Arnold....I am sad,

Recommended Videos

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
manic_depressive13 said:
SaneAmongInsane said:
Okay this isn't about you but people in general, is it so hard to quote my whole post and just write underneath it?
I think it helps to clarify which points I am adressing and I believe it looks less schizophrenic than drastically changing topic with each paragraph. I'll quote the way I like to and you can do it your way.
It's annoying as all fuck and comes across condescending.
 

Tyrant55

New member
Sep 3, 2008
191
0
0
Guy from the 80 said:
Tyrant55 said:
Again, it's a purely subjective sport at any rate. Personally, I'll take massively muscular thighs over big arms any day of the week. As somebody who lifts weights myself, I know for a fact that getting big legs takes more blood, sweat, and dedication than building any other body part. A reason for this is because there are less androgen receptors in the lower body, so basically that means that steroid use has much less of an effect on the lower body than the upper body. Also, big arms require less demanding exercises like curls, but to get big legs you're going to have to spend some time with heavy weight on your back in the squat rack. So I guess that's why I really appreciate muscular lower bodies in bodybuilding, it's one of the best signs of straight up hard work and dedication (NOT saying that people with smaller legs don't work hard).
I can totally understand that logic. But do you think that big legs look better from a beaty perspective?

I can totally understand that logic. But if that guy had chicken legs but kept all of his upper body mass would he look like LESS of a freak?

I agree though, big legs will only be appreciated by those who know what it takes to get them. Whatever floats your boat. And although the ladies might not give a shit about "quad sweep" or whatever, many do love a man with powerful striated glutes :)
 

Guffe

New member
Jul 12, 2009
5,106
0
0
I liked him as a kid, he was big and manly and killed loads of things, something else needed?
Answer: Not really!
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
imahobbit4062 said:
Watch Snatch, Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and London. 3 movies where he doesn't kill a single person and he's still a damn good actor.
That's stretching the definition of 'damn good' a long way. Not seen London, but I can barely even remember him in Lock, Stock, and he's really not very good in Snatch.

Brad Pitt is 'damn good' in Snatch, Statham isn't.

He's better in The Bank Job, but even then there's nothing to write home about.
 

General Twinkletoes

Suppository of Wisdom
Jan 24, 2011
1,426
0
0
Guy from the 80 said:
When I was young, Arnold Swarzenegger was immortal. He was the like a god. He killed everyone, there is no way to describe Arnold to the kids today.

There are no one to pick up the torch, not even after Sylvester.

How do I embed this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-al8o-Zps4

There are no heroes like Arnold today, what Brad Pitt? There are no one.
Bloody hell that's insane. He looks sculpted sometimes. No matter what he did with steroids or anything like that, no one else could do that sort of thing, with or without drugs It's always impressive seeing that sort of thing.
He's one of the most impressive people in the world to me. I wasn't even alive during his golden age, but the fact that he has done practically everything, and had just a huge cultural impact. I can hardly imagine what it was like. He's not my idol, I don't plan on being like him and I don't know much about what he's really like, but it's still very impressive.

EDIT: This might be a double post. My internet is acting up.
 

General Twinkletoes

Suppository of Wisdom
Jan 24, 2011
1,426
0
0
Michaluk said:
The only guy who I can think of who has similar accomplishments is Brock Lesnar.
Well he's basically a meat head through and through though. I've only seen a bit of wrestling, and wasn't interested, but I noticed that brock lesnar was also really huge, so I looked him up to see if he was more then meets the eye. He's not. Apparently he was last to graduate, skipped a bunch of school and main drive is to hurt the guy infront of him. Arnie actually seems intelligent. Say what you want about politics, even the worst politicians are pretty smart.

God, what's with the new captchas. These are a ***** to read.
 

General Twinkletoes

Suppository of Wisdom
Jan 24, 2011
1,426
0
0
SaneAmongInsane said:
manic_depressive13 said:
SaneAmongInsane said:
Okay this isn't about you but people in general, is it so hard to quote my whole post and just write underneath it?
I think it helps to clarify which points I am adressing and I believe it looks less schizophrenic than drastically changing topic with each paragraph. I'll quote the way I like to and you can do it your way.
It's annoying as all fuck and comes across condescending.
Well if you're replying to really, really long posts and want to address maybe 1 line, it's a little hard to bring attention to the specific phrase.
 

SadakoMoose

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2009
1,200
0
41
Nobody really cares about that style of action hero anymore, expect for people who were around for that time. We've seen hong kong style action now, and there's no going back.
Audiences expect either bone crushing, super athletic fight scenes (ie; Michael Jai White, Scott Adkins, The Entire Cast of The Raid) or they expect guys who can at least ACT well enough to be considered credible in their roles, or taken seriously (Liam Neeson, Daniel Craig).

