespoons capers Directions: Combine and heat just enough to wilt spinach. Pour over salmon.

One of the best sitcoms not just of its time, but of all time, Seinfeld redefined the sitcom genre. No longer was it necessary to have contrived plot, a lesson to be learned, or some other ridiculous cookie-cutter approach. With Seinfeld, an episode could be about nothing and everything all at the same time. The show follows the lives of four friends living in New York City, stand-up comedian Jerry Seinfeld, his childhood friend George Costanza (Jason Alexander), his eccentric next-door neighbor Cosmo Kramer (Michael Richards), and his ex-girlfriend Elaine Benese (Julia Louis-Dreyfus). Together, they form one of the most unforgettable comedy teams in television history.

The Seinfeld (Season 4) DVD offers a number of hilarious episodes including the season premiere in which Jerry asks George to accompany him on a trip to Los Angeles where he’ll be appearing on The Tonight Show. While in Hollywood, the two attempt to track down Kramer who recently moved there to become a star. But the trip goes awry when hotel maid Lupe can’t grasp the concept of George’s preferred bed tuck, Jerry loses his Tonight Show material, and Kramer is freehdmovieswatchonline fingered by local police as the prime suspect in the “smog strangler” killings Other notable episodes from Season 4 include “The Bubble Boy” in which George incurs the wrath of an entire township following his argument over a Trivial Pursuit question with a local handicapped icon who (for medical reasons) lives in a bubble, and “The Contest” (based on a real life Larry David experience) in which Jerry, George, Kramer, and Elaine place a wager on who can practice self-denial the longest “The Junior Mint” and “The Handicap Spot” round out a year that is arguably the best season in Seinfeld’s hilarious nine-year run

Below is a list of episodes included on the Seinfeld (Season 4) DVD:

Episode 41 (The Trip: Part 1) Air Date: 08-12-1992

Episode 42 (The Trip: Part 2) Air Date: 08-19-1992

Episode 43 (The Pitch) Air Date: 09-16-1992

Episode 44 (The Ticket) Air Date: 09-16-1992

Episode 45 (The Wallet) Air Date: 09-23-1992

Episode 46 (The Watch) Air Date: 09-30-1992

Episode 47 (The Bubble Boy) Air Date: 10-07-1992

Episode 48 (The Cheever Letters) Air Date: 10-28-1992

Episode 49 (The Opera) Air Date: 11-04-1992

Episode 50 (The Virgin) Air Date: 11-11-1992

Episode 51 (The Contest) Air Date: 11-18-1992

Episode 52 (The Airport) Air Date: 11-25-1992

Episode 53 (The Pick) Air Date: 12-16-1992

Episode 54 (The Movie) Air Date: 01-06-1993

Episode 55 (The Visa) Air Date: 01-27-1993

Episode 56 (The Shoes) Air Date: 02-04-1993

Episode 57 (The Outing) Air Date: 02-11-1993

Episode 58 (The Old Man) Air Date: 02-18-1993

Episode 59 (The Implant) Air Date: 02-25-1993

Episode 60 (The Junior Mint) Air Date: 03-18-1993

Episode 61 (The Smelly Car) Air Date: 04-15-1993

Episode 62 (The Handicap Spot) Air Date: 05-13-1993

Episode 63 (The Pilot: Part 1) Air Date: 05-20-1993

Episode 64 (The Pilot: Part 2) Air Date: 05-20-1993

“The Truman Show” is a profoundly disturbing movie. On the surface, it deals with the worn out issue of the intermingling of life and the media.

Examples for such incestuous relationships abound:

Ronald Reagan, the cinematic president was also a presidential movie star. In another movie (“The Philadelphia Experiment”) a defrosted Rip Van Winkle exclaims upon seeing Reagan on television (40 years after his forced hibernation started): “I know this guy, he used to play Cowboys in the movies”.

Candid cameras monitor the lives of webmasters (website owners) almost 24 hours a day. The resulting images are continuously posted on the Web and are available to anyone with a computer.

The last decade witnessed a spate of films, all concerned with the confusion between life and the imitations of life, the media. The ingenious “Capitan Fracasse”, “Capricorn One”, “Sliver”, “Wag the Dog” and many lesser films have all tried to tackle this (un)fortunate state of things and its moral and practical implications.

