Lurker > Doe

WilliamPorygon posted...

In the episode, Homer becomes suspicious of Bart's new Muslim friend, Bashir, and decides to invite his family for dinner. When Homer offends them, he goes to their home to apologize but discovers what he believes to be a terrorist plot to blow up the Springfield Mall.

this reads like a Family Guy plot...

Mfs really say they read comic books for the plot

AVGN supports the Activision-Microsoft merge, Nostalgia Critic does not and will break up the Walt Disney Company. Both are running as independents

She doesn't really love me she's a demon :(

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/4/AAcZIZAAEaxa.jpg

It was a military decision, so it's bizarre to word it that it 'saved' Japan. It hastened their decision to surrender, along with the Soviet Invasion. Zero part of Truman's decision involved 'saving' Japanese people, it was for more favorable surrender terms

Hmm

MedeaLysistrata posted...

what is this?

Like in the OP video, the idea of tracing themes or production elements of SpongeBob directly to early cinema in the turn of the 20th century.

GeraldDarko posted...

I think that had a lot to do with the subject matter. I mean what can you say about Skyrim that hasn't been touched on or that would challenge perspective? It's not exactly a complex subject.

I don't disagree, just saying a lot of these works WISH they were the OP but are not

I wish they had overly deep and esoteric research and intertextual connecting, but in reality those videos are hours of just summarizing the work itself and the youtuber talking about their personal feelings for it, while occasionally throwing in comments of people from the production team or broad critical & audience reactions. These videos are basically recompiling the original content through the personality and presentation of the youtuber, serving as a less attention-demanding and more (para)social alternative to engaging with the original work.

pencil lead in 0g is problematic for sensitive equipment, which is why they developed the pen

It's messed up that what are essentially fruits are sentient creatures. Nature in the pokemon is double messed up

Legend_of_Zelda posted...

Breaking bad is also going against bcs in this poll, why wouldnt it?

Yeah that's wot I meant

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

If you want your pet to have the cat equivalent of fingers, then yes.

Legend_of_Zelda posted...

Well it is up against every other show in existence + people with bad taste so i'd say BB is going great in this poll

Right how many votes are people who have it top 2 but prefer BCS

Beveren_Rabbit posted...

BB was written with every arc planned out ahead of time.

Vince didn't plan for Jesse to even live past season 2

Jimmy does feel responsible for bringing Kim to his level. He is hesitant about the doomsday scam at first because he doesn't like that she's acting like how he does. But ultimately he chooses to be complicit and gets off to it as much as Kim does

If you try to give your cat different food they get mad tho

MrMelodramatic posted...

season 5 is totally skippable

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/4/5/AAcZIZAAEadR.jpg

catfan2008 posted...

That's what I mean. Gus was introduced early on and is clearly shown to be really stupid being convinced that Jessie is ok.

Yeah but Jesse is incidental to the test. Gus is clear that he wants nothing to do with him. The drop is structured so that the only question is if Walt can deliver good product on demand, and then when Gus decides to actually employ Walt there's no involvement of Jesse.

People like Tucker should learn to smile more. They spend too much time scowling about shit like m&ms and it rots their soul...

catfan2008 posted...

I thought that character came in a season after Gus or something?

He's there as soon as Walt is actually working in the lab. Gus' offer for Walt to work full time (as opposed to the 1 time exchange in s2) comes without Jesse being involved

orcus_snake posted...

Better call Saul was better from season 3 onwards clearly, even on season 2 it was already debatable.

Season 1 is one of the best seasons of Better Call Saul. The more cartel stuff that gets introduced, the less focused BCS gets.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/9/7/AAcZIZAAEach.jpg

Mr_hulk88 posted...

I don't equate taking life in prison to be more "redeeming" than taking 7 years though.
I don't see the value in choosing to go to prison for life, when able to go for 7 years. It was contrived and unrealistic.

It was about saving his soul tbh. To quote Mike about the money in season one: "I believe you said something about doing the right thing." He remembers Chuck's advice that it's never too late to change your path, and sees Kim do it, so he realizes he can too.

In the abstract taking 80 years over 7 just for morality sounds unbearable, but Jimmy's life was already joyless by then. There's no burst of color as he grows back into Saul's shoes when negotiating the plea deal. The only color that returns for him is when he shares the cigarette with Kim.

Nah he's as funny as ever

fair enough

Punished_Blinx posted...

What is then?

