EXTomar's forum posts

#1 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

As already hinted, both this movie and John Wick are surprisingly good turns for the "action movie" genre which felt stale even after The Expendables. What sells both movies is that their leads easily slip into that role. You believe Cruise's character is a simpering goof that is forced to be in a war. Later on when transformed by the experience you believe that character is bad ass.

#2 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

@amir90 said:

Seems to me it is a mental health issue, not a gun carrying or gun selling laws that are the problem.

Criminals and mentally ill people don´t care about what is legal or not.

Btw, when people propose banning guns, they never talk about the police force. Should they be allowed to carry a gun in the streets? (a friendly reminder that there are few European countries out there were police officers don´t carry handguns. They do often have a gun available in their car though).

But it see a "gun selling law" issue. It is so easy to get access to a lot of weapons and ammo that a lot of people who really have no reason to have one can have one "just because". Forget the other details: In any environment with a lot of weapons, the rate of injuries and deaths go up. That isn't about good or righteousness or laws but statistics.

And btw, it is important to note that the kid killed himself with a handgun which is often ignored and unreported across the US. The biggest method of suicide in the US is "firearms" with the old popular method world wide of "hanging" coming only comes in at half. I'm not saying that "get rid of the guns, get rid of the problem" but rebutting the idea that the ease and availability of guns is harmless.

Basically, ease of gun ownership has had an easy to measure effect and I personally struggle to find the benefit or silver lining and a bunch of stats seem to bear that out. Its not a plague or epidemic but it is worrisome.

#3 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

Before Columbine, there was something like dozen a mass shootings with less than 5 people dead each. What has changed from the 80s on is the tech and the availability of cheap and easy to use and easy modified weapons.

So a giant "whatever" to people who think there isn't a problem with the level of gun violence in the US. If no one is willing to ask "Why did this kid have access to a handgun?" then we must accept that this stuff is going to happen with regularity.

#4 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

A big issue with Man of Steel is how it was relentlessly unfun. Everyone was telling Clark how much everything sucked where no wonder why he fretted if he should use his power to save anyone. He is so worried about what humans would think of him that he ignores or forgets that the world is being destroyed! It was so dark and gritty it sucked the life out of the movie where I'd wish I was watching Jor'el The Intergalactic Freedom Fighter instead.

On the other hand, Guardians of the Galaxy was packed with fun and a hell of a lot more fun to watch. In fact it could be said a problem with the movie was that it has a "break neck" pace and rarely slowed down but at every moment there was something serious along with something fun going on.

At this point, it feels like Disney/Marvel has the right idea where I'm just rolling my eyes at the "leaks" on this and that and how "serious" they want to keep Batman v. Superman Special Victims Unit. Bring it on Avengers 2!

#5 Posted by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

People are weird....don't feel guilty or try to say you are sorry for liking a game. Even those that seem controversial or unpopular.

On the other hand, if you hate something like "mustard" then you are a monster and should feel bad. :)

#6 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

@turtlebird95 said:

This week's episode was pretty great. Meelo is such a little troll. I'm glad Ikki finally got some spotlight, because compared to Jinora and Meelo she barely does anything. She's just kind of... there.

That is a distinct issue with "the middle child" (even though she really isn't).

#7 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -


I'm not necessarily talking about "previous work history". Now more than ever, people are doing checks against whatever "digital footprint" you leave to make sure what is going. If you said "I worked for Boeing at Seattle for Soandso for 5 years" it is easier to check Facebook and whatever to see if you where there that long than it would be to wrestle with Boeing.

We already have an easy and recent example of this with Paranautical Activity where Maulbek now has a very public, very easy to find mark against him. I'm pretty sure he isn't on any "blacklist" but if wants to work for EA or Activision or some other big company where they have HR do simple checks they are going to see what happened with that game and pass on him. For the press, it is an even smaller circle of people where checking isn't going to take that much work because their job is to leave stuff all over the place in text.

#8 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

Hmm, people should know that "blacklists" have existed since there were tribes. To suggest that someone is actively blocking this guy or that guy from getting a job ever again is the kind of loopiness we've seen from "other movements". On the other hand, if someone does a background check this stuff maybe be easy for any HR or their contractor to find. And video games aren't so large that events like are pretty unusual and easily float around.

Is there a blacklist that this guy is on? Probably not. Is he going to have issues finding work in the industry. Possibly if he applies to a company that cares to run a basic background check. This is why people today need to realize how posting random stuff may come back to haunt them.

#9 Posted by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

If he didn't threaten to kill someone there wouldn't be a problem either.

I don't think people are ignoring the fact Valve made a mistake. I do see multiple posts trying to ignore this guy made a big mistake.

#10 Edited by EXTomar (4849 posts) -

Maulbeck's behavior is not professional. I'm still wondering why anyone is even bothering trying to figure out an excuse for it.

Part of the thing with "freedom of speech" is that you have to accept the consequences of speaking freely.