The blurring line between life and its representation in the arts is arguably the main theme of “The Truman Show”. The hero, Truman, lives in an artificial world, constructed especially for him. He was born and raised there. He knows no other place. The people around him – unbeknownst to him – are all actors. His life is monitored by 5000 cameras and broadcast live to the world, 24 hours a day, every day. He is spontaneous and funny because he is unaware of the monstrosity of which he is the main cogwheel.

But Peter Weir, the movie’s director, takes this issue one step further by perpetrating a massive act of immorality on screen. Truman is lied to, cheated, deprived of his ability to make choices, controlled and manipulated by sinister, half-mad Shylocks. As I said, he is unwittingly the only spontaneous, non-scripted, “actor” in the on-going soaper of his own life. All the other figures in his life, including his parents, are actors. Hundreds of millions of viewers and voyeurs plug in to take a peep, to intrude upon what Truman innocently and honestly believes to be his privacy. They are shown responding to various dramatic or anti-climactic events in Truman’s life. That we are the moral equivalent of these viewers-voyeurs, accomplices to the same crimes, comes as a shocking realization to us. We are (live) viewers and they are (celluloid) viewers. We both enjoy Truman’s inadvertent, non-consenting, exhibitionism. We know the truth about Truman and so do they. Of course, we are in a privileged moral position because we know it is a movie and they know it is a piece of raw life that they are watching. But moviegoers throughout Hollywood’s history have willingly and insatiably participated in numerous “Truman Shows”. The lives (real or concocted) of the studio stars were brutally exploited and incorporated in their films. Jean Harlow, Barbara Stanwyck, James Cagney all were forced to spill their guts in cathartic acts of on camera repentance and not so symbolic humiliation. “Truman Shows” is the more common phenomenon in the movie industry.

Then there is the question of the director of the movie as God and of God as the director of a movie. The members of his team – technical and non-technical alike – obey Christoff, the director, almost blindly. They suspend their better moral judgement and succumb to his whims and to the brutal and vulgar aspects of his pervasive dishonesty and sadism. The torturer loves his victims. They define him and infuse his life with meaning. Caught in a narrative, the movie says, people act immorally.

(IN)famous psychological experiments support this assertion. Students were led to administer what they thought were “deadly” electric shocks to their colleagues or to treat them bestially in simulated prisons. They obeyed orders. So did all the hideous genocidal criminals in history. The Director Weir asks: should God be allowed to be immoral or should he be bound by morality and ethics? Should his decisions and actions be constrained by an over-riding code of right and wrong? Should we obey his commandments blindly or should we exercise judgement? If we do exercise judgement are we then being immoral because God (and the Director Christoff) know more (about the world, about us, the viewers and about Truman), know better, are omnipotent? Is the exercise of judgement the usurpation of divine powers and attributes? Isn’t this act of rebelliousness bound to lead us down the path of apocalypse?

It all boils down to the question of free choice and free will versus the benevolent determinism imposed by an omniscient and omnipotent being. What is better: to have the choice and be damned (almost inevitably, as in the biblical narrative of the Garden of Eden) – or to succumb to the superior wisdom of a supreme being? A choice always involves a dilemma. It is the conflict between two equivalent states, two weighty decisions whose outcomes are equally desirable and two identically-preferable courses of action. Where there is no such equivalence – there is no choice, merely the pre-ordained (given full knowledge) exercise of a preference or inclination. Bees do not choose to make honey. A fan of football does not choose to watch a football game. He is motivated by a clear inequity between the choices that he faces. He can read a book or go to the game. His decision is clear and pre-determined by his predilection and by the inevitable and invariable implementation of the principle of pleasure. There is no choice here. It is all rather automatic. But compare this to the choice some victims had to make between two of their children in the face of Nazi brutality. Which child to sentence to death – which one to sentence to life? Now, this is a real choice. It involves conflicting emotions of equal strength. One must not confuse decisions, opportunities and choice. Decisions are the mere selection of courses of action. This selection can be the result of a choice or the result of a tendency (conscious, unconscious, or biological-genetic). Opportunities are current states of the world, which allow for a decision to be made and to affect the future state of the world. Choices are our conscious experience of moral or other dilemmas.