If "good guy and bad guy" is a morality tale then basically every story is a morality tale. A morality tale illustrates a moral through its story. Eg Hansel and Gretel illustrates the moral of caution around strangers. The kids first meet the witch at which point following her seems consequentially insignificant or even positive as she promises treats, but then they learn that such offers from people they don't know may come with ulterior motives.

When a story at its outset labels one party as good and the other as bad and then they fight (such as the opening crawl of every Star Wars movie), then the story is not illustrating a moral. Like, Star Wars is just not about why the Empire is bad or why the Jedi are good. We already know blowing up Alderaan is bad and that stopping that behavior is good.

s0nicfan posted...

Sure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_the_Author

Now, let's see if you're arguing that the ultimate meaning is completely divorced from the actual stated intent of the author:

Yep, that's literally "death of the author." This has been my TED talk.

My post doesn't state that "death of the author" is an "axiom". An axiom is something you assume to be true without being able to prove it as the basis to be able to conclude other things. It is just a fact that George Lucas' intentions do not influence what viewers take away from Star Wars because physically they are not engaging with George Lucas' intentions, they are engaging with the movie.

From my pov you are acting like, because the facts I'm pointing out have been put under an umbrella and labeled 'death of the author', that choosing to accept those facts is just a philosophical opinion, similar to how people try to make evolution or intelligent design equal choices.

Punished_Blinx posted...

There's a literal light side and dark side lol

"there is good guy and bad guy" is not the definition of a morality tale...

s0nicfan posted...

And thus we're back to my first post:

Enlighten me on how what I wrote contradicted what you said?

s0nicfan posted...

If you ask the author what he meant by a scene

That's not what's being asked. What's being asked is what do we, as a viewer, learn from a scene. When an audience sits down in a theater, what the author intended means nothing, all that matters is what the audience actually learns from what the scenes actually show.

"What are the themes conveyed by A New Hope" and "What themes did George Lucas intend to convey in A New Hope" are wholly different questions, and the first one is what actually matters to what the film told audiences.

By the time Caesar marched on Rome and triggered civil war, changes in how the military was funded had already led effective power to be collected in the hands of very few wealthy people who owned the legions. 'Dictator' was historically an emergency position during wartime, but after Caesar won he got the senate to name him 'dictator in perpetuity' because he was powerful enough to own everyone, and he was assassinated for it like two weeks later. When Augustus consolidated Caesar's power after the second civil war, the Senate never went away. It was just packed with so many loyalists, and Augustus granted so many positions of authority in the government, that he was effectively the absolute ruler.

So, the formation of the roman empire was less about using fearmongering to be given power, and more about how capital corrupts republican institutions, particularly when instruments of real power are privatized.

averagejoel posted...

Palpatine is Nixon and Darth Vader is Kissinger

that makes no sense

s0nicfan posted...

Some people may choose to ignore the author flat out saying what the meaning of their work is, but that doesn't mean that it's an incorrect interpretation

It's not that you should ignore what the author says for the sake of excluding the author from conversations. It's that you should not use the author's intent as evidence, and you should not use the author as an appeal to authority. If the author compellingly lays out textual evidence to argue how a scene works or what message is being delivered, then that's as valid as any great argument. Use of textual evidence and reason is what makes someone authoritative.

You could probably get quite the explanation of the themes and messages of The Room from director Tommy Wiseau, but neither his perception of the finished product, nor what he alleges were his goals during production, has any effect on what The Room actually tells audiences.

wackyteen posted...

Lucas himself is on the record stating that Star Wars is a morality tale.

This is an appeal to authority based on Lucas creating the IP. I could also throw out the Lucas quote that "Jar Jar's the key to all this, if we get Jar Jar working. 'Cause he's a funnier character than we've ever had in the movies...". But without actually examining the text, if I just use this to argue that Jar Jar holds the prequel trilogy together, I would be appealing to authority.

I'm conflicted. What I ask myself is whether the conclusion feels inevitable based on Jimmy's characterization across the show, and to that, I am not sure. The ending reevaluates whether Jimmy and Kim "are bad, for each other." Because while their relationship led to the death of Howard and a lie that consumed Kim's life, their break-up allowed Saul Goodman to fully be unleashed. And it is Kim's withholding of relief, her confession, and her physical presence in the courtroom that seems to motivate Jimmy to confess to everything.

The tapes we see Gene rewatching over the course of the series are his tapes he produced as Saul Goodman, not the tapes as Jimmy that he made with Kim. (I guess you could argue the intro shows that Gene is 'rewatching'/reliving the entire series over and over, but the videos played within the show are always his lawyer advertisements.) Gene comes very close to braining a cancer patient during a burglary.

