Lurker > Collat

KiwiTerraRizing posted...

I want so many bad movies nobody remembers anything good about the franchise.

Before Disney even bought it, there were arguably more bad ones than good ones.

IloveJesus posted...

Do I need to have seen the others to enjoy this one?

Only saw Road Warrior before it. As far as I can tell, the stories are self contained enough that you don't really need to see them in order.

First one takes place before society collapses though.

If you are shitting on people who take care of their bodies, it's 100% jealousy.

Guess people can be arrogant about it, but the same applies to anything.

I like how he lists talking to friends as a hobby. Yeah. I bet nobody who goes to the gym does that.

Thompson posted...

I never figured out where Fury Road takes place. The previous movies were in Australia, but Fury Road seems like some kind of fantastical world, what with the weird bog, the massive sandstorms, and the Citadel being an aquifier with huge release pipes high up on the side of a tall butte.

Pretty sure it's still Australia, but the salt flats they talk about driving through is the dried up ocean.

They just kind of pushed how fucked up and weird the world had gotten.

Maybe I can fix her.

Now those same people will pretend that they always liked the character.

WTF are you even on about?

pinky0926 posted...

But now I just don't give a shit about the new Justice League movie

It's an extended version of an old movie that we already know is bad. Hard to get hyped about that.

nothanks1 posted...

DC is actually better than Marvel if you're a comics fan as it tries to stick to the comics.

Batman is a violent murder who uses guns.

Tyranthraxus posted...

You won't have to. It's broken up into 4 episodes

Oh. That actually sounds much better.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Yes they filmed new footage for the movie.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

It's going to be an even more bloated BvS

It's supposed to be 4 hours long. Not sure why they didn't just have Snyder make a full sequel at that point.

I don't even know If I could sit through a good movie that's that long.

Ivynn posted...

Why are people pretending SnyderCut will be good

DCEU stans are weird.

TommyG663513 posted...

So those soliciting themselves on that site have zero responsibility?

For managing their customers finances? No. How the fuck would they even do that?

Seriously though. Why are they so obsessed with pegging now? Projection as usual?

Gavin McInnes couldn't even repill his wife.

He created the Proud Boys and she voted for Hilary.

Monolith1676 posted...

I said if someone attacks you, not just oncoming traffic.

I just made it a more fitting comparison.

Monolith1676 posted...

if you are jaywalking and someone attacks you, you would not be afforded to use self defense if you killed that person.

If you jaywalk as an excuse to shoot at oncoming traffic, that is not self defense.

VipaGTS posted...

The simple act of going there to help maintain order shows he wasnt trying to avoid shit. If he wanted to avoid it he should have stayed home. Conflict had already started before he got there.

Apparently it's self defense as long as you don't stand in place like a dumbass.

BeyondWalls posted...

But you could make that argument for anyone there.

This really is all you people have isn't it?

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Imagine thinking we're slurping just because it was factually self defense.

Nah. You slurpin.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Its actually irrelevant to whether or not it's self defense, and regardless he didn't take a gun across state lines and he lived closer to the town than anyone involved.

Holy shit. That's the funniest thing I've read today. Thanks.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

citation needed

Why else would he need it? To show everyone his cool gun? We already ruled out defending property and self defense.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Where did I say I was against him facing trial?

Well that depends on if he's found guilty or not in your case.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

It is. Sorry kid.

Bringing an assault riffle into a hostile environment like that means you are intending to use it. He had no property to protect and wasn't in danger until he put himself in danger. Saying so is not a violation of anything, it's just common sense.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

But you're claiming taking guns is intent to cause harm in a situation where dozens of people took guns and didn't cause any harm. Seems like a pretty glaring issue in your argument.

You know what I mean. You are just being disingenuous as fuck.

Like usual, the difference here is one side defends their worst, while the other lets them face consequences.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Claiming that carrying a gun is intent for violence is a direct violation of the second amend.

No it isn't.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

They're people doing the exact same thing you claim shows intent for violence. I'd say it matters.

Nobody is defending the rioters, so whether they had guns or not is irrelevant. They could arrest them too for all anybody cares.

BeyondWalls posted...

But there were LOTS of other people there with assault rifles. Rittenhouse wasn't alone in that.

Like I said.

That does not fucking mater.

You people bring up the most irrelevant shit to defend this pudgy little bitch.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Second amendment says otherwise.

Too young to be carrying, but the intent remains all the same.

BeyondWalls posted...

Well, that's not true. He interacted with Rosenbaum for awhile. So he knew his character the minute Rosenbaum started trying to push a flaming dumpster into a police barricade. You mean Rittenhouse didn't know their criminal history, which is true. But character is something different.

The criminal history is what people bring up and that's what he didn't know.

But I double checked to see if he knew of him and wouldn't you know, on the very first link:

Additionally, no proof existed to confirm or deny whether Rittenhouse knew of Huber, Rosenbaum, or Grosskreutz or their criminal histories before he was captured in video footage patrolling the protest with the rifle.

You get an L on this one.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

Evidence he wanted to kill someone? Simply being there is not premeditation,

Bringing an assault rifle is a red flag.

he had as much constitutional right to be there as anyone else.

Being there isn't the problem. Showing up to kill people is. That has nothing to do with the constitution.

RadiantJoyrock posted...

He never shot into a crowd. He shot three specific people who were direct threats to him.

