We can mainly agree on the last point so I cut it. I'm not against legalization of some drugs. Also, some proactive intervention could stop the violence from spilling across and helping the poor villagers that see the brunt of it every day.SAMAS said:It's mostly a side effect of Republican policies from the 70's-90's biting them in the ass. Back when they decided to continue courting the Racist vote by shrouding it in the trappings of economic policies (yes, they actually did document that). Given that many of the same assholes are still in charge or have influence (and Republicans even now saying dumb racist/misogynist junk), you can see how it taints... well, damn near everything they say regarding anybody not White.Brockyman said:And of course Bob continues his "I have to talk about something ungodly liberal in every review" cliche. He's becoming like Brian in Family Guy, started out full of wit and humor as a straight man and devolving into a liberal cliche.
C'mom Bob, not everything has to be about something.
Also, border security isn't "anti-Mexican". While I know some people do have racist intentions, the majority of Americans that support border security just want to be secure. Most of them don't mind good, hardworking, TAX PAYING, LEGAL immigration, and most support making becoming legal easier for those who deserve it (i.e. not drug dealer, rapist ect).
Not everything in life is fueled by racism and sexism, and while they still do exist (and probably always will since stupid people can't be exterminated), it's not the end-all, be-all to everything, and consistently using it is like the boy crying wolf to the point most people don't care.
I think "cringy kind of boner" is the internet's phrase of the day!PunkRex said:The first film was so dumb... I remember laughting, which means I was proberly enjoying myself but that pool scene was something else, I cringed... then got a boner, but a cringy kind of boner.
Not only wasn't it "that bad", it was unique, very low budget and pretty much all around awesome. The things that make it unique is pretty much what Bobby hated about it*, is what I got from his review of it. Everyone acts their ass off, people suddenly die Game of Thrones style for no apparent (story) reason.Stabby Joe said:Ever since Red State (a film that wasn't even that bad), Bob seems to have in for Kevin Smith recently, despite previously implying enjoyment of his past work. Confusing.
Yeah, I always find that a touch ridiculous, like you're more likely to see a decapitation before a set of naked boobs. Yet which one's more likely to hurt? Or at the very least, leave a mark on the floor that requires a bit more than a fresh bottle of Disinfectant to clean up afterwards...teamcharlie said:Pulling a dude through a helicopter blade via his colon? A-okay! Nipple? Nooooooope.
Welcome to the future, lads and lasses. It's gonna be a repressive ride.
Please, please stop with the "Well, we were on the good side a hundred years ago" argument. As the old question goes: "What have you done for me lately?" And the answer isn't good. I suggest you look up the term "Southern Strategy". Here's something to get you started -- an excerpt from a 1981 interview with Lee Atwater:Brockyman said:We can mainly agree on the last point so I cut it. I'm not against legalization of some drugs. Also, some proactive intervention could stop the violence from spilling across and helping the poor villagers that see the brunt of it every day.SAMAS said:It's mostly a side effect of Republican policies from the 70's-90's biting them in the ass. Back when they decided to continue courting the Racist vote by shrouding it in the trappings of economic policies (yes, they actually did document that). Given that many of the same assholes are still in charge or have influence (and Republicans even now saying dumb racist/misogynist junk), you can see how it taints... well, damn near everything they say regarding anybody not White.Brockyman said:And of course Bob continues his "I have to talk about something ungodly liberal in every review" cliche. He's becoming like Brian in Family Guy, started out full of wit and humor as a straight man and devolving into a liberal cliche.
C'mom Bob, not everything has to be about something.
Also, border security isn't "anti-Mexican". While I know some people do have racist intentions, the majority of Americans that support border security just want to be secure. Most of them don't mind good, hardworking, TAX PAYING, LEGAL immigration, and most support making becoming legal easier for those who deserve it (i.e. not drug dealer, rapist ect).
Not everything in life is fueled by racism and sexism, and while they still do exist (and probably always will since stupid people can't be exterminated), it's not the end-all, be-all to everything, and consistently using it is like the boy crying wolf to the point most people don't care.
To the point.
