|
Jurgan posted:This, on the other hand, was stupid. One guy at the FAA has a bad day and hundreds of people die? They have better safeguards than that, or else we'd be hearing about plane crashes all the time. It was just a really contrived way to make Walter responsible for lots of death, and really disappointing given they spent the whole season hinting at something bad that was coming. It did allow for this great moment to happen though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-8FB6k8jik Also I think the point that I really first turned on Walt was when he was when he started to emotionally blackmail Skyla into letting him live in the house again, refusing to leave knowing that she will never say to the police the real reason she wants him gone and allowing his son, friends and family to effectively view her as an awful person who was destroying the family for no reason
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:44 |
|
|
The real sin was not giving John De Lancie a juicier role in BB.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
swampland posted:It did allow for this great moment to happen though: Wait, did Walt actually know that he was indirectly responsible for the plane crash?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:It was justified. There's no way Walt could trust that B.  NoEyedSquareGuy posted:According to CNN, the San Bernadino shooting was the #1 "Crime/Justice" story of 2015. White people died, biggest tragedy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
swampland posted:Also I think the point that I really first turned on Walt was when he was when he started to emotionally blackmail Skyla into letting him live in the house again, refusing to leave knowing that she will never say to the police the real reason she wants him gone and allowing his son, friends and family to effectively view her as an awful person who was destroying the family for no reason That's also the moment where I turned on Skyler. Up until then, she was innocent of all of Walt's crimes. When she told her lawyer about it in confidence but refused to go to the police, she became an accomplice in his crimes. She eventually realized it had gone too far, but by that point it was too late to back out. But she had plenty of chances to stop Walt and instead went along with all of it. Mr Interweb posted:Wait, did Walt actually know that he was indirectly responsible for the plane crash? He must have. The news reports were saying that his daughter had died of a drug overdose. I know by "Fly" he had definitely made the connection.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Breaking Bad derails are the worst. Walter White was a Bad Person and so was Iron Man, your allies can be villains and the worst thing you can do is refuse to believe it. Where's that "a communist reviews Iron Man" article again? That was great NoEyedSquareGuy posted:According to CNN, the San Bernadino shooting was the #1 "Crime/Justice" story of 2015. WOW WHY DO THEY REFUSE TO CALL IT TERRORISM? WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID OF? Epic High Five fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Dec 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:The real sin was not giving John De Lancie a juicier role in BB. no its a good thing cuz after seeing some dumb documentary about dads disappointed in brony suns i cant help but hear de lancie talking about how cool mlp is for dudes. and i thought q was as smug as an rear end in a top hat could get!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
The man is alive thanks to virginal male nerds being as virginal and nerdy as they could against all odds. I can't blame him for fanning the flames still.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Breaking Bad derails are the worst
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
I'm old enough to remember when nerds knew their place, adults weren't infantalized by regressive pop culture (leggos! transformers! scooby doo!), movies were fairly original and every other one wasn't either a sequel, reboot, derived from a comic book or original idea from another era, and little MRA shits were losers shunned & isolated by society. And mainstream conservatism was comparatively progressive. Just get off my lawn fuckers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I'm old enough to remember when nerds knew their place, adults weren't infantalized by regressive pop culture (leggos! transformers! scooby doo!), movies were fairly original and every other one wasn't either a sequel, reboot, derived from a comic book or original idea from another era, and little MRA shits were losers shunned & isolated by society. And mainstream conservatism was comparatively progressive. Just get off my lawn fuckers. I'm not old enough to remember these things, but long for the good old days anyway. Be sure to read my op-ed in the latest College Republican Newsletter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
There are probably more Sonic the Hedgehog fan/slashfiction writers than there are self-described MRAs. Hope that makes you feel better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:and little MRA shits were losers shunned & isolated by society I don't know how old you are but I'm gonna take a punt and guess the visibility of people acting like that nowdays is just way more apparent because it was waaaay more acceptable to be casually misogynistic back in the good old days
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
On the other hand, the range of acceptable adult interests was narrow and stifling, open sexism and racism were common, and everyone was busy selling out progressive politics to get in on sweet sweet dollars. Nostalgia is a disease.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:every other one wasn't either a sequel, reboot, derived from a comic book or original idea from another era, So what were you around when they were making the Epic of Gilgamesh or something
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Does CNN considers the San Bernadino shootings bigger Crime / Justice news than everything that came out of SCOTUS this year? (Or is that a different category?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
Republicans posted:There are probably more Sonic the Hedgehog fan/slashfiction writers than there are self-described MRAs. Hope that makes you feel better. Hey, that kinda does feel better. I'll take "weird" over "hateful."
