search results matching tag: emo

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (89)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (4)     Comments (332)   

This is Halloween

gwiz665 says...

Your taste is bad and you should feel bad!
>> ^JiggaJonson:

Sorry to dissapoint @gwizz665, but after some sifting through emo-cult-movie-whore reviews I did find a few people who agree with me:
"Danny Elfman has done some fabulous stuff in his time: Edward Scissorhands, Batman etc. But when his songs were thrown into the spotlight as they were here, they sadly failed on so many levels."
"It is so difficult to get through and you'll find yourself checking you watch several times throughout."
"I saw The Nightmare Before Christmas when it opened. I had just started college. The hype hadn’t started yet, and I still thought it stunk. The music is awful and it’s just plain boring. I was recently shocked to learn that it’s only an hour and a half long. It seemed so much longer."
http://listverse.com/2008/08/25/top-10-overrated-movies/

This is Halloween

JiggaJonson says...

Sorry to dissapoint @gwizz665, but after some sifting through emo-cult-movie-whore reviews I did find a few people who agree with me:

"Danny Elfman has done some fabulous stuff in his time: Edward Scissorhands, Batman etc. But when his songs were thrown into the spotlight as they were here, they sadly failed on so many levels."

"It is so difficult to get through and you'll find yourself checking you watch several times throughout."

"I saw The Nightmare Before Christmas when it opened. I had just started college. The hype hadn’t started yet, and I still thought it stunk. The music is awful and it’s just plain boring. I was recently shocked to learn that it’s only an hour and a half long. It seemed so much longer."

http://listverse.com/2008/08/25/top-10-overrated-movies/

The Saddest Kitten Of All Time

I choose to be gay.

wax66 says...

Love the content, but ummmm... I seriously think that this video would have had more impact if the woman didn't look like a hipster emo.

Besides the other things she said, YES SHE IS LOOKING TO BE A SOCIAL OUTCAST! Just as I was in those days with my silly 'goth' thing.

Getting High On Krystle

spoco2 says...

Bloody hell Hamilton is creepy. His emo laden wording of things, his near god worshipping of her, his bizarre looks towards her.

'Premier exotic dance establishments'? Really, you're going to try to make it sound classy? It's a strip club for fuck's sake.

When she's asked how much she'd been exposed to drugs prior to the whole bunker thing, and says, virtually nothing... 'just pot, meth and cocain'... in who's world is that virtually nothing?

[edit]

Wow, and the beginning of the accompanying article is such dribble:
"There is no facile synthesis of the events that transpired at the Wamego missile silo between October 1 and November 4, 2000. The available information is a viscous solution of truths, half-lies, three-quarter truths, and outright lies, the fractionation of which yields no pure product. "

Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey trailer

Weezer cover Radiohead's Creep (With 200 Guitars)

hpqp (Member Profile)

lavoll (Member Profile)

Does Shyamalan care about Airbender's bad reviews?

smooman says...

at the request of BoneRemake (because my "m night shyalaman is an idiot" rebuttal wasnt long winded enough =P):

sixth sense was "meh" for the following reasons:
"These souls who for whatever reason are not at rest are also not aware that they have passed on. Theyre not part of consciousness as we know it. they linger in a perpetual dream state; a nightmare from which they cannot wake." this may sound familiar. it may sound familiar as the general premise of The Sixth Sense and central to the "twist" (if you could even call it that) ending.

it may also sound familiar as a line from Poltergeist, and also being the central premise of the conflict resolution.
speaking of poltergeist, the open cabinet drawers scene in sixth sense is directly lifted from the moving chairs scene in poltergeist. you may call this an homage, i call it half-assed hackery.

his color reference as hints are just too obvious. theyre vague and ambiguous at first, but once you start noticing em it becomes plainly clear. as for the whole "twist" BRUCE WILLIS IS DEAD OMG YOU FOOLED ME YOU OLD TOSSER i felt it took away from the movie. when i originally went to see the sixth sense with my dad i went to see a tense psychological thriller that would chill me. and for the first 20-30 minutes or so, it did not disappoint..... until my dad and i figured out willis was dead (the "i see dead people" scene gave it away for us). we were dumbfounded at first, wondering what in the hell this had to do with furthering the plot, but we didnt need to wonder anymore once the movie became about bruce willis being all emo about being dead. and the big reveal at the end, considering we already knew, really just made us both scoff. simply put, it was a pretty scare and intense movie when it was about the boy, then it became boring and stupid when it does a 180 and becomes about bruce willis. thats my opinion anyway, tomaytoe-tomawtoe

now having said all of that, there is one, and only one thing, i like about shyalaman: his vision as a director. He's not a genius or anything, but he's pretty damn good. he has a real knack for framing, tone, and pacing. probably the only thing i like about sixth sense was his ability to add tangible tension through masterful pacing and mood setting.
....i take that back. theres two things i liked about sixth sense. the overall directing, and the anniversary dinner scene. that scene really did add an ambiguity to the whole dilemma of willis being dead. on one hand the scene must play out as an emotionally drained wife frustrated (and even pissed off) at her husbands increasing distance. simultaneously she must convey a mournful widow still in grief over her husbands death on their anniversary (and the anniversary of his death if im not mistaken). that scene is legit. but credit must be given to the actress and her portrayal more so than shyalaman because she nailed it beautifully.