Christoff finds it strange that Truman – having discovered the truth – insists upon his right to make choices, i.e., upon his right to experience dilemmas. To the Director, dilemmas are painful, unnecessary, destructive, or at best disruptive. His utopian world – the one he constructed for Truman – is choice-free and dilemma-free. Truman is programmed not in the sense that his spontaneity is extinguished. Truman is wrong when, in one of the scenes, he keeps shouting: “Be careful, I am spontaneous”. The Director and fat-cat capitalistic producers want him to be spontaneous, they want him to make decisions. But they do not want him to make choices. So they influence his preferences and predilections by providing him with an absolutely totalitarian, micro-controlled, repetitive environment. Such an environment reduces the set of possible decisions so that there is only one favourable or acceptable decision (outcome) at any junction. Truman does decide whether to walk down a certain path or not. But when he does decide to walk – only one path is available to him. His world is constrained and limited – not his actions.

Actually, Truman’s only choice in the movie leads to an arguably immoral decision. He abandons ship. He walks out on the whole project. He destroys an investment of billions of dollars, people’s lives and careers. He turns his back on some of the actors who seem to really be emotionally attached to him. He ignores the good and pleasure that the show has brought to the lives of millions of people (the viewers). He selfishly and vengefully goes away. He knows all this. By the time he makes his decision, he is fully informed. He knows that some people may commit suicide, go bankrupt, endure major depressive episodes, do drugs. But this massive landscape of resulting devastation does not deter him. He prefers his narrow, personal, interest. He walks.

But Truman did not ask or choose to be put in his position. He found himself responsible for all these people without being consulted. There was no consent or act of choice involved. How can anyone be responsible for the well-being and lives of other people – if he did not CHOOSE to be so responsible? Moreover, Truman had the perfect moral right to think that these people wronged him. Are we morally responsible and accountable for the well-being and lives of those who wrong us? True Christians are, for instance.

Moreover, most of us, most of the time, find ourselves in situations which we did not help mould by our decisions. We are unwillingly cast into the world. We do not provide prior consent to being born. This fundamental decision is made for us, forced upon us. This pattern persists throughout our childhood and adolescence: decisions are made elsewhere by others and influence our lives profoundly. As adults we are the objects – often the victims – of the decisions of corrupt politicians, mad scientists, megalomaniac media barons, gung-ho generals and demented artists. This world is not of our making and our ability to shape and influence it is very limited and rather illusory. We live in our own “Truman Show”. Does this mean that we are not morally responsible for others?

We are morally responsible even if we did not choose uhe circumstances and the parameters and characteristics of the universe that we inhabit. The Swedish Count Wallenberg imperilled his life (and lost it) smuggling hunted Jews out of Nazi watchmoviesonlinefreehd occupied Europe. He did not choose, or helped to shape Nazi Europe. It was the brainchild of the deranged Director Hitler. Having found himself an unwilling participant in Hitler’s horror show, Wallenberg did not turn his back and opted out. He remained within the bloody and horrific set and did his best. Truman should have done the same. Jesus said that he should have loved his enemies. He should have felt and acted with responsibility towards his fellow human beings, even towards those who wronged him greatly.

But this may be an inhuman demand. Such forgiveness and magnanimity are the reserve of God. And the fact that Truman’s tormentors did not see themselves as such and believed that they were acting in his best interests and that they were catering to his every need – does not absolve them from their crimes. Truman should have maintained a fine balance between his responsibility to the show, its creators and its viewers and his natural drive to get back at his tormentors. The source of the dilemma (which led to his act of choosing) is that the two groups overlap. Truman found himself in the impossible position of being the sole guarantor of the well-being and lives of his tormentors. To put the question in sharper relief: are we morally obliged to save the life and livelihood of someone who greatly wronged us? Or is vengeance justified in such a case?

A very problematic figure in this respect is that of Truman’s best and childhood friend. They grew up together, shared secrets, emotions and adventures. Yet he lies to Truman constantly and under the Director’s instructions. Everything he says is part of a script. It is this disinformation that convinces us that he is not Truman’s true friend. A real friend is expected, above all, to provide us with full and true information and, thereby, to enhance our ability to choose. Truman’s true love in the Show tried to do it. She paid the price: she was ousted from the show. But she tried to provide Truman with a choice. It is not sufficient to say the right things and make the right moves. Inner drive and motivation are required and the willingness to take risks (such as the risk of providing Truman with full information about his condition). All the actors who played Truman’s parents, loving wife, friends and colleagues, miserably failed on this score.

