I'm guessing it is the same as with wasps, bees and bumblebees as they can sting you even while they are decomposing if you touch the stinger, it "shoots" out and stings you. Reflex like actions even while dead...

>> ^ponceleon:

You know, that was actually a lot more fun than I thought it would be! Any chance the goalie just took it easy on him because it was charity?


Watch the whole sequence of penalties here http://videosift.com/video/Soccer-Aid-2010-Penalty-Shoot-Out-Part-1

They weren't taking it easy anyone. Woody was like the 9th or 10th person for his side to step up.

Here's part two : http://videosift.com/video/Soccer-Aid-2010-Penalty-Shoot-Out-Part-2

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

>> ^Tymbrwulf:
Majority of the women I know would only watch movies as entertainment occasionally and don't really call themselves "movie buffs." If you think there is an untapped "movie buff" in the female world you would think the movie industry would attempt to tap into it? (Chick flicks?)


Wow.. are you trollin' Tymbie? Or just thick?
Cause if you can't find the faults in that statement. I think you should immediately take some critical thinking classes.
Have you ever wondered why most women you know don't consider themselves "movie buffs"?
Female 1: "Hey the new Comic Book/Action/Eddie Murphy Comedy movie is out."
Female 2: "Fuck yes! I've been dyin' to see gratuitous explosions/shoot-outs/prosthetic fat all year!!"
And then, like some marketing executive from the 60s, you have gall to suggest that female movie enthusiasts truly crave to be spoon fed stereotypical bastardized depictions of themselves in films.
~~ written by @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/BoneyD" title="member since July 7th, 2006" class="profilelink">BoneyD - A lot of chick flicks would fail the Bechdel Test as well, btw...
Like real world women all are desperate love-obsessed delicate lilies that: need to reunite with their sisters and babble about romanticism. Or find a rich man so they can stop whoring themselves. Or reunite with their "mature" party slut friends and babble about sex.
I bet female movie goers find those films ultra empowering! =D
And on top of all that - deep breath - "chicks flicks" don't even begin to scratch even the bottom of any list or review of the most popular movies.
So what have we learned?
- Realistically relatable females aren't depicted in mainstream media.
- The niche genre for females depicts them as clueless whiny emo kids hoping some stronger, usually male, character saves them from their shitty situation/themselves.
- You find that's perfectly normal and don't see an reason why younger females shouldn't be raised to expect the same.


I agree in a number of ways with you regarding the way women are depicted in a majority of modern movies. However, the part that I think there are two big factors here that are being overlooked by you and by women who argue for more "realistic and substantive" roles for women in movies. First and foremost in my opinion at least is the fact that making movies is all about making money (again looking to the majority here, indie films are somewhat of an exception to this but then I think you'd agree that they are also largely an exception to this Bechdel Test). Since it's about making money, the unfortunate truth is that the majority of the target market for films these days is men, and what most of them want is the same mindless, formulaic story over and over again. If making films was primarily about telling a good, detailed and deeply thought provoking story, I think things would be very different. This just doesn't sell on a large scale and you'd have one hell of a time convincing the film studios of the world to begin shooting films for the artistic appeal and forget about the financial aspect.

On a bit of a side note to your point below,

"Like real world women all are desperate love-obsessed delicate lilies that: need to reunite with their sisters and babble about romanticism. Or find a rich man so they can stop whoring themselves. Or reunite with their "mature" party slut friends and babble about sex."

I agree that this is a very unrealistic depiction of real women. I would also contend that real men don't drive cars off ramps onto moving boats, or shoot anything that moves, or smoothly sweep any attractive woman off their feet with a few suave words. That is however, the image of men in the movies and I'd wager that it's not only the male population of moviegoers that enjoys seeing men depicted that way. And that's why it continues to sell...

My advice is... stick to indies.

>> ^Tymbrwulf:
Majority of the women I know would only watch movies as entertainment occasionally and don't really call themselves "movie buffs." If you think there is an untapped "movie buff" in the female world you would think the movie industry would attempt to tap into it? (Chick flicks?)



Wow.. are you trollin' Tymbie? Or just thick?
Cause if you can't find the faults in that statement. I think you should immediately take some critical thinking classes.

Have you ever wondered why most women you know don't consider themselves "movie buffs"?

Female 1: "Hey the new Comic Book/Action/Eddie Murphy Comedy movie is out."
Female 2: "Fuck yes! I've been dyin' to see gratuitous explosions/shoot-outs/prosthetic fat all year!!"

And then, like some marketing executive from the 60s, you have gall to suggest that female movie enthusiasts truly crave to be spoon fed stereotypical bastardized depictions of themselves in films.

~~ written by @BoneyD - A lot of chick flicks would fail the Bechdel Test as well, btw...

Like real world women all are desperate love-obsessed delicate lilies that: need to reunite with their sisters and babble about romanticism. Or find a rich man so they can stop whoring themselves. Or reunite with their "mature" party slut friends and babble about sex.

