Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: Nuns with Guns)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

sexpig by night posted:

mmm smell that new thread smell.

You guys like...STAR WARS?

Yes. Let's talk about Star Wars. The Last Jedi and Rogue One are great, and gently caress all the haters.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

But what happens if Zack Snyder has a Star Wars-themed brunch?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Torchwood literally started with one of the principle characters committing sexual assault, so, yeah, there's that.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Jamie Faith posted:

Wait, what's wrong with Chris Sabat?

I blame him for Vegeta's actions during the Cell Saga.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Twincityhacker posted:

< insert Synder derail here >

Give us the Snyder cut of Rise of Skywalker.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

BigRed0427 posted:

Im browsing the dude's uploads. So this is what an honest to god NEET looks like.

Was he the weird sex doll guy in Tokyo or whatever?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Spark That Bled posted:

You mean these videos?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xENS8a4hrbo

EDIT: I thought I could keep the sequel hidden, because of :nms:.

Yep, that's the guy.

Like, if he needs a sex doll to get off, then hey, fair enough. I just remembered he was also really odd.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

nine-gear crow posted:

And yet, in the aggregate, I fail to see how anything said in those two tweets are exactly wrong :thunk:

Fans of [Popular Media Thing] are fragile as fine china and will go bonkers aggro at the nearest object possessing a second X chromosome over the tiniest encroaching microagression on their fandom. As represented by Anita going "wtf boobs? lol" and the internet going



And honestly, can you blame her for being a bit salty? Why should she be the one to show decorum when a bunch of loving crybabies pitch a poo poo fit every time she so much as breathes in public?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Quantum of Solace loving sucks.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Terrible Opinions posted:

The 2006 Casino Royale is actually a really good entry point, which makes the failure of its followups all the more disappointing. Unless Skyfall was actually good, it's the only one I didn't see.

Skyfall is great, unlike QoS and Spectre, both of which thoroughly suck a poo poo.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Max Wilco posted:

I was watching some video the other day, and mentioned Zack Snyder's daughter, so I looked it up, and turns out (and maybe this is common knowledge) that his daughter committed suicide back in 2017 (sometime before Justice League came out).

Having read that, it makes me wonder if the reason his films are the way they are is a result of coping with his daughter's depression and death. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into it, or attempting armchair psychology.

Justice League began production in 2016 and was in the post-production process when Autumn Snyder died.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Holy poo poo, is the Snyder argument still going?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Junpei Hyde posted:

Sincerely tho can the thread talk about something else for a bit please

Yeah, like Star Wars or Contrapoints!

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Violet_Sky posted:

Richard III is Tudor propaganda.

Yeah, no poo poo, dude. I hope you're seated for this one: so was Sergei Eisenstein's body of work.



Kim Justice posted:

King James is a bloody Stuart king, stop getting Albion wrong.

In all seriousness, yeah. The annoying thing when Shakey's taught in schools that often a lot of context gets removed and he's just presented as THIS GREAT MAN WHO CREATED OUR LANGUAGE THAT YOU MUST RESPECT and so forth when he was but the most popular playwright of his day, and it's far more interesting to view him from that angle. No wonder so many kids despise him. Not that Shakey isn't good, I love a lot of it. But he doesn't need the pedestal.

I presume a lot of Shakey is still taught in the schools. The government doesn't like kids learning about authors and books that aren't British.

Catholic girls' school English teacher chiming in. I taught Midsummer Night's Dream at the start of the year to a class of 14 year-olds prior to the nation-wide lockdown my country did (which also totally disrupted the assessment task based around it). We kind of try to emphasise that the ideas of Shakespeare's plays are still relevant, or in some cases, ahead of their time (like the 4th-wall breaking in Midsummer Night's Dream and the play-within-a-play subplot), and one of the ways in which we try to emphasise the relevance of Shakespeare is "lots of words and phrases he used were first recorded in his writing."

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Alacron posted:

Let's not make this weird, please.

Weirder.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Rockit posted:

It sounds like Hooper is just wack at musicals. Are there any non-kings speech stuff he's good at or nah?

I remember enjoying The Damned United, but it helped that Brian Clough vs LUFC is a fascinating story in and of itself.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Dapper_Swindler posted:

honestly my biggest issue with the Les Misérables movie is why the gently caress did they put Russell Crowe in it. like sure he looks like a cop physically and poo poo but holy gently caress he can't sing. like at all. i like the musical enough that the movie isnt THAT bad for me. just kinda dumb.

They should've cast Russ le Roq as Valjean. Apparently he has interest in acting.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

So, uh, it looks like Ryan Haywood plans to return to streaming. A former colleague of his at RT, Alfredo Diaz, had this to say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrqK0HnPkwk

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007


Christ, I'm glad I missed this when it happened. "My child is hungry but my super precious wonderful super wow jigsaw puzzle was far more important than my own flesh and blood." Except he writes like a complete wanker.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

He's kind of right on this one, tbh.

Anti-vaxxers can get hosed at the best of times, doubly so during a global pandemic.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

grittyreboot posted:

He's angry at the right thing for the wrong reasons. Movies getting delayed shouldn't be within the top 100 reasons to get mad about the covid response.

Well yeah, I figured "Even when Movie Bob is right, he does it in the wrong way" went without saying.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

I randomly chanced upon a syndicated showing of the final episode, and what an excellent ending it was.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Farm Frenzy posted:

proudly stating that you havent heard of some internet poo poo in a weird attempt to own everyone else in this threa dof all threads should be an instant ban

So what punishment for acting like it's a prerequisite to know some internet personality from ages ago and getting pissy because some people apparently failed this purity test?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Ghostlight posted:

this thread currently has significant boomer energy

It's such a baffling thing to get so elitist, and in one instance in the last page or two, gate-keepey over. Christ, maybe some people need to re-evaluate their lives and think about where they went wrong.

:monocle: "What? What do you mean you don't know who this person is!? Well I never!" gently caress off.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Groovelord Neato posted:

Mega64 had been mentioned only pages prior to your "who?" Still be weird for an SA poster in this of all threads not to know but a bit understandable if the group hadn't just come up.

just lol if you don't meticulously take notes on every single person who gets mentioned in the thread and maintain a spreadsheet of when and how they were mentioned and how often. just lol indeed.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

If anyone is keeping track, Ryan Haywood, who got outed as a massive sex-pest and got fired from Rooster Teeth, just got permanently banned from Twitch.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Ariong posted:

He could probably have lasted a lot longer if he had kept his head down and just started streaming again. Instead he made a lot of noise about how he's totally better now and ready for his big comeback and got the hammer brought down on himself. Dumbass.

That's fairly likely, considering that Twitch hadn't even bothered to ban him until now. loving took long enough.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

I remember one of his videos came up in my recommendations, and luckily I recognised his name from either a previous incarnation of this thread or the Internet Culture Warriors thread in C-Spam, and blocked that poo poo.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

DoctorWhat posted:

Karl Jobst is a crypto-fascist, just as an FYI.

It's come up in this thread before, and as I recall, he's been caught saying and agreeing with some horrifically racist poo poo on some fash-infested Discord servers.


Bingo:

TheFlyingLlama posted:

short answer, yes.


Long answer is that he was in the goldeneye speedrunning discord with rwhitegoose that was super loving nazi. Imgur link here, but it is pretty vile

https://imgur.com/a/X7qLRXa

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Ghostlight posted:

So glad to see RT making headlines with the new Hitman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFp9ln5iQFQ

Reminds me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65IPyQBgbF8

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Garrand posted:

He already deleted the tweet, but in response to this tweet

https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1356796585917747207

Patrick Willems made an oblique reference to the fact that he made a video about R rated super hero movies and IMMEDIATELY got dog piled but a whole bunch of Snyder fan boys who were super mad about him criticizing Justice League.

He then went on to tweet as much

https://twitter.com/patrickhwillems/status/1356821829109841924

and of course some fanboys jumped into the replies there as well

God, I can't wait for the movie to inevitably suck a gently caress because you can only polish a turd so much.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

The American ratings system is loving stupid anyway, and everyone should adopt the ones used in New Zealand and Australia.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

DoctorWhat posted:

How many times do kids movies there get to say "oval office"?

Practically a pre-requisite for anything rated G.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Dapper_Swindler posted:

that makes me curious how the British/Australian ratings board rates language like that. like i know over there "oval office" isnt as bad as in the US and poo poo.

In New Zealand, where I live, the ratings system goes like this:

G - General, so family films, kids' movies, etc.

PG - Parental Guidance. The odd "poo poo" might sneak in here, like Tim Burton's Batman.

M - Most PG-13 and soft R films tend to end up here. The Dark Knight trilogy are all rated M, as is The Matrix or Ghost World (this is also the lowest rating that I've seen for a film where a character drops that word).

After that, you get the Rs.

R13, R15, R16 and R18. The number, as you'd probably have guessed, is how old one needs to be to view the films legally. You can more or less cite a film where someone says "oval office" at least once for any of these ratings.

You can also occasionally find films with an RP restriction, where they're nominally restricted to persons aged XX, but can be viewed by someone below that age if there is parental supervision. It's rarely, if ever, used, and I've only ever seen it on The Shawshank Redemption.

The R rating essentially acts like the American R or the "A" rating that Siskel and Ebert often advocated for, as an alternative to the NC-17 rating.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Max Wilco posted:

The NC-17 is like the AO rating for games; the reason why you don't see it much is because most theaters/retailers won't carry it, and when you can't sell your stuff at Wal-Mart and Best-Buy, that's a big stream of income just out the window, so they'll edit it down.

That's one of the main differences between NZ and Australia's R18 and the NC-17 - major cinema chains carry R18 films and it's not exactly commercial death here either, nor are major retail chains like JB Hi-Fi or online retailers like Mighty Ape afraid to carry them. Off the top of my head, Dredd (rated R18) and Mad Max: Fury Road (R16) did as well as they could in NZ cinemas. Dredd was helped by having Karl Urban, a good Kiwi lad, in the lead role.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Sydin posted:

I was with you until this, but I think this gets way too granular. What exactly is okay for a 16 year old to legally see, but not a 15 year old?

The OFLC usually publishes a summary of their decisions. Here's why Saving Private Ryan got a specially created R15 instead of its original R16:

quote:

"Saving Private Ryan deals with matters such as horror, cruelty and violence in terms of s.3(1). Nothing in this film falls within s.3(2). The Board gave “particular weight” to the extent and degree to which, and the manner in which, the film describes, depicts, or otherwise deals with “[a]cts of torture, the infliction of serious physical harm, or acts of significant cruelty” in s.3(3)(a)(i). There are many such scenes in the film. The Board also considered the matters in s.3(4). These include the extraordinarily powerful emotional effect of the film, its cinematic impact (which would be significantly greater than in video format because of more visual detail), its importance as an educational and cultural memoire of the sacrifices made in World War II, and its importance as an example of a well-made film in the war movie genre.

The Board was of the view that the public good would be injured if this film were made available to persons under 15 years of age who are likely to be both insufficiently emotionally equipped to cope with the depictions of violence and not as knowledgeable about the historical context in which the events in the film take place. In the Board’s view, person’s 15 years of age and over are more likely to be emotionally equipped to cope with the scenes of violence and are more likely to have studied in school the history of the twentieth century. They would consequently be able to recognise the significance of the film without being overwhelmed by its depictions of violence. The Board consequently classified Saving Private Ryan as “objectionable unless its availability is restricted to persons 15 years of age and over” with a notice advising that the film “depicts graphic and realistic war scenes”.

The Board balanced the graphic violence identified as a “particular” concern in s.3(3)(a)(i) with the film’s obvious merit in s.3(4). Significant in this regard is the fact that the violence is both realistic and is set in the context of a world war. The Board was satisfied that the violence portrayed in the film is an honest and genuine attempt to convey both the horror of war and the enormous sacrifice made by a generation of young men and women. This sets the film apart from other films that may show significant violence. Given the honest purpose of the film and its significance as a reminder of the horrors of war and the sacrifices made, the Board was of the view that the public good would be served by making the film as widely available as possible, but not to audiences who could be adversely affected by the portrayals of violence. Audiences who could be adversely affected would be those upon whom the educational and historical benefits of the film would be overwhelmed or subsumed by the power and emotional impact of the scenes of violence.

They're also incredibly open and accessible (they regularly attend the Media Teachers' conference that happens every other year and hold Professional Development sessions, for example). They key thing is that they consider the creator's intent, the context, and the likelihood for "harm."

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

Benne posted:

I mean, if you have to put timestamps in the video where the skits begin and end so people can easily skip them, maybe your skits just suck and you should stop doing them?

It's pretty much one of the reasons why I don't watch much of his stuff. As soon as I even get the whiff of a skit brewing, it just immediately puts me off of that poo poo.

For me, the worst though are the older Mr Plinkett reviews that RLM did. I watched the Phantom Menace one that everyone had a collective jizz over, and I found the skits not only intrusive, but gross as gently caress. Hahahahaha woman chained to radiator while a serial killer calls her a bitch and threatens to kill her hahahahaha funny funny funny hahaodfjnaxl;kfhgnoai snmgkoajsdng. gently caress off.

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

So what's funny about a woman chained to a radiator in the basement being threatened?

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

So women suffering is funny. Good to know.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

edogawa rando
Mar 20, 2007

That poo poo put me off of the Plinkett reviews as soon as I saw them. I don't think I even sat through the rest of that overlong whinge about TPM, let alone any of the other prequel videos.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply