Movie Defense Force: Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

Baby Jesus died for our sins, and that's why Kirk Cameron needs to stop wanking.

Watch Video
 

Remus

Reprogrammed Spambot
Nov 24, 2012
1,698
0
0
Here's my reaction to this review, and pretty much any movie with Kirk Cameron - "Jesus" Drink! "Jesus" Drink! ad infiniteum. Does the poor sod not know how to play in anything without a heavy-handed Christian message?
 

Tanis

The Last Albino
Aug 30, 2010
5,266
0
0
O,u.

My parents LOVE this movie.
Not surprising, given that they're r-wing; Fox News loving; Jesus was white; Xtians, but even THEN...

I mean, I've actually SEEN this movie.
It's bad.

The acting is WORSE than 'God's Not Dead'.
Do you know how HARD that is?

That's like, worse than SyFy original movies bad!
 

josh4president

New member
Mar 24, 2010
207
0
0
You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.
 

Soulrender95

New member
May 13, 2011
176
0
0
I miss the old style MDF, I miss Jim sincerely defending movies which were critically panned.
I know he's probably busy given this months heavy game load, but still.... come on Jim, thinly veiled sarcasm is less entertaining because I can get that pretty much everywhere else on the internet.
I didn't always agree with Jim but it was good to see a different viewpoint on some movies.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
josh4president said:
You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.
The lyric is actually "If you CAN'T laugh at bad films," so no. Not off message at all. Just a different way of telling it.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
"I miss the old style MDF."

Like the one we had before this one?

Christ, you change the formula up now and then, and people think it's the end of days. There's nothing to miss, people. I just do these types of episodes to keep things interesting for me from time to time.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
Fireproof - The Official White People Problems Movie

Baby Jesus died for our sins, and that's why Kirk Cameron needs to stop wanking.

Watch Video
White People Problems: The Movie, huh?

Now I kinda want that to be a real thing. Seriously. I'm picturing a Scary Movie-esque parody of these kinds of movies, blatantly self aware and ridiculous, but treated as super-cereal. It would be hilarious.

Somebody make it happen.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Wait, was this a defense or pure mockery of the movie?

Haha, so funny either way. Oh man, almost cracked at work.
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,023
0
0
That film was so Chrishun that it burned my Bolshevik hide at twenty paces.

You win again, Babby Jesis.
 

dharmaBum0

New member
Mar 17, 2012
41
0
0
At first I thought it was particularly dumb to take a baseball bat to your old CRT and spread shards of glass all over your lawn.

That's it.
 

WickedLordJasper

New member
Aug 8, 2014
32
0
0
I've never seen Fireproof before, but from the MDF clip, I got that the movie was overly Christian and written for a strongly religious audience. So that's what makes the movie bad?
 

josh4president

New member
Mar 24, 2010
207
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
josh4president said:
You know how in the intro it says:

"If you came to laugh at bad films, I'm afraid you're out of luck"?

Yeah I think we've gone off message in this series for a while now.
The lyric is actually "If you CAN'T laugh at bad films," so no. Not off message at all. Just a different way of telling it.
Really?

I could have sworn you wrote this:

http://i.imgur.com/8kBylHs.png

But seriously, I can't help but feel you're in much better form when you're actually defending a neglected/maligned/hated film instead of just taking something terrible and turning sarcasm mode on. Even in your Mall Rats/'Michael Rooker's Ass episode you at least did mention a few things about the overall feature before descending into frame after frame of jiggly man-buttock.

At this rate you could very well do an episode 'defending' Attack of the Clones by gushing breathlessly about how brilliantly the romantic sub-plot is written and how it artistically elevates the series as a whole with 1950s-style space diners and children acting terribly with buckets on their head.

Do you really want to live in a world where you could actually make a Movie Defense Force of Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones?

Is that what you want, Jim?
 

SonOfVoorhees

New member
Aug 3, 2011
3,509
0
0
Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.
 