I bet female movie goers find those films ultra empowering! =D

And on top of all that - deep breath - "chicks flicks" don't even begin to scratch even the bottom of any list or review of the most popular movies.

So what have we learned?

- Realistically relatable females aren't depicted in mainstream media.

- The niche genre for females depicts them as clueless whiny emo kids hoping some stronger, usually male, character saves them from their shitty situation/themselves.

- You find that's perfectly normal and don't see an reason why younger females shouldn't be raised to expect the same.

You know that delightful red spray that shoots out of someones body when a projectile traveling at high speeds hits them? Or the wonderful mixture of shrapnel, shit, and intestines when someone blows up? What about the arterial splatter that is caused by severing the Carotid artery?

Well these guys don't get to witness that first hand, they see it through a CRT or LCD there's no direct threat to their lives; unlike an infantryman. Who's to say that the target is legit? The boss, well how about that Milgram_experiment? How do you know you made a righteous kill? Because someone told them so? I'm sure that will put a whole new spin on the Nuremberg Defense. The fact of the matter is this, it's fucking complicated. Made more complicated by the fact that they are pulling the trigger from the comfort of they're god damned arm chair.

It's a lot like lethal injection. Lethal injection makes it easier for a killer to kill. Make no mistake about it, if you take part in killing someone, even if it is lawful you are still a killer.

But, it is noted that even drone pilots get PTSD, and for good reason. They get to go home like nothing fucking happened. In my mind that makes it worse.

http://trueslant.com/jefftietz/2009/04/16/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-drone-pilot/
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/08/09/pilots-of-predator-drones-suffering-ptsd/

Footage of what a predator drone sees, caution I didn't watch it all but someone probably died. It's liveleak.com after all.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7bb_1210698031

Thanks for the promote

In reply to this comment by radx:
*promote

>> ^solecist:
this is how gunshots SHOULD sound in hollywood movies. why is hollywood so afraid of reverberation? doesn't sound "clean" enough, i guess.


This is exactly why I like this scene. I'm glad it gets some appreciation

Thanks for the note, I've fixed it up now.

In reply to this comment by radx:
Came here to promote, but unfortunatly, it's *dead.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
The point still stands that he's failed at all his promises ( gitmo, don't ask don't tell, stopping corporate crooks).
Just because people hope he'll stop sucking and be the best president he can be doesn't guarantee he will.
The Nobel Peace prize isn't some magical pill that makes foreign policy perfect and rainbow shoot out of your hands. It doesn't fix anything.
Let's not forget that the abuses at Guantanamo Bay have NOT stopped. He continues two pointless unending wars. And he endorsed the Israeli invasion which massacred 1500 Palestinians last January.
..And we should, by any reasonable measure, be proud he was awarded a - PEACE - prize???
Yay, hope! I'm sure the Iraqis with no power or phones, the Afghan refugees with no parents, and the blind burnt Palestinian children are filled with hope and international pride over this. -_-


What's with the 'FAILED' rhetoric the right is spewing lately? HOnestly, I cannot help but be surprised and sadly impressed at how well the ENTIRE CONSERVATIVE CONSTITUENCY OF THE UNITED STATES can start using the same phrasing and marketing speak on the exact same day. Seriously, have you guys all signed up for a newsletter or something?

FYI, he hasn't failed unless he is no longer president and his promises haven't materialized. The guy has been president for barely ten months. He has THREE YEARS to go. Conservatives have FAILED at keeping the trust of the American people, and they have FAILED at keeping the country on the right track, they have FAILED to end abortion despite six years having majorities in all three branches of government, in fact, conservatives have FAILED at everything they've tried.

Now I realize that last sentence may be factually incorrect, and I invite any conservative talking heads to show me any major point that conservatives have succeeded on in the last ten years.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
Just because people hope he'll stop sucking and be the best president he can be doesn't guarantee he will.
The Nobel Peace prize isn't some magical pill that makes foreign policy perfect and rainbow shoot out of your hands. It doesn't fix anything.

>> ^EndAll:
It's damaging to the peace prize as an institutional device and a foolish decision by the Nobel committee that I was surprised to see them make.


It's amazing to me when intelligent people can miss a point so completely.

The awarding of the Nobel Peace prize is like a slap in his face. It says, "We've heard all the pretty words, Mr. President, and they were inspiring. Now are you going to follow through on those words?"

He doesn't pass laws, but he sets the tone and direction of what is probably still the most powerful country on the planet. As such, he is perhaps the single most powerful person in the world. If you had the ability to give him a shove and remind him of everything he has said about prioritizing peace in the past few years, wouldn't you do it?

If this award helps to re-commit our president to the pursuit of peace, then will you still have such disdain for their award decision?

The point still stands that he's failed at all his promises ( gitmo, don't ask don't tell, stopping corporate crooks).

Just because people hope he'll stop sucking and be the best president he can be doesn't guarantee he will.
The Nobel Peace prize isn't some magical pill that makes foreign policy perfect and rainbows shoot out of your hands. It doesn't fix anything.

