Milkman delivers

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 30, 2015 -> 05:56 AM) I would guess part 3 usually is. I loved Spiderman 2 lots more than the first. The Tobey ones. And we all know how 3 was. The Dark Knight was my favorite of the 3. Empire.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 20, 2015 -> 02:36 PM) Rogue One is supposed to be a heist/war movie about the squad that stole the Death Star blueprints. It doesnt get cooler than that Will the characters be Bothans, then?

Everyone's always trying to bash these Marvel movies before they come out, probably so they can say they called it. Then the movie is great and everyone asks why they doubted it.

Danny Trejo is around 70, so not him.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 2, 2015 -> 10:54 AM) According to Gawker, there are reports that the homeless guy was going for the cops gun, hence the shots. And at least one of the cops was wearing a camera. So this will be sorted out pretty quickly. http://gawker.com/graphic-video-lapd-offic...n-br-1688818269 Without watching the video and going simply by your original description, that's exactly what I figured the case would be. And leave it to the buffoon above you to jump to the conclusion he did.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 03:15 PM) Since when does Reigns winning Mania represent what everyone wants? It's cannon fodder and nothing more whoopee doo Bryan is in the match. Everyone wanted Bryan in the match, and now he's there. You're a crybaby.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 11:03 AM) Reigns will still win Bryan just window dressing. Fans will not like Reigns winning regardless. VKM being VKM. Seriously, do you listen to yourself? In this situation, the guy's giving everyone what they want. And you still cry.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 07:05 PM) at the Battle of the Bulge, WW2. the nazi killed american soldiers that were POW, it was at Malmédy. by your statement, it was ok b/c they were known enemies??? pls explain, and if i was wrong, then i am sorry for implying that. POW's are a different story, obviously. I'm talking specifically about a sniper shooting an enemy. A sniper looking through his scope at an enemy combatant who doesn't have a gun in his hand at that very moment can still shoot him.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 07:00 AM) I'd love to see how many of those kills were situations similar to the ones portrayed in the movie, "life and death" decisions involving women and children...the split second decision of are they civilian non-combatants or terrorists? Is all of that information still classified? Certainly it's not in the interest of the government for the public to find out, for example, how many of his kills were shot in the back or not holding weapons, etc. It's hard to imagine he didn't make a few mistakes when the kill record has somewhere between 160 and 270 insurgents listed, depending on the source. The movie makes a dramatic point about potentially shooting an unarmed woman and child (if he was wrong) and intimating he would have been court-martialed. As far as the all-time record, I think it's hard to compare World War II snipers with Gulf War I and II, or how many kills World War I flying aces had with WW II, for that matter. Context is always important to take into consideration. http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/02/0...tation-in-2009/ Here's a story that supposedly confirms the gas station shootings. Not sure how believable the explanation of the cover up is...it doesn't say the two victims were Mexican/Latino, but it intimates he suspected they were going to try to sell the truck across the border. That doesn't sound like a typical gringo move IMO. http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/03/2...-of-chris-kyle/ And the counterpoint, why that story, if true....is troubling for so many different reasons. What does that matter? And even with the stipulation that a person isn't holding a weapon, if it's a known enemy, it makes no difference if they're armed at the exact moment.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 09:50 AM) my point is snipers are a necessary piece of equipment that is needed in war. whether most like to think it is cowardly or not, they saves life. my point is in WW2, a sniper / commando's saved life, in the long run. killing this mad man who is worst than hilter caused an additional 10,000 people and a complete town. but it still saved lives. no matter what anyone say, his kills are certified by the military, so there is no false numbers there. he saved or helped saved lives. If you're talking about the same town, it wasn't destroyed by him. It was destroyed in retaliation for his assassination.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 09:10 AM) snipers in war serves a purpose, whether it is understood or not. like all things, it can be abuse. perfect example. the killing SS-General Reinhard Heydrich in WW 2. the results was brutal by Hilter, but it was needed. Heydrich was to be the 2 nd german dictator if hilter was killed or the army took over. heydrich was more brutal than hilter, snipers group, commando took his out. He wasn't killed by a sniper. It was a grenade.

Michael Moore is not someone I'm listening to when the topic of courage/cowardice is being discussed. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 07:21 AM) Speaking of IB, I'm watching a movie with Melanie Laurent and Jake Gyllenhaal called "Enemy" that's really creepy like Nightcrawler...some websites list it as the best movie of the year that earned under $10 million. Of course, there's the obligatory 9/11 scenes to serve as motivation, but it's nothing we haven't been through 1000 times with the likes of the Pat Tillman Story. What is IB? And I don't think the 9/11 scenes were specifically propaganda (they weren't very long), as much as building a narrative and explaining where he'd be deployed. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 07:47 AM) American Sniper isn't awful, but it's far from great. Completely agree. And I liked Gran Torino a lot. C'mon, Brian. QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 20, 2015 -> 08:27 AM) the best way to see the movie is with an open mind. this movie is a movie based on 1 person action and his somewhat mindset that made him the top sniper in america. now if the action of the use of a sniper, well that is a tragedy that made the use of them b/c the USA is using what it can to help save military life. the USA were the not the first and i am sure we will not be the last. if people want the military to stop using snipers, then find a way idiots will stop attacking the USA. Chris reason is not solely his own reasons, but other have had that patriotic reason, if that was the reason. who is to judge. as in all films there is prob embellishment and some story telling, but come on, this is a movie. look at the latest movie Exodus: Gods and Kings, they me if that is all true accounts, or ten commandments, story of christ. i think you get my point. it is a movie. Not really. I can hardly grasp what you're saying most of the time with the layout of your posts.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 19, 2015 -> 09:38 PM) They're not critics, with a few notable exceptions. When you hear statistics like that, you start to wonder about all the nominations for American Sniper, for example. And no club in the United States — over the last several years, the Academy has been around 93 percent white, 76 percent male and an average of 63 years old — is in more need of new blood than Hollywood. from nytimes.com article earlier cited Film industry people, either way. I'm trusting their opinion on it. It's ludicrous to force nominations to meet a quota.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2015 -> 12:53 PM) But if you've got 2 racial minorities who are in the top 4 in ERA, wins, and fWAR, for example, and they don't wind up in the top 8 in cy young voting, you do start to wonder why. How do you prove that, though? That's your personal opinion. If these professional acting critics didn't think it was top 5, I'll believe them.