It is in this mimicry that the philosophical key to the whole movie rests. A Utopia cannot be faked. Captain Nemo’s utopian underwater city was a real Utopia because everyone knew everything about it. People were given a choice (though an irreversible and irrevocable one). They chose to become lifetime members of the reclusive Captain’s colony and to abide by its (overly rational) rules. The Utopia came closest to extinction when a group of stray survivors of a maritime accident were imprisoned in it against their expressed will. In the absence of choice, no utopia can exist. In the absence of full, timely and accurate information, no choice can exist. Actually, the availability of choice is so crucial that even when it is prevented by nature itself – and not by the designs of more or less sinister or monomaniac people – there can be no Utopia. In H.G. Wells’ book “The Time Machine”, the hero wanders off to the third millennium only to come across a peaceful Utopia. Its members are immortal, don’t have to work, or think in order to survive. Sophisticated machines take care of all their needs. No one forbids them to make choices. There simply is no need to make them. So the Utopia is fake and indeed ends badly.

Finally, the “Truman Show” encapsulates the most virulent attack on capitalism in a long time. Greedy, thoughtless money machines in the form of billionaire tycoon-producers exploit Truman’s life shamelessly and remorselessly in the ugliest display of human vices possible. The Director indulges in his control-mania. The producers indulge in their monetary obsession. The viewers (on both sides of the silver screen) indulge in voyeurism. The actors vie and compete in the compulsive activity of furthering their petty careers. It is a repulsive canvas of a disintegrating world. Perhaps Christoff is right after al when he warns Truman about the true nature of the world. But Truman chooses. He chooses the exit door leading to the outer darkness over the false sunlight in the Utopia that he leaves behind.

“The Truman Show” is a profoundly disturbing movie. On the surface, it deals with the worn out issue of the intermingling of life and the media.

Examples for such incestuous relationships abound:

Ronald Reagan, the cinematic president was also a presidential movie star. In another movie (“The Philadelphia Experiment”) a defrosted Rip Van Winkle exclaims upon seeing Reagan on television (40 years after his forced hibernation started): “I know this guy, he used to play Cowboys in the movies”.

Candid cameras monitor the lives of webmasters (website owners) almost 24 hours a day. The resulting images are continuously posted on the Web and are available to anyone with a computer.

The last decade witnessed a spate of films, all concerned with the confusion between life and the imitations of life, the media. The ingenious “Capitan Fracasse”, “Capricorn One”, “Sliver”, “Wag the Dog” and many lesser films have all tried to tackle this (un)fortunate state of things and its moral and practical implications.

The blurring line between life and its representation in the arts is arguably the main theme of “The Truman Show”. The hero, Truman, lives in an artificial world, constructed especially for him. He was born and raised there. He knows no other place. The people around him – unbeknownst to him – are all actors. His life is monitored by 5000 cameras and broadcast live to the world, 24 hours a day, every day. He is spontaneous and funny because he is unaware of the monstrosity of which he is the main cogwheel.

But Peter Weir, the movie’s director, takes this issue one step further by perpetrating a massive act of immorality on screen. Truman is lied to, cheated, deprived of his ability to make choices, controlled and manipulated by sinister, half-mad Shylocks. As I said, he is unwittingly the only spontaneous, non-scripted, “actor” in the on-going soaper of his own life. All the other figures in his life, including his parents, are actors. Hundreds of millions of viewers and voyeurs plug in to take a peep, to intrude upon what Truman innocently and honestly believes to be his privacy. They are shown responding to various dramatic or anti-climactic events in Truman’s life. That we are the moral equivalent of these viewers-voyeurs, accomplices to the same crimes, comes as a shocking realization to us. We are (live) viewers and they are (celluloid) viewers. We both enjoy Truman’s inadvertent, non-consenting, exhibitionism. We know the truth about Truman and so do they. Of course, we are in a privileged moral position because we know it is a movie and they know it is a piece of raw life that they are watching. But moviegoers throughout Hollywood’s history have willingly and insatiably participated in numerous “Truman Shows”. The lives (real or concocted) of the studio stars were brutally exploited and incorporated in their films. Jean Harlow, Barbara Stanwyck, James Cagney all were forced to spill their guts in cathartic acts of on camera repentance and not so symbolic humiliation. “Truman Shows” is the more common phenomenon in the movie industry.

