Exactly! Cracked towards the end before I stopped visiting it altogether served as a great recommendation site.
Anything they'd say was problematic, I knew was must-view entertainment. They're the ones who by telling me how "awful and toxic" Entourage was, led me to watching it and it becoming one of my favorite shows of all time.
A few don't have to do with politics, but most on the list do.
Guys, don't watch those shows anymore. They objectify women, they're racist, homophobic, you name it. Do better!
Yeah, it's such garbage. I'm never buying that game. I heard it's boring and empty open world anyways.
I'm out of modern gaming pretty much full stop.
PS2 and PS3 generation reigns supreme and I still play that era.
N64 and earlier is good too, but those two generations I mentioned....that's the sweet spot right there.
And as I said, would be out of place typically in a 1970s Midwest Suburb.
In New York City, in the punk rock clubs, sure you'd find Joan Jett types.
You'd stick out in a suburb in Illinois. Not saying there would be none, but it doesn't ring true to authenticity that all of these characters are the "hippest" examples of the 1970s from different demographics.
Watch Halloween from 1978. Observe how the female characters dress. The wardrobe department picked the outfits and looks based on authenticity.
If an authentic late 70s neighborhood of people is what they were going for, they didn't land it.
The hair style you're referring to is the first girl. I said the girl wearing the cross and the leather jacket.
I caught the period accurate Farrah Fawcett hairstyle, although noted it was put on a hispanic looking girl, but that 2nd girl shown, that is a modern hair style.
The racial demographics are part of authentic aesthetics.
If you were making a Shaft video game set in 1970s Harlem and you went and got all the 1970s New York aesthetic perfect, but 90% of the characters were white in 1970s Harlem, wouldn't that feel odd aesthetically?
Wouldn't the aesthetics of the environment and time period clash with the aesthetics of the characters.
Like having a World of Warcraft game where half the characters look like modern day navy seals. It would be odd. The aesthetics would clash.
The game is set in the 70s which is why it's the aesthetic that it is, in the same Midwest suburban neighborhood as the movie.
The point is they're aiming for "authenticity" until it comes to the "message", and then authenticity doesn't seem to matter anymore.
Don't you think when they designed the houses around the neighborhood that they did countless hours of research looking at 1970s photos to recreate furniture and wallpaper as well as possible. Yet they can't take 2 minutes to ask AI what the demographics of a typical midwestern suburb in 1979 would be comprised of?
You can either have realism or not realism. They want to have both because of political correctness. So you'll have these WW2 games with meticulously detailed firearms, yet also have the ability to customize a gender neutral black woman as your front lines infantry fighter.
Revisionist history is garbage.
Heard the same about the last part.
Yeah I don't understand why these guys do this at all. It's so bizarre to me. I wonder if there's some sort of "arranged marriage" ordained by Hollywood where it's like, "you either marry her, and stay with her, or you no longer get Comedy Central Specials, and we'll leak that blackmail on you and get your reputation ruined, because comedians tend to run in seedy circles and most probably have black-mailable things on them.
I think something similar happened to Will Smith. There's no way he'd stay with her unless there were consequences we're not privy to if he got divorced.
So, yeah, I guess I sort of buy a theory that these guys are being strong-armed into certain marriages, especially depending on your influence.
Bill Burr spoke too bluntly about feminism that resonated with people that were too afraid to verbalize those feelings.
Trey and Matt would attack any political ideology and expose it and would be taste changers in the culture, and it was worse because they seemed unbiased because they'd attack in any direction, which made people give even more credence to what they mocked and what it was mocked for. They couldn't be dismissed as "right wingers".
I wonder if guys with too much "edge" are presented that Faustian deal. They say, you want to keep enjoying the lavish Hollywood lifestyle and the addiction of fame, then marry this woman who is antithetical to everything you value as a free man. It's a conspiracy theory, but I can't imagine a good reason why Bill Burr who could get just about any woman he would want at his fame and income level, and despises feminism would go for an unattractive feminist other than coercion.
It might be the male version of the casting couch. Sure, men don't have to sleep with the producer to get the role, but it doesn't mean they get a free ride either.
In 1980, white demographic was 83% of the United States. The original Halloween movie had either none or almost no non-white people, which would be expected for a middle class, midwestern suburb.
The 17% of non-white Americans would largely be found in the cities.
I could dissect the characters in several ways, but I'll keep it at the other standout which is the woman wearing the cross, that haircut is not a 70s haircut AT ALL. It's a completely modern hairstyle.
And again, that clothing style is very modern. A woman wearing a black leather jacket type thing you might see hipster chicks wear in downtown Portland, would be very odd in a middle class midwestern suburban neighborhood in the late 70s.
Appreciate it. Your recommendations are more of what I'm looking for.
Very funny :)
Brilliant write up!
Thank you for that perspective. It does add an even more heinous layer.
And yes the religious thing.
It sounds like a cheesy cliche "God shaped whole in their heart" but it's a cliche because it's true.
Creations are designed to worship their Creator.
When they abandon that role, they try and fill it with something else.
Some worship themselves and their own interests but because humans are social this isn't filling enough for most people.
Communism, which this globalism mindset basically is, replaces God with the government.
Heaven on earth will be achieved by perfect adherence to the government. Trump is in the way of this false god so he is like the Satan to the god of communism.
This communist government as a replacement for Christ idea is why these communist governments always lead to mass deaths, because the "heretics" who don't perfectly align stand in the way to utopia or heaven as man wants to create it.
As it says in the Bible, eternity is written on man's heart.
You notice that so many of these secular people talk about through technology being able to live forever by uploading their conscience into computers. It's the desire for heaven apart from God.
What's unique and shows the truth of Christianity is it doesn't demand everyone be in complete agreement about everything or else be purged from the church.
If you're a complete heretic it tells how to deal with them in the church, but for actual Christians it says bear with one another with love and forgiveness and to not judge each other because we all serve and answer to the same Judge.
The Bible is confident in the unity of believers because God gives all one Spirit, the Holy Spirit so rigorous murderous enforcement is not necessary.
But in the world they don't have that so the secular communist type governments must appeal to absolute herd mentality based on fear, ostracization and complete adherence. They are insecure because they know their god is false.
Christians are secure and bold and can stand up to all the powers of the world even as they kill us because we know our God is true
That post about Westboro Baptist Church.
They're attention mongers who feed off of it. They're also mostly one family and a few dozen people comprising the entire church last time I checked.
The phrase don't feed the troll. They want nothing more than attention on everything and it's been the anti-Christian left and their media that has given WBC the attention they so desperately crave because they want a "Christian church" that they can use as representative for how they want to paint Christians, when not a single Christian I've ever heard has recognized them as anything other than demonic.
The dozen or so trolls saying whatever garbage about Charlie Kirk insincerely because they want to get on the news is very different from the epidemic of leftists celebrating with no motivation other than the joy of knowing someone who said words they disagreed with is dead.
If WBC knew they would get no media coverage, they wouldn't do what they're doing about Charlie Kirk because they're just camera chasing scumbags.
The leftists on the other hand would and have celebrated privately and publicly no matter the circumstance. That's a vast difference.
I don't care about what a dozen idiots do. I care about what the hundreds of thousands or even potentially millions do. That's the number that is alarming.
It's a pretty open and shut case of fair use.
Satire that re-contextualizes it
Spike Lee definitely
I'm not familiar with E;R. Who's that?
I had seen the trailers and they seemed really Satanic, and I figured there'd be some racial aspects because it's the year 2025 and Jordan Peele is the producer (but not the writer or director this time).
But the anti-white stuff is way worse than I would have imagined. The reviewer sums up the story starting around 3:40
But it's worth it to watch it from the beginning just to hear him trash the movie for 3 minutes before even diving into the story.
I, in a sense, am more against free speech than I used to be.