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Xanderkish posted:So what were you around when they were making the Epic of Gilgamesh or something I know lack of originality/quality is nothing new, but the sudden growth of awfulness in American culture over the last 15 years or so is laughably obvious. But... I guess there were a lot of signs pointing to it happening well before then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
It's more that it's mostly a different kind of awful. There was plenty of horrid poo poo going on in 2000 and before. Television's definitely gone downhill though
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
GIS your name followed by "the MRA" the results may delight you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
pussy riot police posted:It's more that it's mostly a different kind of awful. There was plenty of horrid poo poo going on in 2000 and before. Television's definitely gone downhill though Yeah, I'd liken it to an encroachment of cancer, starting out slow then gaining speed as the latter half of the century progressed. Maybe beginning with the advent of TV, I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:Hey, that kinda does feel better. Lowtax had a quote about that recently. Rich Lowtax Kyanka @lowtax I'd like to personally apologize to any furries I may have insulted over the past 15 years. You guys are normal compared to the new internet We've reached that point thanks to the idiots at the MRA movement amongst other shitheads have made idiots with fox tails look tolerable. It's much more of an option to troll the idiots that start "reaganbook" than it is to some guy that writes a sonic gay fanfic. FuzzySkinner fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Dec 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:Hey, that kinda does feel better. ... Look at how many people are subscribed to the reddit MRAboard alone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
pussy riot police posted:It's more that it's mostly a different kind of awful. There was plenty of horrid poo poo going on in 2000 and before. Television's definitely gone downhill though I actually think that things have gotten a lot better in terms of culture. The way I see it, we've got more representation of minority groups, new mediums and digital distribution combined with increased accessibility of creative technology allowing for a wide variety of different media made by a bunch of different people at lesser cost, and an increasing global interconnection allowing for a bunch of different cultures to all interact and influence one another in different ways. All that is of course going to lead to shitheads getting a bigger voice, but the way I see it those voices weren't not there before; they were just taken for granted. Now they stand out because the culture has moved on from them. Also since the new millennium we've gotten most of the Sopranos, the Wire, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Leftovers, Bojack Horseman, Jessica Jones, and that's just the shows I like. People might not like everything out there but drat, television has become a vast and diverse storytelling giant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
The only reason golden age Hollywood wasn't a sequel-fest (and it most certainly was an adaptation fest) is because golden age producers were too dumb to realize it would work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I'm old enough to remember when nerds knew their place, adults weren't infantalized by regressive pop culture (leggos! transformers! scooby doo!), movies were fairly original and every other one wasn't either a sequel, reboot, derived from a comic book or original idea from another era, and little MRA shits were losers shunned & isolated by society. And mainstream conservatism was comparatively progressive. Just get off my lawn fuckers. No ya ain't. Regressive pop culture just had different forms - cowboys, f'r example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:The only reason golden age Hollywood wasn't a sequel-fest (and it most certainly was an adaptation fest) is because golden age producers were too dumb to realize it would work. That or maybe nobody thought of it yet. Or, you know, there wasn't enough stuff to make sequels to yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Xanderkish posted:I actually think that things have gotten a lot better in terms of culture. The way I see it, we've got more representation of minority groups, new mediums and digital distribution combined with increased accessibility of creative technology allowing for a wide variety of different media made by a bunch of different people at lesser cost, and an increasing global interconnection allowing for a bunch of different cultures to all interact and influence one another in different ways. All that is of course going to lead to shitheads getting a bigger voice, but the way I see it those voices weren't not there before; they were just taken for granted. Now they stand out because the culture has moved on from them. The niche stuff is cool, it's the mass consumption stuff that makes me puke. I guess cable TV is the guilty party there. If you don't have premium channels or Netflix or anything like that, watching TV makes you want to kill yourself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:The niche stuff is cool, it's the mass consumption stuff that makes me puke. I guess cable TV is the guilty party there. If you don't have premium channels or Netflix or anything like that, watching TV makes you want to kill yourself. i do actualy agree with this, basicaly lots of good stuff on exclusive channels. but most stuff is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
