Jump to content
Hondo's Bar

Jumbie

Drunken Deities Royalty
  • Posts

    7,192
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    42

Everything posted by Jumbie

  1. I wouldn't bank on anyone getting a comeuppance in this series. It seems to take a very existentialist stance that suffering and success in life are detached from 'goodness' and 'badness'. No such thing as karma. Granted a lot of bad guys get horrible deaths, but that's just cuz everyone gets bad deaths. You might see just rewards in someone's purple-faced and anguished death until you recall all the people they killed who didn't deserve it. And Martin's already given a few bad guys routes to redemption or at least made us glad to have them around because they end up helping the cause of 'good'. Like say the child-murdering Melissandre or child-murdering Theon or the child-murder-attempting Jaime. It would be just like him to have a despicable person like Ramsey help save the day at the wall in some way and live 'happily for now'.
  2. I'm puzzled. Can't they just spend some money to advertise that they took the e-coli off their menu?
  3. I always liked Wonder Man for some reason. At this point we should have a 'who is Starlord's dad' betting pool going. I give Wonder Man 1-20 odds
  4. The implication of 'because' HHH/WWE ditched her is unfair to HHH. (Don't know if you realized you were doing it, but it's been a common sentiment the last couple years that this is somehow HHH's fault.) As if she wasn't doing drugs and such when she was hanging with them and simply continued the lifestyle. Remember, Razor Ramon, Shawn Michaels and a lot of others from that cliq almost died too carrying on the old party ways after WWE cleaned up and started mandatory drug testing for active performers and they couldn't fit in as professionals anymore. Chyna was just already in too far. The others got lucky. Shawn Michaels especially managed to hook himself into some clean living and finish his career strong. HHH is actually low-key straight edge so he escaped it entirely. Point is, they all got 'dumped' by WWE's wellness policy and some fell in line and came back. Others couldn't.
  5. Wait, you can take phones from an audience and lock them in a box? :rubs hands together: When the fuck are we getting this technology at the movie theatre!?
  6. Doesn't it kind of undermine the idea that this is some philosophical dispute about how to safeguard humanity if you're using fight night imagery? Whatever was wrong about civil war 1, they still got the look of the comics perfect to suit the story.
  7. Given what happened to Teen Wolf as a tv series, I think they could definitely make it work as a different genre from the original. Most likely we end up with Dawson's Creek II Also, that Riverdale pic at the top: They put the gay guy and the black girl to stand back. Heh.
  8. That time Spiderman forgot to change out of his PJs before he went to school was very traumatic and helped make him the hero he is today.
  9. I never equated the acts of those people to each other. (Or in the cases of Payton and Roethlisberger, alleged acts) NEVER. I said I had negative reactions to all of them and that the reactions for each were enough to not support their teams. To say I equated them because I put them in the same category is like saying that because Bernie Sanders a socialist he's in the same category as Stalin, so Sanders is as bad as Stalin. Categories still allow for broad levels of difference within the category! I also NEVER said that I had the same level of negativity to each of those people. I was talking about a threshold: They all at least met the minimum to make me pissed off enough to not support their sports team. That's not AT ALL saying they disgusted me equally. - - - Given that in trying to respond to you more on this 'monster' issue I would end up picking at Donatella, I'm not going to continue discussing this here. If it means enough to you, you can find me on private messenger to hash it out.
  10. I don't enjoy the fighting, which those two did. Plus Panch never wants to have the good kind of make-up sex. I gave who a what now? I dare you to find that quote. Hondo's makes it easy to quote a post. Go on. I never said that. Or anything close to that.
  11. I have not disputed her right to her opinion. Also, Donatella, I'm a crabby, nitpicky sob at times, but really, I didn't start out looking to get into this level of detail over your terminology. Panch made me have to defend my opinion with his baseless attacks.
  12. I ain't give nobody a pass! Especially not in this thread where I specifically said Gibson was out of line for acting like Ricky Gervaise shouldn't be giving him crap. I'm fine with calling Gibson douchebag king or a piece of shit and I definitely don't enjoy his movies anymore because of what I know about him. (Only watched the Mad Max movies before the new one came out so I could prepare) But I tend to think 'monster' is reserved for people who at the least commit a heinous murder, or callously assaults a child or something on that level. From a purely linguistic point of view, if Gibson is an 'absolute monster', then what's Stalin or the guys who shot Malala or Fidel Castro? We're losing the sense of proportion on that. My reference to knowing people worse than Gibson is simply to point out that he's not exceptional in his stupidity and ignorance, therefore there's no 'absolute' involved. I think that there is a danger in labeling Gibson as an outlier. He's representative of a good chunk of humanity. Using terminology that acknowledges that is more useful for me. He's an asshole/king douche/thug etc are good words for him.
