Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 08:44 AM) How the hell does this guy get away with the hyperbolic bile in this forum? I thought there were some rules established here. All Dems are unpatriotic unAmericans. All public workers are lazy bums. These are facts now. SMH Your reaction to all this is pretty hilarious. There's finally an extreme conservative on the board spewing the same extreme crap you guys do, and you cry foul, like it's the worst thing ever. Welcome to the Filibuster since I've been a member.

I've watched this video approx 10 times and don't see much movement towards the plate. I've seen guys with windups that clearly motion towards home (bend over half-way moving their torso in a bit of a circle). That's just part of their getting set up to throw and it's never called. Balks have always been a mystery to me (except for the obvious ones).

Saw Jackass 3 and Black Swan over the weekend. Jackass was pretty hilarious, as usual. Black Swan. Meh. I didn't get the hype for this movie. Portman was good and it was well done, but at the end of the day the story just sucked and I was checking the clock to see how much longer I had to go to finish it. There were way too many long, drawn out scenes between the really good ones (the sex scene, the various mirror shots, the scene in her mother's painting room, the scene near the end in her dressing room, etc). And who didn't see the ending coming? As soon as you saw the practice for the end of the ballet you knew how the movie would end.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 03:03 PM) We seem to disagree on a lot of things. I think his standup is hilarious. And Jake Gyllenhaal is a legitimately good actor. He's not great, but he's worlds better than Ryan Reynolds. Ugh, really? Whatever I watched was him sweating profusely while sitting at a piano, pretending that he was going to play a song and continually going from joke to joke. Except none of the jokes (one liner observations) were very creative or funny. I dunno, different strokes for different folks I guess.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 01:51 PM) Wow I didnt see the hate for Dazed and Confused. Its not just about smoking pot, its about hilarious lines like "That's what I love about these high school girls, man. I get older, they stay the same age. " I mean I liked it, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it was the quintessential coming of age story or anything. I felt like Adventureland, which is basically the same idea, did that story better.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 12:58 PM) I don't want to see that ever.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 12:12 PM) Great article on grantland by Bill Simmons about Ryan Reynolds. Yeah I was duped into thinking he was a star of sorts. Probably because I was fan of 2 guys a girl and a pizza place. Although Simmons makes a bunch of terrible points in there. First, Adventureland was a good movie, equal to, if not better than the overrated Dazed and Confused (oh! they're smoking pot! an instant classic!) Also, his list of 24 stars is atrocious. Galifinakis? Really? I guy that's never headlined his own movie is a star? He's not even funny (seriously, go watch his "standup," it's brutal). Also, Affleck? Really? Are they friends? Did he ignore that whole decade or so where he was considered one of the biggest flops in hollywood history? Or is it just because thay bohth hail frohm fackin' beantown? And Gyllenhaal? Ugh. I get he's not saying the "best" actors out there, but come on. Gyllenhaal is basically Reynolds right? Didn't Prince of Persia flop just as much as the Green Hornet?

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 18, 2011 -> 10:42 AM) Bill Maher skewered this imbecile last night. I'll post the video once it's available. EDIT (It's the last 'New Rule'): I used to like Maher until he started his big rant about how prescription drugs don't work and we should all just go back to eating natural foods and we'd be healthy again. At first I agreed with him - the country is over medicated and instead of being healthy we just reach for pills. But then he went overboard, claiming that he'd never get the flu and that people don't need antibiotics. So, I love that he can "skewer" a guy like Perry for praying (and saying that's ancient Maya-type thinking) but he refuses to acknowledge the importance of medicine? Here's the video:

So, 60+ movies a year you'd HAVE to see in the theaters to make that worth it. I think on average I go see about 5 a year. A lot of that has to do with it not being worth the cost, but it's also because most movies aren't worth seeing.

