gbaji wrote:
Majivo wrote:
You're joking, right? That or you really don't know anything about psychology.
*Snerk*
·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- The Hunger Games movie sucks bloated goat ***
The Hunger Games movie sucks bloated goat ***Follow
Or I know more about it than you.
*Snerk*
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
And you're assuming that people who live in a fictional future would have a specific worldview. They probably would look at things a lot differently than we do, that doesn't mean that they wouldn't react the way Majivio described. There is no way for us to know what would be realistic in that situation, because we don't live in that sort of world.
Stop me if you've heard this one:
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
Edited, Apr 4th 2012 4:56pm by Eske
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
Edited, Apr 4th 2012 4:56pm by Eske
gbaji wrote:
You're projecting your own worldview onto people who would have a very different one.
I'm seriously bringing this up next time you complain about how nobody here seems to understand your logic.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
I just don't feel like this can be stated enough: IT'S A FICTIONAL BOOK AIMED AT TEENS, GBAJI.
Eske Esquire wrote:
Stop me if you've heard this one:
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Nadenu wrote:
I just don't feel like this can be stated enough: IT'S A FICTIONAL BOOK AIMED AT TEENS, GBAJI.
That he hasn't read.
I will confess that whoever said I was ******** because there wasn't enough tiddies in the movie has an excellent point. Katnip, for all of her other faults, cannot be accused of not filling out her fake-fire black leather catsuit and later her pink prom dress.
It's nice to see Hollywood movie starlets with some meat on their bones for a change. ScarJo is a prime example of Hollywood liberalism run amok. There you have a good looking and nicely rounded Fly-over State girl who makes it big in Tinseltown, only to go on a diet after being told her carbon a$$print is too big and turn into Sarah Jessica Parker's sister.
/whinney
That girl needs to put a feedbag on her face and substitute those oats with a cheeseburger. I just hope it doesn't happen to Katnip.
Totem
It's nice to see Hollywood movie starlets with some meat on their bones for a change. ScarJo is a prime example of Hollywood liberalism run amok. There you have a good looking and nicely rounded Fly-over State girl who makes it big in Tinseltown, only to go on a diet after being told her carbon a$$print is too big and turn into Sarah Jessica Parker's sister.
/whinney
That girl needs to put a feedbag on her face and substitute those oats with a cheeseburger. I just hope it doesn't happen to Katnip.
Totem
Gbaji,
You really should read the books if you're going to try and point out specific flaws. Children in District 12 have no opportunity to prepare for the Hunger Games. The book states that starvation is rampant in the district, with many families exerting all their efforts into simply obtaining enough food to survive. Additionally, weapons of any kind are forbidden under penalty of death. Katniss hunts using a bow she hides outside the district to avoid detection.
To Totem's point, I read the books because my wife ordered me to and I enjoy sex, and I considered them trash novels in that they are enjoyable books, you read them at a fast pace and can throw away after reading. The movie was decent if you'd never read the books.
You really should read the books if you're going to try and point out specific flaws. Children in District 12 have no opportunity to prepare for the Hunger Games. The book states that starvation is rampant in the district, with many families exerting all their efforts into simply obtaining enough food to survive. Additionally, weapons of any kind are forbidden under penalty of death. Katniss hunts using a bow she hides outside the district to avoid detection.
To Totem's point, I read the books because my wife ordered me to and I enjoy sex, and I considered them trash novels in that they are enjoyable books, you read them at a fast pace and can throw away after reading. The movie was decent if you'd never read the books.
Eske Esquire wrote:
Stop me if you've heard this one:
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
1. Gbaji has an okay point that he'd like to make. Instead of just making it succinctly, he coats it in a fine layer of BS and sends it forth in all its verbose glory.
2. Somebody tells him that he's wrong about some part of this. Now's his chance to pare down his initial point to the small nugget of truth that it might have contained, and reassert it.
3. Instead, he throws more BS at the problem, hoping that he can sweep away the opposition by virtue of the sheer amount BS that they have to wade through in order to contradict him. He's effectively quadrupled the amount of stuff that he got wrong in the first place. The point that he is trying to make may now have shifted entirely.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 until somebody gets bored, or forgets to respond.
