White Girls movie makes millions

2nd grade boy tried to represent some history and gets tossed out of school

black face does not equal racism

hell Robert Downey Jr was in blackface for entire movie and he won a fucking award lulz

that school should be sued for racism for kicking the student out

>> ^rychan:

>> ^Deano:
"There was never just one" - lol, that's a lazy way to justify a new Bourne film. Maybe they can keep doing Bourne films in this way as the demand is there but Damon did manage to smuggle some acting into the originals and I wonder if they can create a character as well as more action.

I'm confused. Doesn't every single movie make it abundantly clear that there are lots of these agents? He spends a great deal of each movie fighting against the others who went through the same program as he did.


Yes but it's just that they've taken that banally obvious fact and present it as the initial jumping off point for the new film. It just made me laugh at how lazy that was.

>> ^Deano:

"There was never just one" - lol, that's a lazy way to justify a new Bourne film. Maybe they can keep doing Bourne films in this way as the demand is there but Damon did manage to smuggle some acting into the originals and I wonder if they can create a character as well as more action.


I'm confused. Doesn't every single movie make it abundantly clear that there are lots of these agents? He spends a great deal of each movie fighting against the others who went through the same program as he did.

This song is fantastic, and probably my all-time favourite christmas song, but this attempt at animating it , while charming, really doesnt do the song justice, in my view. For one, it is full of, or rather, (it is in many ways only), what Dawkins once referred to as "Lord Privy Seals", that movie-making mistake of always showing the words, ie "whenever X is mentioned, there must be an X in the picture at that moment", where X in this video could be replaced with: Christmas, religion, Dawkins, Desmond Tutu, consumerism, ancient religion, selling, playstations, beer, Jesus, dad, brothers, sisters, gran, mum, white wine, sun...

Oh and that baby girl that looks like a tiny bald man.. creepy.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

Wow wow wow, never once did I say American History X promoted anything remotely related to racism. I said the opposite. "Slashed into" doesn't mean "promoted." Slashed into means "hurt" racism... In fact, "slashed into" is about as far from promoting as possible.
Well that was the biggest fail from you I have seen...and I am only half kidding

I'm always puzzled when people respond to a misunderstanding this way. When someone misunderstands me, I generally consider that a failure on my part to make myself understood.

For some reason, some people who debate me seem to think failing to make themselves understood means they've scored some sort of victory over me.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Next, I meant you would detest the movie but not the free speech. You know, since the movie was made for one purpose only---capitalistic greed. Of course I am assuming the motives of the people who made the film, perhaps wrongly, but I doubt the makers had the best of intentions without the dollars.

Okay, for one, discussions about liberty are about what people should morally and legally be permitted or empowered to do, not their personal preferences. Also, to repeat myself, "positive liberty" isn't an ideology -- saying "positive liberty means you would detest the movie" makes as much sense as saying "red means you would detest the apple".

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
And, on the other note, conservatives are happy with both liberties--but only when both types of liberties are slanted in their favor (For example, see your own part where you mentioned free speech.)

True, but that's because they're hypocrites, not because they're happy with both kinds of liberty.

If I explain positive liberty to a conservative, they usually react the way you did at first, and reject it out of hand. Accepting positive liberty means that supporting liberty sometimes means requires more government intervention, not less. Right-wing people want to pretend that's always antithetical to liberty. It's not.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Liberals tend to favor both liberties less in that self-serving manner, but most still do manipulate them somewhat.

Heh, always with the equivalency. Why would liberals bother with willfully trying to misrepresent it? We don't go around asserting that our policy platform is the One True Freedom, and all who oppose us are against freedom, the way the right does.

We understand that you need to look at the whole picture, and not just whether the government is limiting people's behavior or not.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Hrm, your last point, that the alleged coercive aspect of freedoms impeding freedom is interesting.

As DFT is fond of saying, liberty for the cat is tyranny for the mouse.

It takes some thought, consideration, and debate to come up with what sorts of laws actually maximize liberty. That's what liberals believe, and we really, really, really, wish the right would participate in the debate as free thinking individuals, rather than just laying down ideological dogma and refusing to budge.

"Reason #81
AND THIS IS WHERE I WALKED OUT
(mom moment #19)"

Good for you.
This movie makes Spiderman 3 look like an oscar nominee.

>> ^artician:

Either this video is flipped for copyright protection, or this man has no idea where the human liver resides in the human body.


Even with a flip, a liver should not extend to the bottom of his torso unless he has severe hepatitis. This is some beau-sheet movie making.

I have Dune on blu-ray and the movie makes sense to me after seeing it 4 or 5 times over the years. It's really stirring and unique in a lot of ways. Not having read any Herbert books, I wouldn't change the movie. To me, the movie Dune is all about one thing: scale.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha.

ha.



>> ^quantumushroom:

If she runs, she wins.

A promote with a comment worth upvoting!

Movie making is in trouble, isn't it?

Thanks for the promote.

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Transformers, what have you done? First "Battleship", now this? Oh well, *promote in anticipation "Snakes and Ladders: the movie!"

LOL! I wasn't at work! Where in the heck did that come from?! It's called context! There's social context (black friend knew me, knows I'm not a racist, knows what the intent was when I said it, I wasn't at work, I wasn't around others who might misinterpret it), and then there's the context of the joke, which you can discern that I'm actually poking fun of society often assuming the black guy did it. I'm smart enough to know I'd never make a joke like that at work. I also know it's a bad idea to for example play solitaire at work, too. Does that mean solitaire is an evil thing? OF COURSE NOT! The only thing you're pointing out is a joke like that heard out of context could be misinterpreted as racist because it involves race. I could see my joke being misinterpreted had my friend not known me. I wouldn't walk into a group of people who didn't know me and say the same joke! For that matter, I wouldn't walk up to a stranger and debate economic theory either. Doesn't make debating economic theory wrong! LOL...

Your point is ridiculous in this case. Racism was very often *fought* by comics using similar tactics. Are you suggesting Richard Pryor, Gene Wilder, Jon Stewart, Whoopi Goldberg, Robin Williams, Louis CK, Eddie Murphy, Bill Cosby, all of them are racists?! It's ridiculous. Jon Stewart, who is ethnically part Jewish, makes jokes relating to Jewish stereotypes, so that makes him anti-semitic?! Kevin Smith made an entire movie making fun of Catholicism, and he's catholic. That makes him a Catholic hater?! There's an entire section of culture that has been positive in this regard, and you don't see this?!

If you can't understand that, your brain can't understand context, and what is acceptable in various social situations. The joke I told to the people I told it to, when I told it made everyone laugh and offended no one, and that was entirely expected. In no way was it ever said or implied that blacks are inferior to whites whatsoever. It's therefore NOT RACIST!

You've never heard of a christian husband telling their wife to do something and then she did it simply because he told her to? Uhhhh, Michelle Bachmann is on record saying that her husband told her to become a tax lawyer, and she did it simply because he told her to. That's what Maher was railing about as sexist, and he's dead right about that. That's not as sexist as him telling her, "Go make me a sandwich!" But it is sexist that she had to do it simply because he told her to because he's the husband, and she's the wife. Unless of course, in their marriage, if she told him to go become a nurse, he also had to do it simply because she told him to. But once that happens, that's no longer "wives must be submissive to their husbands". That's "spouses must be submissive to each other". That's the difference.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

No, what counts is the intent of the joke.
A white guy walks into Harlem and starts cracking racist jokes and telling the offended African-Americans, "It's OK because my INTENTION isn't racist..." If you told your joke where I worked, you'd be hauled into the Human Resources department and either instantly fired, or put through a merry bout of "Sensitivity Training" under the threat of being fired. You know as well as I do that there is an entire industry based around the reality that racism is irrelevant of intention of the speaker. All that matters that a comment can be interpreted as racist by a passer-by. That's racism under the law, and if you walked into the HR department with a bunch of crap about "intention" as your only justification you'd get your @$$ tossed out the door - and justifiably so. Quite frankly, you should be thanking your lucky stars that the guy you cracked wise to, or anyone else else in earshot, decided not to make an issue of it or you'd be unemployed.
If you can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you other than your brain lacks the ability to comprehend context.
I perfectly understand the archetecture of the excuses you have constructed around yourself. I simply reject them as factually incorrect, mentally simplistic, and culturally insensitive. If you can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you other than your brain lacks the ability to comprehend.
That's the definition of a bigot - zero tolerance for the ideas of some others. That's not the same as a racist. Nice try diverting that one.
OK - for clarity... Maher is a bigot AND a racist AND a sexist AND whole bunch of other things. And being 'human' is never a justifiable excuse to satisfy Maher when he attacks people he hates. Humans do lots of stupid things. When they do, they are typically held accountable for it rather than getting a free pass.
If the bible says that wives must be submissive to their husbands, that's sexist!
Put simply, Paul's opinions about women are not "Christianity". He was a unique fellow, who also advocated remaining unmarried - and yet that was never christian doctrine. Regardless, as I said before, I've never once met this hypothetical Christian who tells his woman "go make me a sammich". The strawman is more rare than a fiscal conservative thought in Obama's brain. But as I said, roles assumed by couples are less 'sexism' and are more 'practical reality'.
I'm not sure you're aware of this, but people who agree with Maher tend to be the ones who go out of their way to see him live.
Fair enough. I stand corrected in regards to his audience being stacked purposefully. However, I maintain that it is stacked and Maher would be much more moderate in his crass behavior, bigotry, racism, and sexism if he had a more balanced audience that didn't consist of mostly ideologically sympathetic cheerleaders.
Finally, ANYONE to the left of you, you characterize as a neolib, lib, socialist, etc.
Untrue and hyperbole.
Your characterization of his guests isn't accurate in the slightest.
No - I'd say you simply find it uncomfortably accurate and therefore deny it.

>> ^dannym3141:

but also live with himself when he clearly knows what a horrible seedy little man he is.

I doubt he realises or cares how much of a piece of shit he is. He sounds very similar to the reasonings of an xbox hacker I had read about a while back. Unrepentant and utterly ignorant of the fact he's a slimey, piece of shit scumbag that should crawl into a hole to stay so we never have to deal with him ever again.

Also, notice how he always mentions "You being in all the movies... making 5 million pound a movie... you got all these houses..." sounds he's just bitter that he's not in movies or something

In my fantasy universe Stephen Colbert will play the Medic in a real life TF2 movie. Make it happen.

I feel Mr. Raimi shouldn't have deleted this scene from S3. The movie makes so much more sense now.

If he learned it on the journey, why does the movie make it seem like he learns the language over the course of a single campfire and bout of drinking?

If he learned it on the way to the homeland of the Norse, why does he not understand what they are saying at the campfire? I have seen the movie, and it either very poorly portrays the elapsed time (a month or whatever) - or it wants to make the viewer think he learns it in a single night at a campfire.