[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
film/video

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 21977)
Message
File  []
close
Fucking depression.jpg
219772197721977
>> No. 21977 Anonymous
17th December 2017
Sunday 2:37 am
21977 Star Wars: The Last Jedi
I don't know what I was expecting, but I wasn't expecting lore breaking dues ex machina fuckery and overt character assassination.

It's fucking shite.
44 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 22062 Anonymous
4th February 2018
Sunday 4:12 pm
22062 spacer
>>22061

There are only three Star Wars films.
>> No. 22063 Anonymous
4th February 2018
Sunday 4:20 pm
22063 spacer
>>22062

Either stop repeating yourself and make a coherent point or GTFO.
>> No. 22064 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 10:09 pm
22064 spacer
>>22063

According to people of the Jewish faith there is only one biblical testament.

According to some orthodox Star Wars fans, there are only three Star Wars movies.

This shouldn't be a difficult idea to grasp even for the sort of cretin who uses insults like "man-baby" and forgets to sage his bullshit self-gratifying posts.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 22065 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 10:28 pm
22065 spacer
There are only three Star Wars films. There are only three Indiana Jones films. There are only two Shrek films. There are only two series of The League of Gentlemen. There are only four Rocky films.
>> No. 22066 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 10:33 pm
22066 spacer

nile.jpg
220662206622066
>>22064

Surely you also know the biggest differance between the two groups is that the Jews were able to get over de Nial.
>> No. 22067 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 10:38 pm
22067 spacer
>>22064
.gs compares Star Wars to religious scripture. Fuckin' hell.
>> No. 22068 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 11:11 pm
22068 spacer
>>22067

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon#England_and_Wales

Good evening sir, have you got time to hear about our lord and savior Luke Skywalker?
>> No. 22069 Anonymous
5th February 2018
Monday 11:12 pm
22069 spacer
>>22064
Protip: the red anonymous text means he did sage, you prat.
>> No. 22070 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 12:55 am
22070 spacer
>>22069

I was obviously referring to post >>22061 where the referenced "man-baby" insult was used, you gormless fucking pooling of ejaculate.
>> No. 22071 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 4:38 am
22071 spacer
>>22070

I'm glad my post hasn't gotten to you and you've been able to respond in such a mature way, grown-man-in-a-nappy-nibbling-a-rusklad.
>> No. 22072 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 5:27 am
22072 spacer
>>22071

I fucking love rusks, me. That said, I couldn't give a shit about Star Wars but I do love watching spurious pea-brained nu-males posting nebulous infantile insults on an anonymous image board with less than a dozen users and still failing to grasp the basic use of the sage field.
>> No. 22073 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 6:32 am
22073 spacer
>>22064

"make a coherent point"

"star wars is literally the bible don't question my faith, also I'm going to assume the person I'm replying to is the same one as an entirely different post"

Nah. Deliberately unsaged.
>> No. 22075 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 8:04 am
22075 spacer
>>22074

I couldn't give a fuck about star wars, I just wanted to do a joke ban.
>> No. 22076 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 8:48 am
22076 spacer
>>22075

MODS > GODS
>> No. 22077 Anonymous
6th February 2018
Tuesday 1:34 pm
22077 spacer
>>22074
Frothing at the gills over bans is the best. Joke bans to a normal person are so obvious no one even comments, but they also reveal the “Do you know who I am?! I’ll have your badge” green ink types and forces them to respond else their libido be dented and their psyche permanently scarred.
>> No. 22078 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 6:30 am
22078 spacer
>>22073

What's ironic, of course, is that you've done exactly what you've accused me of doing ("replying to anonymous post as though they'd made (SIC) every post disagreeing with you") ; you have assumed that I made the posts >>22060, >>22062 and >>22064 when in fact I only made post >>22064.

Obviously it was I who got the ban, and not you (I mean, whoever heard of a mod banning himself? Now that would be a comedy ban with an actual touch of comedy).

Nonetheless, whinge over. Enough "frothing at the gills" for one lifetime I think.

During my twenty-four hour "comedy" ban there have been maybe a half a dozen posts to this entire site. If what's left of us started fracturing down the lines of "the one last mod who for some reason keeps on moderating Purpz' floating mausoleum in cyberspace decided to ban me because I called him a pooling of ejaculate without knowing he was a mod in disguise", then where would we be, we three; perhaps the last island of beauty... in the world?

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 22079 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 7:00 am
22079 spacer
>>22078

You got banned for making an asinine argument, nobody cares what posts you made and nobody assumed anything other than you're a bit of a tit, which you're proving amply.

As others have mentioned it was pretty transparently a joke ban. I wasn't arguing at any time in this thread, I've only seen about two thirds of a Star Wars film in my entire life.