Let's not forget that the abuses at Guantanamo Bay have NOT stopped. He continues two pointless unending wars. And he endorsed the Israeli invasion which massacred 1500 Palestinians last January.

..And we should, by any reasonable measure, be proud he was awarded a - PEACE - prize???

Yay, hope! I'm sure the Iraqis with no power or phones, the Afghan refugees with no parents, and the blind burnt Palestinian children are filled with hope and international pride over this. -_-


written by MaxWilder

It's amazing to me when intelligent people can miss a point so completely.

If this award helps to re-commit our president to the pursuit of peace, then will you still have such disdain for their award decision?


I think you may have missed my point a bit. =/

Of course if this somehow transforms Barack into the president I was hoping (and voted) for then awesome!
I understand that, to some, this marks an international "holding his feet to the fire".

My point is, more then likely, it won't.
In other words, awards praise and hope do not make the forces subduing real change flee.
If so:
Bush would have been impeached.
Cheney would be in jail.
We'd have begun reversing melting icecaps.
And we all would only have to work one job while driving tesla sportscars.

The second part was to acknowledge the absurdity and question the validity of awarding someone a PEACE prize when their actions obviously don't promote True PEACE.

Are those observations without merit? Am I deranged for contemplating something other then roses and sunshine?

What about the people's pets? My dog would've lost his shit. I cover his ears whenever fire trucks/ambulances/cop cars speed by. I can only imagine what this would do to him. And to me, trying to deal with it all. I'd probably grab my 12 gauge and shoot out the speakers, then plead temporary insanity, genuinely.

For me parts of the sequels seemed very poorly executed. Compounding that was it was impossible to tell in advance after only seeing the second movie. For instance the Merovingian seemed like such an interesting and mysterious character in the second film, but he amounted to nothing interesting by the end of the third.

Mentions of ghosts and vampires (or was it werewolves) by the oracle, having no real part to play in the movies.

Persephone's just one kiss scene in part 2, it seemed like such a pivotal and dramatic scene yet it didn't amount to anything really.

There's just all these elements.. especially in the second movie that don't play out. That goes for the conclusion of the series itself.

Then came the ultimate answer to all of this.. the MMO that was made in corelation with the developers of the film. The Merovingian becomes a faction in the game. I believe the whole ghosts and werewolves thing becomes relevant in the game (I haven't played it). The resetting of the world.. well.. you need that in place if you want to have a game taking place in the world. I seriously think it's their plans for the MMO that weakened the over all plot of Matrix 2 and 3, though part 2 is a VERY fun action movie.

Another big element... there's barely any gun fights in the sequels. I know The One has no use for guns, nor are they effective against him, but come on... they could have had one mega gun fight somewhere in the story. There's a short shoot out in the third movie at least, that's actually one of it's redeeming qualities for me.

The other point someone made about the part 2 and 3 answering so many questions about the world is relevant too. They also seriously fucked up the setting when Neo used his powers outside of the matrix. That's when the tightly constructed universe of the first became a notch closer to a generic super-hero movie.

...nothing in the Matrix movies is as bad as what Indiana Jones 4 did for THAT series however. /derail >.<

Your ideas are fascinating to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

>> ^Drax:
Take a certain movie and slap a label on it "This is a guy movie.", "This is a chick flick." and you get these arguments. Now I have noticed that movies recently do get made with the idea of what audience they'll appeal to, and I think now a lot of work goes into figuring out the magical androgynous formula to pull both audiences together so everyone can go out after and talk about it over coffee or get laid (which ever just happens to be the most applicable scenario), but call me naive or whatever but I think there was a time where people just made movies and let them fall where they landed.
Here's some of my favorites, I guess most are guy flicks.. I dunno.. I just enjoy them. If a girl likes any of these too that's great, Id hope anyone can just approach a movie as "it's a movie", and keep an open mind.
Die Hard - Only the original. It's a freaking classic, not just a good action movie. So many little details worked out that there's a scene where you can see a whole sub-plot silently occurring based on one of the character's facial expressions. When Gruber puts the coke fiend on the radio to talk to McClane watch all of McClane's facial expressions.
Way of the Gun - This is another movie where entire conversations occur between characters without a word being spoken. The shoot out at the end is incredible and well thought out.
SE7EN - David Fincher at his best.
Aliens - Video games will never stop quoting from this movie (or stealing ideas from it). Can't wait for Avatar (no, not the cartoon).
The Hudsucker Proxy - One of the best comedies no one's seen.
Face / Off - Cheesy over the top in the best possible way. John Woo's best American movie IMO (Hard Boiled being his best period).
Event Horizon - Many don't like this flick, I loved it. The whole scientific concept of hell being this other place of pure chaos that this ship slipped into really drew me in.
I've got a ton more, but I'll stop here. Why do I like these movies? Because they're fun in some form or fashion.
And soon as Hollywood can get back to making movies that aren't based off something from 10-20 years ago I'll get back into being a movie buff.
Oh and PS, I SOOO Want to see Antichrist too. Looks like some really F'ed up horror.