Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4895205
timeware wrote:Is it reasonable to ask Leslie's followers to ask for more details then her stating the Ritz doesn't like black people? I would like to know more about the situation then trying to start a boycott. If this is a grab for attention and a blanket accusation I cant lend my support here.
Yeah it's difficult at this stage to know what's going on there. Where they racist or did she misbehave since she's got a reputation of misbehaving on Twitter. I'm surprised she came back, I thought she left?
JurorNo.2 wrote:Sooner than Milo will. :)
Yet his opposite Anita Sarkeesian gets a free ride. Twitter isn't the least bit hypocritical. :roll:
#4895254
If your referring to the president yes and no. The cnn wrestling tweet he put out was freaking hilarious. Often enough he does shoot himself in the foot but no matter what he does the media isn't going to cover him fairly.

I found the phony pity party at MSNBC down right nasty and hypocritical. Scarborough's said just about as nasty stuff regarding conservative women even referring to them at one point as white trailer trash. I'm sure he's made more comments just as equally bad as Trumps. The whole morning Joe fiasco could have been avoided.

With the major news networks admitting to making up phony Russian collusion stories and false articles Face Book and twitter are his only options to get his message out. Were not use to having a president who burps, farts and swears.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4895255
Well I'm not overly invested in what's happening politically right now; the first time I saw the wrestling video my reaction was WTF?, and then seeing the CNN logo in there was again, WTF? I think the free press is important, and posting videos like that is going after the free press. It's good he's using social media to connect with the general public, but I don't think that's enough. The press isn't being allowed to tape White House news briefings, I'm not sure if that's ever happened in the Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr. administrations, or those preceding them. He's picking favorites with news outlets (propping up Fox while going after CNN etc.), and I think that isn't a presidential way to behave. He doesn't seem to be running the country in a democratic manner. Just my two cents, like I said I'm not that invested so agree to disagree if you wish.

I'm not aware of the MSNBC stuff you are referencing.

Which major news outlets have made up fake Russian collusion stories and admitted to it? Where are you getting that information? I'm just curious, that's all. Russia hacked the election, that is a well understood fact. They may or may not have wanted to alter the voting results, although we know for a fact that they didn't alter them. Trump can't seem to get his story straight on whether he knows Putin or not. The Obama administration warned Trump not to hire Flynn, as they knew he had Russian contacts and had terminated his job because of it, yet he went ahead and hired him anyways.
JurorNo.2, 555-2368 liked this
#4895256
CNN just admitted to making up phony stories, and you have video interviews of CNN journalists admitting as such. So Trump could have kept the media coverage on that all week instead of choosing to get into a fight with MSNBC.

I believe in a free press but not when it comes to making up stories, and in Obama's presidency they actually spied on reporters they didn't agree with.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/ticket ... 04299.html

The press is still being allowed to attend briefings.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4895258
Apologies for not getting back to you sooner. I looked into the CNN thing, and it looks like three journalists didn't follow CNN protocal, wrote a false article, and were fired for it with the article being retracted. To me it sounds like CNN took responsibilty for their error. I've never been a huge fan of CNN's reporting style, for years I've felt that they seem to report on any breaking news before it can be verified. With that said, I do not think that they are "fake news" or the likes. Trump is going after them because he doesn't like the way they portray them, and from my observations he's trying to ruin their credibility.

As far as Obama's practices go, I'm not sure if he was right or wrong. However, it is my impression that they were investigating a reporter who actually leaked classified government information. In Trump's case he is mainly going after media outlets he feels make him look bad, perhaps partially to distract from the Russian collusion reports.

The briefings are still going on, however I'm pretty sure they aren't allowing any recording devices to be used, which to my knowledge is a first. Also I'm not sure when the last time Trump directly adress the media was, it may have been recent but I haven't heard anything.

...And at the end of the day, CNN is credible.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4895294
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/ ... index.html
"CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change."

In his apology on Reddit, "HanA**holeSolo" sent a message to his fellow anonymous posters.

"To people who troll on the Internet for fun, consider your words and actions conveyed in your message and who it might upset or anger," he wrote. "Put yourself in their shoes before you post it. If you have a problem with trolling it is an addiction just like any other addiction someone can have to something and don't be embarrassed to ask for help. Trolling is nothing more than bullying a wide audience. Don't feed your own self-worth based upon inflicting suffering upon others online just because you are behind a keyboard."
JurorNo.2, Sav C, Kingpin and 1 others liked this
#4895301
timeware wrote:What's the definition of black mail again?
I might be more sympathetic if he were genuinely deserving of sympathy. CNN may have been heavier handed in this case but when someone posts something like that animation, I guess it will ultimately lead to escalation.
Sav C liked this
#4895303
Speaking of that infamous CNN gif, this is an interesting article about the uncertain state of comedy in the age of political division. Dan Aykroyd recently said that laughter is "psycho-chemically necessary for mankind to survive." Yet the country is having trouble finding a comedic figurehead we can all get behind. Stephen Colbert's jab at Trump received praise, but also a lot of backlash. Jim Carrey, Kathy Griffin, and Johnny Depp famously all went for shock humor and ended up falling flat on their faces. You have other comedians feeling strangled by political correctness. The article also mentions Tim Allen's successful conservative comedy suddenly being cancelled, but to be fair, the network cites a change in programming, plus Allen's salary as the reasons, and I think that's probably more likely.

What the article doesn't bring up is that Aykroyd was referring to Alec Baldwin's portrayal as Trump on SNL, which has consistently received good ratings.

So I put the question to the room, what is SNL doing right that others are seemingly not getting?

http://www.inquisitr.com/opinion/43...s ... -snatched/
Last edited by JurorNo.2 on July 6th, 2017, 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sav C liked this
#4895304
I might be more sympathetic if he were genuinely deserving of sympathy. CNN may have been heavier handed in this case but when someone posts something like that animation, I guess it will ultimately lead to escalation.
I'm probably a little bias when it comes to the Clinton News Network. The silly thing about this gif is it's been in public domain for how many years now? (At least the video that was edited) I don't think I can remember the last incident where kids much less adults acted out the theatrics of WWE.

I'm a huge fan of WWE and never thought something like this could trigger act's of violence. MSNBC, and CNN were pulling their hair out over this and the nice people at Williams St may have broken Atlanta Law in exposing this guy. If anyone ever acted outside the norm on this I blame the over the top coverage. This whole thing kind of seems a little contrived?
#4895305
JurorNo.2 wrote:
So I put the question to the room, what is SNL doing right that others are seemingly not getting?
Why do I feel like I'm the only one still watching South Park? Not one-sided enough? Or better, "correct-sided?"
I mean, we're talking internet trolling, doxing, and blackmail right now and I swear I just saw a whole season devoted to it.
Image

Meanwhile, catch the same joke on repeat, week after week, with Awec Bawldwin, president of F.A.G. :


God, I miss SCTV...didn't have to deal with any of this crap.
SpaceBallz liked this
#4895308
JurorNo.2 wrote:You have other comedians feeling strangled by political correctness.
Though there are some comedians who might complain about being stifled when it's really more a case that their comedy just isn't palatable anymore, because it's racist, homophobic, or rooted in some other prejudice (see Michael Richards' infamous stint from a few years ago for an example).

A further factor to consider, is political intimidation... some comedians may be straying away from traditional topics like politics because of what's happened to some of their peers. Some comedians may be avoiding lampooning Trump and his cadre (with the exception of SNL) because of the response either from the White House or his supporters via social media, fearing similar responses like the case with Kathy Griffin. It's concerning that there's already as much pressure as there already is, and while some take it too far, you should have the freedom to be able to criticise those in power if there is legitimate concern over how they're acting.

It may also suggest that the "shock" has somewhat gone out of shock comedy, given what's been happening in the world in general, and the sort of stuff humans are perpetrating on each other online.

Though maybe the staff of SNL have the backing of the company, which is what helps embolden them where other comedians have shied back?
timeware wrote:I don't think I can remember the last incident where kids much less adults acted out the theatrics of WWE.
I don't feel that re-enactments are really the issue behind it, but rather the sentiment. It's one thing for the President to dislike a news network in private, but retweeting it on his official twitter account? It's one more drop in the bucket of things Trump has posted that as a head of state, he shouldn't have.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4895310
Kingpin wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:You have other comedians feeling strangled by political correctness.
Though there are some comedians who might complain about being stifled when it's really more a case that their comedy just isn't palatable anymore, because it's racist, homophobic, or rooted in some other prejudice
If all things were equal, I might agree. But when I see younger people online shaming movies like Trading Places for being racist, I'm highly skeptical of such accusations. Or when I see people outraged at a Louis CK joke. A lot of people don't understand the difference between actual prejudice, and comedy that merely points out prejudice.
(see Michael Richards' infamous stint from a few years ago for an example).
That was a guy who didn't know how to do stand up comedy. I've seen it happen with other actors. They're not all just somehow racists.
Though maybe the staff of SNL have the backing of the company, which is what helps embolden them where other comedians have shied back?
That definitely does help! SNL has a long history of working with the network. But the network is likely mostly cool with it because it's getting good ratings. Clearly there's more than enough people in the country who enjoy seeing Trump lampooned. So again I would ask what is SNL doing differently from other comedians?
#4895318
JurorNo.2 wrote:That was a guy who didn't know how to do stand up comedy. I've seen it happen with other actors. They're not all just somehow racists.
A guy who doesn't know how to do stand up usually just dies on stage, they don't usually go shout a racist epithet at the top of their lungs, and then when called out on it, antagonise the audience further. Likewise I think it's pretty clear it wasn't a joke that was misinterpreted by the audience. Richards was being racist.
Alphagaia, Sav C liked this
#4895320
Kingpin wrote:A guy who doesn't know how to do stand up usually just dies on stage, they don't usually go shout a racist epithet at the top of their lungs, and then when called out on it, antagonise the audience further. Likewise I think it's pretty clear it wasn't a joke that was misinterpreted by the audience. Richards was being racist.
He was extremely low class and trashy in the clip, no argument there. I just think he was bombing, thought he was being edgy, and completely lost it. Doesn't mean he walks around in daily life eager to take people's rights away. Look at George Lucas, the creator and hard core advocate of Jar Jar Binks. I don't think that means he's racist. Just that he's incredibly tone deaf and should not be allowed near a script. ;)
Sav C liked this
#4895322
If you don't mind it's been years since I saw the prequels, so what's that about Jar Jar Binks?

I'm not going to watch the Michael Richards clip. I love Seinfeld too much, I don't know if I could handle it. I've seen Michael be very remorseful about it, so I'm not sure what to think. I agree he probably isn't racist in everyday life, at least not to the extent he was when doing standup that one time. I'd certainly hope not.

I think SNL gets away with all of the political skits because they have consistently lampooned politics on both sides since their creation. My personal favourite comedic commentary right now is the Closer Look monologue on Late night with Seth Meyers. He does it around three times per week. It is witty and just overall very well written. Worth a look if you haven't seen it already! :)
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4895323
Sav C wrote:If you don't mind it's been years since I saw the prequels, so what's that about Jar Jar Binks?
Jar Jar Binks was accused of being a unflattering stereotype of a Caribbean, with his exaggerated features and pidgin English.
I'm not going to watch the Michael Richards clip. I love Seinfeld too much, I don't know if I could handle it. I've seen Michael be very remorseful about it, so I'm not sure what to think. I agree he probably isn't racist in everyday life, at least not to the extent he was when doing standup that one time. I'd certainly hope not.
Yeah I wouldn't watch it; either way, it's far from his proudest moment. I'm not that knowledgeable of his work, but I suspect he, like Lucas, is better when other people are doing the writing for him.
I think SNL gets away with all of the political skits because they have consistently lampooned politics on both sides since their creation.
You're right, they've had 40 years of building up that credibility.
My personal favourite comedic commentary right now is the Closer Look monologue on Late night with Seth Meyers. He does it around three times per week. It is witty and just overall very well written. Worth a look if you haven't seen it already! :)
Cool, thanks for the tip! :)
Sav C liked this
#4895327
Can we stop throwing Jar Jar under the bus like he was the single worst thing about the prequels?
It's 2017 and only SW fans that have always lacked a sense of humor about their fandom still do that... you know, the same ones that shell out for $85 figuarts of Padme and Mace Windouche.
Image
"I'm not bad... I'm just drawn that way."
pferreira1983 liked this
#4895328
featofstrength wrote:you know, the same ones that shell out for $85 figuarts of Padme and Mace Windouche.
Well I agree that there are plenty of other lack luster characters in the prequels (and in the new Disney Star Wars for that matter).
Sav C, featofstrength liked this
#4895329
featofstrength wrote:Can we stop throwing Jar Jar under the bus like he was the single worst thing about the prequels?
It's 2017 and only SW fans that have always lacked a sense of humor about their fandom still do that... you know, the same ones that shell out for $85 figuarts of Padme and Mace Windouche.
Image
"I'm not bad... I'm just drawn that way."
Anything more annoying then Jar Jar Binks? Snarf from Thundercats. Before Disney Infinity went sunset you could find Jar Jar frozen in carbonite in Jabba's palace.
JurorNo.2, Sav C liked this
#4895330
JurorNo.2 wrote:Jar Jar Binks was accused of being a unflattering stereotype of a Caribbean, with his exaggerated features and pidgin English.
Ah, ok. I don't mean to look bad or anything as like I said I haven't seen the prequels in a long time (and therefore they are fading away), but from my faint memory that seems like a bit of a stretch. Take my opinion with a grain of salt, though.
I'm not that knowledgeable of his work, but I suspect he, like Lucas, is better when other people are doing the writing for him.
Yeah, I'm mainly familiar with his Seinfeld work, but he was also on a season of Curb Your Enthusiasm (the one where they had the Seinfeld reunion), and he was the motel manager in the Coneheads movie (which I presume you've watched). :)

I wonder what year the Coneheads sketch debuted; it had to be at least seventeen years old when the movie was released.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4895334
featofstrength wrote:Can we stop throwing Jar Jar under the bus like he was the single worst thing about the prequels?
The single worst? Maybe not, but if nothing else he does embody some of what was really wrong about Episode I.
featofstrength wrote:It's 2017 and only SW fans that have always lacked a sense of humor about their fandom still do that... you know, the same ones that shell out for $85 figuarts of Padme and Mace Windouche.
Ouch. For the record I've never bought figuarts, and I like to think I have a reasonably good sense of humour about the franchise and how it's been parodied and lampooned in popular media... that doesn't excuse the fact though that Jar Jar sucks.
timeware wrote:Snarf from Thundercats.
Somewhat annoying but he isn't more annoying than Binks, and not quite a fair contest, Snarf was from a cartoon wholly aimed at kids.
#4895341
timeware wrote:Before Disney Infinity went sunset you could find Jar Jar frozen in carbonite in Jabba's palace.
Yeah, and they sold a Jar Jar in Carbonite action figure at SDCC.
"Hey, we hate him too! Har dee har...BUY MORE CRAP! Darth Maul's got robot legs! BUY IT, STUPID!"
Kingpin wrote: Ouch. For the record I've never bought figuarts, and I like to think I have a reasonably good sense of humour about the franchise and how it's been parodied and lampooned in popular media... that doesn't excuse the fact though that Jar Jar sucks.

16:30 - HAR DEE HAR! WEESA HIWARIOUS!
Next, a Boba Fett wet dream! Drool!
  • 1
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14

I'd really like to see the new t-shirt unlocks t[…]

Hey and welcome

My Little Pony/Ghostbusters crossover done by my d[…]

Great work identifying the RS Temperature Control […]