Then there is the question of the director of the movie as God and of God as the director of a movie. The members of his team – technical and non-technical alike – obey Christoff, the director, almost blindly. They suspend their better moral judgement and succumb to his whims and to the brutal and vulgar aspects of his pervasive dishonesty and sadism. The torturer loves his victims. They define him and infuse his life with meaning. Caught in a narrative, the movie says, people act immorally.

(IN)famous psychological experiments support this assertion. Students were led to administer what they thought were “deadly” electric shocks to their colleagues or to treat them bestially in simulated prisons. They obeyed orders. So did all the hideous genocidal criminals in history. The Director Weir asks: should God be allowed to be immoral or should he be bound by morality and ethics? Should his decisions and actions be constrained by an over-riding code of right and wrong? Should we obey his commandments blindly or should we exercise judgement? If we do exercise judgement are we then being immoral because God (and the Director Christoff) know more (about the world, about us, the viewers and about Truman), know better, are omnipotent? Is the exercise of judgement the usurpation of divine powers and attributes? Isn’t this act of rebelliousness bound to lead us down the path of apocalypse?

It all boils down to the question of free choice and free will versus the benevolent determinism imposed by an omniscient and omnipotent being. What is better: to have the choice and be damned (almost inevitably, as in the biblical narrative of the Garden of Eden) – or to succumb to the superior wisdom of a supreme being? A choice always involves a dilemma. It is the conflict between two equivalent states, two weighty decisions whose outcomes are equally desirable and two identically-preferable courses of action. Where there is no such equivalence – there is no choice, merely the pre-ordained (given full knowledge) exercise of a preference or inclination. Bees do not choose to make honey. A fan of football does not choose to watch a football game. He is motivated by a clear inequity between the choices that he faces. He can read a book or go to the game. His decision is clear and pre-determined by his predilection and by the inevitable and invariable implementation of the principle of pleasure. There is no choice here. It is all rather automatic. But compare this to the choice some victims had to make between two of their children in the face of Nazi brutality. Which child to sentence to death – which one to sentence to life? Now, this is a real choice. It involves conflicting emotions of equal strength. One must not confuse decisions, opportunities and choice. Decisions are the mere selection of courses of action. This selection can be the result of a choice or the result of a tendency (conscious, unconscious, or biological-genetic). Opportunities are current states of the world, which allow for a decision to be made and to affect the future state of the world. Choices are our conscious experience of moral or other dilemmas.

Christoff finds it strange that Truman – having discovered the truth – insists upon his right to make choices, i.e., upon his right to experience dilemmas. To the Director, dilemmas are painful, unnecessary, destructive, or at best disruptive. His utopian world – the one he constructed for Truman – is choice-free and dilemma-free. Truman is programmed not in the sense that his spontaneity is extinguished. Truman is wrong when, in one of the scenes, he keeps shouting: “Be careful, I am spontaneous”. The Director and fat-cat capitalistic producers want him to be spontaneous, they want him to make decisions. But they do not want him to make choices. So they influence his preferences and predilections by providing him with an absolutely totalitarian, micro-controlled, repetitive environment. Such an environment reduces the set of possible decisions so that there is only one favourable or acceptable decision (outcome) at any junction. Truman does decide whether to walk down a certain path or not. But when he does decide to walk – only one path is available to him. His world is constrained and limited – not his actions.

Actually, Truman’s only choice in the movie leads to an arguably immoral decision. He abandons ship. He walks out on the whole project. He destroys an investment of billions of dollars, people’s lives and careers. He turns his back on some of the actors who seem to really be emotionally attached to him. He ignores the good and pleasure that the show has brought to the lives of millions of people (the viewers). He selfishly and vengefully goes away. He knows all this. By the time he makes his decision, he is fully informed. He knows that some people may commit suicide, go bankrupt, endure major depressive episodes, do drugs. But this massive landscape of resulting devastation does not deter him. He prefers his narrow, personal, interest. He walks.

But Truman did not ask or choose to be put in his position. He found himself responsible for all these people without being consulted. There was no consent or act of choice involved. How can anyone be responsible for the well-being and lives of other people – if he did not CHOOSE to be so responsible? Moreover, Truman had the perfect moral right to think that these people wronged him. Are we morally responsible and accountable for the well-being and lives of those who wrong us? True Christians are, for instance.

