moviefreakedmind

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Comments like that weren’t being made by most in the politics thread. Jay broke his own rules on personal attacks and insults and then deleted the thread almost immediately after people started calling him out on it.

I told dahmage he was acting like an ass (and he was) for doing exactly what everyone in the thread was warned not to do repeatedly over the course of months, if not years.

You didn’t. You called him an ass for pointing out in one word how senseless your political commentary was. No one ever has been told not to use one-word responses to call someone out. So that’s a rule you made up on the spot.

As I’ve said elsewhere, rather than losing my cool, I probably should’ve just banned him for failing to heed previous warnings, in which case we’d be in the same situation (“Jay’s abusing his powers blah blah blah”), but at least I wouldn’t have “broken my own rules”.

Of course we’d have said that you were abusing your power because you would’ve banned someone who didn’t even break the rules and that you were obviously just mad at because he was being “snarky”, as you like to say, towards your political opinion. If snark is against the rules then you would’ve had to have banned yourself a million times before, so if you’re saying respectfulness is a rule then it’s just another of the many rules that you yourself are not beholden to.

Comments like that weren’t being made by most in the politics thread. Jay broke his own rules on personal attacks and insults and then deleted the thread almost immediately after people started calling him out on it.

I’m so erratic that I’m not allowed to drink.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Warbler said:

oojason said:

For banning someone who posted up an image regarding paedophilia, bestiality and religious intolerance (and IIRC was also racist?), and who also kicked off at the mods and then re-posted the offending image - I’ve no qualms about my actions there.

Just so everyone knows what oojason is referring to here. It image in question was one of a westboro baptists protester, holding up offensive signs. I was not posting it condone, or agree with what they do or condone or approve of paedophilia, bestiality, religious intolerance, racism, or homophobia. I think the westbor baptists are the scum of the earth. I absolutely hate what they do. oojason knowing me as long as he did, should known that would not approve of those things or the westboro baptists. I posted the pic to show that not all peaceful protesters are good people. I thought I had made that clear in the initial post. I thought, if the post was read in the contexts of the posts that had come before and with the accompanying text with the pic, that my reasons and intentions were clear. But turned out it was not. I made more clear my reason for posting the pic later on, but it was not done fast enough to suit oojason.

Oojason’s referring to Haseo and the image which got him banned.

Actually I think he’s talking about jediknightsuzini.

Trident said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Uh, OK this is getting too creepy. I’m done here.

It gets a little hot on the understanding department and it blows your mind? Good God. What a coward.

No. It’s creepy that you’re talking about pedophilia being a “deep love for kids.” Not wanting to be involved in that conversation does not make me a coward.

Uh, OK this is getting too creepy. I’m done here.

It’ll be up to flametitan whether this can even be discussed in this thread, so she’ll probably comment on it whenever she’s next here, but I wanted to debunk some of this shit myself because I didn’t want that inherently bigoted comparison to go unanswered.

If you’re a secular humanist then why are you kosher?

It’s similar but it involves defiling an animal rather than a child.

pleasehello said:

But judging by the reactions, I don’t think anyone is really even willing to consider the perfectly reasonable possibility that Trident is putting forth: that these two completely different phenomena could both be the result of the physical wiring of someone’s brain.

It’s a bad analogy. It’d be better to compare it to people with a desire to torture or hurt people or something like that.

RicOlie_2 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

What is SSA? And fuck any attempt to compare or link LGBT orientations to pedophilia. I have no tolerance for that.

Why? He’s not linking them on a moral level, he’s linking them on a psychological level. Clearly, there’s a difference. Both are attractions that are not evolutionary beneficial (neither can lead to procreation if pursued).

Child rape actually can and does lead to procreation. Your church demands that impregnated children not be allowed to terminate those life-threatening pregnancies. So you’re totally wrong there.

Homosexuality at this point is evolutionarily beneficial since it won’t contribute to overpopulation (which I’m assuming you pretend is a myth). Plus gay couples can adopt and raise children that are orphans, unwanted, or wards of the state.

Are we basing whether or not something is a disorder on whether or not it is “moral” in and of itself? That’s seems awfully arbitrary to me.

I’m basing it on whether or not it has negative consequences. If something has no negative consequences then I have no problem with it.

Was there gate weave in the 35mm used for SW and ESB? I don’t remember there being any if there was.

