mescalito Posted March 29, 2003 Just watched this Depp movie again after many years-forgot how Hillarious this cult movie was :D -recommended Viewing for those who haven't seen it yet! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wyyrm Posted March 29, 2003 Fear and Loathing should be an inspiration to us all... it certainly is for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Plantsoma Posted April 23, 2003 I have this classic on CD in AVI format. Viewable on DivX etc, from you computer, if anyone was interested? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gerbil Posted April 25, 2003 Personally, I didn't really like it at all. Maybe it was because so many people were telling me to watch it, and how great it was, but I found it to be quite a let down. Maybe it was just me hehe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gomaos Posted April 25, 2003 I also find there's a lot of segemnts in the movie which are rather boring, i.e.in the beginning when they are playing wargames or whatever that part was simply totally annoying, I also find that the movie did not point out that it is possible to use drugs recreationally and positively and not just like the 2 "heroes" absolutely uncontrolled and unguided. Somebody told me that they used to show this movie in the 90s at unis to frighten the students off drugs and to show how decadent american culture is or something like that.... In the end is it not because of such compulsive behaviour and irreponsible drug-(ab)use that drugs are illegal? Which is unfair and unjustifyable to the overwhelming majority of drug users who know what they are doing and do so mostly with little damage to health physically and psychologically. Only because of 5-10 per cent of extreme people who can't and/or don't want to control themselves the rest of us has to put up and live in fear of persecution and possibly even prosecution. Democracy my ass! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tryptameanie Posted April 25, 2003 I loved the book but found the movie so boring and irritating I don't think I even made it to the end. I thought the best bit of the book was Thompson's rants and raves, which didn't make it into the movie. The plot was basically "two men take shitloads of drugs", not much there really....I also thought the movie pandered to popular misconceptions about drug use and users(including those held by many drug users themselves, while Hunter's book was a highly intelligent musing not just on drugs, but on the surreal and nauseating enigma that is American culture. If you havent seen the movie, read the book first, if you have then read the book regardless of whether you liked the movie or not, it really is a classic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fractalhead Posted April 26, 2003 hehe, and it ws until recently that i thought 'adrenochrome' was a fictional drug just in fear and loathing. Has anyone tried this indole? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nabraxas Posted April 26, 2003 agree w/those who thought it was a let down. as to the excess ov dwug taking, i agree w/gomaos- the saddest thing is that many idolise thompson & the book precisely for the OTT drug escapades- many ov which, as thompson has admitted, are sheer literary fantasy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mescalito Posted April 26, 2003 I did say it was HILAIRIOUS not educational Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Plantsoma Posted April 27, 2003 gomaos: In the end is it not because of such compulsive behaviour and irreponsible drug-(ab)use that drugs are illegal? Only because of 5-10 per cent of extreme people who can't and/or don't want to control themselves the rest of us has to put up and live in fear of persecution and possibly even prosecution. Democracy my ass! Too Right Gomaos!!On a sensible note also: Governments probably would love it if most people saw drug use in a similar manner to this film. Sort of supports their means to persecute against 'drug' users. 'See kiddies, this is what will happen to your life if u use drugs' Although, i cant help but love the film for what it is. Fictional. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest electro Posted April 27, 2003 nobody asked me, but ill put my 2 cents in anyway... Personally i find the first 15 minutes of the movie extremly funny, with the rest progressively getting worse and worse until finally making an absolute mockery of all substance users. It puts fourth an image of irresponsibility and recklessness to the (majority of) unknowing public, who, having nothing to balance this view against swallow the view hook line and sinker. even worse is the fact that i have seen many "wannabe hardKore druggies" follow this movie religiously, so much so that they "steal" dangerous pieces of the movie to claim as their own behavioural traits for use when "fucked up" - these people should be getting help for whatever their issues are while hiding from them with drugs, not endangering both themselves and others while hiding, pretending to be "cool like those in F&L in Las Vegas" movies are a very powerful form of media, especially in shaping younger generations views on the world. I'd like to say that Directors should be more careful with the underlying messages their movies portray. However this is (supposed to be) a free country, and everyone should have their right to feel and express what they want: so they can make these movies however they want and i get to whinge about it... i just hope not too many people are influenced negatively by it, and if they are, that they take responsibility for their own actions (and not try to blame their influences). Wow that was a long 2 cents ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darklight Posted April 28, 2003 Funnily enough you could say that about the book ( well, not you maybe and I certainly wouldn't... but yr general public reaction is more than capable of coming to such conclusions IMO ) Is this a case of film somehow being seen as a more 'persuasive' media than print- especially books- or do you think that a fault of this particular movie is that it fails to accurately capture the spirit of the book that it was based on? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mescalito Posted April 28, 2003 So what!? -Dr. Seuss wasn't a real doctor :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tryptameanie Posted April 29, 2003 quote: do you think that a fault of this particular movie is that it fails to accurately capture the spirit of the book that it was based on? Yeah. I thought the spirit of the book (and it's entertainment as well as philosophical value) was contained within the non-plot-developing rants that were ommited in the movie. Although the plot was almost identical, the soul of the book was not there. In contrast, the movie of that other "drug classic", The Naked Lunch, had almost no commonality of plot or scenes with the book, yet captured it's essence beautifully. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pezzhuascan Posted April 29, 2003 just to give my self some kind of credibility i study nueropharmacology- i am under the understanding that adrenochrome is an oxidated form of addrenaline... with little to no effects if taken exogenously... The unoxidised form- addrenaline is relativly boring exogenously too- mainly bumps up your heart rate a little... Noraddrenaline on the other hand can be reasonably entertaining- be very careful though... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pezzhuascan Posted April 29, 2003 btw- indole has nothing to do with adrenochrome- adrenochrome is a catechoamine- indolamines are serotonin (5HT), Melatonin, DMT and various other but adrenochrome is certainly not an indole and has very very different effects... basically stim vs hallucinogen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pezzhuascan Posted April 29, 2003 It's been a while since i've seen the movie too, but after reading great white shark hunt i came to the conlusion that dr gonzo is a fictional character based on a friend of Hunter S. I'm not sure (haven't seen the flick in a long time) but it is my impression that Dr. Gonzo is portrayed as a figment of Hunter's imagination... im pretty sure the only time he speaks is either when he is only in hunters presence/earshot or when there is one other person in the room... the hitchiker thought he was crazy anyway- why would him talking to his imaginary friend add any surprise- the poor christian girl- well... even if should could here dr gonz too- that many entheogens on your first hit and you'll here all kindsa sh*T (not sure of the language restriciotns on this board yet) Also i am not sure about this- have to watch the movie again but doesn't the photographer who comes to there appartment ask who hunter is talking to when observing a convo between gonz and hunter? and i dunno i'm pretty sure im wrong about this one butwas there only one bed in the hotel room? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Auxin Posted April 29, 2003 "indole has nothing to do with adrenochrome- adrenochrome is a catechoamine" WRONG! Epinephrine (adrenaline) is a catecholamine, but its intermediate oxidation product adrenochrome is a indole derivative. Adrenochrome may not have the actual indole moeity, but I assure you it is a indole derivative (a 5,6-indolinedione derivative to be specific). You probably wont beleive me until I draw it, so here... SEE, not a catecholamine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theobromos Posted April 30, 2003 Go on, give us dopachrome too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Auxin Posted April 30, 2003 !!DOPACHROME!! Great name for it :D But its called 5,6-Indolinedione (assuming you meant the dopamine derivative) and I have no idea of what if any effects it has. As far as the structure goes just look at the adrenochrome pic and take away the CH3 and the OH. Because dopamine is a primary amine instead of a secondary amine I doubt you could make it in any useful yield by the standard oxidation methodology utilized in adrenochrome synth. (you should get more difficult-to-remove byproduct than product) but I have been wrong before. [ 30. April 2003, 17:19: Message edited by: Auxin ] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theobromos Posted May 1, 2003 It is produced biologically (mushrooms and purslane if I remember right but don't quote me on that) but usually as an intermediate. Can't remember if I made up the name or not Mmmm, bisindoles as byproducts are usually not a good idea, peak E in that tryptophan, for example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theobromos Posted May 1, 2003 And I really can't remember if you get the amino acid version too ( -COOH at the 2 position), it is a long time since I saw those pathways, but I suspect so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theobromos Posted May 1, 2003 1,160 references to dopachrome on Google, I thought I must have seen it before. It is the carboxylic acid, derived from DOPA. Humans have a dopachrome tautomerase for making melanins. I wouldn't recommend trying either of these compounds, there are some 5,6 dihydroxyindole derivatives that are quite good at killing nerves. I've rembered it was fungal pigments that contain the dopachrome, such as some of those of Fly Agaric. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Auxin Posted May 1, 2003 So dopachrome is a common name, and its the 2-carboxylic acid Huh? Cool, learn something new every day Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaNozz Direct Posted May 2, 2003 Pezzhuascan - Dr. Gonzo was the name of the person who should have checked into the first hotel, but Hunter and his mate stole his room. Hence the total freakout with the receptionist, Hunter thinking he's busted for scamming her, she turns into a giant eel etc. Hard to tell this happened unless you've read the book. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