Timely post on grantland about Bay: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/670664...nse-michael-bay

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 29, 2011 -> 10:01 AM) When garbage is marketed to people from an early age what do you expect the majority of people to gravitate to? It starts with sugar and HFCS infused cereals and goes all the way to fast food chains on every corner of every major street in America. The lobbies for meat, dairy, and corn have a ton of pull and they are able to offer that crap at ridiculously low cost. Lol, such a typical liberal response: "People can't think for themselves! They're all mindless zombies at the mercy of greedy corporations. Government must protect all!" In reality I think there's a little truth to what you're saying, but it comes down to laziness. Why spend 45 minutes cooking a healthy meal when I can just go to mcdonalds and buy 4 mcdoubles? And even if what you say is true, that kids are brainwashed and are "forced" to eat these unhealthy foods, there's nothing stopping them from going outside to play and lose all that fat they're gaining.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 29, 2011 -> 09:55 AM) Just think "District 9" for an outlandish sci-fi premise that turned out to be an excellent film. True, I did enjoy that. And it was an original idea (at least to me).

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 29, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) And I bet lifestyle choice contributes to more than half of those cases, with some simple changes/choices, they'd fall off those charts. I'm not one to talk about "lifestyle" choice, because I tend to eat what I want, however, I also eat relatively healthy most of the time. It's about moderation, and sadly, no matter how much educational material exists, and no matter how much you put it on the minds of people, they'll do what they want to do anyway. The best and only true preventative care is NOT seeing a doctor, but making simple decisions of what you eat/drink and how much. Choice? They have no choice. They HAVE to eat crappy food to make them fat. Just like they HAVE to have a cell phone and premium cable to survive in this world.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 06:56 PM) It doesn't need to be deep or existential but it isn't a lot to ask that there at least be a not utterly ridiculous plot, characters with any depth whatsoever (or that at least are somewhat likable or hateable), and humor that wasn't apparently written by an 8 year old. Not to mention how about not creating two characters that make Jar Jar Binks look like a cinematic masterpiece. The 2nd Transformers was complete garbage and while taste in movies are subjective I can't fathom how anyone over 12 can like that movie. There is nothing snobby about ripping on piece of s*** movies. He shouldn't dumb himself down just because the public makes something popular. But the premise of the movie (robots that turn into a variety of machines) is absolutely ridiculous, so why does it have to be some structured, well designed plot? What more do you want from these movies unless you're trying to make it into a film and not just entertainment. I mean I get what you're saying. We all want the Last Crusade, not the Temple of Doom. But Ebert's just annoying with his reviews of most movies, and especially with any sort of action flick that doesn't meet some ridiculous level of expectation he's got. And then he's all smarmy about it. Re: comic book movies, my problem is they're just lazy, which is a problem I've had with Hollywood for a while. I want something new and unique. At least the two new batman movies, especially the 2nd, went for something totally different (like Ledger's Joker character). Do we really need 18 spiderman movies? Do we need the Green Lantern? Thor? Captain America? The Avengers?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 29, 2011 -> 07:23 AM) Greece looks like they lost the Stanley Cup this morning... Is anyone on the board Greek or know anything about how their government works? An attorney in my firm (who is Greek) was telling me over lunch the other day that the main reason the people of Greece are so upset is that they're now going to have to pay taxes they never paid before, like property taxes. I guess they only pay sales tax and a really low income tax? Also heard a demonstrator on the radio basically say this whole move is smoke/mirrors. It's a country 100+ billion in debt with ~10 million residents with no manufacturing, little to no exporting. The economy is entirely dependent on tourism and olives. In essence, he claims they'll be back in the same spot 5 years from now.

Ebert is a snobby movie douche. Coming from a guy that hates these movies (and most of the recent comic book retreads) I recognize that these movies are made to entertain, not win Oscars for best film. It's supposed to have load explosions, cool robot battles, hot women, etc. It's not designed to make us reflect on the morality of robots or existence of alien beings. Clearly a gazillion people are entertained since these movies make a s*** ton of money year after year. f*** Ebert.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 04:08 PM) Please educate me ... a.) Will Blago be able to appeal? If not, why not? He won the first trial and govtment got another trial. b.) Do you feel Blago is a big-time crook or was his crime small in nature? c.) Will he go to a real prison? d.) Is the mop haired Blago a likeable guy to you all or a douche? My take is he's guilty and kind of dumb. I don't really see his appeal to voters. Is it the hair? I would think he would have the right to appeal though. a) yes, though as Balta said, it's gotta be something strong enough that would have made a difference in the outcome of the trial (to win an appeal anyway, you have a right to appeal any judgment/verdict). Here, I'm not sure what that would be. From some of the coverage on the radio I guess there's a question about how much the Judge allowed the Defendants to question Blago, i.e., whether he limited Blago's testimony such that he wasn't afforded a fair trail. But from what I remember Blago ranted about a LOT of irrelevant stuff, and the jury still didn't buy it. I'm guessing any appeal would be a loser. b) I think he's a crook, but a pretty dumb crook. Let's face it, on the scale of mass murder to verbal abuse, what he did was much, much closer to verbal abuse. He was corrupt, but no one died because of it. Fitzgerald can say all he wants that what Blago did wasn't just pay for play politics, but it was, and it happens every day. Look at how Congress works. The entire system is set up so that bill A get's passed only if Senator Random gets a federally funded project in his state that has nothing to do with the bill. Is there really much difference between the Senator personally benefiting from some increase in votes and Blago trying to get himself a better political position (or campaign contributions)? c) yes, anywhere from 8-12 years. Apparently he could get upwards of 300 years, but federal sentencing mandates have really changed what Judges can do. d) Absolute douche. He's a two-faced liar (surprise) that's probably legally insane. On the one hand he's complaining about how s***ty the governor job is, and on the other he's talking about all the great things he tried to do for the people of Illinois. He used his political position to further his own career, and would have had he not been so stupid. Similarly, I don't get why Fitzgerald was saying it was the right move to nab him before he picked someone. Why? I don't get it. His only reasoning was "we don't want things like that to happen. We didn't want a governor to sell a senate seat." Why exactly? Well, I think we know why, and it goes up a lot higher than Blago.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 09:23 AM) I don't know why Lebron going ape**** is unlikely to happen again. Rose choking like that is hopefully unlikely, but hell, those weren't even great quarters for Lebron, they were good ones but he has better. He wasn't driving to the lane and making easy layups. He was hitting 20-25 foot shots with a hand in his face. He did the same thing (though less often) during the Boston series. Not much you can do about that. And really, I think the Mavericks exposed Lebron a little. It's up to Lebron to counter the league, but I guess we'll see how many commercials he shoots over the summer.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jun 28, 2011 -> 06:46 AM) I know people don't like her because she is overexposed but i have always had a crush on Aniston and her as a nympho could make my head explode. Pun may or may not be intended. +1. She's ridiculously hot, especially for her age.

I'll grant you there's a lot of hyperbole there, which he owned up to. I see nothing that's "insane." Insane is "Obama is a purple headed dinosaur trying to convert all of our kids to be gay Muslim terrorists."

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 03:12 PM) What did his spouting of Tea-Party bumper sticker slogans add to the discussion? There was nothing discussed in his post that merited serious rebuttal. A different opinion? A different perspective? Can I just respond to you and say you're just spouting a bunch of liberal progressive sticker slogans every time you give your opinion on a topic?

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 02:41 PM) It's kahn, though. Ya know, after listening to his podcast with Bill Simmons, I came away thinking that Khan is a lot smarter than I thought. Yes, a lot of his deals have been bad, but he explained a lot of those mistakes, like his reasoning for drafted Rubio and Flynn in the same draft. I found myself thinking "that sounds reasonable" or "yeah, I guess that makes sense" more than once.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 02:05 PM) Who's going to tolerate insanity? Ya know, it's this sort of comment that makes this board such a big circle jerk for liberals. It's not really surprising when the few conservative members of the board simply give up and post elsewhere. What does this s*** add to the discussion? If you think he's wrong, then attack him with an argument. Show that he's factually incorrect. Just because he has a different view of the world doesn't mean he's "insane."

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 01:35 PM) He's obviously free to say what he believes, but he should also expect to hear a ton of brushback when he makes some outrageous claims. Eh, it was kind of a personal statement and what he believes. Not sure why it needs to be labeled "outrageous."

Interesting that the decision didn't follow the "party line" like so many others seem to. I agree with the decision, but find it odd when 9 people get to decide whether saying "f***" or showing a .2 seconds worth of Janet Jackson's nipple is somehow more dangerous than violent video games.