- This topic has 39 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Oh yeah Rob, like you don’t say, “I’m sorry I called you black bitch,” twelve times a day.
Also, whether Cate Blanchett is pretty or not is in the eye of the beholder Bryan, but if you’ve seen films like The Good German, Coffee and Cigarettes, Little Fish and Babel you’re a crazy man if you don’t think she can act. Even if you don’t like the films themselves she’s never short of utterly believable in a huge range of roles. I mean, us kiwis aren’t in the habit of saying nice things about Aussies but Cate is an ubertalent. I behold her as very pretty too. I like her shape. God, do I like her shape.
Julianne Moore though … shitola. I can’t belive how many people wet their pants over Children Of Men when her 10 minutes of screen time alone drag it way the fuck back from any kind of awesomeness. Fuck Julianne Moore, except for in Boogie Nights where she was perfectly cast as a shallow wreck, I like what she did in that one. But otherwise, fuck her.
Also, the song during the song game that Jerry ends with, “But that’s what friends are for,” that was genius, one of the best ever. By the time he’s sung but that’s what friends you already know where he’s going and it’s already hilarious in some kind of anticipatory twilight zone dreamland of comedy potentiality, so that when he sings the end of the line, when he brings that baby home, you’re already laughing along with Bryan and Robby. I think it’s not long after the moving and exquisite Abortions Are OK song, around 3:25-3:30.
God, this was a fun show. So fun.
- Women sense my power and they seek the life essence.
Yeah dude, that’s the sort of fucked up imaginative shit you can only get from the one and only Rob Michaels. He should be the next prez after Obama.
Also, the stuff in the show about the terse boss with his, “Ok, you’re hired, we’ll be seeing you on Monday, welcome aboard. Now fuck off.” Hilarious. And the downtrodden, world-weary voices saying random things at the end of the show. So much good shit in this show. So much good shit.
- Women sense my power and they seek the life essence.
Okay, so against my better judgment, I was up until 3 am listening to BC-OO9 and this. caught about 50 minutes of this one before i decided to hit the sack. which…i mean, really, i admire a parent who says “hit the sack” because they’ve already come to terms with their child’s imminent masturbation habits – but anyway
Nah robbie I like 4chan…two years ago, maybe. Not so much anymore. Like, that up the shut fuck picture, i saw a loooong time ago.
you’re fucking old, dude, stop trying
Thanks for reminding me of that, you little prick. 😉 Old age really isn’t so bad – maybe one day it’ll happen to you.
Stop trying…hmm.
rob wrote:Thanks for reminding me of that, you little prick. 😉 Old age really isn’t so bad – maybe one day it’ll happen to you.Stop trying…hmm.
lol, oh rob, you crazy dude
I think I listened to the second hour this afternoon before I fell asleep.
1. Bry you’re way too homophobic. Can’t watch a movie because it entails a gay relationship? Come on, that just seems a little childish. Plus, I heard it wasn’t bad, but I never saw it. Anyway, that’s…eh, just kinda silly.
2. ….don’t like star wars anymore?
😥
hahah, i laughed my ass off at the garageband songs
i was just messin’, rob, ya’ll still got it, boy
Homophobic is not the word for it. I’m not afraid that gay people are going to change me, or affect me in some way… I actually don’t care much either way about them. I have issue with gay content movies using the gay content as a crutch; thereby sticking their content in your face. I should also mention that I generally think that movies that do this with hetero sex make the same kind of mistake and usually suck enough for me to avoid them; though admittedly not for the exact same reason since I belong to this vast majority segment of the population of the planet Earth.
“Childish” is definitely not the word. If you’d like to express your opinion that I’m close-minded to it, that’s probably a more accurate choice of words, and true of me in some cases about many subjects. But having a valid reason (as stated above, and on more than one occasion about Broke Back Mountain) to not want to watch something is far from childish. Even if you don’t agree with the reason, it’s still a valid point as it comes from my personal perspective, not something I heard, something I was programmed to believe or something I say to fit in.
Climbing up on your shetland pony to talk down to others about their opinion or point of view and labeling it without any understanding of the world outside your own headspace could be considered childish perhaps. I’ll cut you some slack though, because inherently, your age can only relate to things that way… from your own space. It’s an essential part of the maturing process that you live in such an ego-centric universe. But your maturity will really show when you have the sense to remember this before you open your mouth. Yes I understand that I’m not talking down to you… you need to know how annoying it is for adults to see a response like yours above from a child. A smart child, but a child none-the-less.