It worries me that you're so affected by this. You're clearly not all bad since you quoted Withnail but jesus lad, take a breath.
>> No. 22080 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 7:42 am
22080 spacer
FOAM IN HIS MOUTH
STEAM IN HIS EARS
ANNOYING LITTLE CUNT-OFF LAD HAS BEEN TROLLED TO TEARS
>> No. 22081 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 1:58 pm
22081 spacer
>>22078
>During my twenty-four hour "comedy" ban there have been maybe a half a dozen posts to this entire site.
Save us, mercy!
>> No. 22082 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 1:59 pm
22082 spacer
>>22080
I was waiting for this. I couldn't remember it word for word to post it myself.
>> No. 22083 Anonymous
7th February 2018
Wednesday 6:12 pm
22083 spacer
>>22082
To be honest I'm not 100% I got it right; it was guesswork

MUD IN HIS BLOOD
SHIT ON HIS SKIN
>> No. 22084 Anonymous
8th February 2018
Thursday 8:59 pm
22084 spacer

must-win-internet.jpg
220842208422084
>>22079
> You got banned for making an asinine argument,

Capital. Beside the point of that completely contradicting the reason given in the original ban message, it was supposed to be tongue in cheek. Never mind.

> It worries me that you're so affected by this.

Don't worry m25, I'm not coming to raze the shedbunker to the ground or anything I can't anyway since you fuckers moved it to the cloud *grumble grumble* .

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 22086 Anonymous
9th February 2018
Friday 2:07 am
22086 spacer
>>22084
You're still getting banned for being asinine. Imagine our mirthsurprise.
>> No. 22087 Anonymous
9th February 2018
Friday 8:48 pm
22087 spacer
>>22086

This asinine argument requires 2 sides to perpetuate. As an outsider the only difference I'm seeing is that one side has mod powers and the other doesn't. Someone with some sense please delete all of the offending posts (yes even the mod circlejerk ones (it really doesn't look good from the outside) and this one) .
>> No. 22088 Anonymous
9th February 2018
Friday 8:54 pm
22088 spacer
>>22087

Ya' foolin' no one, la'!
>> No. 22089 Anonymous
10th February 2018
Saturday 12:09 am
22089 spacer
>>22088

Your paranoia aside as to who I am. Am I wrong?
>> No. 22090 Anonymous
10th February 2018
Saturday 6:06 am
22090 spacer
>>22089

I think you're just prolonging the argument by making points like this, no matter how valid. Not that there was ever a mod in this thread defending or lambasting Star Wars, just for the record. It'd be different if the lad got banned for being right (or wrong) about Star Wars, but what actually happened was he made an infuriatingly silly point and was comedy banned for it, at which point he asked for everyone's badge numbers and made it a whole thing, after which he was banned twice more for fun/autism.

Believe it or not, mods do not last long here if they make frequent over-judicious bannings.

>(it really doesn't look good from the outside)

Neither do heads on spikes at the castle walls, but it bloody works!
>> No. 22091 Anonymous
10th February 2018
Saturday 9:57 am
22091 spacer
>>22090
>Believe it or not, mods do not last long here if they make frequent over-judicious bannings.

Name one.
>> No. 22092 Anonymous
10th February 2018
Saturday 1:41 pm
22092 spacer
>>22091

You're literally just asking me to name a colour, daftlad.

Beige.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 22331 Anonymous
10th June 2018
Sunday 8:07 pm
22331 spacer
You could just write it off as racist misogynists being racist and misogynist, but I really don't understand why Kelly Marie Tran has got so much shit that she had to leave social media.

You may think her subplot was ridiculous, but her acting was fine and her character (even if she was to blame for her character) was at worst unremarkable. She wasn't annoying or lore-breaking or anything. She was just... in the film. I just can't fathom why anyone would choose to have a go at her.
>> No. 22332 Anonymous
10th June 2018
Sunday 8:43 pm
22332 spacer
>>22331

She hasn't said anything to that affect from what I know it seems like the online gossip mill (read:news site) have taken it upon themselves to speculate that as the reason. Which seems a few too many steps into begging the question to me. (harrased by trolls and quit - sure that's one of the the many possible reasons.
Specificaly racists sexists going after her and quit - now that's just wishful thinking to fit a sensationalised narrative and get clicks).

It could very well be a completely personal or mundane reason, I don't think people need a good reason to quit social media, even celebrities.
>> No. 22333 Anonymous
11th June 2018
Monday 12:19 am
22333 spacer
>>22331

Rian is the one who deserves the criticism for having her interrupt Finn's redemption moment, but the irony there is he wouldn't have needed that moment if they hadn't glossed over the character devolpment he had in TFA.

All in all, there was so many missteps that people are overwhelmed with things to criticise about it, but attacking an actress who at worst just followed direction seems like a uniquely American pastime. They're absolutely mental.
>> No. 22334 Anonymous
11th June 2018
Monday 9:25 am
22334 spacer
>>22333

Rian gives me narrative blue balls.
>> No. 22335 Anonymous
11th June 2018
Monday 6:20 pm
22335 spacer
>>22332
Why is social media harassment a 'sensationalised narrative'?
>> No. 22336 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 10:45 am
22336 spacer
>>22335
It isn't, but saying it must be racists and sexists is.

And remember we still have no reason to suspect that that is the reason she left other than speculation at this point.

