MovieChat Forums > TaRaNRoD > Replies
TaRaNRoD's Replies
.... what the hell are you talking about?? Can we stick to the subject and can you answer my question please?!
What?
Are you pucking fun of SlyStallone’s post by any chance lol?
Yes because you can’t love both: having sex AND be in a relationship...
There was a guy (MaximRecoil I think) who called you a whore and for some reasons it was deleted. I was about to tell him to « please don’t reproduce » . But I guess I’m late for the party lol.
Nobody? Too busy defending women?
You answered your own question.
And you didn’t answered why being vile and mean is necessary? He has the right to not like Cruise, it’s like if he were Daniel Day-Lewis. His opinion is just as good as yours.
Arnold Schwarzenegger won a Golden Globe... just saying.
And, btw, what is this new shitty trend to have this « you don’t agree with me and don’t like a certain actor/person, so you are just jealous and have a shitty opinion » mindset? And why do you feel the need to insult? I see it more and more lately.
Me?
« JohnMcCock requires an answer, fucktards (Taran-fag and gjb-retard). »
Well, here’s an answer: you’re one needy little bitch.
« who believes that, please drink the cyanide-laced kool-aid. We won't miss you.»
The post is dumb as fuck... but this is just unnecessarily mean.
''Just a reminder''
Yeah, sorry, I read your comment fast and didn't get that it was more like a ''interesting fact'' than an argument. Sorry, my bad, I'll buy you a cookie!
If you are responding to the OP, he was exactly blaming liberals for that. I strongly disagree with his point of view, but if you tried to counter OP, you are actually giving him an argument.
''Seemed more of a blend of liberal and conservative extremes to me.''
Great point, now that I rethink about the movie, I must agree with you.
''The views and restrictions towards sexual intercourse in particular are classic ultra-conservative.''
Yup, and I never understood why in the fucking hell. This would be like returning 600 years back. The hypocrisy in this is SO infuriating (I know this statement was made 1000 times and I'm not original nor did I personally thought about it, just wanted to point out): the US government seem to constantly try to demonize sexuality.... while having the biggest porn industry in the world. I guess this is because porn industry is one of the most profitable industry in the world, so it's probably for financial resons. But this is like if someone would be a devoted protester against guns, while being a gun seller himself.
Fun fact which is not really relevant to the situation, but I recently learned this and thought it was another case of total hypocrisy: despite the fact that homosexuality is totally forbidden in Saudi Arabia and is subject to the death sentence, lesbian porn (not gay porn, only lesbian) was recently legalized because it generates a lot of profits. So basically, a woman can make a lesbian porn scene, but if she opens up publicly about her homosexuality, she gets killed. This is a real case of an abysmally hypocritical dumbfuckery.
P.S.: I hope everyone understands that I'm not saying that lesbian porn shouldn't be legal, but rather that the fact that homosexuality is still illegal in some parts of the world is really depressing and frustrating.
''The movie seemed to think that the pictures mattered so within the context of the movie the camera was an important plot device.''
But that's the problem: he didn't ask for the pictures, or even mentionned them, only for the camera. I just rewatched it to be completly sure and I confirm he didn't. So, should we simply accept that Harry didn't know what kind of camera Kevin had? Because in the scene when they are rubbing the toy store, it seemed quite obvious that photos came out of the camera and Kevin put them in his pocket. I agree that there was a considerable distance between the robbers and Kevin, and that no everybody has a perfect eyesight.
If that is the case, I can almost put this in the category of little subtleties that not everyone would notice, and I love when movies do that. It always add something that relies on the viewers' attention to details to little details, without really affecting the plot if you don't notice/care about it. I've always thought about how the camera wasn't what they needed, but just now with your comment I think about your interesting angle that the camera was useless anyways (despite having relevance, as you said, in the context of the movie). I mean, it's not SO relevant anyways, but it's fun to spot it.
''Just the LOUDEST ones''
Yes, thank you! I'm quite aware of that, I didn't mean to generalize. Sorry if it looked like it. I would add that specific rule applies to political ideologies: the loudest people say some dumb things or do some dumb shit and then they make their political side obvious, so then we get the impression that this applies to everyone who thinks like this.
