MovieChat Forums > DracTarashV2 > Replies
DracTarashV2's Replies
In translation… I’m outraged over this movie like all my fellow pathetic reich wing manbabies are because it hurt my totally not-so sensitive fascist feelings like almost every modern Hollywood production does (to hell with what they call progress! It’s anti-straight white conservative Bro agenda!) and so I’m gonna be my super edgy broken record fascist self and throw out all the buzzwords that my kool raging red pill Q-bros spew 24/7 all over this ‘family values’ type of site cause triggered I am. (Goddamn, so predictable y’all are.) Now bring on the next triggered projecting snowflake propagandist mediocre wrong winger (that fortunately doesn’t represent the majority of fans in general, only the majority on this and other klanservative infested sites that make the term “troll” obsolete) who will have some SUPER original complaints. Oh look, its all over here as usual.
Haha, but [i]thank fuck[/i] your big bad woke enemies in this industry (and society) aren’t looking for the approval of the reich; keeping things the way they were back in them good ol’ vanilla days not on the non-donny chump cult’s watch. Stay mad and petty as ya do best, chuds.
In short: Ikr
But if it’s interesting and the execution is solid, then good :)
The totally not desperate, totally not unoriginal and oh-so kkewl mediocre white reich wing manbaby cryfest over today’s nazi disapproved evolving entertainment industry and society as a whole - this is an ongoing agenda. Classic/lazy AF reactionary fear-mongering that has only exploded in the maga chud era. Waaa! People who don’t look like and act like me are taking over! Recast classics posts? Watch me cry like my fellow reich wing bigots and predictably list what kind of individuals the radical
non-bigots will want cast in today’s pc woke (aka pushing against bigots and assholes) world!
But yeah, you’re only preaching to the projecting red pill Q-bro choir up in this klanservative-infested joint. As with all of your fellow chuds though, you can’t do nothing but whine, you legit snowflakes! There may be many of you red pill hate mongers out there spewing your nonsense, but clearly the world is moving forward without you. So keep crying
I can see that, but I say much more like the Bureau from The Adjustment Bureau/Philip K. Dick’s Adjustment Team in general. Throw in some Men in Black to the mix as well (note: the TVA predates MIB & The Matrix). :)
It’s a messy multiverse kinda deal overall.
Well, providing there’s no editing [i]trickery[/i] there (as far as the trailer goes), then yes that’s exactly what she says. And if that’s how she truly feels, then I say it won’t be hard to see where she’s coming from. Now with it you deal. ;)
Another mediocre broken record MCU-hating edgelord spewing the same nonsense as all his fellow edgy ones have done for over a decade about every project in this [b]unstoppable[/b] franchise (all the unoriginal trolls and mediocre white reich wing bro propagandists on this board and entire site feel him). Zzzzz
Marvel — well-deserved win after well-deserved win
Salty, lazy and hater contrarians (plus true agendists overall) that NATURALLY be very mad and petty AF over Marvel continuing to win over the majority — 0, a big f’n 0
Buh bye
Now that we know for sure (or do we?) that something [i]very[/i] shady is going on with the TVA, it seems clear to me they never intended to give Loki a fair trial, ya know. Could a certain Kang be behind it all? Hehe. We’ll see what goes down.
If you rather skip looking up the character’s history in Marvel, then just keep this in mind: [i]Variant[/i]. That said, the popular theory is she’s not really Loki (any variant of Loki). ‘Matter of fact, her being someone other than “Lady Loki” ([b]Enchantress[/b]) seems like a foregone conclusion to many. I still say… stay away from popular theories from now on! XD
If this *is* who we’re supposed to believe it is though, then fantastic. (If not, bring on the character that’s expected.) And why female? Why not HER? Either way, this is in fact all based on the comics. Yes, female Loki? Guess what…. it’s also based on the legend.
But this not coming from out of nowhere is something the propagandist reich wing incel manbabies (who thank f’n goodness Marvel, Disney and most studios today will never appease) couldn’t care any less about. (To say they can’t tolerate the supposed agenda they have a real agenda against would be an understatement.) Hell, but if this wasn’t based on any previous thing, I wouldn’t be bothered by it one damn bit. Loki be…. gender fluid?!? REEEEE! WOKE PC ANTI-STRAIGHT WHITE BRO AGENDA! Yeah son, reality and the non-reactionary agenda triggering the con reich as always (spewing their tired fascist red pill drivel like the projecting little snowflaky chuds they be, what else is new).
Lol, poor you. [b]Petty[/b]. But yeah, yeah… the old flicks were superior in every way, they were set up flawlessly, they touched the hearts of audiences like a true heart-wrenching drama would, they simply weren’t trash like this modern continuation that was handled by basically the same exact people as the original flicks, and I bet the revisionist reactionaries would say they were edgy and could offend the woke boogeyman (in contrast to this new series which, like any modern Disney IP and most films and shows today, naturally trigger the projecting sensitive broken record reich wing manbabies cuz it didn’t pander to their truly safe space-living asses like a myriad of films and shows did for decades). Hah!
Well, apart from other non-agendist nostalgists always complaining about their childhood being ruined and the typical projecting reich wing mediocre white bros spewing their tired anti-leftist fear mongering, it’s great to know most people (both old & new fans) have embraced this delightful show and couldn’t disagree more with takes like this! (That’s judging by the reviews and general audience response, btw. And token black kid in a franchise that was never predominantly white? Smh, please.) Yup, that’s what actual open-minded folks who come to this reich wing-infested site should always keep in mind as they see virtuallt most new films and shows on these boards getting heavily criticized — this site far from represents the majority. Duh, that should be obvious regardless of the propaganda the fiercely anti-woke (red pill dorks) mob spreads. Woke! Woke! Yesterday it was communists destroying ‘Murica and society according to the reich, today it’s… well, apparently still the communists but they get branded different buzzwords. Obvs “SJW” is no longer the go-to for deranged fascist maga scum; just wait until they start using another buzzword they’ll cry about and beat to death.
With that out of the way, I guess to be fair to those who have valid criticisms of this show and aren’t simply whining about their bigot regressive values not being reflected and welcomed in entertainment (and society) today by many, good on you. Not many of you on here, but you’re around I suppose. To the many other boring detractors with a real agenda: bleh
Oh kewl, another salty AF reich wing manbaby whining about the usual and of course throwing his lazy klanservstive approved buzzwords — waa waa woke! How edgy and totally original. Keep crying bigot chuds.
The first amazingly unique show in this new era of small screen Marvel live-action projects (WandaVision) was sublime. Its best overall moments were absolutely no less awe-inspiring than anything we saw in Loki’s first episode, as far as I’m concerned. But comparing WandaVision’s first (even second) episode to Loki’s premiere episode doesn’t seem fair given how radically different both were from each other. In short, the two went for a very different effect, if you will (Wanda’s early episodes were ‘course modeled after and mainly played out like classic sitcoms). As for the second show? Didn’t quite have the wow factor of WandaVision, but nevertheless it was well-executed, impactful and very much relevant (usual detractors be damned).
That said… sure, with only one episode in Loki is looking like it’s going to be on another level in terms of scale and narrative (trailers alone made it seem that way). And Disney+? I wouldn’t leave it there — it’s the best of the three [b]legit[/b] MCU shows so far. ;) Yes… and high bar indeed! Things are only gonna get better and better.
Correction: Yes, and that’s an extremely high bar according to so many non-naysayers/non-propagandists not on these miserable boards.
Keep killing it, big M! You know the kewl online detractors don’t speak for most.
[b]Yes.[/b]
This series is already looking like it’s going to be the best one yet (adored the others). So pleased Disney+ is a thing, now the [i]legit[/i] MCU shows have arrived! :) Loki particularly deserved his own feature/series in this franchise.
If anyone appears to be a grouch-o… it’d be you, boomer xoomer. ;) And it goes without saying you’re far from the only in these boards where angry ass petty people complain nonstop (to put it mildly).
Keep doing ya thing, Ford! You can portray Indy now in a walker, and you’d still be way cooler and more badas than any of these kewl naysayers online. Act haggard now? Lol, what some have been saying about Ford for well over a decade. Yet, he’s still killing it. Retire gracefully…. pfft
Coherence (2013)
Déjà Vu (2006)
Predestination (2014)
Source Code (2011)
Bond films
Tenet gets better and better with every rewatch for me
Like many action stars and movie stars in general before him did. Been waiting for him to do Shakespeare myself, but if it ain’t broke… ;P
Ooh, the all too familiar troll thing is going on (though “troll” would suggest these boards ain’t filled with lifeless bro hos). Very kewl, ya lifeless bro hos—mostly maga chud bro hos. Definitely make it still worth coming to this circus
Loved it myself, and no apologies will be given (to hell with the painfully predictable - typical - hate on here).
No less than an 8 for me.
Why the F not I say! Give me that sweet Cruella origin story, baby! ;)
Oh, those listed critics (and the kewl, always raging posters up in this incel infested barnyard) predictably had bad things to say about it? Well, at the end of the day… many more still have more positive things to say about it! You singled out the ones plenty on this board agree with (even if some haven’t seen it naturally), yet looks like most critics liked it. Ha! As such, now allow me to list some of those more glowing reviews/quotes…. nah, why bother? Complain and rage on as is the petty way here.
Although! I shall share 1 highly complimentary quote from a Top Critic that rejects these predictable negatives ones: [b] “The director, who brought a wicked edge to pop-culture redux I, Tonya a few years back, has rescued Cruella from the predictability of the earlier 101 Dalmatians remakes and created a stylish new franchise of its own in which a one-time villain has been reborn as the unlikeliest of role models.[/b] - Peter Debruge, Variety.
Not only praised the direction they took with this new film but even threw shade (understandable shade) at the earlier live-action films with Cruella? The ones you’re supposed to like and call better? [i]BOOM!!![/i] (And no, it’s definitely not the only positive review out there like this. Yes, and Glenn Close was perfection in the old flicks.)
Delighted by this gorgeous film I was at any rate, as many others surely will be (look at those verified high audience ratings, baby!).
Well, then obviously those movies didn’t really suck if they were okay (loved Mistress of Evil myself). :P Not classics? Meh, as if the majority of those who have an issue with non-yesteryear cinema (that’s one way of putting it) would ever call anything new… regardless of how good it may be and especially if it comes from a regressive-hated studio like Disney… a classic anyway.
With that said, The Jungle Book remake, Moana, Zootopia and Christopher Robin were fantastic films (Zootopia is a damn masterpiece). I’d say the Aladdin remake was also very well-done, much better than expected. And I know, those kind of statements aren’t appropriate in these miserable boards, but some useless positivity can’t hurt. As for Cruella, a bunch of critics aren’t finding it necessary, but I ask: is any film necessary then? Because it seems like so many hard-to-please critics (from the professionals to the naysayers on sites like these) find most films these days, except for flashy arthouse and some other non-franchise/non-tentpole [i]pictures[/i], unnecessary. I know where y’all coming from though, and it’s… boring.
At any rate, the majority of critics are still digging Cruella (some more than others) and it appears like so are audiences (you know, those who don’t dedicate their life to criticizing everything these days online).