MovieChat Forums > strntz > Replies
strntz's Replies
Not treason, no. Owning or possessing fissionable material? That's a different story.
Okay, I've only seen II once since it was my least favorite (too convoluted) so I don't remember the scenes that clearly, but couldn't they just have used the same footage from the first film?
No one (OK, almost no one) cares about George McFly. He was a big part of BTTF, but not II.
Given the short amount of time he was actually on screen and the insignificance of the character in II, they should just written the character out.
God bless you. I won't rest until there is finally justice for Harambe.
Never.
Lots of possibilities including the ones you mentioned. Birth control is never 100%. IUD, pills, condoms, all have varying degrees of effectiveness.
It's said that most women have rape fantasies. The difference is that with a rape fantasy, the woman has complete control. Does having fantasy make women scum? I don't think so. Of course, Connie acted out that fantasy, and here we are..
It's no different than men's fantasies, other than the specifics of course.
The story of this film was about a woman who did something wrong. She knew it the first time she did it and every other time she did it, yet couldn't stop even though it was causing her mental anguish and having a profound effect on her relationship with Edward.
It's fascinating to see someone continually do things they know is harmful as well as morally wrong - and this film is indeed fascinating. I also found it fascinating that a woman who had it all (money, family, doting husband) would risk it for a tryst with a hunky bad boy.
What this film does NOT do is portray Connie's actions as heroic or even acceptable. The only moral lesson this film teaches is that, in this case at least, Connie's cheating brought nothing but regret and eventually tragedy to their lives. Also it's interesting to speculate that had Connie never met Paul, she most likely would have lived her entire life without cheating on her husband.
Paul was also fascinating to watch. He was a predator of sorts who knew women and was excellent at reading them. Paul had a strong suspicion that Connie would find a reason to return after she left the first time. I loved watching his reactions when Edward knocked on his door to confront him about the affair.
Yes, but it doesn't mean he wasn't flattered...
Maybe Burns was flattered?
LOL, I think Burns was the only one in Springfield who totally missed every overt clue that Smithers was gay!
And that was before tonal shifting software was available.
No shit!!!
[quote][b]Penny was being exploited by the disco for her looks and her breasts [/b]just like Tony’s family, Mr Fusco and the Disco all exploited Tony[/quote]
Well, I don't think anyone would have wanted to see a 75 year old homely woman with kneecap warmers strip.. Penny was a stripper, yes. Her body, her choice. If she wanted to take her beautiful face and hot body to work at McDonald's for 1/10 of the money, she could have.
The real significance of the stripper in the film? Gratuitous tits and ass, for which I was grateful.
I'm not going to spend all day and try to sort that whole mess out, but I'll address this:
[quote]and yes you dont believe in science. and are against women choice. the alternative being return to back alley abortions and women in jail. wow congrats[/quote]
Not sure what point you were trying to make about science. As far as abortion, again, we see the limited binary thought process of the left. Science tells us the fetus is a human being. One with a beating heart, one with brain waves, one with it's own unique DNA from it's mother. It needs the embryonic sac to protect it from the mother's immune system. This is all known. [b]Now, because I believe an abortion is killing it, I'm anti-woman. [/b] There's no other possibility...
If both genders were able to carry children, what name could they left call me then? It wouldn't be anti-woman but I'm sure they'd come up with something. Nature ordained that it would be the female to carry the children, but gender has nothing to do with this argument as the child that is aborted could be either gender.
For the record, I was uninterested in the whole abortion debate when I met my wife. She was staunchly anti-abortion and convinced me of the wrongness of it. And in case you ask, my wife is agnostic and I'm an atheist. The only time I see the inside of a church or synagogue is during a wedding or funeral.
Oh, there is a another choice beyond abortions: don't get pregnant or give the child up for adoption. A little inconvenience is a small price to pay for not having a lifetime of regret and guilt over killing your child. My best friend and his wife aborted a child when they were in high school. They later married and are still married over 40 years with three adult kids. That abortion haunts them both to this day.
Except capitalists are not anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-immigrant, anti-women's rights except in the limited binary thought process that hinders so many on the left.
For instance, I am now considered anti-gay because I don't believe a man should be able to use a woman's restroom. I am anti-minority because I believe everybody should be treated equally (being a black man, that's one of my favorites). I am anti-immigrant because I believe in legal immigration. I am also anti-women because I believe that aborting a child in eutero is killing it.
Yes, conservatives and most capitalists are pro nationalism, and unashamedly so. America's exceptionalism is what makes me proud, despite the self loathing of Americans on the left. I am pro-military because I served and believe a strong military will keep us free.
Under Hitler, murders were convicted. Rapists were convicted. Because the Nazis had 98% of their laws that paralleled ours, we should drop them?
Didn't see that but I love the scene in Blazing Saddles where the actor playing Hitler is chowing down his lunch at the commissary and discussing his shooting schedule with his co-actors: "they lose me after the bunker scene"...
[quote]That would make him an absolute maniac, which he (Hitler) wasn't.[/quote]
I don't know if was mania or the drug addiction, but he fit the description of a maniac. He not only continually made mistakes, he refused to listen to his top military minds.
Germany most likely would have captured Moscow had Hitler not redirected a division south towards Leningrad and the oil fields of the caucuses 1941. By the time the division resumed it's return towards Moscow, the winter hit hard.
He fired and reassigned his generals and took complete control over the military.
If Moscow fell in 1941, it might have been a much different war.
[quote]its so pathetic[/quote]
I wonder what motivated him to make the connection? I actually do know..
The left has been unfairly calling everybody on the right "Hitler" since Reagan. Simply denying it no longer works because a lot of leftists don't know their history. A lot of leftists don't know anything about Hitler except history paints him as bad. Since Hitler is bad, conservatives are bad.
Would Hitler be a modern socialist? I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But there's not enough evidence to convince me that Hitler would be a modern socialist for me to call leftists "Hitler", so I don't.
But if you honestly assess where Hitler's beliefs and policies fell between the left and the right, more of his beliefs fall on the left.
I don't care all that much for either, but if forced to have to stare at one of them for an hour, it would be Kathie Lee.
That Hoda is one ugly spud.
Judgement city was one of the first in the universe to institute complete recycling..