- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
I was at Macy's thanksgiving parade and it was time for the balloons to pass by my street. I looked out my window and saw all those classic icons of cartoons, like spongebob, mickey mouse and he-man. Then came movie characters, and there was this loving massive balloon of the dragon from the neverending story (falcor?), and those creatures from Gremlins, among other things. After that came corporate mascots, you know stuff like Coca Cola's Santa Claus, Chester Cheetah and Tony Tiger.
But what caught my attention, was what the Camel cigarette company brought. It was an insanely gigantic Camel, seems they wanted to bring him back and make him relevant again. He stood taller than some buildings, and had a cigarette on his mouth that was thicker than a subway train.
That was the very first time I saw a bigger fag than ralp.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 18:37
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2024 07:12
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
also applies to the jungle book transsexual guy
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 18:39
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
Wow, leftist analysis really gets under your skin, eh?
Guess I'll use it more often then 
there is only the barest minimal attempt, or sometimes none made at all, discuss cohesion, plot development, believable characters, cinematography, or overall enjoyability.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 14:39
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
I put this post in a txt, changed the file format to .mp4, and when i played it back on vlc it was the entirety of the Brokeback Mountain gay sex scene in the tent.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 05:07
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
well, according to a guy in the speedrun thread ummm "I would have banned you because [I'm] not funny", and if my speedfriends say so, it must be true.
Still, I thank you, clemens, you're my friend.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2014 05:18
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2024 07:12
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
I checked to see if this was an exaggeration
i don't believe the point of that is to take it serious, but rather as a joke. the failing in this, is that it's just plain not funny.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2014 16:47
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 18:37
