Just returned from a midnight showing and overall: I like it.

Joker is very cool and the "pencil-trick" is not nearly as gory as my mind's eye pictured it. I love the little touches, where he feels very human, like when his remote doesn't work right.

Batman's gravely voice annoys me, but I can accept that he wants to shield his identity somewhat. The gadgets weren't that many, which is a good thing, but that sonar idea was just retarded.

The film dared some things that you didn't expect and copped out on some other stuff. If you enjoyed the first one, this is better. If you hated the first one, you're probably not going to like this one either.

Two-Face was very well done, both the cg and acting. He wouldn't be able to speak properly with half his lip missing, but I'll suspend that disbelief.

I did respond civilly rottenseed, I think if you re read Spoco2's posts and my answers to them you'll see I kept my cool for as long as possible. I don't think MarineGunrock ever attacked me, and I certainly didn't attack him.

It seems now that I'm here to defend myself that people have less to say about it. The video was made in fun, by my 17 year old and myself as we were astounded by how well he was playing against guys my oldest usually plays against. It was one of those "Let me try! Let me try!" we got out of his way and let him.

People see this, and the other vid I made when he was younger and think This is all he does, Which isn't so. He occasionally plays these games, but when he does, he's good at them. *That's* the joke of the vids we're trying to convey. Our shock at how good he is at mastering the key commands. Crouch, jump, strafe, and weapon switches, he learned it all by watching, Before he could even read. And could pull it off with his tiny hands and short fingers.

I dunno. the images of ragdolls being blown across the sky dont seem gory to me. There are flashes of simulated blood, but on my system, it's hard to tell. It's not like other games where if you shoot someone they're covered in blood, and lose and arm or leg. Like FEAR or something. Those games are harmful because of the atmosphere, the sounds and music are huge contributing factors that create an air of fear and horror.

For the record, we dont have any vice city games in my house. Attacking police, robbing people, and picking up hookers isn't something I'll let my kids partake in, even if it is just a game.

>> ^deathcow:
My dad took me to see "it's alive" in a drive-through when I was 5, and Alien when I was 8. Both feature gory killing. I must be totally broken now.


I agree with you, but not your reasons...

My dad took me to see "it's alive" in a drive-through when I was 5, and Alien when I was 8. Both feature gory killing. I must be totally broken now.

The guy on the bottom left, security guard - i want to be his friend..

TOTALLY lays out 2 people at the start and the end, and one in the middle.

I like this because it wasn't too gory or graphic, and it showed a bunch of punks start a fight and lose.

*discuss

Did the rule on snuff change while I was away? This might not be gory, but it's definitely real people dying, seemingly depicted for its own sake.

>> ^Eklek:
Life's not à la carte..

In life...

If a neighbor is bumping music you don't want to hear you have the option to close your window.

When you get to the gory scenes in Hostel you can cover your eyes.

When a telemarketer calls during dinner you can hang up your phone.

If you don't want to watch commercials during your favorite show, you can skip them with your Tivo.

If you're bored on stage during a MLK Jr. Day speech you can doze off.

Mmm... gory. *actionpacky *commercial.

i know we're on the internets and all and so ignorance is fun, but,

A) i think the isn't so much that she's expecting people to the gory details of a gender reassignment operation, but more that she's expecting people to know that it might be just a little personal, and thus insulting to be asked about by complete strangers.

and

B) i'm sure you'd be pretty angry too if everyone treated you as a spectacle and not a person everywhere you went

Tags for this video have been changed from 'story, of, riki, oh, gory' to 'story, of, riki, oh, gory, really crappy dub' - edited by JAPR

I disagree with this video. But I'll upvote to promote discussion.

Exploitation is a very natural drive. Since when did animals treated their rivals and prey as their equals and share their abundance?

Seeing all creatures on earth as 'equals' is a uniquely exclusively human and extremely philosophical, which is, man made. But yet, exploiting one's environment and designing them to aid one's self isn't a strictly human thing. Lots of species out there exploit other animals or their surroundings to do their bidding.

Scissor ants harvest leaves, against that tree's will, to grow a fungal farm. Hyenas steal cheetah's food when they're exhausted from chasing the prey. And they don't give a gazelle's ass whether the cheetah dies of hunger or exhaustion.

And when it comes to cruelty, mammals like lions kill off all cubs when newly taken control of a pride in order to wipe out the previous leader's seeds and to lessen competition by them near future. Birds kill the competitor's young by replacing the competition's egg with their own egg.

So what this video argues has nothing to do with how the actual nature runs things.

Do whatever you wanna do with these animals as you please. Feed'em, help'em, sleep with'em do whatever you want. You might even have an awed sense of respect towards the way nature works. But coming up with a 'rule' that somehow harming animals are wrong, that's just absurd.

Yes, humans are still co-dependent with several other domesticated animals, and still heavily dependent on nature itself. That's all good. But because of this, now we have to treat every animals differently? No. We aid animals that give us benefit. We get rid of animals that do us harm. That's the basic principle, and what the heck is so wrong with that? This seems to be the main focus point. And I say there's nothing wrong with aiding ourselves and exploiting what's around us.

But people may say that sometimes we go too far. I believe torturing animals is wrong, but not because of what this video is suggesting. I believe it's because we shouldn't promote things that allows entertainment from pain and suffering of of others (another reason why I don't like gory movies).

So what if we're torturing the animal to do our bidding, such as moving heavy things and etc, and there's no other means to do it? Well then that's fine by me. Because if it is truly too much for the animal to bear, it would die out or be severely disobedient. But obviously the animal doesn't mind it too much, as long as it's being fed regularly and groomed once in awhile, the good side of being domesticated and sticking with humans. So there's always a give and take. My argument is that the animal, in ecologic terms, wanted to be exploited in return for human protection.

So overall I would say that this video is made with good intentions to achieve a certain goal. It tries to promote as what I believe are the right things, but the reason they give are just plain wrong.

Aww... i was hoping it was Conan the barbarian killing Colbert in a grizzly gory manner, well, i can't have everything

/Upvote

If it's put to a vote, count me in to vote to allow death in our videos. And, just because someone dies in the video does not constitute a snuff film, in my opinion. I consider it snuff when the it's done for entertainment. People dying in accidents or especially in politically motivated instances, to me, shouldn't be barred from the site, especially when they're not gory and exploitative.

Question: I've tried searching under several different terms, but does anyone know if we have sifted in the past the footage of the JFK assassination? That would be an equally relevant (but much less... gory) video.

*80s, *1sttube, *horrorshow

*NSFW for gory violence.

Nice pick.