Dude.. the term hippie was used by the press back in the sixties, the 'hippies' didn't call them self hippies, and even now, the people who were hippies some time ago are not hippies anymore, they are just very liberal... dude, don't label your self
Be here now - was one of the things that the freaks that I hung with said a lot. Good advise even now. I also would like to have been born in 1955. That would make me 8 years younger (grin)
Back in '55 people must've walked around, shaking their heads in disbelief muttering, "Man, this is a long time ago!"
Omg, I tought you were Ant who got high and thinks he's 14! You know, there's a guy here who's Mr Mojo Risin, too! And about being born 50 years ago, I think it's silly. Of course, I would like more than anything to have chance to hear The Doors, Janis, Hendrix...etc live, but if I was born 50 years ago I wouldn't be this person I am now and I wouldn't be around the people I love... Time machine would be great, though...
Being born 50 years ago would have exposed me to the possibility of being drafted and sent to Vietnam.
Well Mojo, I'm a bit older than you, but when I think of the political situations and the counter-culture movements going on back in the '60s I almost wish I was there. But hey, the world's still full of problems, maybe not quite the same ones. But they're everywhere around us, and I think we need the same kind of free, counter-culture people around right now to effect some kind of change. So I think, yeah, it'd be groovy to be around four decades ago and be labelled a hippie by all of the squares; but we've got plenty to do right here and now, today, as well. Take care dude. Love, Johnny.
THE TIME MACHINE * * * STARRING: Rod Taylor, Alan Young, Yvette Mimieux, Sebastian Cabot, Tom Helmore, Whit Bissell, Doris Lloyd 1960, 103 Minutes, Directed by: George Pal The Time Machine has aged terribly - which is perhaps ironic for a movie with such a title. Not only does the movie, made in 1960, predict that the world will end after a nuclear war in 1966 (!), but the special effects and make-up are positively antiquated now. Sure, the special effects were clever for its time, but if you're the type who hate old movies because of their inferior (when compared to today's special effects extravaganzas) production values, then you're advised to avoid The Time Machine. In such an event I am sure that you would prefer the 2002 remake. Be warned, however, that both movie versions take liberties with the H.G. Wells' novel on they are supposedly based. It would seem that any similarities between the movies and their source material are purely coincidental, especially in the case of the new version: its producers probably wanted to make The Mummy instead! "The Morlocks are blue-skinned hairy monsters that toil beneath the earth, keeping the Eloi in their luxurious lifestyle. Starting to get H.G. Wells' point?" This 1960 version will have literary purists fuming, even though it doesn't take as much liberties as George Pal did with a previous H.G. Wells movie adaptation, namely 1953's War of the Worlds.) Wells' Darwinist comments involving labour and capital evolving into separate races are diluted in favour of romance and adventure. A Victorian inventor takes a time machine to the year 802 701, where he finds humanity divided into two groups: the Eloi and the Morlocks. The Eloi are a vacant lot, looking like the kids from Village of the Damned would probably have looked like had they grown up. These airhead Aryan types lead a life of complete luxury in a virtual paradise, but they lack culture, drive and ambition. In contrast, the Morlocks are blue skinned hairy monsters that toil beneath the earth, keeping the Eloi in their luxurious lifestyle. Starting to get the point? For a succinct summary go watch Mel Gibson's 1996 movie Ransom, in which the villain played by Gary Sinise explains The Time Machine's plot points. (Or rather don't: any movie in which one identifies with the supposed bad guys instead of the film's hero has to be skewed. Besides, who can identify with a corrupt billionaire union-bashing airline owner played by Mel Gibson?) Like I said, unlike its literary inspiration The Time Machine isn't out to score any philosophical points. Despite this it remains a fun movie to watch. The plot is still interesting, the acting decent, the pace brisk, the dialogue thoughtful and the whole affair isn't anywhere as camp as it could have been. If you're a serious SF fan then you'll no doubt enjoy The Time Machine and agree that it is deservedly the classic that it is held out to be. Catch it late on TV one night. (Possible double bill idea: rent this movie together with the much underrated
hey hun it didnt turn out that way, but you can make something from you live when you are here.. now... there is much to do still
im not so sure you can be a "real" hippy nowadays. back then it was just the cool thing to do. not so much anymore. hiphop is the new hippy nowadays
Back in the '60's, I used to wish I had been born in the 1940's...the years when many of the hippies who really did hang out in the Haight and go to Woodstock were born. I was just a kid in the 60's, and it broke my heart that I was too young to go to Woodstock...but I got my opportunities as I got older to participate in the similar things that were happening when I came of age. The opportunites are still there...they are a little different now, but there is always room, in any generation, to be a "hippie", to be a kynd soul who lives and promotes peace, and has a wonderful time doing it!!
Well Hiphop is a very influential part of the music scene. It also represents a culture and has some proud roots. There is also some social conscience associated with it. However, being a freak was a bit more that the music. I do not think Hiphop has the social change agenda that the Hippy/Yippy movement has.