pussy riot police posted:It's more that it's mostly a different kind of awful. There was plenty of horrid poo poo going on in 2000 and before. Television's definitely gone downhill though How's T.V. gone downhill? There was a period between 2002 - 2006 (?) where reality T.V. garbage was at its zenith, and cable channels went overboard saturating any T.V. show that was remotely popular (Spongebob, Law and Order: SVU), but nowadays there's tons of diverse, entertaining programming.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:How's T.V. gone downhill? There was a period between 2002 - 2006 (?) where reality T.V. garbage was at its zenith, and cable channels went overboard saturating any T.V. show that was remotely popular (Spongebob, Law and Order: SVU), but nowadays there's tons of diverse, entertaining programming. Your choice of Spongebob as an example is really weird, I don't think Nickelodeon has changed how much they've aired Spongebob since like 2000, after the first season was really successful. Also you seem confused: the other Law and Order spinoffs they tried in the 2000s had little to do with SVU, but rather with the popularity of the original L&O.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Your choice of Spongebob as an example is really weird, I don't think Nickelodeon has changed how much they've aired Spongebob since like 2000, after the first season was really successful. During that period, Nickelodeon didn't just give Spongebob extra air time, we're talking about 10 hour marathons day in day out. Same with Law and Order: SVU. It wasn't that it lead to a bunch of spinoffs, just that like with Spongebob, networks went crazy playing episodes all throughout the day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:During that period, Nickelodeon didn't just give Spongebob extra air time, we're talking about 10 hour marathons day in day out. Ok, and? They've done that to tons of show ever since I was a little kid. Do you just hate Spongebob? They played L&O regular way more often than SVU then, largely because they had a much larger stock of original L&O episodes to replay. And they got great ratings. You seem really angry at super standard TV stuff, and have a weird misconception that this only happened in the 2000s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:How's T.V. gone downhill? There was a period between 2002 - 2006 (?) where reality T.V. garbage was at its zenith, and cable channels went overboard saturating any T.V. show that was remotely popular (Spongebob, Law and Order: SVU), but nowadays there's tons of diverse, entertaining programming. TV has been increasingly geared toward appealing to the least common denominator with shows made as cheaply as possible for a while now. A few people figured out that viewers will shovel money at you if you actually make, you know, good shows but you also have to expand beyond cable to do that. This is part of why stuff like Breaking Bad was so successful. You want to watch it when it actually airs? Go for it. You can't because you have stuff to do or cancelled your cable because "gently caress you, Comcast?" The internet has you covered. Can't stream it or don't want to stream it? That's cool brah, here we have these boxes full of DVDs. Reality TV was cheap and easy to produce and got people watching but part of the issue is that TV is kind of going the way of radio. It isn't going to disappear but the internet is just plain better. There were arguments that the internet was what was destroying TV but people being willing to put the money down on risky things like "actually producing quality shows" turned out to prove that wrong. Well sort of; piracy of literally everything is rampant but it also turns out that people are willing to subscribe to streaming services and throw money at people making quality shows. The other snag is that mainstream TV doesn't want to take risks. The reason that whatever is popular gets vomited all over everything is because everybody wants a slice of the biggest pie. Which is the other thing people are finding out; niche shows that have a lower potential viewership aren't the worst idea. When everybody is trying to make the most popular cop drama and somebody else is like "have some Game of Thrones!" people who don't like cop dramas but love low fantasy succession porn are going to be all "oh, neat. Can I have more of this?" What some people are (rightly) realizing is you can't just spam whatever seems to be the most popular and expect a success as well as the fact that people want, and are willing to pay to watch, actual good shows rather than the TV equivalent of garbage shovelware. You can actually see this in the history of animation. Early animation was often incredible. Once you remove all the racism that just doesn't jive these days you still have a poo poo load of stuff that is quality made, entertaining, and still worth watching like 60 or 70 years later. Then the quality drops and you had companies just churning out utter garbage as cheaply as possible. Then suddenly you have things like Ren and Stimpy, Rocko's Modern Life, and all the things Cartoon Network has been up to being all like "you know guys you can actually make good cartoons and here's something amazing...people will watch them." ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Dec 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
You don't know poo poo about old TV if you think 40s through early 70s TV wasn't all about appealing to the lowest common denominator. To pretend that TV "recently" became "increasingly geared" to that is to just show you're ignorant as all hell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:How's T.V. gone downhill? There was a period between 2002 - 2006 (?) where reality T.V. garbage was at its zenith, and cable channels went overboard saturating any T.V. show that was remotely popular (Spongebob, Law and Order: SVU), but nowadays there's tons of diverse, entertaining programming. I don't know what tv you're watching, but I'm seeing even more garbage now than back then. But I doubt that this conversation's going to go anywhere productive since it's almost entirely based on our opinions. I will say that I miss when the discovery channel and history channel were documentaries and poo poo that was enriching rather than like 50 different knock offs of deadliest catch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
fishmech posted:You don't know poo poo about old TV if you think 40s through early 70s TV wasn't all about appealing to the lowest common denominator. To pretend that TV "recently" became "increasingly geared" to that is to just show you're ignorant as all hell. You know there was a time when The History Channel had actual documentaries or TLC had shows that would actually teach you things rather then "let's talk about aliens then spend three hours failing to find Bigfoot again." I thought TV in the 80's was mostly bad. In the 90's there was stuff worth watching but my interest in it started to fade again and died after about 2002. Now I'm actually seeing shows that are interesting coming out again. Ebbs and flows. Movies are the same, really; for a while it was "let's rehash all the same garbage over and over." Then suddenly stuff like Fury Road starts coming out and I'm like "hey this is actually good. What happened?' edit: Also, yes I know that entertainment is mostly targeted at the least common denominator. It always has been and always will be. The issue was that it got way, way too far in that direction into everybody trying for that demographic as cheaply as possible. Which ended up with a mutually assured destruction scenario; everything was bad and nobody was targeting niche viewers. Nobody wanted to take a risk. Then somebody did and went "you're all stupid maybe try making a show that doesn't suck." ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Dec 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
fishmech posted:You don't know poo poo about old TV if you think 40s through early 70s TV wasn't all about appealing to the lowest common denominator. To pretend that TV "recently" became "increasingly geared" to that is to just show you're ignorant as all hell. For real. People think stuff was more quality in the past but that's just because the good stuff is the stuff future generations tend to remember. Back then there was just as much trash as now, if not more, but people forget about that stuff because it was forgettable. That's how nostalgia plays with everything. That's why I sometimes catch myself fondly remembering parts of high school even though I know I hated it. Only the interesting things stick out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
There's just more options for entertainment now. So of course that means there's gonna be more crappy stuff, just by sheer numbers. It also means there's gonna be more good stuff. This goes for movies, TV, music, pretty much any type of media.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:44 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:You know there was a time when The History Channel had actual documentaries or TLC had shows that would actually teach you things rather then "let's talk about aliens then spend three hours failing to find Bigfoot again." And? TV was a loving wasteland until practically the cable era. TLC was only marginally good in the late 80s and early-mid 90s (and wasn't that great then). The History Channel spent most of its time before being the weird semi-reality show network as a dumping ground for war stuff and reruns of documentaries made by other places - and now there's two spinoffs for those. Actually all the vaguely "educational" channels got by mostly on the backs of imported programming from the rest of the Anglosphere, and occasional stuff done in partnership with a major public broadcaster in the US like WGBH. I'm going to guess you turned like either 18 or like 30 in or around 2002 then? Lots of people lose interest in TV, but in all honesty it's been getting steadily better, ever since you didn't have big 3 strangleholds and the occasional local channel that might accidentally create something good. There was a big dip when the writer's strike happened, but the loss of good scripted stuff from then simply couldn't be avoided without the labor issues having been addressed before a strike happened. Again, the peak of the lowest common denominator stuff was TV before the early 70s at least, and realistically TV before cable took off in the late 80s. There was good stuff here and there, but you'd have westerns up the rear end, or the fad of the "rural" shows in the 60s, or other crap like that. Xanderkish posted:For real. People think stuff was more quality in the past but that's just because the good stuff is the stuff future generations tend to remember. Back then there was just as much trash as now, if not more, but people forget about that stuff because it was forgettable. That's how nostalgia plays with everything. That's why I sometimes catch myself fondly remembering parts of high school even though I know I hated it. Only the interesting things stick out. I was lucky enough to get to watch like a night's worth of average weekday TV from the early 60s (I think it was taken from ABC?) at a college event once. Good lord it was dire.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 03:44
|
|