• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Jumbo

  1. Per requests in other t-threads and because it's fitting as a standalone. To that end, I will ban for trolling anyone who pops in with a complaint about the thread's existence. Have at it.
  2. Let's take care of some business first: I started this as a new thread after perusing already existing alternatives and being dissatisfied with the options, including a thread I MET'd awhile back trying to accomplish the same goal----which is to give a regular place to learn about, or comment on, movies that are in the making, or rumored to be so, but haven't got their own threads yet :cool: So if we're going to talk about Rocky #32 in here, it's fine until someone starts a thread just for that, and then we'd just post there to discuss that movie. To start off, I'd recommend a trip to the Marvel site for super-hero movies fans, as I found the notices of the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant Man I can see lot of potential for both, although the Guardians I read is quite different than their newer manifestations. There is also stuff on other new Cap and Thor flicks (Thor looks to pick up where Avengers left off). Also, I was disappointed a few months ago when I heard Tyler Perry (c'mon) was going to be Alex Cross. And I guess the movie is disappointing money-wise as well as otherwise. Part of me is glad it's a dud hoping they ****-can Perry for any future possibilities for Cross movies. But to me it is too bad that Mathew Fox (who is supposed to be good in it) may suffer since this is his first big role since LOST. On a similar note, one of my favorite fun-reading-material characters is Jack Reacher of the Lee Child (pen name) novels. The guy is kind of a cross between Dirt Harry, Jason Bourne, and Kwai Chang Kaine, but more with the persona of some of the badass characters Charles Bronson often played in the 60's--80's. He's a drifter and loaner and retired major of a special MP detachment with deep ties to Special Forces. Not a lot of talk in him, but a lot of serious trouble if you get on his wrong side. I have long wanted to see Reacher in a movie, and thought he could be a great leading action character and the books always had straight-forward and very well crafted premises and regularly varying supporting characters. Probably the most singly emphasized physical characteristic is his height (like 6'3-5ish). It's a central feature every time his physicality is being featured (which is often). So I finally hear there is going to be a Jack Reacher movie and I get all jacked up and then....I find the star is ****ing Tom The Mad Manic Midget Cruise. And I hate Tom Cruise (thought the I like a number of the dip****'s movies,dammit). I could shoot him. I HATE he's got the role. A couple weeks later I saw some previews and it made me want to shoot him again. What a waste.
  3. I kept thinking we need a place to stick stuff like this (there's so many I see) but that don't really fit anywhere else (they're not all China turf) and aren't worth a new thread for every one that comes along. "Two and a Half Men" star finds religion, calls TV show "filth" http://news.yahoo.com/two-half-men-star-finds-religion-calls-tv-213606045--finance.html more <incl. video> at link
  4. This has been talked about as an a aside many times. Certainly a good topic for our venue. We are fortunate here to have some very impressive, true experts, in some very demanding fields. There are two areas (in both broad and specific manner) in which I have a high level of expertise (by much evidence). But in the last few years in particular, I almost always avoid serious discussion threads where I see the topic centers on either area. In today's world with all that bubbly brain chemistry having access to so many social media platforms and so many perpetually upset and ignorant egos (with way too much time on their hands) married to their indefatigable opinionating, actually knowing stuff about something and having reasonable standards regarding how much aggressively uniformed or outright stupid/obnoxious (even hateful) "discussion" you'll indulge, may make you an "elitist. " So just buy the t-shirt. I exaggerate to get the ball rolling. I will add more on my takes as time allows. http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/17/the-death-of-expertise/ <end of excerpts> It's a long piece, so here are some paragraph headers from the rest: How conversation became exhausting The downside of no gatekeepers The confidence of the dumb Experts: the servants, not masters, of a democracy It might be cool if one is industrious enough to be reading un-posted sections and is moved to address them, that they quote that part of the article in their post.
  5. Don't you guys saddle me with your demented projections. I was simply so excited to see such wild sci-fi at that time that I spilled greasy buttery popcorn all over myself. Some people.
  6. Barbarella---I was 14 when it came out. Should have worn darker pants.
  7. I love the English. But then I love the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish. Hell, I love the French. In some ways I make a lousy German.