Animals.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 19, 2015 -> 11:32 AM) This reaction is just strange to me give that a year ago this issue was supposedly put to bed when The Black Movie and The Black Director/Writer and The Black Actress and The Black Actor were all nominated and/or won at the Oscars. How'd the Academy go from being not so racist to racist again in 12 months? Should The Black Movie of every year be nominated just because? I mean this movie very well may be deserving and they could have gotten screwed out of a nomination, but a lot of movies are. I hate when people just scream "because racism." It's almost like saying that there better be a black guy in the top 5 of the AL/NL CY/MVP voting, or else the voters aren't doing their part to ease racial tensions. If they didn't think a person was top 5 for the year, they simply didn't think they were top 5. Race should have nothing to do with it.

You can drop religion from the argument, and just ask when the last time something like that happened in one of the non-garbage areas of Earth. Like, outside of the Middle East or Africa.

Thanks for stirring the pot even more. Hey, maybe next you can pull a statement from a YouTube video.

People arguing every side of a debate in the douchiest way possible and caulfield bringing China into the discussion. Yeah, this is definitely Soxtalk.

The guns are purchased legally and then "stolen". So, not much of a chain of ownership.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 10, 2015 -> 12:39 AM) Benedict Cumberbatch. Kiera Knightley. Brilliant actor. Right now, I'd say it's going to come down to the pr spin war between MLK/Selma and this film for the Oscar. The Imitation Game glosses over Alan Turing's homosexuality and shameful demise which was just recently rectified sixty years too late by the British government. MLK does the same with his indiscretions to focus primarily on the historical achievements. Dr. Turing should be accorded a position as one of the five most important figures of the 20th century but he's barely a footnote in some textbooks. Toss-up. I'll go Selma Better overall film. I haven't seen Selma yet, but I don't need to in order to say that I'd bet every single penny I have that it wins the Oscar for Best Picture and Best Actor.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2015 -> 04:14 PM) And his efforts to get rid of that is a big reason why the NYPD is turning their backs on this mayor. A solid part of the reason why he was elected was that people were tired of being subject to that. I think you're muddying that up just a tad, but there's really no point in arguing with you. You have your opinion on it, and you've made it clear.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2015 -> 04:04 PM) I'm glad you find that so objectionable and unreasonable because that was my attempt to put "Stop & Frisk" into a "check your privilege" context since it's something I don't have to deal with on an everyday basis. People stopped and searched with no probable cause because they happen to be in the wrong area and "look wrong" in some fashion. It seems crazy when applied to the daily life of driving in the suburbs, but that is a privilege we get. It's worth, therefore, pondering what kind of Hell it would be like if we didn't have that privilege. Definitely the kind of thing that would get a person so sick of being targeted that they might say things like "I'm tired of it, it stops today, because every time you see me you want to harass me". Didn't they get rid of stop and frisk in New York already? I don't really pay attention or even care. I just know that you need to be able to articulate a reason in Chicago.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2015 -> 10:19 AM) Of course, the true irony here is exposed in the comparison between these two posts. This is quite literally a fundamental example of why these communities feel they're being slighted. In the first post, how terrible it is, how unfair it is, to constantly be caught and fined for actually breaking the law. Speed limits are supposed to be flexible right, cops are supposed to be flexible, how dare they figure out easy ways to enforce them. In the second post....I'm sick of the cities being held to no f***ing standards at all. This is exactly the problem. Some people are allowed to and just expect to be granted immunity from harassment because of their privilege. Speed limits are important sometimes but how dare they figure out ways to focus on me and use me as a source of revenue! This shouldn't matter to me, it's totally unfair to target me! I know it's not going to happen, but try and take the experience of the first post and put it into the second. Imagine you've been ticketed for 2 mph over the speed limit 10 times in a year and stopped another 5 times just because they wanted to make sure you weren't thinking about speeding. Think there's any chance you might get mad? Think there's any chance that on any of those you might say something about how sick you are of being hassled? Maybe raise your arms if they try to grab you? After all, it's just a speeding ticket, right? Would that be worth being put in a choke hold? Or attacked by tear gas and MRAPs? As was pointed out, the communities in Ferguson and surrounding areas pull in 25-50% of their funding from tickets and court fees. You've literally outlined how its BS for police to come up with ways to maneuver around the rules to come up with that funding...but that's your privilege. On the other hand, communities that have to actively deal with that kind of focus on a non-stop basis aren't allowed to complain. They can't get angry in reply. They can't act out. It's their own fault. This is where the phrase "Check your privilege" comes from. You must be talking about a suburban department. No city squads have radar, unless they're specifically the traffic unit. And they're not in the neighborhoods you're strongly hinting at them harassing. And you need a reason to pull someone over. Despite what you say, nobody gets pulled over because they look like they wanna speed. I know, I know. DWB blah blah blah. Traffic stop statistical studies constantly show no bias.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 1, 2015 -> 10:30 AM) um... you're not damned if you do your job correctly... Ha.