xoney

Ok, so I'll definitely give you TDK (even though it was 1/2 an hour too long) as a *good* film. I'll probably give you X-men First Class & I'd add Days of Future Past (only because I'm biased and it was great to see Patrick Stewart and Ian Mckellen one (?) last time). 

In line with the trilogy, Rises was a "dark" film that took itself seriously but was ultimately just a shallow, silly film with another nuke ending (boring!). But cat woman was great and so too were the visuals/sound effects, I guess. Avengers (also feat. nuke) with an action scene in New York that felt like it was over an hour long (and probably was quite close to it). Just senseless & dull violence for the 2nd half of that movie. 

And the others don't really warrant a discussion tbh.

Haven't watched Guardians, Civil War, Ant-Man, Batman V Superman, Kick Ass, Dead-pool or Watchmen so I can't comment on those. I might - eventually.

Well, which ones are good?

I admit I stopped watching them after the abysmal second Avengers.

(Edit: not incl. TDK)

How do people still get excited by this shit... there's like 5 of these movies every year and the only good one so far was Iron Man. 

The one liners are so bad - do you actually laugh at them or cringe?

lmao this is hilarious

but no one cares that Hilary fabricated her foreign policy experience before Obama hired her? lol 

These candidates are both awful. Seriously impossible choice

Edit: nvm

"sell your soul"

it's just a phrase/metaphor

like other industries, it's usually just when artists give up some of their artistic integrity away to music execs for more commercial success 

it's not that deep

But that's my point. It's difficult for music stars to separate the two... primarily because most of them are bad actors. 
 

No doubt Janet is better than most. But she is a passable actress, at best.
 

I know she's not...

but Halle Berry is *just* an actress, Janet has the added weight of separating her character from Janet Jackson, the music superstar.

lol The Matrix 2, X-men 1,2&3 > Why Did I get married, Nutty Professor 2... 

We both know I don't need to get the receipts out lmao.

IMO, nothing can ever be more "universally panned" than a Tyler perry movie.

Yeah, that's true. Especially since Janet is a weak actress. 

She was better in Poetic Justice and her child roles though. I think Poetic Justice was the only "smart" choice she made. 

Hardly. The roles that Janet has actually taken are far worse. Less lucrative, and even less well received. 

I think the part she was offered was eventually given to Jada Smith so it was the sequel to The Matrix. At that point, it was a planned trilogy. So she would have been contractually obligated to film the third as well. 

As for X-Men, it's possible there could have been something in the contract. But unlikely that she would be obligated to do it (as the sequel would be dependent on the success of the film, which was uncertain).

SMH the guy on my tv talking about the degree of responsibility France's roll in the international community has for this attack... fuck offf!

FreeXone is right to say that people in Western countries bitch and moan about every little "injustice" when they live in one of the most-free countries in the world. The irony is that it is exactly because those countries are so free that they are able to bitch and moan all they want.

BUT this doesn't apply to BLM. 

For someone to listen to Jessie Williams' speech and tweet that All Lives Matter is ignorant (even though he was using "all" as a synonym for "Black") and underlines the need for BLACK to remain in the slogan. 

But that doesn't mean it's without flaw. Even though I do think that much of the rhetoric of BLM is divisive (it does seem to be fanning the flames of Trump), it is WRONG to accuse the movement of not being inclusive.  

Having said that, the rhetoric seems to encourage black people to blame their encounters with police entirely on white prejudice (and not at all on black criminality). Putting personal experiences aside (note: I'm not denying there is clear evidence of bias against black people), does this seem accurate? Statistics show us that it's not (note: that statistics are of course not isolated from this bias). 

History shows us how scary it is to use our "experiences" to stereotype. Police brutality is an issue, but not all police are responsible. I can't help but feel the deaths of police in dallas are a symptom of this. After all, in this forum I have read things which imply that black people are being killed en masse by white racist policemen.

I read this comment on facebook:

BLM doesn't want anyone to look at the actual crime rate to evaluate *why* black people have a disproportionate number of encounters with the police. No one will get an accurate picture until BLM is willing to have the courage to look closely at the disproportionately high number of times the police are called by black victims to apprehend a black suspect, increasing the number of these confrontations.

1) Sigh. Yes, it is legal in the UK (doesn't include Northern Ireland). 

2) A better question: will Trump/Hilary like her? 

Of course not. But I can understand (although I use this term lightly) why some of them voted against it/chose to abstain. 

It's a distortion of reality to compare them to the GOP based on this one issue. After all, it was under a Conservative Government that the act was proposed and passed.

Exactly.

Labour preach feminism. Tories practice it.

A lot of their voters were against it. 

Politicians are supposed to represent the people, after all.

despicable 

4 officers dead & 7 more shot. smh

both could only dream of being as strong a PM as Thatcher.

Not convinced of either's ability - May hasn't been too effective as HS, represents status quo & voted Remain, whilst Andrea is inexperienced (and apparently the worst EM we've ever had but I expect that's just a smear) but voted to Leave.

Difficult choice.

Sigh.

Clearly, Iraq and Afghanistan are the only cases of US military intervention that you are aware of. I think it best to end our discussion here.

(And side note: you are in the <1% who think the US (and other western countries) do not have a moral obligation to protect people (of whatever nationality) from genocide, murder, WMDs, biological/chemical weapons etc.)

so you measure a president by the number of times he uses military force? That is a pretty narrow-minded metric, but ok.

What you see as "minding your own business" I see as a super power with great scope for good in this world abandoning its responsibility. 

What's spineless is that Obama has failed to act on a number of cases where he said he would (see Syria and Obama's "red line" which Assad crossed). Why? All too ensure his legacy. America's military is now run by opinion polls, popularity, and party politics. It's shameful.

He's lost America's deterrence power. That could be catastrophic. And in the end, this could cost more American lives than anything else.

You used the present tense. Not me. 

edit: admittedly, "convenience' was an insensitive word to use.

HA! Clearly.

Of course Obama is not focusing on all lives. We know this from his spineless foreign policy.