MovieChat Forums > mooville > Replies
mooville's Replies
Yes I have. Great movie.
Why are you LOL'ing like a clown and calling people retarded over and over, is that as far as your vocabulary goes? What Karl is saying is correct.. This is primarily a disaster because of the agreements made between Trump and the Taliban. Regardless if you think Biden is a idiot, any sitting president no matter who they were, were going to experience something similar. I suggest you read about the Taliban offensive, understand from a logical standpoint WHY it started and WHEN. As Biden told the entire world in the simplest way possible, there was really no other choice aside from staying in Afgan territory even longer.
This really just my shot in the dark in attempt for you to quit deviating from facts, but I sort of doubt it's going to go anywhere because you kind of seem like a child from reading your posts..
Barbed Wire Dolls (1976) comes to mind.. It contains one of the most hilariously bad death scenes probably in film history, where a rape victim confronts her rapist, stabs him or something, and the man falls to his death in slow motion. But it's not actually slow motion, it's shot in live action frame speed and he's acting in slow motion.. quite unique. Don't worry, I'm not ruining anything, the film has no plot to speak of.
You're either not following or didn't read my post all the way.. Nobody ever asked Jonathan why he lied to his wife about going on a business trip. It seems pretty clear to me that he had incentive to kill, otherwise why would he lie about the trip and why flee?
<blockquote>Hughie was obviously a formidable con man, an expert at duping people and taking advantage of the situation. How else was he able to successfully kill everyone aboard the sail boat and remain unscathed?</blockquote>
We actually don't know ANYTHING about Zane's character, or if he even killed ANYBODY! Zane's character had absolutely ZERO development, the only indication that he may have killed the girls on the sail boat is the dead bodies in the sinking sail boat he was rowing away from and some retarded footage that was running that made no sense whatsoever. I'm assuming it was supposed to give some sort of indication that he was some sort of weirdo, but who cares? We're left to guess on if he's really the one behind the dead bodies and what really happened on the boat.
<blockquote>So John & Rae misread the situation and made a bad decision, whoopee; it happens every day. And by very intelligent people. </blockquote>
No, I'm sorry.. But even Neill' character had half a brain to notify the audience that he didn't trust Zane's character after they put him in his room, but he left his stupid fucking wife there with him anyway to make the most stupidest fucking decisions imaginable. I don't know anyone in my life that's dumb enough to automatically trust some person they didn't know the way these morons did.. It's like ignoring a "Do not pick up hitch-hikers" sign outside of a prison that the state has always warned us not to do..
It wouldn't have been so bad if the characters weren't so woefully and unbearably stupid. Come to think of it, every character in this movie was fucking stupid, even the dog. Who the fuck leaves their idiot wife on a boat with a guy they don't know, seriously? He had to know his wife was that stupid...but come to think of it, he was dumb enough to get on a fucking dinghy and row a mile away to board a sinking sail boat. They both had the IQ in comparison with a 6 foot inflatable clown. There's simply no excuse, I'd probably have preferred to watch the innocent couple die because of how idiotic they were. But of course they both survived, happy ending like a episode of Family Matters or something..
Yeah, there were only a couple parts that were funny, unfortunate because it could have been a lot better. The message they were trying to throw was to vote, sure it's important but don't get why it needs to be spewed in all the crap we watch. Sort of assuming they were getting pressure from that Ad Council bullshit to encourage others to vote in the election. I'm not a South Park fanatic or anything but I know these guys can do better.
No, you're pretty much the only one on the board that thinks so. And also probably the only one that equates adults to 12 or 13 year olds because the jokes in the show "are just things one might observe themselves anyways", assuming a adult would be dumb enough to watch it still. I suggest you just go and watch reruns of Game of Thrones for the rest of your life and beat off to the sex scenes in it, because I feel that's the only thing that's going to rock your boat for the rest of your life as far as entertainment on TV goes, and the minds behind MST3K won't ever be able to help you. But if you do decide to give it a try again, maybe try to understand what the theme of the show is trying to convey to you.
Seen the first two which are excellent, but not the third. Will keep it in mind. Thanks!
Excellent choices. Seen all those. Was actually just thinking of No country for old men
I don't have Disney+ and don't ever plan on getting it. That being said, speaking as someone who rolls out product services like this, if I were responsible for rolling it out and these things happened I would be fired no question. And yes, it's completely out of the question and embarrassing for a company the size of Disney to roll something out like this after so much planning and experienced the magnitude of the problems that were reported. I have no sympathy, it's simply incompetence. This technology that they're rolling out is nothing new, it required research which they had plenty of time to do, but they failed.
Always, yes. There's sometimes quite a bit of underlying dialogue that you wouldn't even know existed unless you had the subtitles on. A few rare exceptions are if I simply don't care what's going on in a movie I've seen a hundred times. But if it's something I haven't seen before, subtitles are always on.
Just being a fly on the wall (don't much care for the topic, just wasting time), but just to point out you didn't really put into consideration the inflation of the one dollar bill. Things back in 1977 weren't as expensive as they are today, specifically the cost of a movie ticket, or am I wrong? I'm too lazy to really look, but if I'm right then the argument about how much money was made at the box office then and what is being made now doesn't really mean much in this context. In fact it may even go against the argument you're making that interest isn't being lost.
I'm confused.. what exactly is it you expect them to contribute? Some people just want to learn the title of a movie that's been bothering them, and the Internet, intended to be as free as it is (and moviechat.org, which is also free) is a place for them to do that. If you don't like it, maybe start a pay-to-ask type movie website? I guarantee nobody will join it however so you'd probably be wasting your time.
Pretty sure he threw at least a couple bombs in "Death Race 2000". In fact, I think it was one of his first lines, when he gets pissed off at the crowd, takes out his Tommy Gun and starts gunning some of them down calling them mother effers..
Hidden gem of a movie.
Paul Verhoeven
Alex Proyas
Ridley Scott (in his earlier years)
George Lucus (in his earlier years)
.. Depending on the movie, James Cameron
Problem isn't so much starting the posts that's the easy part, it's just that the genre area isn't exposed very well on the site. Aside from individual movie threads most of everything is being discussed in the general or political threads (take your thread on adventure movies you posted a few hours for example). There's just not much incentive to explore other areas on the site for most of the users.