WarpZone

New member
Mar 9, 2008
423
0
0
Ugh. So now we've gone the "No Right Answer" route of not knowing whether an episode is ironic or sincere until five jokes into it. It's the shark that never stops jumping itself! That said, this episode was pretty funny, just... have we *really* run out of actually legitimately underrated movies? All of them? Already? Or did some religious freak above you at The Escapist hold a gun against your head and order you to defend this movie or else lose your job?

Overall this episode is fine, I just wish I understood why you made it instead of making a Movie Defense Force.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
WickedLordJasper said:
So that's what makes the movie bad?
Well any movie built on the idea of ideological masturbation that isn't a documentary is destined to be awful. While documentaries can at least provide meaningful points, the movie approaches from a lense where you already assume that all these things are super awful merely for existing. Rather than portraying such things can be bad, we assume that they're bad, and that these things we're already supposed to hate prior to watching the movie is the real problem. The problem in the marriage isn't that they're so far apart that the husband had to go searching for porn online to experience sexual satisfaction, like it would be in the real world, its that porn is bad. The fact that the wife is seriously considering cheating on her husband isn't indicative of anything wrong with their relationship, because marriage is a perfect fairy tale, its rather the reason the relationship is failing in the first place. There's no genuine, real conflict, but rather the writer creates fake conflict using their personal boogeyman - basically its creating a strawman of sorts. Thats why these types of films are always awful - they're soulless propaganda with no cultural value or artistic merit made for profit thats pandering to its target audience by creating a strawman so that they can burn it down. Its kind of like how most Call of Duty games are basically "fuck yeah, 'murica! We are the most awesomest best people in the world and do no wrong!"
 

WickedLordJasper

New member
Aug 8, 2014
32
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
Rather than portraying such things can be bad, we assume that they're bad, and that these things we're already supposed to hate prior to watching the movie is the real problem. The problem in the marriage isn't that they're so far apart that the husband had to go searching for porn online to experience sexual satisfaction, like it would be in the real world, its that porn is bad.
Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
WickedLordJasper said:
Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.
But they're not problems specific to Christians. Rather, they're something broadcasted as negative through a Christian lense. Its ideological, and actually religious in nature. Due to that, their reason for holding why its bad is... on faith. you don't reason as to why porn is a marriage-killer, its just assumed that because faith in what somebody else is telling me without them explaining why. Its not even "unreasonable", its a complete lack of reason entirely. Anybody who comes to the film with any perspective that is different than what is represented in the movie will never walk away from the movie thinking differently, and for those who already believe that, well, the movie didn't do anything but give emotional validation. Thats why I call it masturbatory - nobody walks away from it with anything of value. Nobody walks away as a better person, or even having watched a decent film as a timekiller (because they're never even halfway decent films).
 

WickedLordJasper

New member
Aug 8, 2014
32
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
But they're not problems specific to Christians. Rather, they're something broadcasted as negative through a Christian lense. Its ideological, and actually religious in nature. Due to that, their reason for holding why its bad is... on faith. you don't reason as to why porn is a marriage-killer, its just assumed that because faith in what somebody else is telling me without them explaining why. Its not even "unreasonable", its a complete lack of reason entirely. Anybody who comes to the film with any perspective that is different than what is represented in the movie will never walk away from the movie thinking differently, and for those who already believe that, well, the movie didn't do anything but give emotional validation. Thats why I call it masturbatory - nobody walks away from it with anything of value. Nobody walks away as a better person, or even having watched a decent film as a timekiller (because they're never even halfway decent films).
If this film's intended audience is a certain subculture of Christianity, then the audience wouldn't need to have it explained why pornography is bad for marriage, any more than they'd need it explained why receiving Communion every week is good. You may not agree with those reasons, but that's just one reason why you're not the target audience.

Now, if the movie doesn't bother to pitch itself to Christians and instead presents itself as something that everyone should be able to empathize with, that's clearly a mistake. But Christian-specific entertainment, like Christian rock, tends to be made with the assumption that no one except Christians are ever going to bother to go see it.

And again, I haven't seen the movie, just the Movie Defense Force, so all this is just hypothesis.
 

bdcjacko

Gone Fonzy
Jun 9, 2010
2,371
0
0
Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
bdcjacko said:
Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.
Well excuse me if we came here to have an actual discussion on a forum that's dedicated to-- oh, wait, you meant the other kind of wanking.