So to me the face-turn hangs almost entirely on Gene's phone call with Kim where he calls her a hypocrite for not confessing to the Howard scam. And I'm not convinced that's enough when his first plan in Saul Gone is to rat her out and destroy her for a pint of ice cream. Now the episode does also introduce the theme of regret and the motif of the time machine, but it rubs me a little raw that all the moments of Jimmy slowly learning the meaning of regretting your actions are withheld from us until this last episode. The conclusion seems to be that if Jimmy had the time machine then he would go back to that night and have a heart-to-heart with his brother. But Chuck never enters Jimmy's mind again from season 5 until the finale so that also feels underdeveloped.

A lot of this kinda goes up to my biggest problem with seasons 5 and 6: there is not enough Jimmy. Way too much screen time on old fat Giancarlo Esposito who is a static character. Too much time on Mike who is static once he kills Ziegler. Too much time on Ignacio given that his story arrives at a dead end and had nothing to do with the titular character since like season 2. I'm not saying the cartel storyline was bad, but in a show called Better Call Saul, it did not have enough baring on the show's central relationship to justify how much focus it got.

that cat clearly likes her cuz he's slow blinking, he's being playful

wackyteen posted...

Lucas himself is on the record stating that Star Wars is a morality tale.

Well to start with, we don't ask the author what their work was supposed to mean, we conclude the resultant meaning of the work from the textual evidence. George Lucas is kinda infamous for his extravagant claims about meaning.

I think you can better argue the prequels are a morality tale because Anakin, particularly in episode 3, questions the moral compass he gained from Jedi instruction and changes his values based on his perception of hypocrisy. But Star Wars being a story about the redemption of Anakin or the Skywalker name is something that's been added later and over time. It's just not present in the original movie, or per the topic title, in the Empire vs Rebels plot.

wackyteen posted...

Star Wars is literally about good guys vs bad guys and the redemption of Anakin Skywalker via his son.

Neither of those statements describe a morality tale.

Did this game just not sell? There's like no fanart

Mental health resources. Mental health 'management.' That's what you're offered at university, they send out these emails any time there's a high profile shooting in the news or if a student dies on campus or there was a hate crime or it's finals week.

Last week one of my professors ceded some of lecture time to a lady who is the 'director of student support' who had a whole PowerPoint about how much sleep you should try to get, what you should eat or drink, how much physical activity you should get.

And this really steamed me because I realized that the office of student support is a lie. The meta-message behind 'resources' about 'managing' mental health is that it's actually all on you. If you fail, whether you fail on a test or drop a class or drop out of college or die or anything. The message is that you didn't utilize your resources effectively, you are a poor manager of your mental health.

But it's not just that the systems in college and American life as a whole are not sufficiently designed to accommodate mental health. It's that these systems, including the ones of this college, are designed to not accommodate people struggling. And that makes these offers of resources so insidious because they're part of that system that lays the blame on you. That if you can't adapt to the artificialities and constructions in our society then it's because you just don't have the constitution for it, and you're led to never examine the core systems for problems.

I've never been able to get into superhero comics

https://youtu.be/bl5TUw7sUBs

It's complete and absolute bullshit. Like actual evidence and studying shows that this behavior makes it harder for fat people to improve their health. All the people described in the OP actually want is to have a group they can demean and make fun of, the idea that it's helpful behavior is only a justification for their awful behavior.

Crick gets so fed up with Temenos' shit that I'm wondering if the narrative is leading to Crick fighting him

https://meaww.com/did-matt-walsh-really-suggest-16-yr-olds-be-impregnated-resurfaced-rant-shocks-internet

Matt Walsh, on the record, concurs also that Biblical morality concludes that girls should be wed to men and impregnated at 16 because "they're most fertile at that age" and why would God make it that way were it not his intention.

I use VLC currently.

I like the east continent as a group with Temenos holding it together. His questionable ethics means it's totally believable he'd meet a murderer and a thief and think "ah yes traveling with you is a great idea". While he'd pick up Ochette for being connected to the coming nightfall

TFW no beastling bf

Tyranthraxus posted...

That's not true. Once you unlock subjobs he can get a sub like dancer that has skills to break anything.

Second job is kinda past early levels at least that's how I remember it in Octo 1

Irony posted...

Temenos is the 2nd strongest character after Hikari

Perhaps eventually, he just feels declawed at early levels. If you dont ready his ability at an inn then you're just not gonna be able to question 90% of npcs.