El Rustirino from elsewhere on the site wrote:I’m almost 16, dude.I know. I parent a 16 year old, dude. Keep that in mind. I not only remember being 16 enough to remember the mindset, but I see it reflected back all of the time to remind me.
sorry
I’ve never heard you talk about movies using the hetero crutch sucking because of the hetero crutch, which could just be me, since you might make it more subtle than when you express your dislike of movies, yanno. For the gays.
It was a poor choice of words, and it’s not childish (that was stupid, i’m sorry), but “closed-minded” would have been the word I would have used if I had thought about making that response before I, um, made it. Really, it doesn’t seem like it was using it as a crutch – keep in mind I could be completely wrong about this, and you’d be better off citing Rob. But from what I’ve heard, it was about a relationship, and there’s tons of movies out there like that – homo or otherwise. Do you hate all of those because they lean on a “relationship” crutch? It just seems like a…theme, or an element, rather than a “crutch”. To me, at least.
Annnd yeah i’m a kid i don’t know anything i’m egotistical yeah yeah
I wasn’t really trying to talk down to you, I made that post before or after i did that insane P.E. final (there’s a post in Orange Lounge for it), and it’s midterm week, so I’m losing sleep and not thinking straight. Sorry.
Jesus, it’s posts like those that make me seem like a faggot. I have the worst time trying to articulate myself in a way that doesn’t seem self-absorbed sometimes, even though that’s not what I intend for it to sound like.
Quote:when you have the sense to remember this before you open your mouthsounds like my dad
Oh, I was saying that one of my chief problems with gay content friendly movies, is that they lean on their gay content as a crutch, a vehicle in which to deliver the story, rather than a detail of the life of the characters. BBM seems to have done this, as good love story or not, I assure you it would not have gotten critical acclaim if it was a guy and a girl. I went on to say that movies that use hetero love scenes as a vehicle rather than material to actually support the storyline are just as bad… just easier to accept/watch/get past because they depict the part of the population I belong to. But they still suck for it.
So to answer your question, do I have movies that rely on the relationship aspect? No, it’s the point of the movie. What I do hate is when they have to work in several “passionate” scenes to show some so-called sexy moments between the stars to supposedly sell the relationship, when in fact they are leaning on this as a crutch rather than having directors and actors actually sell the relationship, or putting in other devices to support the plot. Don’t get me wrong, I totally love to see some boobies, but I still hate movies that just jam stuff in there out of place to get attention for it. A good example would be that Diane Lane movie that got so much attention several years back (Unfaithful I think)… the sex was stupid, unrealistic and was just a vehicle to drum up buzz for the movie (full-circle moment approach in 3-2-1), which is what in my opinion BBM was doing. If it had been a love story between a heterosexual couple, it probably would have gone unnoticed. If it has just been about two guys and concentrated on the love story, it may have gotten SOME attention for it ( there have been movies featuring gay content that aren’t as visible as the movie in question)… but BBM made damn sure that they all but rubbed the fact that it was a gay content movie in the faces of the whole country. It may be a good movie, but it was a gay agenda movie… period. Don’t believe me? Go look at all of the internet posts where the writer defends their movie and tell me they didn’t have an agenda.
El Rustirino wrote:sounds like my dadYeah, we do that. -Sound alike from time to time that is.
Brokeback Mountain is to gay movies as Trainspotting is to drug use.
Now, while I will agree that the gay part of society trumpeted Brokeback as a pro-gay or whatever movie, that’s absolutely NOT what the movie is about. They twisted the message of the movie — and I hated that they did that. The gay movement, at least in my eyes, has made a lot of the same mistakes as other minority groups — the message gets lost most of the time.
What I liked about Brokeback is that it basically just covers these two guys’ lives. No big gay movement or whatever, it’s what these two guys went through. If anything, it’s more of a “scared straight” kind of movie (no pun intended). And I think that Trainspotting got a bad rep for being a pro-drug movie, but if you’ve seen it…wow, some of that is just downright scary.
So…yeah. Just my two cents…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.