Tags for this video have been changed from 'Jackie Brown, Pulp Fiction, Pam Grier, Tarantino, Tongue In Cheek' to 'Jackie Brown, Pulp Fiction, Pam Grier, Tarantino, Tongue In Cheek, Dick Dale, Miserlou' - edited by Trancecoach

I like the part where we cut back to Sean to find someone in the studio laughing at the (clearly tongue-in-cheek) comment.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:


Now that's pretentiousness!


While I was obviously being tongue in cheek, there is an element of truth in what I said.

There's a certain amount of ritual involved in drinking Guinness. Pouring it correctly, waiting for it to settle and so on are a part of Irish (pub) culture. You don't drop in on a surfer, you don't wear shoes in a Japanese house and you don't drink Guinness until it's settled!

Oh, and @bareboards2 the bitterness is part of the taste. It's like eating anchovies and complaining that they're salty!

In case anyone wonders, yes, it's silly, and yes I get the whole "stop making me wait for a drink" gag. I'm probably suffering from a bad case of ex-pat Irishness.

Not the cleanest, or most discrete, execution.

It's good for tongue-in-cheek fandom, I guess.

>> ^Murgy:

That's what I heard, too. In spades.


>> ^hpqp:
Interesting, but phenomenally anti-democratic. Then again, the US political system is phenomenally anti-democratic already... was that the point being made?

The way I saw it, he was pointing out that the U.S. seems to feel the need to run other countries as it is, so wouldn't it only be fair to allow them to elect "their own" government? I think much of his point may have been muddled by his tongue-in-cheek joke suggesting that instead of the entirety of the globe voting, everyone but America votes being crammed in to too short a time frame.
Though there might have been some seriousness, or at least an element of poetic justice, to the idea in that it would give the American people an idea of what it is like when a government that you had no part in bringing into power starts making drastic decisions that affect both you and your country.
But again, that's just what I saw.

>> ^hpqp:

Interesting, but phenomenally anti-democratic. Then again, the US political system is phenomenally anti-democratic already... was that the point being made?


The way I saw it, he was pointing out that the U.S. seems to feel the need to run other countries as it is, so wouldn't it only be fair to allow them to elect "their own" government? I think much of his point may have been muddled by his tongue-in-cheek joke suggesting that instead of the entirety of the globe voting, everyone but America votes being crammed in to too short a time frame.

Though there might have been some seriousness, or at least an element of poetic justice, to the idea in that it would give the American people an idea of what it is like when a government that you had no part in bringing into power starts making drastic decisions that affect both you and your country.

But again, that's just what I saw.

I disagree with the entire conception of a liberal "bias". There definitely seem to be more liberal-minded people here, and liberal political videos fare much better than conservative ones, but that doesn't make Videosift "biased", it just means it's a community that's largely populated with liberals.

As far as your response on #2, that's a pretty flimsy justification for trying to assert that the entirety of liberals don't work and are dependent on government, and refuse to take responsibility for their lives.

As far as having a sense of humor, I can most certainly take a joke, but conservatives say this kind of deeply insulting, ridiculously bigoted and prejudicial shit all the time, and then try pass it off as some sort of joke. They seem happy enough to say it without an ounce of mirth when they think they're safely ensconced in a conservatives-only setting.

>> ^deedub81:

#1 is true "on videosift" as I asserted. I stand behind that statement. Nothing wrong with it, just the way it is. Do you disagree?
#2 The reason why this stereotype exists is because lower-income voters (those with a household income of fewer than $30,000 per year) lean HEAVILY to the left and favor the democrat party by a margin of 17 points.
My original comment was completely tongue-in-cheek, playing on the stereotypes about a liberal bias and lazy welfare loafers but you looked right past it and accused me of being shortsighted myself. You obviously don't have a sense of humor when it comes to politics. I'll be more careful in the future.

#1 is true "on videosift" as I asserted. I stand behind that statement. Nothing wrong with it, just the way it is. Do you disagree?

#2 The reason why this stereotype exists is because lower-income voters (those with a household income of fewer than $30,000 per year) lean HEAVILY to the left and favor the democrat party by a margin of 17 points.

My original comment was completely tongue-in-cheek, playing on the stereotypes about a liberal bias and lazy welfare loafers but you looked right past it and accused me of being shortsighted myself. You obviously don't have a sense of humor when it comes to politics. I'll be more careful in the future.
>> ^NetRunner:

Oh, I agree, they're not completely uniform, but most of the time it's just a difference in intensity, rather than some substantively unique outlook on the world.
In the narrow scope of my earlier comment, I was defining conservative as believing in one or more of the fairytales the social group known as "conservatives" like to tell themselves. You espoused two:

1. That "liberal bias" exists.
   
2. That liberals are lazy lieabouts who don't work for a living.
   

There are too many good movies that are overlooked because theyre foreign language (someone mentioned chow sing chee, you MUST watch Fight Back to School), if this pulls in more of a western audience, gets them revenue so they make more films, im all for it. Plus its very tongue in cheek, so i really dont see where its trying to trick you.

>> ^nomino:

I found this trailer incredibly patronizing. Fuck this guy for thinking we are all retards that need digested bullet points to distract us from the fact that this is a foreign language film. I don't care if it's not in English and I hope others feel the same way. But this narration is just insulting.

>> ^chingalera:

What has always pissed me off here and internet-wide, esp. after having been (and remain in the limited framework of many users minds) accused, convicted by kangaroo court and jury and labeled a troll???

I have to agree you're not a troll, choggie, though I have made numerous tongue-in-cheek statements to the contrary.

Trolls drop bait and wait to see who takes it. When you're stirring shit up, you harass specific targets. Trolls are passive-aggressive; You are just aggressive. That's not trolling, that's instigating.

Very interesting rant, but I truly hope it was written tongue-in-cheek. The comments bring up one of the central holes in the criticism of school subjects' "uselessness", namely "how does one find out whether one likes/is good at this or that?" Moreover, school democratises (or should democratise) knowledge. Thus, a kid growing up in an uneducated household raised on Jerry Springer and Cartoon Network might discover a love for literature, or physics, etc. via good teaching during the obligatory cursus, and follow an otherwise unlikely career path.

The problem with the US system, for the little I know of it, is that it tailors to the lowest common denominator instead of offering diverse pathways of education/career. I don't want to sound patriotic or anything, but I think the system here in Switzerland is not too shabby (although there is plenty of room for improvement). What the wiki article fails to articulate is that in the last three years of obligatory school (13/14-15/16yo) the different sections tailor to different skills, eg home economics and handyman crafts for the "low level" section, and Latin/Greek and advanced math for the "high level" section.

>> ^bareboards2:
@Reefie, for what it's worth, I don't think you are an evil monster or a lowly wretch for having a different opinion than Yogi.
I hope this thread doesn't devolve into a pissing match. Just a hope. No way to stop it.
Sigh.


Wouldn't worry about it, I'm not prone to take such outbursts personally! My humour is rather dry so I'm guessing the tongue-in-cheek undertones didn't come through in my last post, sometimes the written word adds so much - other times it loses something in translation

About the only thing worth saying is that I myself am rarely offended by anyone else expressing their opinion, whereas the hard-working people of the BBC and NHS who provide quality national services to the UK might be somewhat displeased by opinions expressed by those who don't actually reside in the UK and therefore lack the first-hand experience that is so helpful in generating informed and accurate insights into the reality. Like I said to begin with, I don't take Yogi's opinions personally so I'm fine, but maybe a bit of consideration for the thousands of people's feelings for whom such comments can be personal and disheartening isn't too much to ask for.

Possibly one of the most fantastic things ever.
Okay, maybe not. But still.

It being a parody really really really helps, because God help the world if that wasn't tongue in cheek. Whomever God is (or isn't, or was, or will be, or will be again) to you. (There, I think I got everybody.)

I don't see why they couldn't build a construction loader like the one Ripley used in Aliens.

I thought this "mech" is a nice accomplishment, and the video is very tongue-in-cheek - and real depends on your perspective. If some rich mecha fan wants to buy it, that's great - I'm sure it would get ticketed an impounded if he drove on the streets. I certainly hope any military weapons procurement expert would simply laugh at this video... or at least smile.

I don't. Hence, the tongue in cheek comment.

>> ^Jinx:

Why do you care who he fucks? Honestly, the hysterics people get into over celebs sleeping arrangements. You'd think he'd killed somebody...