Why are they acting as if they're in a porno.. just terrible acting.

The effects sound faked, there is a blue-screen behind them, his terrible acting along suggest total bullshit. I do think they were in Saudi Arabia, but their environment was hardly a war zone. They were probably in a hotel room or something similar.

It's like a Tom Cruise movie except without all the terrible acting.

This ad is just horrible, terrible acting and a terrible script. How is it funny that someone pukes from seeing porn? If she had puked because he was using a bad browser (like IE) it would atleast have been mildly funny, sort of unoriginal, but atleast it would be a working joke.

Terrible acting.

I suppose that's one way of looking at it...

I see it as "Jet Li finally decided no other film star was man enough to defeat him, so he made a movie where the only one who can defeat him is himself, and in the end showed he was both an inmate-beating badass, and a cute makes-you-wanna-vomit husband at the same time... All with bad English and terrible acting."

Crake, I think its fallacious to claim someone is lying without actually presenting a case where the person blatantly lied. I think Chomsky occasionally overstates the case but his readings of policy are dead on when you look at American actions in the historical sense as part of imperialism.

Furthermore Chomsky mentions Washington because the US government has carried out countless non democratic actions and terrorist actions in South America (Chile), South East Asia (Vietnam) and the Middle East (Iran) but we don't apply the same kind of value judgments as it does when it comes to other states. As he says in another clipping 9/11 is historically relevant because not only is it a terrible act, but its the first time an Imperialistic power experienced an attack on its home front, historically this has never happened for example in England.

Isn't it sad? I like to pretend George Lucas died in the early 1980s. Helps me sleep at night.

Prequels? What are you smoking; Lucas died in '83.

In reply to this comment by rychan:
The acting was indeed terrible, but I still think all three of these movies were 90% of the way to being really excellent, if someone could have just told George Lucas which of his ideas were terrible. And obviously someone else should have directed.

The terrible acting and dialogue from that kid, from Jar-Jar, and even from Natalie Portman just cancel out all of the "wow cool" stuff that is legitimately there.

The acting was indeed terrible, but I still think all three of these movies were 90% of the way to being really excellent, if someone could have just told George Lucas which of his ideas were terrible. And obviously someone else should have directed.

The terrible acting and dialogue from that kid, from Jar-Jar, and even from Natalie Portman just cancel out all of the "wow cool" stuff that is legitimately there.

Morality is an abstract human concept created by human beings to describe basic socially beneficial actions brought up through evolution and the propagation of the species. This was furthered by human cultural development as well.

The interesting thing to note here is that believers of faith hold that Morality is given by god, but numerous historical events show that faith based societies would commit terrible acts in the name of religion basically disassembling that whole notion.

Morality is also a fluid concept and not directly black and white, it is wrong to kill people, but it is okay if done for national security interests or at a time of war. It is wrong to commit theft, but not if it benefits me and I cannot be caught see Enron/Maddoff.

Quality delivery from Carr.

The intent of creating a porno that people want to watch from start to finish is a fools errand. It's what movies like Pirates and the like have done. (Which, yes made heaps of money... not my point).

There's this current line of thinking that to make porn more acceptable to the masses, and appealing to women, you need a great story etc.

Bollocks

Pirates as a case in point, they pile on sets, costumes, some sort of vaguely workable story, terrible acting etc. AND YET, when it comes down to the actual sex... what do you have? The same, terrible sex scenes where the women are treated like objects and degraded. It's crap... and a huge turn off for most women. (There are a minority that like that I guess, but it's not the majority AT ALL). So... you have a film where you have a vaguely passable movie that you wouldn't choose to watch on its own, interspliced with sex scenes the same as in any other porno.

It's all wrong, what you need is sex where BOTH parties appear to be enjoying themselves, BOTH parties are turned on and are pleasured by the other party, and if you have that you need sweet bugger all setup. Just the minimal required to set the mood, build tension, and then on to the sex...

You really do, as Carr says here, only want to watch some of the movie, enough to get things going as it were.

(I'm talking from the point of view, mainly, of a couple watching here... which is where they're aiming with these 'adult films you actually want to watch for the sake of the film' malarky)

And now... I'll get off my dirty, dirty little porno soapbox...

Ahem.

Yeah, so... funny video

this is terrible acting!! i mean, did you notice how the black cop looks extensively at his set mark next to the chairs? oh such flaw! terrible terrible acting...

Upvote for the terrible acting from the studio "audience".

I was a little disappointed they didn't mention that the oil, timber, and cotton industries were behind much of the early marijuana prohibition. Industrial Hemp, something you wouldn't want to smoke, was the primary target of early legislation, the government used the propaganda about reefer to distract the masses.

*fake.....................terrible acting by the guy sitting beside her, and she isnt real, far from it.

What terrible acting. A disgrace to his school and sport.