I want good speech to be incentivized and bad speech to be de-incentivized.
In the 50s you had obsenity laws. Nothing wrong with that.
The liberals idea of free speech is blasphemy, perversion, subverting truth, etc.
True free speech would be philosophical discussions on political issues, ability to criticize the government in reasonable adult ways, rather than burning flags or other stuff. The ability to reason together in churches the Bible without being told by the government what the correct application or interpretation of the Bible is.
Free speech works for moral people with some amount of control over their tongues and a mind that is at least semi-rational
Leftists "You just want to take the speech WE say away, you're not about free speech".
Well, yeah now I am leftists. Didn't use to feel that way. But since you can't talk like an adult you lose speaking privileges.
It's like this scene from Boardwalk Empire "You sorta talked me into it"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1OBAeRlde4
When the communists are out of the country or you get criminalized for being a communist, and American citizens are not a bunch of overgrown children or weak effeminate men, then yeah, free speech is back on the table.
Like John Adams said "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other"
Likewise, freedom of speech when wielded by immoral and irreligious people becomes the megaphone of insanity. When you get called a nazi for stating that men are men and women are women, then it's time to stop letting the loonies run the asylum.
In reality, all that you need to have freedom of speech nowadays is still have public humiliation like being put in stocks where people can throw vegetables at you if you are advocating "transgender" ideology. That's really not an extreme thing, and yet in our pansified world, we'd never implement it. That "punishment" is way lesser than the crime.
You put someone in the public square in stocks with rotten vegetables thrown at them and they'd be embarrassed for a while and they'll remember that moment and it'll have a corrective effect....you teach children all this Marxist nonsense and you screw them up for life. Which is worse?
If that was the consequence for obscenity, then you'd find a lot more people hiding their twisted views.
We couldn't even challenge the narrative, we couldn't even point out the facts, we couldn't even talk about it at all except on their terms and Charlie Kirk didn't have hundreds of monuments made of him across the globe or had leftists in self flagellation disguised as generosity/solidarity washing conservatives feet in showy displays of pathetic-ness.
Good point, I think the redditors are on to something
They're a factory mill trying to compete to get things out in a world where seconds matter in terms of having the edge with views.
Would it be better for them to scrub through, find a shot where she's sad looking, screenshot it and post it as a custom thumbnail out of respect? Absolutely.
But they're a business, and businesses only care about opportunity cost, is the time worth the money, juice worth the squeeze. When you're right on to the next upload immediately, you don't do the due diligence or care about your last upload if you're a video factory mill.
Same thing with all the AI slop channels that fills the internet. They don't care about quality, just about the bottom line.
It was pinned on the Donald a few days ago
The bottom one in that photo there was the one they had.
If anything they picked the most respectful one.
In the top 2 photos she looks way more "ecstatic", more of a beaming smile
I'm in the minority, but I prefer TV where the plots are self contained one and dones.
The only exceptions are Breaking Bad (My favorite show of all time) and Entourage (top 5 shows of all time). Even Entourage is sort of like a mix, where there definitely large connecting plot being a huge focus, but self contained misadventures are also a huge part of the shows appeal.
I'm not too into these long epic length plotlines really in 90% of cases.
A good balance is the show Elementary. It has some woke garbage in it, I'm only in Season 3, but it is an entertaining show.
It has longer threads that pop up here and there in moments in the show, but each episode the focus is on the "mystery of the week" as it were, where the long plot gets dripped little by little in scenes.
To me, the short, one and done episode style is more entertaining than an extremely elongated movie.
You have to be really skillfull to pull it off. Breaking Bad, but Vince Gilligan is like the Rod Serling of our time, in terms of the caliber of writer he is, and as a talented director.
I feel like even Better Call Saul wasn't able to keep that addicting pace like Breaking Bad. It was too much spent on certain things, stretched out way too long. I enjoyed it, except for the ending, but I don't think it's as entertaining.
With Breaking Bad, things moved at a break neck speed, so it never felt like things were being artificially stretched.