Instigating a fight with someone so you can kill them is not self defense.

People bring up the character of the people he shot as if it justifies what he did, but he had no way of knowing any of that. Hence, it's just like shooting into a crowd.

In this case he just happened to piss off the crowd first.

Maybe I dont agree with ignoring the facts of the case to condemn someone just because they're a piece of shit? That doesn't sound like justice to me.

"Facts"

BeyondWalls posted...

Eh... the guy Rittenhouse shot also carried a firearm across state lines.

That means fuck all in a murder case.

Neither does one of them being a pedo.

If you shoot into a crowd there is a non-zero chance you could hit a pedophile or a murderer. It doesn't make you a hero if it happens on accident.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Well he sure likes defending them.

Since it's Deadpool, they could have him blatantly say that he's there because Disney bought Fox.

He's the one character from those films that they should not consider recasting.

He literary spouts Qanon bullshit and Fox is cool with airing it.

SauI_Goodman posted...

Remember when they gave kingpin to mcd. How all the fanboys lost their shit.

He was a better Kingpin than he was a Balrog.

It'll probably be bad.

Not because of the casting, but because they are adapting a video game to live action.

lolife67 posted...

Oh, it's definitely intentional. I was just saying we haven't gotten confirmation either way.

Fair.

ShibaToken posted...

Compare how much the supposed Goldeneye remake changed to how much the latter did.

In the case of FF7, a hell of a lot more.

It's not 1to1 at all.

Darmik posted...

I think this one would be a bit different since it was the exact same game Nintendo published in the 90s with prettier visuals. So while Nintendo don't have any rights over the Goldeneye name or any new adaptations of the movie I could see them having some sort of ownership over the game they published so that would stop publishers and developers from simply releasing the same game again.

Not the case with any other Rare game though aside from one's dealing with Nintendo properties for obvious reasons.

There just seems to be this long standing urban legend where Nintendo is sitting on the rights to one specific Bond movie forever even though they haven't touched it in 25 years and other game companies have used it without issue.

ArianaGrandSlam posted...

Older games than it are more playable. Other N64 games are more playable.

GoldenEye is a mess and only the delusional recommend playing it as-is in current year.

Console fps games from that gen don't really hold up in general. Twin stick control schemes were rarely used until the next gen and even then, the early PS2 games were a bit rough.

ShibaToken posted...

It was a reboot, not a remake.

Getting real nitpicky aren't you?

It is a modern reimagining of the 1995 James Bond film GoldenEye as well as a remake of the 1997 video game of the same name, developed for the earlier Nintendo 64 console.

The fact of the matter is, they were able to put out a Goldeneye game on all consoles and Nintendo couldn't do shit about it. Just like they couldn't when EA used the name.

Now that IO Interactive has the license, they would be free to use it as well, though I'm expecting their game to downplay the shooter style gameplay compared to other Bond games.

ShibaToken posted...

That wasn't a remake.

It was.

Not a very faithful one, but it's literally called Golden Eye. Just done with a new cast and locations that don't really look like the original game.

Maybe you are thinking of EA's attempt to cash in on it by making a game about some guy named "goldeneye"

ShibaToken posted...

Activision didn't make a remake

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldenEye_007_(2010_video_game)
Published.

Clickbait.

In an earlier interview, they said it was more about the movie and games being licensed by different companies and trying to secure the likeness of all the actors.

By the time they were working on this, EA already made a Goldeneye "spinoff" for PS2 and xbox without issue. Activision's remake also ended up on PS3 and 360.

Nintendo don't own shit.

lolife67 posted...

We don't know that's what she did, as an fyi. Right now it's just a theory. It could just be an Easter egg and meta on the whole recasting thing they do on sitcoms.

If not, it's an intentional tease because we know multiverse stuff is coming.

The other possibility is she just took a random civilian and forced him to play her brother.

BakonBitz posted...

They're definitely confirming multi-verse stuff with this phase then.

I think the next saga after the infinity saga is probably going to be centred around it. Dr Strange and Spider-Man are pretty much confirmed to dip into it.

Could be the best or worst thing to happen to the MCU I guess.

BakonBitz posted...

Who the...WHAT? Her brother's actually alive!?

When's uh...when's the next episode coming?

In Foxs X-Men movies. She plucked him from that universe.

They come out on Fridays I believe.

dave_is_slick posted...

You are the ONLY person who wanted that.

IMO, the episode where they explained everything going on outside the bubble came a bit too soon.

Guess Ill have to see where they go with the rest of it to know for sure though.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Some hobbies get boring in excess. Some peoples hobbies require being able to go placea they now cant.

Some people didnt even make it a week before throwing a fit.

Pathetic.

I know its a joke topic, but seeing all the idiots protesting lockdowns last year made me realize that there are a lot of people with no hobbies whatsoever.

Does that even count as streaking?

Batman V Superman doesn't dunk on anything. Both movies are trash.

Esrac posted...

That is a painfully cringey idea.

The ultimate Karen move.

Of course he won't.

All his takes on the pandemic are moronic.

Crepes posted...

Why does epic get so much hate but steam gets a free pass?

If they did something as lame as paying for exclusives, they would absolutely deserve hate for it.

Like when everyone shit on them for trying to sell mods. Bringing that up doesn't fit the egs simp's naritive though.

The bundles have been a bit less impressive, but they occasionally throw out free games too.