1. I don't get your "racist vote" thing. The Republican Party was founded by slave abolitionists in 1854 and included Abraham Lincoln. The Republican Party had a very strong voice in Civil Rights legislation, and mainly democrats, including George Wallace in Alabama, were Democrats. Yes, there asshole that are racists in all parties, but there isn't any directly racist actions I've ever seen.
?just too much that you don?t know,? Bennett said. ?But I do know that it?s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could ? if that were your sole purpose ? you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down.?2. What "racist/misogynist junk" are you refering too? You whole "they say regarding anybody not White" already shows your bias, but I'd like to hear your opinion. I'll also give you a few examples others shoot out at as racist or misogynistic.
I didn't say jack about this...-Government shouldn't pay for abortions or birth control. This one is always held up as misogynistic, and thinking that is honestly, stupid. Small government activists don't want the government to pay for anything, or as little as possible. It's not anti-woman, but anti-spending
...Or this...-Abortion. This is seen to an afront to women's rights. Take a look from a different perspective. The people on that side of the aisle see life as important and precious and see abortion as killing an innocent life. While I personally don't want legislation to make abortion illegal, I understand their point, and shudder that people use it as birth control when so many great things are out there to stop pregnancy
...or this, for that matter.-Voter ID. This is probably the stupidest one I've heard. "It's RACIST" TO WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE IDs to VOTE!!! You have to have an ID to do almost anything in this country from writing and cashing checks, to traveling by car or air, ect. Why shouldn't you have to prove who you are to vote? An instead of talking about "disenfranchising voters", why don't those groups help underprivileged people GET THEIR STATE IDS!
It's ok, I forgot it existed till you brought it up, but, yeah, its your standard 2D side scrolling beat em up, like Shatter Hand or Batman, but with a leveling system.MovieBob said:Kick Master snip
SAMAS said:As opposed to the Democrats, who are nothing but a shining beacon of purity and all the is good in this world, right? Let's go to the "old question" and ask them(the democrats), what have you done for me lately?Brockyman said:Please, please stop with the "Well, we were on the good side a hundred years ago" argument. As the old question goes: "What have you done for me lately?" And the answer isn't good. I suggest you look up the term "Southern Strategy".
Oh that's right, they decided to give companies a break but screw over individual people [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCXNeHmx9Qw&t=1m44s]. Better yet, the democrat administration have set up a website that doesn't even work despite the fact that poor college kids are being forced against there will to use the website if they don't want to be fined. Just for kicks, watch Kathleen Sebelius dodge all of John Stewart's questions about whether or not the Affordable Care Act website is working properly:
Gee, what else can I look at when I think of that question, "what have you done for me lately"? Oh, I see that under the current administration, Edward Snowden is treated as a criminal, Chelsea/Bradley Manning was illegally put in prison for three years prior to being convicted for any crime, and is now serving a 35 year prison sentencing. Meanwhile Julian Assange still faces questionable charges that might be used by the US to get him extradited if he ever leaves the Ecuadorean embassy.
That's not even getting into the whole NSA spying program and how Obama basically said that we should trade freedom for security(despite previously being against such views) [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vixVPE4LBAU] and we should allow the PRISM program [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29] to continue to run.
And who could forget the fact that NONE of the CEO's of any of the major banks that caused the 2008 economic meltdown have faced any jail time, and instead, said companies received tax payer funded bailouts, all the while people are having their houses foreclosed on them.
Then there is the fact that Obama seemed to be dead set on military intervention in Syria despite the fast majority of the US being opposed to it.
And finally who could forget about Libya? A move that SNL rightfully criticized for having a questionable justification [http://videos.mediaite.com/video/SNLs-Muammar-Gaddafi-Has-Some-A].
Yeah, good thing those democrats are not as bad as those horrible republicans, right?
Both of America's parties are essentially different shades of the same BS. I forget whose political model it is, but I'm very convinced by the one that describes things in terms of two different axes - one measuring a standpoint between authoritarian government and libertarian government and another measuring left (socialism) or right (unlimited capitalist) approaches to economic policy. On this diagram, both the Republicans and the Democrats fall decisively inside the upper-right quadrant of authoritarian/right-wing-economics, where the government is unstoppably powerful and works hand-in-hand with an ever-shrinking oligarchical class that lobbies on both sides of the aisle. The Democrats may be incredibly talented at appearing to be 'the modern Left', but all of that is insincere 'lifestyle liberalism' mixed with heaps of advertising and triumphalist nonsense. To me, it's simply galling to watch my dumb Democrat friends do asinine crap all of the time, i.e. slap some equals-sign sticker on the back of their car and assume that such an act amounts to political participation, go on running races to end discrimination, etc... Give me a break. Gay people will only gain privileges (i.e. not 'rights', such magic ideals have little bearing in the real world) in this country when the government decides that their taxable income is more important to them than pandering to poor, backwards, religious zealots. Women and minorities will similarly suffer until the government feels that their mistreatment is causing a net amount of money to disappear. As for these supposed 'leftists', not a one of them ever go to town meetings, vote in elections that aren't sensationalized presidential races (and sometimes they skip that too), read deeply about matters of wealth disparity, environmental sustainability, workers' rights, America's imperialist interventions in the third world, militarization of domestic police forces, etc...Helmholtz Watson said:Yeah, good thing those democrats are not as bad as those horrible republicans, right?
I think you're thinking of the political compass [http://www.politicalcompass.org/].Caostotale said:I forget whose political model it is, but I'm very convinced by the one that describes things in terms of two different axes - one measuring a standpoint between authoritarian government and libertarian government and another measuring left (socialism) or right (unlimited capitalist) approaches to economic policy.
You need to watch the first one. It's more OTT and I love it.Brian Tams said:"If there's one drawback, its that the gore has been dialed back..."
Bob says, as a clip plays of Machete ripping out a man's intestines and throws it into the whirring blades of a helicopter, causing the man to be yanked into the blades and chopped into tiny pieces.
Not sure why you decided to bust the soapbox out, there wasn't really any discussion about sex with this whole thing before and Machete 1 had a lot of boobs just hanging around the place. I'm guessing this one will be at least somewhat similar.teamcharlie said:Pulling a dude through a helicopter blade via his colon? A-okay! Nipple? Nooooooope.
Welcome to the future, lads and lasses. It's gonna be a repressive ride.
By and large I agree. I would say that considering the level of social and political comentary in the first Machete film it was reasonable and noteworthy that this has been dialed back in the newer film but that said I don't think that is a bad thing. I found the tone of the first film trying to talkle "big issues" from quite a bias standpoint jarring with the OTT violence and humour.Caostotale said:The comparison to Brian from Family Guy is actually pretty spot on, as the introduction of political/social/economic issues into a discussion on a mass-entertainment film like this is just about as self-defeating as any cartoon's feeble attempts to 'get serious.' I enjoy Bob's movie criticism, game discussions, etc... in and of themselves, but dearly wish he would stop trying to tie both into dopey and superficial left-authoritarian, pro-Democrat master narratives that won him over during those impressionable college years. It wouldn't be much different if an astute political philosopher or historian tried to throw some poorly-thought-out blanket statement over whole genres of movies or gaming.
All I'm saying is that I'm not interested in even opening up a discussion on Spanish-American discrimination when I'm watching trailer footage for a movie about a character who couldn't possibly be more of a white overgrown teenager's fantasy imagining of a bad-ass Mexican. On the surface, everything about Trejo's appearance and vibe makes him seem like one of the over-the-top caricatures from a GTA game. I similar wouldn't start discussing womens' rights while watching a porn video.
You should get that looked at. I don't even want to think of what shape it turned into.PunkRex said:The first film was so dumb... I remember laughting, which means I was proberly enjoying myself but that pool scene was something else, I cringed... then got a boner, but a cringy kind of boner.