whether he makes shitty films or not, sixth sense rocked the boxoffice and gave him some arguably deserved limelight. but his subsequent films proved that he is a one trick pony. his movies became exponentially more and more transparent, more and more boring, and more and more stale, lacking anything of substance. (with the exception of Signs arguably. i personally didnt love it, but i kind of liked it and its a solid enough film if you disregard the shit ending) the fact that his handle of "the twist ending filmmaker" is a passive aggressive insult shows this.

m night shyalaman as a filmmaker just.......sucks. theres really not a better or more concise way to put it. as a director, however, he really does shine......which brings us to devil, a movie in which he wrote and produced but did not direct. so basically the one thing he's actually good at, he didnt fucking do in that movie........and it shows.....its utter shite. at the risk of sounding pretentious, the twist ending (cuz you know theres fucking gonna be one, its a shyalaman movie for christ sake) is so limp and stupid, you can figure it out just from watching the damn trailer (i did).

and as far as the michael bay (barf) comparisons, i think the only difference is this: michael bay knows what he is. he knows exactly what kind of movies he makes. In cinema, motion pictures come in two forms: Films (art form) and movies (entertainment). Michael bay makes the latter, and he knows it, and everyone who watches his movies knows it. shyalaman makes movies masquerading as film. seriously, when your go to device is the plot twist, and you have one in each and every one of your god awful movies, they really lose the "surprise" appeal which utterly defeats the purpose of it in the first place and thus, deserves to be mocked

there, that a thorough enough rebuttal for ya, you crusty bastard? =P

Christopher Hitchens on the ropes vs William Lane Craig

shinyblurry says...

I reread every comment you made in this thread, and at no point until now did you assert that the peasant is the king's servant, much less his slave as you have now suggested. Not until I suggested that the peasant is in fact free to think as well as act did you suggest that the peasant was a slave. Even if we assume that the peasant is in fact a slave, you have still not demonstrated that his mental condition is in any way relevant to his ability to "perform his job", or "provide for his family", which I have proposed as his motivation for working, irrespective of his belief in an actual king.

You could have tried reading the original comment, which stated:

Now lets say one day you refuse to work, refuse to submit to his authority. You say to yourself, I don't believe this King is really real; I've never seen him with my own eyes.. This a conspiracy, I will just do whatever I want. You even decide to go into the towns square to tell others to stop working for this King. That it is a fools errand, the King is a hoax you say. You're wasting your lives when you could live for yourself! Yet, when the King gets wind of this he tells his soldiers "Fetch my ungrateful servant and bring him in front of me"

The peasants life is intrinsically tied to the King. The peasant is not just working to earn a wage, but to be freed from his obligation..to be freed from slavery basically..not only that but to attain what he could never attain on his own, for himself and his family: a future. Without the reward, the peasant would have to eke out a subsistance existence until he died. His motivation is not a living wage, it is freedom from having to produce. The only way he can do this is by living a life pleasing to the King. The King expects obedience, ie the peasant has to work. The King expects results, ie the work has to be satisfactory and yield a good harvest. The King expects gratitude, ie the work is not proportional to the reward.

Nothing the peasant could ever do in his entire life could earn that reward. Upon receiving the reward, the peasant will certainly be grateful. If he didn't believe the reward existed though, he would simply hate the King for having to work for him. He would desire to flee the Kings authority and live for himself. He would seek out the company of people who felt the same way about the King and form conspiracies against Him. He would recruit other people and say the King was unjust, that there was no reward.

Now say the King had mercy on these peasants who were rebelling against him. He was a good King and cared about his subjects. He only wanted to reward them ultimately, but neither could he force them to believe his promise. So, for a time he let the peasants have a piece of his land to cultivate. They constantly gave him problems, either by raiding his stocks (because they could not sustain production for themselves), or encouraging others into disobedience. He was occassionally forced to kill some of the worst offenders, for the sake of the stability of the Kingdom.

His plan was to ultimately move everyone onto His land, after enough was stored up so no one had to work any longer. He would send emissaries into the places of rebellion, to encourage the peasants to return. He offered complete forgiveness for their crimes, if they would only work again for the sake of the Kingdom (which was in their own self-interest). Some listened, but others did not want to give up their freedom and killed the emissaries or drove them out.

Eventually it came time to pass that the Kings plan came to fruition. All the peasants who obeyed the King lived with Him on his land in harmony with one another, with enough to last them the rest of their days. The rebellious peasants could no longer raid the Kings stocks because they were completely shut out. They begged to be let in, because they were now starving, but it was too late..the King was neither going to take from the reward of those who earned it, to give to those who didn't, and who were presented every opportunity to change their ways, nor was he going to pollute the harmony he had cultivated (harmony based on gratitude for the reward and his justness)..for the rebellious peasants were neither grateful nor did they think the King was just. For them, it was here today and gone tomorrow..that is how they lived and that is how they died.

People have certainly been argued into believing in Jesus is their savior. They are typically called children. But, to get to the crux of your argument, until I can believe in god, I can't believe in god. Or rather, until I believe in god, I will have no reason to do so. That is about as circular as you can get.....

No, I am saying that until you feel that you need to be saved, for whatever reason, then you won't come near Jesus. You have to feel you need a savior before you look for one. Curiousity might get you near, but it won't make you follow Him. It is useless to argue someone into knowing Jesus..Jesus Himself predicted the kind of Christians that would produce in the parable of the sower: A weak one the devil will come steal away in times of hardship.

Your arrogance truly knows no bounds, does it? First off, you're about 2 decades off in your estimation. Second, as I quite clearly noted in parens, my interest in knowing the lawmakers in DC has nothing to do with whether or not I accept the rules of society. I am in fact deeply interested in the persons that would rule us. Let me ask you - can you name more than 50% of the 535 elected representatives in Congress, and more than 50% of their aides? I deeply care who our elected officials are, what they are doing, why they run, and their ultimate goals (so far as they may be elucidated), but my reasons for doing so have absolutely nothing to do with acceptance of their "authority over me". I think it is you that needs to reread this discussion and find the truth of what was written. You "know" that I have not searched for a god? What incredible presumptuousness. Are you now claiming not only to know God's love, but also when and where He will demonstrate it? Are you the arbiter of God's will????

Don't know don't care pretty much spells it out doesn't it? Seems like that is pride in being uninformed to me. This is the comment that made me think you were young, because that kind of apathy is very common among youth. Generation Emo doesn't give a shit, doesn't want to work, does everything based on feelings, and hasn't thought too deeply about anything because they want instant answers to everything. I concede its possible you have honestly looked, and perhaps God will lead you to Him later, if there is something in your heart that desires to know Him. Whatever it was though, it wasn't good enough. Have you ever tried doing the things that are pleasing to God first, before jumping up and down in his throne room and demanding He dance for you like a court jester? Yes, I do know Gods love. That's why I am here.

It's a philosophical question. Not caring isn't a valid answer to the question.
Not valid for you. Take off your blinders. You do not get to determine what is or is not valid for everyone else's intellectual endeavors.

I accept [that] people see things differently but this question only has so many answers.
This question, as with all questions, has as many answers as individuals as are willing to answer it. If you refuse to accept an answer as "valid", you must logically provide evidence why that is so.


Come on..this issue has been deliberately complicated to an extreme..when it is quite simple. The question of whether the Universe was created is entirely valid and relevant, though atheists will try to make it seem ridiculous, because they want to avoid the simple truth that there are only 3 answers to that question, because if they answer truly they have a burden of proof. I think if you're going to be an atheist, have the balls to admit it and stop playing these childish games with semantics. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe the Universe was created by God(s), period.


Okay, lets start very simply. What does morality mean to you and how does it apply to the world?
I will glady entertain this question, but I do fear that this poor thread is terribly off course. You or I should create a new talk post in the religion or philosophy talk page to continue this. I'll gladly do that if you want.


I think it's doing just fine..however it may be necessary because of the broken comments system..the page is already freezing a bit. I'll get back to you if you don't want to continue on here.

Another Earth - Haunting 2011 Trailer

jmd says...

as much as I havnt carred for alot of the sci fi in hollywood these days, this one clearly lacks any science part of sci fi and thus, sucks. If you like emo drama, be my guest.

Nemesea - No More

Geminoid DK - Most realistic android yet. First non Japanese

blankfist (Member Profile)

kronosposeidon says...

I'm you're your spelling/grammar nemesis. I like that.

Don't get all emo about it. Everyone misspells occasionally. Even westy.
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Damn you! I'm always so good about that too. Man, my writing has gotten lazy in the past couple of months.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Well, we could do this the NPR way by having a thoughtful discussion like they did today on this very topic...

...but I'd rather take this opportunity to point out that it's "your", not "you're".
In reply to this comment by blankfist:
I liked that. I always thought NPR was user supported until just the other day. Seems a bit disingenuous to call yourself "user supported" when you're costs are also subsidized with tax dollars. Shall I go on, or is this a good place to end that discussion?

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
Did you notice that I'm part of the NPR crowd? Essentially I wrote that whole comment just for you.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon