|
The Mission Impossible Spectacular Stunt Show Starting Tom Cruise
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:42 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Wasn't Hannah Gadsby the one with the aggressively unfunny Netflix comedy special
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Just popping into the thread to say I'm spending my afternoon getting high and watching the 1978 Watership Down, a fine piece of pop culture
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
1stGear posted:I found White Lotus S1 bizarrely compelling, but the second season didn't do it for me. Banging intro them tho.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
Somebody should leak Napoleon via tweet so we can all watch it
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:Just popping into the thread to say I'm spending my afternoon getting high and watching the 1978 Watership Down, a fine piece of pop culture great movie. still haven't seen The Plague Dogs but i read the book.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 19:52
|
|
|
I may have bitten off more than I can chew
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
imagine me seeing that movie as like a five year old and being hosed up for life
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
All their dumbass rabbit words are just so amazing
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Yeah she got to do an art exhibit basically as a sequel to it, and apparently it was bankrolled by a billionaire family that just won immunity against opioid lawsuits (from totally unbiased judges I'm sure) and is a no-effort cash-in on the Netflix special's brand Um actually Gadsby got assurance that all the cash she took from the Sacklers didn’t specifically come from their opioid blood money vault, so it’s not problematic anymore
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
Holy poo poo that rabbit just laid down and died!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
CRAZY KNUCKLES FAN posted:Didn't like her character at all in s1, didn't really like any of the characters really besides Armond, the dad, and son. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:19
|
|
|
1stGear posted:I found White Lotus S1 bizarrely compelling, but the second season didn't do it for me. Banging intro them tho. The characters in the first season were so much better but I think the overall story in 2 or at least parts of it were much better. Really liked the guy there to discover his family's plotline, but the other one was way too convoluted. The only people you really cheer for in season 2 are the 2 sex worker ladies. 2 does that  capitalism bad type thing, the first did that so much better by showing how psychotic the rich were based on their interactions with the workers.
AnimeIsTrash has issued a correction as of 21:29 on Jun 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:It's really shocking that it has so many seasons. I only watched snippets of it growing up so I thought all the sex/violence towards women stuff was towards the middle seasons but it basically starts around season 2. huh im surprised family guys numbers hit season two cancelation level ten years ago and season three cancelation level five years ago but the show just keeps on going without any hint that its ever going to stop theres gotta be something screwy going on with how the contracts for shows like the simpsons and family guy are written because it just doesnt make any sense that they keep making new ones when there are so few viewers
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
i never know what to make of puck claiming to break entertainment news stories that no one else is covering especially when it seems like an angle hollywood reporter or variety would be all over if they could find literally any credible source for it
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:32
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:i never know what to make of puck claiming to break entertainment news stories that no one else is covering especially when it seems like an angle hollywood reporter or variety would be all over if they could find literally any credible source for it its just clickbait buzzfeed/refinery29 tabloid OP
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:35
|
|
|
i did start laughing when the dutch angles showed up but i dont think that was the intended reading
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 21:51
|
|
|
Shane was also very fun to hate character, everyone's known a Shane at some point in their life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Hannah Gadsby certainly has some problems but LOL at how mad that review was about someone badmouthing Picasso, a well known shithead
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 23:10
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Hannah Gadsby certainly has some problems but LOL at how mad that review was about someone badmouthing Picasso, a well known shithead troll post prob but the review is not mad at that at all holy poo poo plz go back to the kids korner (ted asso)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 23:41
|
|
|
Yeah I dunno how you could read that out of the review unless you had decided to ahead of time but I think Jaxyon just has an argument fetish or something
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Yeah I dunno how you could read that out of the review unless you had decided to ahead of time but I think Jaxyon just has an argument fetish or something they didn’t read the review
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2023 23:58
|
|
|
My criticism of the article is that the author seems to take art way too seriously, but it makes sense that he would because he is an art critic
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
I don't think he takes it too seriously, i mean he might but based on that article you can't really tell. I think he's just annoyed that some insane dork hijacked an opportunity to really highlight feminist artistic movements (including those happening contemporary to or in reaction to Picasso!) or say anything honest about the man in order to do marketing for a 5 year old D+ comedy special I'd be annoyed too if some BA came down to the dicksucking factory and tried to pontificate to me about the art of fellatio
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
loquacius posted:My criticism of the article is that the author seems to take art way too seriously, but it makes sense that he would because he is an art critic https://twitter.com/lint_ax/status/1664642899475038209
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
honestly any aussies in america need to go back to your own loving country (England)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
Revolutionary new techniques in coping
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:i never know what to make of puck claiming to break entertainment news stories that no one else is covering especially when it seems like an angle hollywood reporter or variety would be all over if they could find literally any credible source for it It's just Tom Cruise John Barroning himself in the news.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:gotta be honest i watched the last one of those mission: impossible movies and it was pretty mid, i'm glad they're at least trying to keep stuntwork in action movies alive but beyond that i don't really get the hype I watched some thing talking about how the franchise has been going great after the weak point of MI2 and wtf?? That's John woo motherfucker The new ones are all po faced shite (haven't watched)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
easily Woo's worst American movie
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
he shouldn't of let Tom have that haircut. the movie was doomed from that point
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
indigi posted:they didn’t read the review quote:So far as it has an argument — a problematic — it goes like this: Pablo Picasso was an important artist. He was also something of a jerk around women. And women are more than “goddesses or doormats,” as Picasso brutally had it; women, too, have stories to tell. I wish there was more to inform you of, but that’s really about the size of it. All the feminist scholarship of the last 50 years — about repressed desire, about phallic instability, or even just about the lives of the women Picasso loved — is put to one side, in favor of what really matters: your feelings. “Admiration and anger can coexist,” a text at the show’s entrance reassures us. Again, without defending the show, this sounds like some real "this is unfair to picasso" poo poo rather than "it's not hard enough go harder"
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
mhm and what about when read in the context of the rest of the review
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:51
|
|
|
also they're mad that they called art collecting an elite swindle but it totally is
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:52
|
|
|
indigi posted:mhm and what about when read in the context of the rest of the review you mean quote:The trouble is obvious, and entirely symptomatic of our back-to-front digital lives: For this show the reactions came first, the objects reacted to second. A show that started with pictures might make you come to wonder — following the pioneering feminist art historian Linda Nochlin — why Picasso’s paintings of women are generally lacking in desire, quite unlike the pervy paintings of Balthus, Picabia and other cancelable midcentury gents. A show properly engaged with feminism and the avant-garde might have turned to Lyubov Popova, Natalia Goncharova, Nadezhda Udaltsova or Olga Rozanova: the remarkable Soviet women artists who put Picasso’s breakdown of forms in the service of political revolution. A more serious look at reputation and male genius might have introduced a work by at least one female Cubist: perhaps Alice Bailly, or Marie Vassilieff, or Alice Halicka, or Marie Laurencin, or Jeanne Rij-Rousseau, or María Blanchard, or even Australia’s own Anne Dangar. still more "unfair to picasso" poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
oh for sure
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 00:55
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Again, without defending the show, this sounds like some real "this is unfair to picasso" poo poo rather than "it's not hard enough go harder" No? No? It's saying that the critique is just "hey did you know Picasso was an rear end in a top hat" which yes true but doesn't actually go beyond that to talk about deeper feminist critiques of his work, about any of the actual women either involved in his life or who were creating art in conversation with him, or really anything other than a making twitter jokes about it. You're completely misreading a very simple paragraph! E: to put it simply, he's not mad that they're being unfair to Picasso but to, like, art history and appreciation; theoretically the purpose of an art musem
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 01:08
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:https://archive.ph/Jicpu
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:No? No? It's saying that the critique is just "hey did you know Picasso was an rear end in a top hat" which yes true but doesn't actually go beyond that to talk about deeper feminist critiques of his work, about any of the actual women either involved in his life or who were creating art in conversation with him, or really anything other than a making twitter jokes about it. You're completely misreading a very simple paragraph! actually both hence the complaint about art collecting being a swindle which it is
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 01:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:42 |
|
|
also big "gadsby isn't funny but i'm not like the misgoynists who think that" energy going on this thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2023 01:13
|
|