First, I through in the abortion and voter ID arguments and a preemptive strike because those are 2 of the most asinine and stupid comments my liberal friends make to me.SAMAS said:Please, please stop with the "Well, we were on the good side a hundred years ago" argument. As the old question goes: "What have you done for me lately?" And the answer isn't good. I suggest you look up the term "Southern Strategy". Here's something to get you started -- an excerpt from a 1981 interview with Lee Atwater:Brockyman said:We can mainly agree on the last point so I cut it. I'm not against legalization of some drugs. Also, some proactive intervention could stop the violence from spilling across and helping the poor villagers that see the brunt of it every day.SAMAS said:It's mostly a side effect of Republican policies from the 70's-90's biting them in the ass. Back when they decided to continue courting the Racist vote by shrouding it in the trappings of economic policies (yes, they actually did document that). Given that many of the same assholes are still in charge or have influence (and Republicans even now saying dumb racist/misogynist junk), you can see how it taints... well, damn near everything they say regarding anybody not White.Brockyman said:And of course Bob continues his "I have to talk about something ungodly liberal in every review" cliche. He's becoming like Brian in Family Guy, started out full of wit and humor as a straight man and devolving into a liberal cliche.
C'mom Bob, not everything has to be about something.
Also, border security isn't "anti-Mexican". While I know some people do have racist intentions, the majority of Americans that support border security just want to be secure. Most of them don't mind good, hardworking, TAX PAYING, LEGAL immigration, and most support making becoming legal easier for those who deserve it (i.e. not drug dealer, rapist ect).
Not everything in life is fueled by racism and sexism, and while they still do exist (and probably always will since stupid people can't be exterminated), it's not the end-all, be-all to everything, and consistently using it is like the boy crying wolf to the point most people don't care.
To the point.
1. I don't get your "racist vote" thing. The Republican Party was founded by slave abolitionists in 1854 and included Abraham Lincoln. The Republican Party had a very strong voice in Civil Rights legislation, and mainly democrats, including George Wallace in Alabama, were Democrats. Yes, there asshole that are racists in all parties, but there isn't any directly racist actions I've ever seen.
Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "******, ******, ******." By 1968 you can't say "******" ? that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me ? because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "******, ******."[4]
Short version: in the Lyndon Johson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964), pissing off much of the South, save for Texas ('cause it's LBJ!). Barry Goldwater and the Republican Party moved to take the Southern states by appealing to racist voters. It worked, and the situation you mentioned for that past hundred years or so reversed completely.
?just too much that you don?t know,? Bennett said. ?But I do know that it?s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could ? if that were your sole purpose ? you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down.?2. What "racist/misogynist junk" are you refering too? You whole "they say regarding anybody not White" already shows your bias, but I'd like to hear your opinion. I'll also give you a few examples others shoot out at as racist or misogynistic.
--Bill Bennet
"I struggled with it myself for a long time, and I realized that life is a gift from God, and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen." -- Richard Mourdock (R)Indiana (former, thankfully)
"These Planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink women, and all of these women have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness...We are not going to have our men become subservient." Allen West (R) Florida (Also former, and proof that it's not only White Republicans that say dumb sh*t).
"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Todd Akin (R) Missouri (Again, former, showing that people are much less tolerant of that thing anymore)
"The facts show that people who are raped ?who are truly raped?the juices don't flow, the body functions don't work and they don't get pregnant. Medical authorities agree that this is a rarity, if ever."
?former Rep. Henry Aldridge (R-N.C.)
"As long as it's inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it."
?Former Texas Republican gubernatorial contender Clayton Williams on rape
All of this was said in the past year.
I didn't say jack about this...-Government shouldn't pay for abortions or birth control. This one is always held up as misogynistic, and thinking that is honestly, stupid. Small government activists don't want the government to pay for anything, or as little as possible. It's not anti-woman, but anti-spending
...Or this...-Abortion. This is seen to an afront to women's rights. Take a look from a different perspective. The people on that side of the aisle see life as important and precious and see abortion as killing an innocent life. While I personally don't want legislation to make abortion illegal, I understand their point, and shudder that people use it as birth control when so many great things are out there to stop pregnancy
(And there are simpler ways of birth control than abortion, like pretty much all of them save for the surgical methods. And cheaper, too. So no, I don't see many women using abortion as a measure of birth control. That seems like getting a root canal every time you get a cavity.)
...or this, for that matter.-Voter ID. This is probably the stupidest one I've heard. "It's RACIST" TO WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE IDs to VOTE!!! You have to have an ID to do almost anything in this country from writing and cashing checks, to traveling by car or air, ect. Why shouldn't you have to prove who you are to vote? An instead of talking about "disenfranchising voters", why don't those groups help underprivileged people GET THEIR STATE IDS!