Shit like Date Movie, Disaster Movie, Not Another Teen Movie, the Scary Movie sequels, Meet the Spartans, and all those shit movies have ruined the parody genre. I don’t think that film parody will be a respected art form any time soon because of that deluge of absolute garbage that came out during the 2000s.

Yep. Great video.

What is SSA? And fuck any attempt to compare or link LGBT orientations to pedophilia. I have no tolerance for that.

That’s debatable, but he’d never seen the movie.

That’s my entire point. RLM fans ruin RLM for me.

Dek Rollins said:
At the time I simply said I have no interest in seeing it, and made no genuine comment on my opinion of the movie.

That’s not true. You parroted their opinions and said the film was just Oscar-bait and gimmicky.

pleasehello said:
But I guess there are just some people who consider it their life’s work to try and paint everyone they find slightly annoying as pretentious, hypocritical pricks.

What is this horseshit? I said I liked RLM. I just think they’re obnoxious and I hate their fanbase.

DominicCobb said:

Anakin Starkiller said:

Say Lucas had handed over his company to Kathleen Kennedy, but without selling it to Disney. Would things still have played out roughly the same? Are Disney basically just funding them (and forcing to release Solo in May)? Or would there actually be a significant difference? Maybe the sequel trilogy but no spinoffs?

From what I understand Solo was being developed by Lawrence Kasdan even before the Disney buyout, and Lucas had at one point planned to write/direct Episode VII himself. So it’s possible that in terms of the kinds of films we’re seeing (sequels, spin-offs) things would be the same, but other things would be quite different I’m sure (who’s making the films, when they’re being released, etc.).

I’m pretty sure that Lucas was also brainstorming ideas for the Death Star plans backstory before he sold to Disney, which was the premise for Rogue One.

Dek Rollins said:

moviefreakedmind said:

They always go after people for “pretentiousness” and so does their audience.

But they aren’t being pretentious. Of course they believe in their own interpretations about a film, but they aren’t claiming that their opinions should matter to you. And remember that time they called other YouTube critics “pricks”? In the next episode they bring up how many people got mad at them and Rich blatantly says “I’m a prick.”

They do claim that people who don’t hold their opinions are stupid and simple-minded. That’s pretentiousness in my book.

And to bring up the whole audience issue, I don’t think their fanbase has nearly as many blind followers as you seem to believe there are. People repeating jokes or generally agreeing is perfectly normal.

Judging by RLM fans’ willingness to love or hate a film based entirely on the RLM stance without even having seen it, I’d definitely disagree with you. You yourself have done that on this very forum.

They always go after people for “pretentiousness” and so does their audience.

He is self-deprecating but both of them obviously firmly believe that they’re right and everyone else is stupid and wrong. They frequently attribute the success of movies they don’t like to audiences being stupid or simpletons (see their Rogue One and IT reviews). No matter how ‘common folk’ they seem, that’s their obvious perspective. Like I said, I do the same thing but I don’t pretend otherwise.

Handman said:

I find that the content, the way media portrays that content, and the way the general fanbase interprets that content, are three entirely different things. I’ve definitely let one influence the way I’ve felt about the others before. But lately I’ve been trying to keep them separate and come to my own conclusions… more or less.

Normally I can, but the way people just blindly parrot every single opinion that RLM espouses really bothers me.

Something I am curious about is why it matters in the first place. What you define as genuine exchanges of ideas weren’t requested by the OP and he also never complained that the content of that thread was against his wishes. Since the content also wasn’t breaking any forum rules, according to those same rules the OP’s preference is what matters. I brought that up a while ago and I never got a justification for why it’s acceptable for the administrator to selectively decide what rule-abiding conversation is and isn’t permissible. Obviously you own the forum so you can do whatever you want, but I think we can all agree that that alone would be an immature and unsatisfying answer.

I’ve found that over the last year or two the RedLetterMedia people piss me off more and more. I think it has to do with the disgusting worship that a lot of their fans have for their opinions, but I also think that it has something to do with the way they pretend to be these common folk that aren’t pretentious (which is a quality they claim to hate) but their commentary is some of most pretentious that I’ve ever seen. Just because they put it forth in a vulgar and casual way doesn’t make it less so. And I know I shouldn’t be talking because I think I’m right about everything and I think almost everyone that disagrees with me is wrong and stupid, but I admit it. I say all this as someone that used to be a die-hard RLM fan.