  13. Just be glad you got it now before it's locked in the Disney VaultTM.
  14. I think calling him an absolute monster is hyperbole. He's f*cked up for sure and every time I see see Ricky Gervaise give him shit, I cheer and every time he acts like Gervaise is bullying him, I think, 'Don't act dumb Mel. Until you stop acting like all you did was fart in church, I'm not taking you seriously.' But, no, monster isn't what he is. I personally know lots of people more racist and hostile to women than he is and I still talk with them and even count them as friends. (What can I say, school bonds people very strongly. And cousins and uncles can't be gotten rid of.)
  15. Rewrites can be done pretty fast. Given the money committed already, contracts signed etc, the most likely outcome for JL is a budget drawback and rewrites. The movies for Flash, , Aquaman, WW and even Batman can be put on hold to see how it pans out. *Even with the good reaction the characters/portrayals of WW and Batman got, the risk of investing money in them plus the loss on the BvS is probably going to cost them their solo movies depending on how contractually committed the studio is.
  16. BTW, I hear a lot of people seem stuck on puzzling out the Superman/Jon Kent dream sequence...
  17. An Academy Award winning screenwriter happens to be one of your stars? Why isn't that option one? Article says it's merely an option. Good Will Hunting was a well-written, well-plotted movie. Preachy, but Affleck's had time to become cynical since then so that idealism won't get in the way. The best thing about Good Will Hunting from the POV of a Justice League movie is that there were a lot of 1-1 relationships portrayed with people philosophically opposed to each other, bumping against each other and then some prevailed and others didn't and it all played out very naturally.
  18. It's his thing...in the comics...since about 1975. In the silver age, no one killed, so it wasn't HIS thing, just a thing. Before that, he killed and carried a gun even. Don't get me wrong, I really dig the anti-killing batman to the point I greatly prefer it, but jumping the story to another medium allows me to adjust for a new interpretation. If they tried this shit in the comics after decades of setting up a persona that was against it, then I'd object.
  19. I can get you a pic from a hidden cam of NZA jizzing on the eyes of a Kyle Rayner poster. The image quality's not that good, but on the plus side that makes the cum look kinda yellow and mustardy.
  20. The TL DR or why Roman's not getting traction is that they let him talk. He's not good at it. He had the crowd on his side when he was in the Shield because he'd do this silent badass thing. His body language is actually good most of the time. He's not ready for witty banter, especially with the angle WWE is giving him of gutsy fighter against authority when everyone knows he's with the authority. He should have done a heel stint to build cred and I still can't comprehend why WWE wont let him do it. Cena sucked his first time is a good guy and got over as a heel. Rock got booed his first try as a face and got over huge as a heel. Even MIZ was able to use his heel persona for a successful face run (which ended prematurely due to injury and/or his movie schedule)
  21. WM32 in one week! I'm really up for whatever Kevin Owens ends up in and Brock vs Ambrose is the match I'm buying to see. Plus Jericho and AJ will be meeting in some way though a one-on-one hasn't been announced. But their lead in has been fun. But WWE is devastated by injuries right now, with at least 5 guys out who would have been automatic WM participants so the overall show feels flat, especially with the fan rebellion over Roman ongoing and even peaking.
  22. Right after I watched BvS, Batman Returns was on TV (Keaton's 2nd). Batman casually, but deliberately, sets a street hood on fire *with the batmobile jet flame* in the first 15 minutes. And it's basically played for laughs because the guy was wielding a flamethrower hence poetic justice! So, the movie batman IS a different beast and always has been. As for BvS Spectacle: 9/10, there's more good stuff than just the end fight. Characterisation & Acting: 7/10, dragged down by flat Lois, kept afloat by Irons, Affleck (!) and Cavill Plot/story: 4/10, steered to some real and relevant issues. Couldn't connect events. Pacing/editing/camera: 5/10, Ton of unnecessary crap. Music: 4/10 for intrusive bombast Overall: 6/10 Good, not excellent. - - - - So Yeah, worth seeing on a big screen, but not as good as it could have been.
  23. You mean scenes that should have been in the movie the first time I paid to see it?
×
×
  • Create New...