It would be like saying if you criticize Israel you must be an anti-Semitic who wants to exterminate the Jews. The two don't follow. Most of her trolls probably just though the last jedi was shit they aren't racist or sexist they just have misplaced fustration.
>> No. 22337 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 11:57 am
22337 spacer
>>22336
Like I said before, if they aren't bigots and they thought the film was shit why would they have a go at her? There was nothing otherwise wrong with her.
>> No. 22338 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 12:32 pm
22338 spacer
>>22337
You sound dense now. You don't have to be a bigot to think the actor who played the character you didn't like ruined a movie, you just need to be making an emotional decision rather than the logical one.

People hate traffic wardens, it isn't their fault though that the law is what it is, it is just their job. But that doesn't stop people acting like it is their fault.

Rose is a character that feels like a shoe horned Mary sue and is the catalyst for the most jarring narrative choice in the film of course people are going to hate her and some people aren't wired in a way that they separate that from the actress.

People do it the other way all the time, and you probably do too, without questioning, People act like Patrick Stewart is great because he was Picard, but everything I've seen of him in real life makes him seem like a bit of a knob head.
>> No. 22339 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 1:33 pm
22339 spacer
>>22336
>>22338
Not the one you're arguing with, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest you've not bothered to check on the nature of the abuse before deciding it isn't racist or sexist. Just a hunch.
>> No. 22340 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 1:58 pm
22340 spacer
>>22339

Since none of the 5+ news sites I've checked that didnt want permision to abuse my data have actually provide any examples of the harassment. I don't know what to tell you.
>> No. 22341 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 2:41 pm
22341 spacer
>>22340
What do you know? My hunch was right. Again.
>> No. 22342 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 4:02 pm
22342 spacer
>>22341

Well do you want to maybe demostrate what the racist and sexist harrasment was? Rather then presuming that because I can't prove their isn't a teapot floating by the moon there must be one?
>> No. 22343 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 4:24 pm
22343 spacer
>>22342
>Rather then presuming that because I can't prove their isn't a teapot floating by the moon there must be one?
Stop projecting, lad. It's unbecoming.
>> No. 22344 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 5:02 pm
22344 spacer
>>22343

Who's projecting? my position is that I don't believe that she left because of racist or sexist motivated harrasment until shown any evidence that it was.

I remeber any critism of ghostbusters being labled as sexist when it wasn't, the issue was it looked shit and was. So I am no longer willing to take peoples word that something related to celebrity culture on social media is sexist, without seeing it for myself.
>> No. 22345 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 5:44 pm
22345 spacer
>>22344
>Who's projecting? my position is that I don't believe that she left because of racist or sexist motivated harrasment until shown any evidence that it was.
No, that's not your position. Your position is that she quit because of harassment by people accusing her of being shit. Unless you're backpedaling, as often happens when people are caught out trying to pull this sort of shenanigans.

>I remeber any critism of ghostbusters being labled as sexist when it wasn't, the issue was it looked shit and was.
Which of course explains why the cast were bombarded with racist and sexist abuse. When a black person is in a shit film, that totally justifies comparing them to a gorilla, right?

Get your head out of your arse and stop being willfully blind.
>> No. 22346 Anonymous
12th June 2018
Tuesday 6:12 pm
22346 spacer
>>22345
>Your position is that she quit because of harassment by people accusing her of being shit

except of course when I said-
"She hasn't said anything to that affect from what I know it seems like the online gossip mill (read:news site) have taken it upon themselves to speculate that as the reason"

or
"It could very well be a completely personal or mundane reason, I don't think people need a good reason to quit social media, even celebrities."

in my first post

or

"remember we still have no reason to suspect that that is the reason she left other than speculation at this point"

in my second post

But other than all of the times you are wrong, you are right.

>>22345
>When a black person is in a shit film, that totally justifies comparing them to a gorilla, right?

Because we all know the half dosen or so people who made those comments and were banned from twitter represents all criticism of the ghostbusters film that was made and was being off hand dismissed as misogyny.
>> No. 22349 Anonymous
13th June 2018
Wednesday 1:02 pm
22349 spacer
>>21977
Is it just me, or is that Corbyn in the hood?
>> No. 22350 Anonymous
13th June 2018
Wednesday 1:14 pm
22350 spacer

JME-Jeremy-Corbyn-920x584[1].png
223502235022350
>>22349
No, this is Corbyn in the hood.
>> No. 22351 Anonymous
13th June 2018
Wednesday 1:55 pm
22351 spacer
>>22350
No, that's JME in a cap.
>> No. 22352 Anonymous
13th June 2018
Wednesday 3:02 pm
22352 spacer
>>22351

That's a do-rag, you menk.
>> No. 22353 Anonymous
13th June 2018
Wednesday 9:45 pm
22353 spacer

fat acceptance.jpg
223532235322353
>>22352
Is menk actually a thing? I live in the countryside so you could make up pretty much any word and disguise it as ethnic slang around here. I'm going to invent three right now. Grebby. Lashwang. Deng-eye.

Also I can't be bothered to make a whole post about this in /101/ but what geriatric jobsworth decided that the suffix -wise should be appended to every random government initiative's advertising campaign? Like change4life's 'be treatwise'? Has anyone ever actually used the word 'streetwise'?

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password