In reality, at least with what I observed in my part of the world, people who are open-minded instead of being ignorant extremists are able to put things in perspective rather than saying that everything is perfect with their parties while everything is wrong with the other. Most people I know are able to judge and seeing pros and cons in every political parties, no matter what orientation they personally have.
I know I can, I once went as far as to consider voting for a rightist party because I respected the leader and loved his ideas, while the most leftist party had somehow of a clown rather than a leader. Finally I didn't vote for it, but there was a serious consideration. During these specific elections I went for a party that was more considered to be in the middle (as you probably already guessed, I'm not from the USA).
So yeah, the same recurent issues: the loudest people often make the majority associated to their groups, ideologies or nationality look bad, while in reality they really are a minority.
''Grouping TOGETHER is what solves things, not competing.''
And thank you as second time!
''A religious person of faith who does not want to make a cake for a Gay couple on religous principle is sued''
Yeah... because this is fucking moronic!!! I get that you don't understand that some people can consider it discriminating, but yeah, this is HIGHLY discriminating. And based on their religions? Well, now, there's a cancer we should erase from our society. And our time and place, we have no room for this kind of nonsensuous discrimination. There had been enough wars created because of this kind of intolerance already (which, by the, was often influenced by religious beliefs... or, more accurately, how people decided to interpret old texts describing each religions). We don't need it, simple as that.
If your religion tells your to be a sexist, homophobic, racist fucking asshole, then there is a high possibility that the problem lays in your values. Once again, religions were interpreted in so many ways to justify so many abysmal beliefs and actions that it's really hard to really say if the religions, initially, even had these kind of toxic values.
So, yeah, refusing to make a cake for a couple just because of their sexual orientation because his faith pushed him to do so, is just as retarded and dreadful as a teacher who refuses to teach to a student just because he is handicaped (yes, in my college, this actually happened and the said student tried to commit suicide, just to tell you how far it could possibly go). I honestly say that the gay couple has a really good reason to sue this fucktard's sorry ass. This kind of bigotry isn't welcomed anymore and for good reasons, since everyone deserves to have rights and equality. If your beliefs tell you to have a backward mindset that belongs in another century, maybe it's time to revise the old texts and adapt them to the 21st century (it's not like if the bible wasn't edited before, right).
I would have agreed more with the post if it weren't from the unnecessary (for the 10000th time here) attack on liberals. I agree with the fact that the movie was strangly accurate about how a PC society could look like. A bunch of pussies who want to be in a safe zone by restraining people's right to have their opinions, habits and values. Of course there's a limit to this (for instance: if your values tell you that murdering people is okay, you might want to check on your mental health instead of gaining the right to do so), like another poster pointed out here, but we are really getting at an exaggerated level right now.
And then, as pointed out by one different poster here, you decided to go with the ''let's bash the liberals'' annoying and really overused angle. How that poster said it so well: THIS, is just extremism from the other side. There, this post becomes moronic. Political opinions DO NOT define everything in a person or a group of person, this is just based on all the stereotypes and the dumb things a few people who were leftists had done.
In reality, both parties have there issues and have their fair share of morons. So, this obsession that you Americans have (one that I will never understand) to constantly refer to politics, no matter the subject, and deliberately bash the side opposite to your personal political ideology is getting REALLY old. Myself, I'm more of a leftist, but I have some agreements with the right. Yet, despite my personal beliefs, I know leftists who are complete idiots and not really good people, just like I know rightists who are smart and great people. If you are a decent person and are not toxic for the society, why the fuck should I care about which side you choose to be?
So, could we please stop this childish and ignorant bitching? Because, seriously, and I know I'm not only speaking for myself, it's getting VERY annoying.
In this case, why did Harry even bother trying to trick Kevin into believing that they will let him go if he gives them the camera? I see what you mean and I agree, but I just find it useless considering that they were going to try and get him no matter if he gave them the camera or not.
So.... why would he need the camera then? It's not like him taking more photos would had changed anything at this point.