SonOfVoorhees said:
Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.
Are there even any? In this industry, it's rare for anyone but Yahtzee to dare to call a game that isn't horribly broken anything worse than "OK". If there's any kind of consensus as to a game being straight-up bad, there's a good chance it's objectively awful and the best "defense" you could possibly provide for it is that it's "so bad it's good", and even that is damn hard for a game to be given all the technical expertise required to make it halfway decent.
 

Evil Smurf

Admin of Catoholics Anonymous
Nov 11, 2011
11,597
0
0
This it seems, is the sort of film that you need litres of liquor to enjoy.
bdcjacko said:
Stop wanking all of you. You are on the internets therefore you must be wanking.
The baby Jesus is giving me a handjob, that makes it different. I'm not going to hell, you are!
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Even as a Christian I find these sorts of movies insufferable. It's made to be the sort of thing "Christians" want to see, and while apparently that works for some, what gets me really compelled is the stuff I DON'T want to hear. I want tough analyses of the Bible that look at the plausibility of things, and the stories in the context of their time. I've read the works of people like John Spong, whose extremely historical and scholarly approach to the Bible shows that that Mary wasn't called a virgin until the later gospels and Joseph didn't exist until those same later gospels (because of Mary is a virgin you need some kind of a father figure to make sure Jesus isn't dismissed as a bastard, which is exactly how he is addressed in the early gospels), and that the prophecy from Isaiah which Matthew references to demonstrate that the messiah was predicted to come from a virgin was actually a Greek mistranslation which took the word Hebrew "almah" which is simply a young woman of childbearing years (marital status unspecified) and translated it as "parthenos" which does mean "virgin."

So yeah, after seeing some extremely hard to fight reasons for Mary to not have been a virgin, stuff like this comes off at best as rather soft. And at worst it's self-gratifying, self-righteous, and downright masturbatory. Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades. This stuff doesn't challenge or compel anybody looking for a challenge to their faith or a compelling reason to consider Christianity, it's a way for Christians who want to maintain their status quo and not think about new things to feel secure in their beliefs. By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
SonOfVoorhees said:
Why isnt there a Game Defense Force where he defends games that were deemed shit but in reality are quite good.
You know, I actually made a thread about it awhile but was told that games are somehow different. I forget what reasons they gave but I remember I didn't agree with it.

EDIT: Ah yes, here's the thread.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.400868-Why-Isnt-There-A-GAME-Defense-Force
 

jademunky

New member
Mar 6, 2012
973
0
0
Wow that was funny. Now I have to actually watch that movie. Damn you Jim Sterlingggggggggg!!!
 

jademunky

New member
Mar 6, 2012
973
0
0
daxterx2005 said:
He really cast his own wife to play in the movie so he wouldnt have to kiss an actress?
That does sound like something Kirk Cameron would do.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
May 1, 2020
12,010
0
0
Country
United States
Lilani said:
Even as a Christian I find these sorts of movies insufferable. It's made to be the sort of thing "Christians" want to see, and while apparently that works for some, what gets me really compelled is the stuff I DON'T want to hear. I want tough analyses of the Bible that look at the plausibility of things, and the stories in the context of their time. I've read the works of people like John Spong, whose extremely historical and scholarly approach to the Bible shows that that Mary wasn't called a virgin until the later gospels and Joseph didn't exist until those same later gospels (because of Mary is a virgin you need some kind of a father figure to make sure Jesus isn't dismissed as a bastard, which is exactly how he is addressed in the early gospels), and that the prophecy from Isaiah which Matthew references to demonstrate that the messiah was predicted to come from a virgin was actually a Greek mistranslation which took the word Hebrew "almah" which is simply a young woman of childbearing years (marital status unspecified) and translated it as "parthenos" which does mean "virgin."

So yeah, after seeing some extremely hard to fight reasons for Mary to not have been a virgin, stuff like this comes off at best as rather soft. And at worst it's self-gratifying, self-righteous, and downright masturbatory. Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades. This stuff doesn't challenge or compel anybody looking for a challenge to their faith or a compelling reason to consider Christianity, it's a way for Christians who want to maintain their status quo and not think about new things to feel secure in their beliefs. By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."
I want to frame this post.

Seriously, so much truth :O

OT: This movie looks like ass-balls.
 

Flunk

New member
Feb 17, 2008
915
0
0
I thought the point of this show was to defend terrible movies. I think you really had enough material to backhandedly insult this one, instead of going straight at it for the first time ever.

Also, if god didn't want us to touch ourselves he/she/it would have made it impossible. Building people a certain way and telling them not to act on their urges would be cruel and petty. Or maybe he/she/it just doesn't exist, which is the simplest solution.
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
WickedLordJasper said:
Well, to play Devil's Advocate, why is it a bad thing that the movie makes assumption about its audience that don't fit everyone? Perhaps you're just not the intended audience. If this movie is intended to be watched by Christians (or at least a particular kind of Christian), in order to help them come to terms with their Christian lifestyle, then these problems aren't "strawmen" at all: they just aren't *your* problems. You might as well argue that a movie about a married gay couple in which they discuss problems specific to same-sex marriage is awful, because those problems aren't yours either.
I'm not quite sure you two understand each other. Fireproof's problem is that the movie is about Churchianity [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Churchianity&defid=1917781], not Christianity if that makes any sense.

Anyways, I'm going to echo quite a few people here and say I was quite disappointed with this week's MDF. I hadn't tuned in recently, and when I saw it today I was expecting an interesting and off-beat opinion of a relatively tired subject. Way to let me down, Jim.

Flunk said:
Also, if god didn't want us to touch ourselves he/she/it would have made it impossible. Building people a certain way and telling them not to act on their urges would be cruel and petty.
You're completely missing the point. The simplest premise of Christianity is that God doesn't want people to be assholes and instead wants them to be nice to each other, but forcing someone to be nice by giving them no other option is a fallacy. You can't force someone to not be an asshole, because being an asshole requires a conscious choice. Similarly, there is no point in doing good if you are unable to do evil.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
So is Movie Defense Force just going to be clear mockery under sarcastic appraisal from here on? It's not nearly as interesting unfortunately. Perhaps if Jim's run out of movie's he thinks are underrated he could try doing an antithesis show where he rips on movies everybody seems to love but really have problems, or maybe that would come across as too mean-spirited and argumentative. I am a ghost!
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
Lilani said:
Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades.

Seriously tho, if Fappy hadn't already QFT'd this then I would have. While I'm more about the ethics of Christianity than the academic and etymological aspects of the Bible (what you posted was cool, though) today's church still needs to call itself out a lot more than it already does. The Body of Christ needs some actual damn introspection a lot more than it needs Jesus at this point in time, and things have gotten so masturbatory it should be smashing its computer monitor instead of Kirk Cameron. Well, maybe him too...
 

Naeras

New member
Mar 1, 2011
989
0
0
Oh god this movie. It hurts. Ugh.

Lilani said:
By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."
So... what happens when you earn enough Jesus points?

Can they be traded for cookies?
 

F.Dubois

New member
Sep 17, 2014
24
0
0
If the Jesus Points can't be traded into an allowance for watching porn then I am not converting any time soon. And come on guys, some movies can only feasibly be "defended" if you put your brain on stand by and relish in the love for the magic jewish carpenter and I guess this can be fun for a second or two.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,592
1,884
118
Remus said:
Here's my reaction to this review, and pretty much any movie with Kirk Cameron - "Jesus" Drink! "Jesus" Drink! ad infiniteum. Does the poor sod not know how to play in anything without a heavy-handed Christian message?
No, no he does not. He can't see beyond that heavy handedness. It's consumed his brain and reason.
 

jFr[e]ak93

New member
Apr 9, 2010
369
0
0
WickedLordJasper said:
I've never seen Fireproof before, but from the MDF clip, I got that the movie was overly Christian and written for a strongly religious audience. So that's what makes the movie bad?
Ya... See that's the issue with Christian films. They are made by Christians for Christians, but they seem to think they would function as good outreach. The issue with that stems in the fact that Christian films rarely stand as good films in their own right. They put moral and message before story. [Good] Hollywood movies do the opposite.

Most Christians I know (Myself included) are pretty ashamed of the state of the industry. Even if a decent one comes out, it's 1 step forward 3 steps back (coughGod'sNotDeadcough)

Tanis said:
O,u.

The acting is WORSE than 'God's Not Dead'.
Do you know how HARD that is?

That's like, worse than SyFy original movies bad!
Worse than God's Not Dead? I don't know if I would aim THAT low... Kirk isn't a great actor... but comparing it to God's Not Dead...
 

twosage

New member
Oct 22, 2013
61
0
0
Remus said:
Does the poor sod not know how to play in anything without a heavy-handed Christian message?
Kirk Cameron (or maybe his mother, accounts differ) got Julie McCullough fired from Growing Pains for doing a Playboy photoshoot. Once he was married, Cameron refused to take off his wedding ring when he was playing Mike Seaver (in the later episodes, you can see it was covered with a flesh-colored band-aid). He regularly combines efforts with this idiot:

[/center]

There is a sliding scale of Mainstream Actor to Religious/Political Advocate, and it tends to progress like a cancer on their careers until that advocacy is all they can do. On one end, you have people like Kevin Sorbo who do clearly propagandist work (that they believe in), but still find their way into "real" entertainment a lot of the time. Further on, you've got your Stephen Baldwins, Ben Steins, and Judd Nelsons. The final stage is Kirk Cameron.

You can fight it at the early stages (Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis have been living with it for years), but once it reaches Cameron's advanced state... it's terminal. It's just a shame it took him so young.​
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,655
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
WickedLordJasper said:
So that's what makes the movie bad?
Well any movie built on the idea of ideological masturbation that isn't a documentary is destined to be awful....
So what about the films "Thank You for Smoking", and "Bob Roberts"?

Ideologial films, with set precepts concerning morality, epistemology, law and political theory ... Bob Roberts was glaringly an indictment of America's love affair with spectacle over substance in the democratic process. You could say that Bob Roberts was a movie advocating having voting rights based on your IQ. That 'democracy for all' can only ever amount to 'being popular is more important than being right' for a politician.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,592
1,884
118
twosage said:
The final stage is Kirk Cameron.

You can fight it at the early stages (Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis have been living with it for years), but once it reaches Cameron's advanced state... it's terminal. It's just a shame it took him so young.
Meh, I don't consider it a shame. He wasn't a very good actor, and still isn't. The fact that his religious nutbaggery has him sidelined into stupid religious propoganda works and nothing else, doesn't bother me in the slightest.
 

ninja51

New member
Mar 28, 2010
342
0
0
josh4president said:
Really?

I could have sworn you wrote this:

http://i.imgur.com/8kBylHs.png

But seriously, I can't help but feel you're in much better form when you're actually defending a neglected/maligned/hated film instead of just taking something terrible and turning sarcasm mode on. Even in your Mall Rats/'Michael Rooker's Ass episode you at least did mention a few things about the overall feature before descending into frame after frame of jiggly man-buttock.

At this rate you could very well do an episode 'defending' Attack of the Clones by gushing breathlessly about how brilliantly the romantic sub-plot is written and how it artistically elevates the series as a whole with 1950s-style space diners and children acting terribly with buckets on their head.

Do you really want to live in a world where you could actually make a Movie Defense Force of Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones?

Is that what you want, Jim?
...This was my favorite episode of the show yet and I laughed my ass off. And I think I could stand to live in that world, might be I could find it in my heart to be happy about it even
 

faefrost

New member
Jun 2, 2010
1,280
0
0
Lilani said:
Even as a Christian I find these sorts of movies insufferable. It's made to be the sort of thing "Christians" want to see, and while apparently that works for some, what gets me really compelled is the stuff I DON'T want to hear. I want tough analyses of the Bible that look at the plausibility of things, and the stories in the context of their time. I've read the works of people like John Spong, whose extremely historical and scholarly approach to the Bible shows that that Mary wasn't called a virgin until the later gospels and Joseph didn't exist until those same later gospels (because of Mary is a virgin you need some kind of a father figure to make sure Jesus isn't dismissed as a bastard, which is exactly how he is addressed in the early gospels), and that the prophecy from Isaiah which Matthew references to demonstrate that the messiah was predicted to come from a virgin was actually a Greek mistranslation which took the word Hebrew "almah" which is simply a young woman of childbearing years (marital status unspecified) and translated it as "parthenos" which does mean "virgin."

So yeah, after seeing some extremely hard to fight reasons for Mary to not have been a virgin, stuff like this comes off at best as rather soft. And at worst it's self-gratifying, self-righteous, and downright masturbatory. Certain types of Christians get off on this stuff the way housewives get off on 50 Shades. This stuff doesn't challenge or compel anybody looking for a challenge to their faith or a compelling reason to consider Christianity, it's a way for Christians who want to maintain their status quo and not think about new things to feel secure in their beliefs. By the end they're like "Yeah, porn's bad, and I knew that. Faith validated, Jesus points earned."
I agree 100% I mean I'm Catholic. You know what my favorite "Catholic" movie is? The Excorsist. My Priests is Return of the Jedi. Although it must be said I have never met a Priest that is not as letter perfect on Monty Python's the Life of Brian as they are on the Bible. (Which really tells you everything you need to know about how the Catholic Hierachy actually works. The answer... like government, in spite of itself.)

But I have never met an actual person of faith that can honestly answer the question, "who in God's name are these movies actually made for?" I don't even think the people in them actually enjoy them. Except maybe Kurt Cameron, but this one at least centers around him masturbating. so at least he had some fun in rehearsals.

and really? They made a "Christian" movie where the main plot points is Kurt Cameron jacking off? I'm trying to figure out what part of the Bible that comes from?
 

TheUnbeholden

New member
Dec 13, 2007
193
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
"I miss the old style MDF."

Like the one we had before this one?

Christ, you change the formula up now and then, and people think it's the end of days. There's nothing to miss, people. I just do these types of episodes to keep things interesting for me from time to time.
Can you just keep your solely ironic sarcastic videos confined to your youtube channel? As much as I like it every once and awhile, its not actually defending a movie, which is confusing to people who are new to the site as it messes with their expectations for future videos and gets those who like the original format disappointed creating a divide on a weekly basis. Its also a shame that out of so many underrated movies out there, a week is wasted because of this.
 

ninja51

New member
Mar 28, 2010
342
0
0
TheUnbeholden said:
Jimothy Sterling said:
"I miss the old style MDF."

Like the one we had before this one?

Christ, you change the formula up now and then, and people think it's the end of days. There's nothing to miss, people. I just do these types of episodes to keep things interesting for me from time to time.
Can you just keep your solely ironic sarcastic videos confined to your youtube channel? As much as I like it every once and awhile, its not actually defending a movie, which is confusing to people who are new to the site as it messes with their expectations for future videos and gets those who like the original format disappointed creating a divide on a weekly basis. Its also a shame that out of so many underrated movies out there, a week is wasted because of this.
I disagree. Because I do your point is mute. You want it one way, I want it the other so Jim's only course of action is to make the things HE wants to make not what one of us specifically wants
 

Deadcyde

New member
Jan 11, 2011
187
0
0
Really? basing a whole video on the premise of attacking the "soft target" of white people?

And you wonder why you get thrown into the SJW pile Jim.

Next you'll tell me misandry is a myth too. What a farce.
 

twosage

New member
Oct 22, 2013
61
0
0
Happyninja42 said:
twosage said:
The final stage is Kirk Cameron.

You can fight it at the early stages (Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis have been living with it for years), but once it reaches Cameron's advanced state... it's terminal. It's just a shame it took him so young.
Meh, I don't consider it a shame. He wasn't a very good actor, and still isn't. The fact that his religious nutbaggery has him sidelined into stupid religious propoganda works and nothing else, doesn't bother me in the slightest.
I meant it was more of a shame on a human level. It depresses me to see anyone reduced to buffoonery by insidious memes they can neither understand nor control.