a little offtopic but I find all the hair in inquisition to be terrible. It's all plasticky and super shiny, as if someone polished half a bowling ball and put it on top of people's heads. Is anyone else having a similar issue?
twigger89's forum posts
@i_stay_puft: To be clear I think Conseco is a piece of shit, I just think the other baseball players who cheated are also pieces of shit. Maybe Conseco is a bigger piece of shit, but honestly at that level the differences are pretty meaningless. It's like differentiating between two robbers who robbed a billion and two billion dollars respectively. While the guy who robbed more is technically bad, they both robbed a ton of money and therefore are equally shitty people imo.
I am not defending the guy or anything, but why is it a bad thing that he narced on a bunch of people using steroids? Wouldn't we want to know if people are cheating?
Snitches get stiches.
He was part of a brotherhood that trusted him and he betrayed them. Fuck that guy.
A brotherhood of people who were betraying their fellow players by actively cheating. Jose Conseco may be a cheating dick but so are all those other dudes and frankly I'd rather he rat them out and they all get fucked then some of them get away with it.
He is such a skillfull player but he is a disgusting cheat. If it is proved that he has bitten someone again he should get a long, long ban. Not sure its actually proved yet - is it?
They just showed some pretty good shots of it. Definitely a bite with clear intent. POS move. Dude should be banned not only from this tournament, but from the sport for life.
I agree with this. This piece of shit has three confirmed bites, I don't care how good he is he obviously doesn't know what sportsmanship is and should be banned from professional sports for life to send a clear message. I'm honestly surprised the Italian team didn't start a fight right there.
The rest of Uruguay's World Cup run is going to be shadowed by this moment.
There was a time the majority of people thought the Earth was flat, or that the solar system and/or galaxy rotated around the Earth. Those beliefs did nothing to change the fact that all those people we wrong. Evolution is the same issue. No matter how many people believe that creationism is a valid theory it doesn't change the fact that it is scientifically ... well bullshit. I can understand the need the internally rationalize your faith and what science is telling you, but that need doesn't make your rationalization any more scientific. I'll look up the exact number but a semi recent poll showed that 97% of scientists (including computer scientists and engineers) supported evolution. So the people who live and breath this stuff are all on one side of this 'argument' and somehow we still think is not a done deal? That seems crazy to me.
Or better put
Evolution is true whether you believe in it or not.
Just listened to it. Here is my commentary:
Much the show can be summarized as "remember this?" Having not seen the movie, I don't remember any of those things, and, since I don't actually want to watch the movie, it would be nice if you went into a little more detail about it.
However, you seem immediately dismissive of just about every aspect of it. That fact begs the question of why I, the listener, would want to hear a podcast about something so unworthy of watching or that, as you say "cannot be talked about in a serious manner." You even state at one point that anyone who wanted to see the movie is "dumb" and "has absolutely no dignity." I would like to know the characters' actual names and roles in the story--e.g. who is "ghostly Asian bitch?" What was her significance to the action? Is she part of a coherent mythos?
Furthermore, you call this a "standard action movie," but I don't know what that means. What makes it "standard?" Whose standards do you adopt in order to assert that? What does it mean for the culture that produced the movie that certain qualities can be called "standard?" You use standard as a critical term, but criticism is a delicate affair requiring nearly constant definition and justification.
Most of all, I would like to hear more about the Kevin Bacon project of the podcast. You could reasonably just go to IMDB and figure out a path to Kevin Bacon, but there must be some significance to the content of the movies along the way. Perhaps you could find similarities in the different roles the connecting actors play. Maybe you could find some constancy in time or space.
If the second episode involves substantial changes, I might be interested. Also, make a quick wordpress site where I can go to get the whole catalog, even if you just link to youtube videos.
Thanks for putting in the time. You make a lot of good points about the podcast, most of which I think can be addressed by a more structured approach. We had an outline of how we wanted to discuss the different aspects of the film but it very quickly degenerated into a less controlled discussion. We were trying to showcase the interesting/fun aspects of the movie while also making fun of it but we may have gone too far toward dismissal. It was actually an enjoyable movie and I believe we recommended watching it at the end but we probably should have gone into more detail about what we liked about it.
The Kevin Bacon aspect was something we came up with during the pre-record so it's not fully fleshed out but I do feel like it's one of the more unique aspects of the show. I agree that we could easily map out a path to Mr.Bacon but I don't think that would add to the experience of the show, still it's something we should go over among ourselves as I'd really like it to be an important theme of the show as opposed to a prop we occasionally use. Thank you again for your diligence.
No one wants to listen to your immature ramblings.
To each his own man but I find it a little ironic that the duder saying that have almost 2400 posts on an internet forum. Also isn't most comedy immature by it's very nature? I'm actually inclined to take that as a compliment.