Moreover, most of us, most of the time, find ourselves in situations which we did not help mould by our decisions. We watchmoviesonlinefreehd are unwillingly cast into the world. We do not provide prior consent to being born. This fundamental decision is made for us, forced upon us. This pattern persists throughout our childhood and adolescence: decisions are made elsewhere by others and influence our lives profoundly. As adults we are the objects – often the victims – of the decisions of corrupt politicians, mad scientists, megalomaniac media barons, gung-ho generals and demented artists. This world is not of our making and our ability to shape and influence it is very limited and rather illusory. We live in our own “Truman Show”. Does this mean that we are not morally responsible for others?

We are morally responsible even if we did not choose uhe circumstances and the parameters and characteristics of the universe that we inhabit. The Swedish Count Wallenberg imperilled his life (and lost it) smuggling hunted Jews out of Nazi occupied Europe. He did not choose, or helped to shape Nazi Europe. It was the brainchild of the deranged Director Hitler. Having found himself an unwilling participant in Hitler’s horror show, Wallenberg did not turn his back and opted out. He remained within the bloody and horrific set and did his best. Truman should have done the same. Jesus said that he should have loved his enemies. He should have felt and acted with responsibility towards his fellow human beings, even towards those who wronged him greatly.

But this may be an inhuman demand. Such forgiveness and magnanimity are the reserve of God. And the fact that Truman’s tormentors did not see themselves as such and believed that they were acting in his best interests and that they were catering to his every need – does not absolve them from their crimes. Truman should have maintained a fine balance between his responsibility to the show, its creators and its viewers and his natural drive to get back at his tormentors. The source of the dilemma (which led to his act of choosing) is that the two groups overlap. Truman found himself in the impossible position of being the sole guarantor of the well-being and lives of his tormentors. To put the question in sharper relief: are we morally obliged to save the life and livelihood of someone who greatly wronged us? Or is vengeance justified in such a case?

A very problematic figure in this respect is that of Truman’s best and childhood friend. They grew up together, shared secrets, emotions and adventures. Yet he lies to Truman constantly and under the Director’s instructions. Everything he says is part of a script. It is this disinformation that convinces us that he is not Truman’s true friend. A real friend is expected, above all, to provide us with full and true information and, thereby, to enhance our ability to choose. Truman’s true love in the Show tried to do it. She paid the price: she was ousted from the show. But she tried to provide Truman with a choice. It is not sufficient to say the right things and make the right moves. Inner drive and motivation are required and the willingness to take risks (such as the risk of providing Truman with full information about his condition). All the actors who played Truman’s parents, loving wife, friends and colleagues, miserably failed on this score.

It is in this mimicry that the philosophical key to the whole movie rests. A Utopia cannot be faked. Captain Nemo’s utopian underwater city was a real Utopia because everyone knew everything about it. People were given a choice (though an irreversible and irrevocable one). They chose to become lifetime members of the reclusive Captain’s colony and to abide by its (overly rational) rules. The Utopia came closest to extinction when a group of stray survivors of a maritime accident were imprisoned in it against their expressed will. In the absence of choice, no utopia can exist. In the absence of full, timely and accurate information, no choice can exist. Actually, the availability of choice is so crucial that even when it is prevented by nature itself – and not by the designs of more or less sinister or monomaniac people – there can be no Utopia. In H.G. Wells’ book “The Time Machine”, the hero wanders off to the third millennium only to come across a peaceful Utopia. Its members are immortal, don’t have to work, or think in order to survive. Sophisticated machines take care of all their needs. No one forbids them to make choices. There simply is no need to make them. So the Utopia is fake and indeed ends badly.

Finally, the “Truman Show” encapsulates the most virulent attack on capitalism in a long time. Greedy, thoughtless money machines in the form of billionaire tycoon-producers exploit Truman’s life shamelessly and remorselessly in the ugliest display of human vices possible. The Director indulges in his control-mania. The producers indulge in their monetary obsession. The viewers (on both sides of the silver screen) indulge in voyeurism. The actors vie and compete in the compulsive activity of furthering their petty careers. It is a repulsive canvas of a disintegrating world. Perhaps Christoff is right after al when he warns Truman about the true nature of the world. But Truman chooses. He chooses the exit door leading to the outer darkness over the false sunlight in the Utopia that he leaves behind.