Basically, guys like Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Norris made their careers off of being exaggerated cartoon characters. Norris is just a few points removed from ACTUALLY being Eagleheart. Stallone's early work actually does show some effort on his part, such as the first Rocky or First Blood, wherein he at least TRIES to act. After he realized that he didn't need to try in order to draw an audience, he gave up completely.

If you go back and watch those movies, what do you get? The same one liners, the same static shots where they just stand there and fire from the hip, or maybe some sub par hand to hand combat where only one henchman attacks at a time. Chuck Norris only survives now as a walking punch line to a joke that stopped being funny 3 years ago, and Stallone continues to exist basically so that people can make fun of his Bell's Palsy. Arnold? 1 word, JUNIOR.

As per a reference to wrestling earlier, the audience preferences have also changed greatly since then, with the influx of Mexican and Japanese influence that came in the 90's.
Wrestling fans just don't care about big dudes anymore, as they've since realized that having traps the size of water melons and large biceps do not indicate (and often times negate) athletic performance/agility.
The cutting edge of wrestling doesn't look like the Arnold cup:

The changes are coming. Right now, some of the biggest rising stars in the WWE are guys like Bryan Danielson and CM Punk, NEITHER of whom you could argue look like body builders.

The world moved on, because it realized that it could do better.
 

Soxafloppin

Coxa no longer floppin'
Jun 22, 2009
7,918
0
0
As an amateur body builder myself, Arnold is one of my Idols. They're have been bigger but Arnie is the still the definitive body builder to this day, Ronnie who?
 

Guy from the 80's

New member
Mar 7, 2012
423
0
0
SadakoMoose said:
Nobody really cares about that style of action hero anymore, expect for people who were around for that time. We've seen hong kong style action now, and there's no going back.
Hong Kong action is pretty crap because we all know Kung Foo doesn't work. On top of that, watching people flip out gets boring after a while. The early Jet Lee was god damn amazing, but today its just stagnated and boring.


 

Luna

New member
Apr 28, 2012
198
0
0
Tyrant55 said:
Luna said:
Tyrant55 said:
As a bodybuilding fanatic, I must agree with you. While there may be people who surpass Arnold in the field of bodybuilding (Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman, Phil Heath) there are none that succeed as well in the multiple areas of life that Arnold has. He may not be the best bodybuilder, he may not be the best actor, and he may not be the best politician, but considering all that he has accomplished in his life is truly inspiring.
He was the best bodybuilder of his time.


Also, the only reason why Jay, Ronnie and Phil would beat Arnold if 1970s Arnold traveled through time to compete in 2012 is due to the way the contests are judged; the notion that bigger is better. If it were about aesthetics rather than pure size then Arnold would win IMO.
Bodybuilding is purely a subjective sport, so of course if the judges were changed then in theory anybody could win. Go look at a picture of Arnold in his prime, and while his upper body may have been amazing for its time, his legs were never really anything special. In Arnold's time the lower body was not judged nearly as harshly as it is now, so many competitors got along fine with comparatively lagging lower bodies (Tom Platz is famous for having the exact opposite problem, he was built like a T-Rex with massive legs and a comparatively weak upper body).

Also, to say that aesthetics are dead in bodybuilding is false IMO. Go look at Victor Martinez, he may not be the biggest mass monster out there but he came close to winning the Olympia just because he is so well-rounded.
I never said aesthetics were dead. But I think they were certainly more alive in the 70s than they are today.
 

SadakoMoose

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2009
1,200
0
41
Guy from the 80 said:
SadakoMoose said:
Nobody really cares about that style of action hero anymore, expect for people who were around for that time. We've seen hong kong style action now, and there's no going back.
Hong Kong action is pretty crap because we all know Kung Foo doesn't work. On top of that, watching people flip out gets boring after a while. The early Jet Lee was god damn amazing, but today its just stagnated and boring.
And watching the guy from Kindergarten Cop wax philosophical over a sub par Dragonlance fanfic is any better? There's a reason that these men's careers did not survive the 90's.
captcha: one hit wonder
 

Relish in Chaos

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,660
0
0
imahobbit4062 said:
Relish in Chaos said:
Yeah, Jason Statham is pretty much the modern Arnold Schwarzenegger, only he can actually act worth a damn.

This is in terms of film career, by the way. Part of what makes Schwarzenegger so popular is that his bad acting makes him so funny and easily parodied (especially all his famous quotes). But other than that, he?s just a unique guy, who has appeared in multiple great films. Like Statham, he?s basically playing himself in every film, but he makes that role his own (although Statham can genuinely act, but he just gets typecast).