I would sig that if it was shorter
Totem wrote:
I will confess that whoever said I was ******** because there wasn't enough tiddies in the movie has an excellent point. Katnip, for all of her other faults, cannot be accused of not filling out her fake-fire black leather catsuit and later her pink prom dress.
It's nice to see Hollywood movie starlets with some meat on their bones for a change. ScarJo is a prime example of Hollywood liberalism run amok. There you have a good looking and nicely rounded Fly-over State girl who makes it big in Tinseltown, only to go on a diet after being told her carbon a$$print is too big and turn into Sarah Jessica Parker's sister.
/whinney
That girl needs to put a feedbag on her face and substitute those oats with a cheeseburger. I just hope it doesn't happen to Katnip.
Totem
It's nice to see Hollywood movie starlets with some meat on their bones for a change. ScarJo is a prime example of Hollywood liberalism run amok. There you have a good looking and nicely rounded Fly-over State girl who makes it big in Tinseltown, only to go on a diet after being told her carbon a$$print is too big and turn into Sarah Jessica Parker's sister.
/whinney
That girl needs to put a feedbag on her face and substitute those oats with a cheeseburger. I just hope it doesn't happen to Katnip.
Totem
Agreed. Jennifer Lawrence was so great in Winter's Bone, which would have been a challenging role for a much more experienced actress, and part of that was just that she looked like a real girl. One of the distracting things about Justified is that all the women are drop-dead gorgeous, which, if you've ever been to rural Kentucky, is not exactly representative of the population as a whole.
It pisses me off when actresses get grief in the press if they gain five pounds. Most of them would be healthier if they did.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
It pisses me off when actresses get grief in the press if they gain five pounds. Most of them would be healthier if they did.
Especially if the five pounds is in her chest.
What?
What?
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Have you guys seen hot fat Jessica Simpson is? Omgs
Samira wrote:
One of the distracting things about Justified is that all the women are drop-dead gorgeous, which, if you've ever been to rural Kentucky, is not exactly representative of the population as a whole.
allenjj wrote:
Gbaji,
You really should read the books if you're going to try and point out specific flaws.
You really should read the books if you're going to try and point out specific flaws.
I'm not pointing out "specific flaws" in the books though. I'm not saying "on page 18, they said this, then on page 157 they said something that contradicted that". For that, you'd have a point. But I'm making a general statement about the basic premise of the games themselves and assessing their effect from a socio-political point of view. For that, I don't need to know any specifics. Just how the games are constructed and what the alleged purpose is.
Quote:
Children in District 12 have no opportunity to prepare for the Hunger Games. The book states that starvation is rampant in the district, with many families exerting all their efforts into simply obtaining enough food to survive. Additionally, weapons of any kind are forbidden under penalty of death. Katniss hunts using a bow she hides outside the district to avoid detection.
Yup. All things which by themselves serve well to prevent the districts from rising up against the capital. So why add the games to this? My point is that everything else staying the same, the primary result of the very existence of the games would (in any human society) be to increase the degree to which people hate the capital and increase the likelihood that children will train (in some way) in various skills which may help them in the games *and* which may help them if they ever decide to rise up against the capital again.
The kids are starving and struggling already. What do the games add to this?
Quote:
To Totem's point, I read the books because my wife ordered me to and I enjoy sex, and I considered them trash novels in that they are enjoyable books, you read them at a fast pace and can throw away after reading. The movie was decent if you'd never read the books.
I'll almost certainly watch the film when it comes on cable and I'm sure I'll enjoy it. I'm not saying that this prevents enjoyment of the film. I'm just pointing out that the premise is pretty weak itself. Of course, without that premise, you wouldn't have the games, and you wouldn't have a novel.
Anyone want to take bets on whether at some point hatred of the games grows to a point where another uprising occurs in the novels? Want to take bets on which characters end out leading that uprising (or at least being key players)? Will such a thing (assuming it happens) be directly connected to the existence of the games? Absolutely. Will the skills of those who trained for (and even won) past games be critical to said uprising? Yeah. Probably. It would be a crappy story if they didn't. I mean, we all know where the plot will eventually lead in this series. It's like the author is hitting you over the head with it.
