moviefreakedmind

6’4"

TV’s Frink said:

It’s not my fault Mike Pence sucks.

I don’t doubt that all unaltered footage has been preserved digitally, even if it hasn’t been reassembled. I bet every single frame of film shot for all of the movies has been scanned and filed in the Lucasfilm archive.

Given that Trump is willing to stand for all of the socially conservative shit that Pence genuinely believes in, I’d say he’d be better because at least he would know enough not to fuck around with our nuclear arsenal. I think Trump probably knows enough not to do that either, but I’d rather not risk it. Paul Ryan would be much better than either.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Agreed. How could new installments of a saga not be dependent on past characters and storylines?

Even the standalone films? Star Trek has done just fine with having a bunch of shows and films that aren’t dependent on the plots and characters of the others.

Bingowings said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t really care that it has continued, but I think the fact that both movies so far have been so dependent on iconic SW characters, imagery, and plot lines shows that there isn’t enough material for there to be a “saga”.

Sorry but that’s like saying the James Bond isn’t James Bond if he drives fast women and goes to bed with a sports car.

The James Bond series has never been described as a “vast cinematic universe” or a “saga”, nor has it been advertised as such. It thrives and always has thrived on predictability.

I’m unlikely to see the Han Solo movie either.

TV’s Frink said:

Most people I know have either never seen it or saw it once and don’t really remember it that well.

I fall into that second category.

I don’t know why people are acting so shocked that the new Bladerunner is flopping. It’s almost three hours long and is a sequel to a standalone film made nearly 40 years ago that most people haven’t seen in its entirety.

It’s BS, isn’t it?

I’m shocked that there wasn’t a single soccer thread other than World Cup stuff.

It’s impossible to be too certain this early, but I think that people like me that didn’t vote Democrat in 2016 will be much more likely to vote against Trump in 2020. Don’t forget that he barely won in 2016.

I don’t really care that it has continued, but I think the fact that both movies so far have been so dependent on iconic SW characters, imagery, and plot lines shows that there isn’t enough material for there to be a “saga”.

Warbler said:

I do not understand.

He’s making fun of how redundant your posts have been.

Tyrphanax said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

yhwx said:

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/917497481314947072

@LindseyGrahamSC: Really enjoyed a round of golf with President @realDonaldTrump today.

President Trump shot a 73 in windy and wet conditions!

Not that it matters but

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/lindsey-graham-almost-certainly-lied-about-trumps-golfing.html

If Trump runs his golf game like he runs everything else, he has a cadre of forward-guard caddies who drop or move balls to favorable positions, and a rear-guard of caddies whose job is to applaud and praise him. He might honestly think he shot a 73.

When I think of Trump golfing, I think of Goldfinger and Oddjob.

Trump is kind of similar to Goldfinger, minus the intelligence and twisted charm of course.

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

“And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave”

It seems that some have problems with the third stanza of the National Anthem. I would have no problem altering the wording to remove the offensive parts.

Rather than deleting “offensive” portions of a really old song, why don’t we just accept that it, like all art, is a product of its time? Please, let’s stop worshiping this song!

I would be able to do that, but I was thinking that maybe African Americans might not. In order to be respectful to them, I though maybe the words to the thirds verse should be changed.

EDIT: And aren’t you the guy that is supposed to be all about “respecting” our anthem?

I am about respecting it, yes.

Isn’t revising it for a modern audience disrespectful?

not if done carefully and minimally.

That third stanza should be left as is, and let’s be honest no one even knows that stanza exists,

google Star Spangled banner third stanza. You’ll see people talking about it and complaining about it.

as an example of why we shouldn’t worship a song. It’s not perfect.

I don’t worship it. For me, worship is reserved for God and Christ. No the song is not perfect, but I believe the ideals it represents are(freedom, justice, rights, equality, those sorts of things).

My point was that we shouldn’t have a national anthem at all.

Why not? Every country has one. What would be played when an American wins a gold medal at the olmpics if we didn’t have one?

Who cares? If all America’s theme song is good for is sporting events then that shows, at least to me, that it isn’t very important.

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

“And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave”

It seems that some have problems with the third stanza of the National Anthem. I would have no problem altering the wording to remove the offensive parts.

Rather than deleting “offensive” portions of a really old song, why don’t we just accept that it, like all art, is a product of its time? Please, let’s stop worshiping this song!

I would be able to do that, but I was thinking that maybe African Americans might not. In order to be respectful to them, I though maybe the words to the thirds verse should be changed.

EDIT: And aren’t you the guy that is supposed to be all about “respecting” our anthem?

I am about respecting it, yes.

Isn’t revising it for a modern audience disrespectful?

not if done carefully and minimally.

That third stanza should be left as is, and let’s be honest no one even knows that stanza exists,

google Star Spangled banner third stanza. You’ll see people talking about it and complaining about it.

as an example of why we shouldn’t worship a song. It’s not perfect.

I don’t worship it. For me, worship is reserved for God and Christ. No the song is not perfect, but I believe the ideals it represents are(freedom, justice, rights, equality, those sorts of things).

My point was that we shouldn’t have a national anthem at all.

Warbler said:

“And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
A home and a country, should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave”

It seems that some have problems with the third stanza of the National Anthem. I would have no problem altering the wording to remove the offensive parts.

Rather than deleting “offensive” portions of a really old song, why don’t we just accept that it, like all art, is a product of its time? Please, let’s stop worshiping this song!

EDIT: And aren’t you the guy that is supposed to be all about “respecting” our anthem? Isn’t revising it for a modern audience disrespectful? That third stanza should be left as is, and let’s be honest no one even knows that stanza exists, as an example of why we shouldn’t worship a song. It’s not perfect.

imperialscum said:

Aliens is great until the last half hour, when the film becomes pure shit.

Given that you’re wrong about everything, it’s no surprise to me that you’ve missed the truth yet again. All of Aliens is great.

Handman said:

I liked a lot of Aliens, but it kind of detracted from the original, and I don’t think much would have been lost if it were never made.

Does this really matter, though? I’ve never understood the thought process behind disliking the very existence of a movie. If you like a lot of the movie, why does it matter (and why should you let it) if it detracts from the original?

EDIT: I guess I should add the Alien to my list of movies that I enjoy but don’t understand why they’re so unbelievably fantastic. It has great stuff in it, but at its core it’s basically just a bunch of characters constantly splitting up until they’re all dead. Plot-wise, Aliens is superior in my opinion.

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

I wish I never had to sit through any of the Alien sequels/prequels.

Oh come on.

Until visiting this site, I didn’t know that there was a single person on earth that disliked Aliens. I’m still considering the possibility that everyone who claims to dislike Aliens is actually lying.

I love Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

EDIT: In fact, I was just thinking it was time for an avatar change. I’ll go with him.

I always wondered if I was the only one.

I like the atmosphere too, but I don’t care much for Nicholson’s performance. It’s good I guess but it just kind of feels like nothing exciting happens. I love Christopher Walken as a villain and I think Catwoman was great too. Returns is just more entertaining for me.

I’m curious what the appeal is for the 1989 Batman. I find it pretty uneventful for the most part. There’s little action and not a particularly fascinating story. I think Batman Returns is a million times better. That movie is nuts and entertaining as hell; it’s even quite intense and scary at times.

That was over 20 years ago though.