Which is why I?m more than peeved that they?re remaking Total Recall, and with Colin Farell. He?s a good actor, but not even he will be able to save Hollywood from shitting all over that unnecessary remake. Rule of thumb: don?t remake classics, and definitely don?t remake Schwarzenegger classics.

Anyway, I don?t know why you?re moaning about Schwarzenegger?s bodybuilding career. That?s largely irrelevant to his cultural phenomenon status that?s mostly thanks to his film career. And I think your qualms about bodybuilding are, frankly, stupid. If he wants to pump up on steroids (which is, like, only one part of the job, and even then, it?s not as if they all do it), then he can.

If models want to starve themselves half to death, then they can. And people sometimes can?t help being role models. I don?t like the fact that Lady Gaga is a role model for many teenage girls, but she?s not necessarily doing anything wrong. Encouraging kids to take up a valid occupation such as bodybuilding is just as bad as encouraging kids to be attention-seeking whores who rely on gimmicks to sell their Madonna rip-off records.
Watch Snatch, Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and London. 3 movies where he doesn't kill a single person and he's still a damn good actor.
I didn't say he couldn't act. I said that, unlike Schwarzenegger, he can actually act worth a damn.

I've watched parts of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but not enough to judge his performance in that film. Haven?t seen the other two.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
GeneralTwinkle said:
SaneAmongInsane said:
manic_depressive13 said:
SaneAmongInsane said:
Okay this isn't about you but people in general, is it so hard to quote my whole post and just write underneath it?
I think it helps to clarify which points I am adressing and I believe it looks less schizophrenic than drastically changing topic with each paragraph. I'll quote the way I like to and you can do it your way.
It's annoying as all fuck and comes across condescending.
Well if you're replying to really, really long posts and want to address maybe 1 line, it's a little hard to bring attention to the specific phrase.
Then chop it down to just that line, or bold the line that is the sticking point. Going line by line refuting claims as you go is lazy and disrespectful.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
SadakoMoose said:
Nobody really cares about that style of action hero anymore, expect for people who were around for that time. We've seen hong kong style action now, and there's no going back.
Audiences expect either bone crushing, super athletic fight scenes (ie; Michael Jai White, Scott Adkins, The Entire Cast of The Raid) or they expect guys who can at least ACT well enough to be considered credible in their roles, or taken seriously (Liam Neeson, Daniel Craig).

Basically, guys like Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Norris made their careers off of being exaggerated cartoon characters. Norris is just a few points removed from ACTUALLY being Eagleheart. Stallone's early work actually does show some effort on his part, such as the first Rocky or First Blood, wherein he at least TRIES to act. After he realized that he didn't need to try in order to draw an audience, he gave up completely.

If you go back and watch those movies, what do you get? The same one liners, the same static shots where they just stand there and fire from the hip, or maybe some sub par hand to hand combat where only one henchman attacks at a time. Chuck Norris only survives now as a walking punch line to a joke that stopped being funny 3 years ago, and Stallone continues to exist basically so that people can make fun of his Bell's Palsy. Arnold? 1 word, JUNIOR.

As per a reference to wrestling earlier, the audience preferences have also changed greatly since then, with the influx of Mexican and Japanese influence that came in the 90's.
Wrestling fans just don't care about big dudes anymore, as they've since realized that having traps the size of water melons and large biceps do not indicate (and often times negate) athletic performance/agility.
The cutting edge of wrestling doesn't look like the Arnold cup:

The changes are coming. Right now, some of the biggest rising stars in the WWE are guys like Bryan Danielson and CM Punk, NEITHER of whom you could argue look like body builders.

The world moved on, because it realized that it could do better.
Hey man, do you know about our Escapist wrestling group? Join us.

It's not that the casual WWE fan doesn't like the big guys anymore, it's that with the way wrestling pyschology works big guys aren't allowed to wrestle the same exciting style as the smaller guys. When I was training I knew a guy that had a Mark Henry build, the guy would study Shawn Micheals and Bret Hart. He told me that he'd love to do some of the stuff the more svelte guys do, but he couldn't because the psychology of the big man essentially being the incredible hulk sort of handicapped what he was allowed to do.

Big Show, in his prime, could do a moonsault off the top rope and do a pretty wicked drop kick:


Plus it doesn't help that the business is plain getting an influx of smaller guys wanting to be wrestlers then heavyweights.
 

Nash

New member
May 25, 2012
51
0
0
Not sure how to enter the conversation without sounding like a smark douchebag...

Fuck it. #ShowOff