MovieChat Forums > FilmBuff > Replies
FilmBuff's Replies
I would, too.
If you can't see how woke the show is, you aren't paying attention.
If the follow the comic book story from years ago, she's chosen by Mjolnir because she is worthy, just as Captain America was in Endgame.
He'd have my vote if I lived in his state.
Hope it's good, because you're right, it may well be their swan song. Ryan Gosling is one of my favorite modern actors, Ana de Armas is the prettiest girl on earth right now, and the Russo Brothers have a solid track record, but I doubt it will make Netflix much money. How many new subscribers can one film generate?
Oh man, good point. I hadn't even thought about that, but you're right! She never shows up, does she? Is she ever mentioned during Breaking Bad at all? If not, you may be onto something. Maybe the show will have to address that at some point. If not, it's kind of a big plot hole...
I don't doubt you'd do those things, but I think nearly no one would do what you claim most everyone would do. I believe the vast majority of people would do what I'd do-- subdue the intruder in the safest, least violent way possible, and wait for the police to arrive. Killing him is the absolute last resort. The fact that you not only claim you'd kill him even if you didn't need to, but assume most people would do the same, suggest to me that you are some sort of sociopath/psychopath who doesn't have even a rudimentary understanding of what other people think, or the capability to feel empathy for others.
My hunch is that now that he knows Anakin is alive, he will rededicate himself to the Jedi arts, which will explain why he was much better equipped to face Vader when they had their final fight.
The fight was disappointing in that Kenobi was so ill-prepared, but it also felt real. He looked desperate and scared. He did escape a little too easily, and they were too quick to be like "oh, he's gone." I hope there is a much better second confrontation in store!
Elaborate on that... what plot hole are you imagining?
Most everybody = only psychotic misfits like you
I'm on Team Dr. Curry *fans self*
Now go look up when he died... ;)
He died at 59...
Every year in science we got a laugh out of that.
What you wrote is completely untrue. Watch Wargames and tell me there was no internet in the '80s. My friend was from dirt poor family and he had an Apple 2e with an internet connection as early as 1984. It was very rudimentary, and I really didn't understand what he was doing, but he'd dial up bulletin boards and play games, etc. Plenty of poor folks had home computers in the '80s.
I grew up in a small town, and the local schools didn't have much money. In 1984-85 our science textbooks still read "some day, man may even visit the moon." Yet, our computer lab had 6 or 7 Apple 2 computers. A number of my friends, none of whom were well off, had some kind of computer at home. They definitely weren't only for the rich.
In 1986 transferred to an incredibly low-budget school, where most of the students were kids who had been born in Mexico and moved to the US. Everyone there was dirt poor, and the school was incredibly impoverished as well, and even that school had 4 Apple 2s and a couple other computers.
I'm sure any of the make-believe caricatures you have created for your fantasy version of a right wing individual will do as you say. Not that any such people exist, but you can tell yourself that the world you've created in your head is a better place now for you having posted your nonsense. Well done, keep up the good fight and show those fascist racists who's boss!
That sounds a lot friendlier than your previous reply! :)
It all comes down to taste. I grew up watching films from the '30s and '40s, and later got very much into the silent era. For me, those will always be the glory days, and likely never be topped. I don't think there were no good films made between 1960 and 1994, but overall I think it was a pretty bad time for film, and even some of the best ones have some significant flaws. I attribute it to a lack of studio oversight, where directors were allowed free rein, and Hollywood hadn't quite found its stride yet.
While the studio system was still in place, there was a method to filmmaking that had been fine-tuned, and it worked well. It took a long time for that to come to be the case after the '50s. Pulp Fiction really seemed like a turning point, because after that there seemed to be a balance between director and studio that hadn't been there before.
There are awful films from all eras as well as great ones, but for my taste, films before the '60s work, as do modern films, but most of those in between just seem amateurish.
Even when I think of my favorite filmmakers, they all seem to fall into those two eras... Preston Sturges, Howard Hawks, John Ford, Alfred Hitchcock, Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson, the Coen Brothers. Martin Scorsese may be the one exception, or perhaps Woody Allen, though I think most of his best work came later in his career.
Anyway, I like plenty of '70s and '80s films, but as a whole I don't rate the cinema of that time the way I do the older and newer stuff.
Blame the prequels.