  8. there's nothing new of significance about this world in terms of human behavior. people killing people for the same reasons. just in details of execution (no pun intended) what's significant is the advancement of tools to be used, where one or a few agents can wreak much greater damage than in the past, and the spread/usage of the "terrorist" tactics as people, and thus their issues, spread (population/contact/competition) and there is much more interaction/awareness (and therefore room for issues to expand) with others across the globe hitting the weakest and most vulnerable to strike fear and terror into the hearts of your enemy is an ancient tactic (many such events in most cultures over time), but there are also other new mass communication tools/mthods that with the current spread of civilization allow more effective and sophisticated psychological (emotional) manipulation of individuals and masses (sse advertising/propaganda). so you can get a lot more done with less resources (a primary tenet of guerilla warfare anywhere across time). these new tools work well for old purposes.
  9. What would you say to someone who reads this as "them" = Muslims? Does that reader have it right? Either way, would you elaborate?
  10. he was tagged as a likely dupe/troll a long time ago, but was trying to allow for diverse voices, see what happens, new meat, blah blah. than what often happens in such efforts is the discourse level gets lowered to the more stupid vein, consistently, and a large percentage of the member's posts become simply trolling or fail to sufficiently distinguish from trolling.
  11. heads up: that's a way to go, and often no prob if the context justifies it (staff call, we write about all of this in the rules) but also it's how you risk a rule 5 or 12 action, too. You got a good helping of likes, and I liked it for the easy lay-up it was, but you forgot to note your own partisan spin/hypocrite component on display here (no big) as you and others on the right fail to acknowledge that "the lefties" have almost universally denounced Griffin and the only blowback from them really has been at those on the right perceived as trying to over-milk it given their own past on this topic. As stated, for 8 years the obama stuff was historically vile and venal and vicious and violent and that's just the v's. And much of the right on TV and in here was generally quiet about it, or dismissive about it, and more than a few often defending much of it or even denying it was "a thing" (ala the "exaggerated nature of white > black racism in this country by the left and the blacks" dealio that is near and dear to certain posters in here and many palefaces around the country). As has been duly noted by me elsewhere, the same observation can be applied in lesser scale (still more than plenty of it) to hillary. And that stuff directed at her was generally ignored or dismissed/minimized (or even endorsed) by most gopers---many of them good conservative christians of course----because she's hillary. my first thought reading this yesterday was how mayne got a fairly successful troll out of you guys (but it would have had to be a topic anyway)
  12. one of my favorite all time lables was sheffield labs...niche outfit...all direct to disc recordings (google---quite an art/science)...their recordings are staples in all high-end audio demos...among the ultimate in sound quality and a lot of great performances, too...
  13. In Trumpland, we don't need your stinking information. We make our own.
  14. I'm starting another one on it. In each forum. Just to screw you over.
  15. cnn ac360 just had an interesting backstory on the competitive enterprise institute (climate-and-general science-denier club/think tank---backed mainly by individual secret donors <likely coal/mining interests>) and their influence on don...head dude ( knock-off albino version of wilbur ross) led transition epa staff, backed pruitt as anti-mmcc warrior to trump...blah blah...the world's greatest assemblage of semi-sapient turds with **** for brains in modern history continues...
  16. How much for the Megyn Kelly/Vladimir Putin scat tape? (too far?)
  17. Since one is a major Conservative Christian leader and the other is a damned sexual deviant, I sure hope you see the moral and spiritual differences between the two.
  18. this is a larger block of text from an article than we'd usually allow, but imma doing it here (not becuase this is any big deal) Nunes-led House Intelligence Committee asked for ‘unmaskings’ of Americans
  19. yup @Spearfeather, i got the guy's single when it came out just for her back up it's almost 4...time to prefunk
  20. The perfect version, even
  21. I'm not seeing any of me. I'd like my money back. Other than that, typical stellar work, murf. Hope you're getting in shape for the season---i.e. moving all the pill bottles from the medicine cabinet to the nightstand.
  22. https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-scrambles-defend-trumps-use-climate-data-disputed-authors-200714240.html White House scrambles to defend Trump’s use of climate data, disputed by the authors themselves