generalfrevious

At this rate, Cosby could become the next Jimmy Savile.

Another allegation against Cosby just came in, from Janice Dickinson no less:

http://www.avclub.com/article/janice-dickinson-says-she-was-also-sexually-assaul-212046

Kobe Bryant got off the hook though, thanks to a mistrial.

How about the side against rape? How would you feel if 97% of all murderers got away scot-free? Or say that murder victims deserved do die in the first place because they were asking for it? 

This is today's rape culture people, where any man can sexually assault any woman on the street without any repercussions down the road. It's even better if you're a famous comedian, football player, filmmaker, or politician; the public can just slutshame your victims into silence! This is how extremely sexist modern society is, where being raped is always the victim's fault, and being famous gets rid of all those pesky laws that ordinary people have to obey. 

And it's not just because Cosby thinks black people should clean up their act.

I heard that 97% of all rapists are never charged or convicted in this country. Being female nowadays is like being a Jew during the Holocaust.

Johnny Ringo said:

Anything you say...

Why hasn't Leonardo Dicaprio won an Academy Award?

 Because some say he isn't that great of an actor, even though I personally like his work.

Plus the fact that rape culture has gotten worse in the last few year, almost to the point that we might be just as bad as the Taliban (in some aspects) when it comes to women's issues here.

So the testimonies of fourteen women who were his victims are automatically invalid? Many male celebrities are being outed as sexual predators nowadays, and we are undergoing one of the most misogynistic eras in recent history (gamer gate and rape culture, for example).

These allegations have ruined Cosby forever for me, and I'm even wondering if he was ever funny to begin with.

Has anyone talked about Bill Cosby yet?

Who would've thought he was a serial rapist all this time? He's undeniably guilty and is trying to cover it up like before. That psychopath deserves to be forgotten now, or at least thrown in jail with Jerry Sandusky.

I know humor; I'm just ignoring your joke :)

No. I think Gary Kurtz is more important to the SW franchise the George Lucas ever could be.

DuracellEnergizer said:

^I don't see how Kurtz's competence as a director has any bearing on his role as a female parental unit.

 Are you saying George is the father then? I can name several other people who made Star Wars a good movie ahead of Lucas.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Easterhay said:

Someone referred to Gary Kurtz as a father. No he's not; he's a mother.

What a delightful image you inspire.  

 At least Kurtz could direct the actors on the set of SW better than George ever could. 

Another thumbs up for Interstellar. Saw it last night and thought is was really good.

Meh.

I mean the first film didn't care about subtitles at all; and the rest of the OT  were just known as Empire Strikes Back and Return Of the Jedi. I don't think episodes really came into play until the prequels.

Without Marcia, there would be no franchise in the first place (she saved the film in editing). Shame she was purged out of the official history by that fraud, George Lucas.

Marcia and Gary are the real mother and father of Star Wars.

I seriously believe that there was only one movie at the beginning: Star Wars ANH. There were no sequels in mind when it was made in 1976, hence why the first film feels self-contained compared with the others. It was never meant to be a trilogy until the money started rolling in.

The same here. That rule seems to come out of nowhere just to fill out AOTC. They should have stuck with fear.

There was never meant to be three movies anyways. So clearly George made up the other films and claimed his first draft was split into three movies for time constraints. He got lucky only once.

Everyone knows SW was never meant to be episode IV until after Empire came out, so the PT was never meant to exist until George decided to make them in the 90s. When he made them it was clear to everyone that he haven't seen the originals in years, hence the obvious contradictions.

Yeah, but which trilogy would be more fascinating in the long run: a cash-grab trilogy that was at least competently made, or a film trilogy very ineptly made by a filmmaker who hasn't directed a movie in decades with delusions of grandeur?

Wait until December; then the real rage will begin against BOTFA. 

45 minute battle sequence=45 minute lightsaber duel?

Like I said, it's because they split a 250 page book into three movies almost three hours long; basically the Hobbit is a cash grab that needs to justify the nine hour running time. With LOTR that was a product of artistic ambition, with the source material being longer and tonally different: it could be an epic trilogy. You really can't make an epic trilogy out a children's book, even though they are in the same fictional universe. I actually than Jackson for helping me appreciate JRR Tolkien, creative differences aside; but unfortunately he is trying to relive his glory days.

RicOlie_2 said:

I think the movies do a reasonably good job of it. At least a large amount of the material he's using to supplement the Hobbit movies is from other works of Tolkein, if not The Hobbit itself.

 Scouring of the shire.

I don't think mixing the Hobbit source material with other middle earth stories is exactly the best route to go in hindsight (LOTR and its appendices work better though). And isn't Evangeline Lilly's character in the Desolation of Smaug a completely made up person that never existed in Tolkien's books?

Peter Jackson might be the worst thing to happen to Tolkein's books. After Hobbit BOTFA the Tolkein estate probably would never allow his books to be adapted ever again. Dammit, I like a movie, and then someone comes along that  says I should hate it because it doesn't follow the book or its themes.

NeverarGreat said:

timdiggerm said:

generalfrevious said:

BTW Is Cameron ever going to make those Avatar sequels? It's been nearly five years since the the movie came out, and that is not a good sign for a possible franchise. 

 Yeah, I've been wondering that for awhile now. He keeps talking about making them, but still isn't actually doing it. 

 Last I heard, he has several writers working on the scripts for all three films simultaneously. I expect he wants it to be all planned out before shooting begins.

 Which could be in 2020, at this rate. I mean Avatar wasn't that good to begin with if you take out the 3D gimmick. But let's go back to the Hobbit.