I'd absolutely love to be wrong about that btw. But I'm probably not.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Samira wrote:
Agreed. Jennifer Lawrence was so great in Winter's Bone, which would have been a challenging role for a much more experienced actress, and part of that was just that she looked like a real girl. One of the distracting things about Justified is that all the women are drop-dead gorgeous, which, if you've ever been to rural Kentucky, is not exactly representative of the population as a whole.
It pisses me off when actresses get grief in the press if they gain five pounds. Most of them would be healthier if they did.
It pisses me off when actresses get grief in the press if they gain five pounds. Most of them would be healthier if they did.
But ****, most every show is like that. I mean, male characters can run the gamut of attractiveness, but typically, female principals are pretty attractive by typical standards.
One thing I like about Big Love is that the women on the show look like real people. I guess it takes a show about a culture where makeup is frowned upon to get there.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
If there's the option of volunteering to be tribute, why don't they just train one kid to be some kind of uber assassin from birth. If fiction has taught me anything, it's that those kinds of kids are pretty much invincible.
Also, no, I've not read the books. I may do, but I get the feeling it's one of those more or less straight to film franchises like Twilight or Harry Potter which people over-hype.
edit: After reading thread: Oh right, starvation.
Also, the premise of the books, I'm assuming, is that Katniss will become some kind of saviour for the downtrodden and whatnot? Almost single handedly overthrowing the evil government/ruling class or inciting some kind of revolution?
Edited, Apr 7th 2012 9:45pm by Nilatai
Also, no, I've not read the books. I may do, but I get the feeling it's one of those more or less straight to film franchises like Twilight or Harry Potter which people over-hype.
edit: After reading thread: Oh right, starvation.
Also, the premise of the books, I'm assuming, is that Katniss will become some kind of saviour for the downtrodden and whatnot? Almost single handedly overthrowing the evil government/ruling class or inciting some kind of revolution?
Edited, Apr 7th 2012 9:45pm by Nilatai
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
Samira wrote:
One thing I like about Big Love is that the women on the show look like real people. I guess it takes a show about a culture where makeup is frowned upon to get there.
One of these days I'll finish watching that. I'm about 4 episodes into season 4.
Nilatai wrote:
If there's the option of volunteering to be tribute, why don't they just train one kid to be some kind of uber assassin from birth. If fiction has taught me anything, it's that those kinds of kids are pretty much invincible.
Some of the districts do this. They have to be in pretty high favor with the powers that be so a blind eye is turned, but it happens.
And yes, Katniss and her friend become the focal point of a popular uprising. There's nothing particularly realistic about it, but it's a fun read.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Yes. But do you see how there's a key difference (which I pointed out directly) between those system and one in which you randomly select two teens from each district to fight to the death? I honestly don't know if the book(s) touch on this at all, but I imagine that since the possibility of any teen being selected exists, that every teen will have to spend at least some effort learning skills useful and applicable for those games
Exactly. This is why people who play the lottery spend at least some amount of time learning financial planning skills to better be able to deal with winning.
You should probably focus on the fact that this an extremely popular series for children that's basically Atlas Shrugged FOR TEENS! But it's actually readable...
All of the protagonists spend a great deal of time trying to throw off the oppression of organized government, even, in the last book, the organization that's running the revolution against the original totalitarian collectivist state. The message, very clearly, is that all government is bad, individual will triumphs, yadda. There's a little anti war stuff, as well, but mostly in the context of war being governments fighting with each other, and soldiers not understanding or caring why.
Liked the book, liked the movie. You might hate it, but you should support the main theme.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
One thing I like about Big Love is that the women on the show look like real people.
Really? Chloë Sevigny and Jeanne Tripplehorn look like "real people"?? Amanda Seyfried?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Amanda Seyfried doesn't eve look like a real Amanda Seyfried. She has a weird plasticine quality to her.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Smasharoo wrote:
One thing I like about Big Love is that the women on the show look like real people.
Really? Chloë Sevigny and Jeanne Tripplehorn look like "real people"?? Amanda Seyfried?
More so the other women on the show, but yeah. I'd argue that they look more "average" here than we're used to seeing them, particularly Seyfried and Tripplehorn.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Recent Visitors: 342
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (342)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- The Hunger Games movie sucks bloated goat ***
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC