MovieChat Forums > Underdog_73 > Replies
Underdog_73's Replies
Sadly, I have to agree. Not with the scumbag part, but with the overexposure. He's just seems to be in an over abundance of films and TV. I never disliked him, but I am starting to groan when I see his name. Ballers, Baywatch, Jumanji, Rampage, etc. I think he's even doing another TV series or reality show. He's also slated to appear in 3 more movies I'm interested in, Shazam, Doc Savage, and Big Trouble in Little China. No way can he pull off Jack Burton.
I've never had a problem with him before, and he was entertaining enough, but it's getting to be too much. Take a step back. Give some work to some other actors. The same actor in everything just ruins it.
"That's arson!"
I liked Pepper too. I also had a thing for Jo from Facts of Life!
You clearly went into it with a negative preconception, so you were never going to like it. It brings back a negative memory, so you'll probably never like it. You wanted to see E.T., and you got stuck seeing Annie. I'm curious if you ever gave it a fair chance. Any time you think about Annie, you remember something negative. Maybe try rating it on its own merits.
Here's another real life pedophile. If any law enforcement agencies are reading this, please find the true identity of TheClevelandShow. He's a pedophile. True pedophiles attempt to first bring it up as humor just to see the response. Stop and think about it. This degenerate's mind immediately went to thinking about sex with underage children after watching a completely innocent musical. Beyond creepy.
The only pedophile here is mrmathexpert. Anyone who can watch this movie and think of pedophiles is internally sick and twisted. The authorities need to get the real name and address of mrmathexpert and keep an eye on him. He's the true pedophile.
[quote]posted a year ago by carrowsboy
8 replies | jump to latest
"The Knight of the Drones"
The sinister Asian restaurant owner running a scam in the back of his kitchen.
Michael calling his two henchmen the "Eggroll Brothers."[/quote]
There's something mentally wrong with you. Twisted people like you are what's wrong with the world. Stop finding racism and offense everywhere you look. Get a life. While you're at it, get a dictionary. Look up the word "racist" and attempt to educate yourself.
Seriously? In a show that revolves around a talking car, with a mind of it's own, that can jump over things with no ramp, can scan through walls and see faces, can shoot lasers, jam signals, disable car engines, can pull things up on screen from anywhere with no camera (Star Trek style), and can find everything out about people on an "internet" that didn't yet exist, your suspension of disbelief is halted by someone accepting a ride from a stranger??? Wow. Just wow.
I only just brushed the surface regarding all the impossible things KITT could do, but a stranger getting a ride is just too much to believe. Not much shocks me, but this post is what challenges my suspension of disbelief.
Is the character even British? The accent is horrid enough, but it'd be even worse if this accent was her own terrible idea! I don't recall any mention of this character coming over from England.
Exactly. And while Wikipedia is the most inaccurate website available, even that states it was unlikely slave labor built the monument. I can only assume that was your point, since you failed to include it.
The fact that 75% of the monument was built many years after the Civil War ended, should be the first clue. The second clue is the fact that stone masons and brick layers were highly skilled labor back then. Sorry, but slaves were not skilled labor. Maybe they helped clear the foundation and carried equipment, but that's probably the extent of their help, if any. So any attempt to put a negative spin on the monument is flawed at best.
"I did" is 2 words, not 1, so saying "in a word, I did", makes no sense. But after that idiotic rant you left me on another post, I'm not surprised this simple question threw you.
I also asked who recognized the Portland Head Light. You said, "I was certain I’ve seen it before. So in a word, I did." Um, just because you were certain you'd seen it before doesn't mean you'd recognized it as the Portland Head Light. Your reply actual alludes to you not recognizing it. Again, no surprise. You've already proven your lack of intelligence.
Why don't you memorize some more big words and use them incorrectly like you did in your rant. That'll make you sound smart.......or so you seem to believe.
Wow. What a blathering pile of crap, and an utter failure to sound intelligent. It takes more than simply the use of big words. Much more. The kicker here is your attempt to somehow make this political. That is the go to topic for those without intellect. Everything is political. Right or left. They think it makes them sound smart. It doesn't. By the way, am I right or left? Your reasoning was beyond nonsensical.
In any case, this post had to do with the Washington Monument and who built it. Your crazy rant should be saved for your manifesto. Since you completely missed the point, slaves didn't build the monument. Do some research and try...just try....to use some common sense. I know you'll fail, but ask someone smarter than you. That would be anyone.
And try to learn what a "fact" is. Look it up. It would be comical that you believe it's a fact that slaves built it, if it wasn't so sad. You also need to learn the definition of PC. Nothing I said can be construed that way. Are you really this clueless or is it a joke?
You only came up with 10?????
I'm specifically asking about this version. This is not the 1951 version. This was a TV episode.
It wasn't ambiguous. I'm not sure how the OP took it that way. We hear Santa on the phone as you say, and we also hear the sleigh and reindeer land on the roof, see his shadow, and then he disappears. I think they pretty much wanted to confirm the existent of Santa.
A perfect example of how people view things differently. I was 5 when this aired. I found nothing creepy at all. Quite the contrary. I knew it was Santa and I wanted Big Bird to wake up. I got anxious and felt bad that he missed him and we didn't get to see how he got in....
[quote]strntz (272) 7 days ago
What the *f* is wrong with you?[/quote]
What's wrong? He/she (SyphiliticHobbit) is a hobbit with syphilis. Isn't that wrong enough?
Your last point is spot on. The writers may as well come out and say, "hey, we're killing this character." The change in personality is so awkward, you know they're going to die. I thought that type of writing went out years ago. It's pathetic. That also goes hand in hand with the other personality changes. The characters are only the characters by name now. Their personalities change so drastically it's unnatural and unbelievable. These writers are one trick ponies, but the trick boring and the ponies are lame.
blade101167 is correct. Watch the scene. He grabbed his bag, brought it to the dresser, and started looking for an empty drawer to put his stuff. Many people don't like living out of a bag. Even for one night, and Blaney had no idea how long he'd be there. Hotels have dressers. Why would they, unless people do this?
I, personally, don't unpack, and keep my stuff in my bags, but the scene was clear in its intent.
I think I'd prefer to be a douch over a moron, any day of the week. Sadly, you're both. Idiotic statements that show zero intellect should be left unsaid. Keeping that in mind, a life of silence is best for you.