(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The weird part is that even without the arrest, people are arguing that Zod and his minions weren't killed by Superman. They say that Superman just threw Zod down a slide and never implied that he died.

If true, that would be the lamest ending to a movie ever. Like "I just sent Zod down a slide, Lois. I guess that means that the fight's over. We won. Let's go home, because Zod... went down a slide."



(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I agree that I said exactly what I should say -- that the men's rights movement is composed largely of men who are upset that oppressed women are finding voices and agency. Upset that abusive men can't as easily get away with the harassment and mistreatment that they have customarily inflicted upon women. This latest attempt at re-branding men's rights as a social justice movement defending the innocent is the equivalent of hiring a serial arsonist to be a fire fighter. A movement based on reclaiming the male privilege of immunity in assaulting women is incapable of addressing the plight of male victims.

I'm no expert on the whole system or how it works. I'm not a part of it, nor is Cassie Jaye. I know what she spoke to Men's Rights Activists about in her film, and I agree with a lot of it, but disagree with some of it. I also know that there isn't one "men's rights movement", so when you say that it's made up of a bunch of crazies, you're going to have to specify which group you're talking about. I know there's a Reddit group that sounds crazier than other groups.

Oh, good lord, THE RED PILL's star subject is Paul Elam. I've changed my mind, I don't have time to watch THE RED PILL because I've spent quite enough time reading the words of Paul Elam, a lunatic who spews hate speech such as declaring that all rapists should go free, blaming rape victims for being assaulted and declaring that Asian women must never be trusted and other horrific garbage.

No, Paul Elam is not the star subject. You need to stop getting all of your information from angry articles that have obvious bias. Elam was interviewed, but it was just on of many people interviewed. Jaye did not ask him many hard hitting questions, but she also didn't do that with the feminists that she interviewed. She took the approach of letting them speak for themselves, which I think works best for a documentary. It's not a hard-hitting interview.

That said, when it comes to Elam's comments that you mentioned about, one of four things is happening:

1. You are willfully misrepresenting what the man was trying to say.
2. I am looking at the wrong videos/articles written by him (I only looked at two of the three that you mentioned, due to lack of time and my back killing me)
3. You're getting your information about these comments from third or fourth hand sources who are distorting what he said in order to misinform people.
4. This is like one of those optical illusions where we can look at the same thing but see totally different pictures.

In regards to Asian women, the video that I watched with Elam had him responding to comments made by some rather stupid sounding men in his comments section, where they declare that they're going to go get them some Asian women, because they're more submissive. Elam spoke about how there are basic cultural differences when it comes to relationship dynamics in some areas of Asia, which mean that these men might be expecting a 1950's American wife, but that's not what they'll be getting. He also spoke to the fact that those cultures are changing, so these men could very well end up with a radical feminist. And he said that anyone wife that you get from shopping around on the internet is probably going to be a bad idea (typically, we refer to Russian mail-order brides, not Asians, but I guess it's the same concept). The moral to his video was that these people need to stop being stupid and be realistic about women. You find a mate by meeting people and getting to know them.

And in regards to "all rapists should go free" thing... not remotely what you said it was, if the article that I looked at was correct. It was an article discussing how many men have been cleared of rape charges since their DNA could be checked against evidence, and how there are an alarming number of false allegations of rape around the country. There are also laws that are meant to protect victims of rape from further stress, but these laws are sometimes used to prevent relevant evidence from being seen, and often present the man accused as being guilty in the courtroom, despite the fact that he is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.

He talked about how this is an incredibly complicated subject, but if you are on a jury and can't be sure that you are being given all of the information needed to decide a case, how are you supposed to decide that someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

And... that's a good point. Sorry, but it is. We've had a shit-ton of rape allegations that have been proven false, and in most of those cases, the life of the man (or men) accused is still ruined. This is a very, very complicated subject because nobody wants to do more harm to a victim, but we also can't work under the assumption that the person that is being accused is actually guilty until a verdict is reached. Which means that any action taken against the accused in order to shield the accuser is going to be biased.

The article was written with a deliberately startling concept, but it wasn't presented a great option. It was presented as a need for a real examination of this issue to take place, because a lot of officials are more interested in getting a conviction than getting the truth.

So, did I read the wrong article and watch the wrong video? Or did you get your impressions from articles written about the comments? Or do you look at the same thing as me and just see something completely different? Because I'm sure as hell not a supporter of rapists, and I have no dog in this race of feminists vs. men's rights activists. I'm sure there are plenty of loons on both sides. So... I don't get where you're coming from here. If you wouldn't mind making some actual comments about the issues, rather than vague references to things that don't seem to fit what you're saying, maybe I could see your view more easily. (I realize that that sentence could be read as snarky, but I didn't mean it to be snarky)

This has got to be a joke, right? Transmodiar, this is you pranking me, isn't it?

I'd just like to add that Informant's views are always welcome here and I don't respond to argue as much as not wanting the internet to think Sliders.tv is entirely a band of alt-right Trump supporters. We're home to lots of strange people including this one crazy person who considers Quinn Mallory a 90s era Jesus and that eunuch who asked us to advise him on his girl problems.

I'm not alt-right. Nor am I a Trump supporter.

(It wasn't weird that he was a eunuch; it was weird that he would ask US for relationship advice, a proposition that at the time was asking the blind to lead the blind.)

Maybe I should write an erotica trilogy based on that experience...

Or not.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well, you get an A+ for saying exactly what you're supposed to say.

The problem is that you didn't actually read what I wrote or respond to what I said. You saw keywords, which triggered pre-programmed responses, filled with lots of flashy words and phrases which have probably been put through hundreds of focus groups on Madison Avenue, but which don't really apply to the conversation at hand. You don't have opinions, you have algorithms. And to top it all off, you demonstrated what I actually did say perfectly.

If you had actually read my post, you would have seen that I was talking about the fact that people don't even listen to what the other side says, and this is the problem with our culture. What I was saying was that the movie highlighted the fact that you can agree with a little bit of what someone says without agreeing with everything they say. You would have seen that I specifically stated that I don't agree with everything that the men's rights people said in the movie, but I did agree with some of it. (mostly based on years of my own research, not any group website or slogan)

____ from this point on, I'm just responding to you. None of this is even what I was talking about in my original post ___

You also contradicted yourself. If I must consider myself a feminist because I believe that a woman should have the right to work or vote, or whatever, then you too must be a men's rights activist if you believe that a woman shouldn't be allowed to beat the shit out of a man without facing any legal ramifications. If men's rights groups are perpetuating rape culture, then the women who deny the significant number of male victims of sexual assault would also be guilty of perpetuating rape culture.

But of course, rape culture isn't really about all rape against all people. It's about certain kinds of rape, committed against the right kinds of people.

By your own standards, you are a hypocrite. But, good news! By my standards, you're not! By my standards, you don't have to label yourself a feminist or a men's rights activist just because you believe in some common-sense issues that they put on their posters. Neither of these things are philosophies, they are organizations. Much like cults, they use the sensible, common-sense ideas to draw people in, and the next thing you know, they're using you to march in favor of Sharia Law (guess which group did that... seriously, guess). Feminism is just another means by which people can be grouped together, for easier herding. And this is why I'm not a feminist, nor a men's rights activist, nor a black lives matter activist, nor a Tea Party activist, nor a member of any other organization that will pin my name to whichever belief they feel like supporting at any given moment. I don't even belong to a church because I got tired of this crap. I don't even have a real political label... I'm certainly not a republican. I call myself a conservative, but I also have libertarian views on some subjects.

I don't get how liberals can believe in a hundred and fifty genders, but their view of complex issues is so incredibly binary.

No, I'm not a feminist. I don't give a crap what some half-rate comedian declares to be true. Seriously, why are liberals taking all of their life philosophies from comedians these days? Y'all are following the court jester into battle there.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The Red Pill. Anyone seen it?

For those who don't know, it's a documentary made by a woman, Cassie Jaye, who came into the project as a feminist who had read some bad things about the men's rights movement, and she set out to investigate. As she made the movie and spoke with several of the activists, as well as feminists and other people, and as she did research into specific issues and cases, Cassie began to question her own beliefs, and while she still believes in a lot of equality issues, she no longer calls herself a feminist.

The movie has been getting a lot of attention lately, both good and bad (depending on who you're reading/watching/listening to). I happened across an interview with Ms. Jaye, from Australia ( https://youtu.be/xvLsslFEv7k ) which I thought was really frustrating to watch, because the interviewers had refused to watch the movie (despite their comments in the interview, Jaye has proven that the full screener was sent to the interviewers three times over the course of about a month, as well as being available on sites like Google Play, etc), yet they were criticizing her approach to making the movie. She was constantly telling them that she had addressed their points in the film, but they kept pressing the matter as though she hadn't... all without having seen the movie.

I see this all over the place, and not just with politics. People comment on issues, or TV shows, or movies, or articles, all without having actually looked at the piece itself. They base their opinions on preconceptions and third-party talking points, and then argue those opinions to the death. It annoys the crap out of me, which is why I have a general policy against criticizing things that I haven't personally looked into/watched/read/etc. (there is a lot of criticism of The Handmaid's Tale now, but I haven't seen it, so I won't criticize it... but I do plan to sit down and watch it when I get some time. I did the same with Dear White People a while back.)

So, I saw that the movie was available on Amazon Prime. I have Prime, so I decided to take the couple of hours to sit down and watch the movie. I wanted to see what was so scary and offensive about what Ms. Jaye was saying.

The movie is actually really interesting. It says a lot of stuff that I've known for a long time. There's no support for men who are sexually assaulted or who are victim of domestic violence. I've read stories where the police will actually laugh at the men who seek help. I've looked up the statistics on male rape in the past... basically, none of the major points were really news to me. I don't necessarily agree with everything that the men's rights activists say (I have no problem with a policy of women and children first in an emergency, and I don't want women drafted into combat situations... though I probably wouldn't mind them being drafted for other wartime roles. Stuff like that), and I don't know that Jaye did either. However, I found her personal journey throughout the making of the movie to be really interesting. You can see legitimate change coming over her as she actually talks to people, from both sides.

The thing that is annoying is the concept that in order to give an inch to one person/group, you must take away from someone else. This is all over the place in our culture. There are no shades of gray. There is no nuance of opinion. History is often more processed than canned cheese products. I don't buy into this. I don't think that in order to want to help female victims of domestic violence, you must turn a blind eye to the male victims.

There's this thing with the Black Lives Matter movement, where if you don't support #BlackLivesMatter, you are a racist. If you say that all lives matter, or that police lives matter, you are a racist. However, Black Lives Matter isn't a simple sentiment, it's an organization. It's an organization that has proven to be racist, divisive and violent. So while I might believe that black lives matter, I don't support Black Lives Matter. However, that distinction will have me labeled as a racist, alt-right, neo-whatever.

I've even seen this pop up with stupid TV show or movie arguments. It's not just politics.

At some point, the groups, which essentially becomes competing teams, cause more harm than good. Gender equality shouldn't be about supporting one and bringing down another.

An interesting part about the movie was in watching the different approaches that interviewees took. The men's rights people (often considered to be the evil, sexist ones) were basically just fighting for causes like custody rights, support for male victims of sexual assault or domestic violence, and stuff like that. Meanwhile, the feminist interviewees were fighting against the men's rights people, insisting that they were the hateful, sexist ones, while those men never actually wanted to take anything away from women.

You will tell me that the documentary was obviously skewed, and you're right. Documentaries are all skewed, and all have a message that they're trying to get across (though several of the points they made can be backed up with my own experiences and observations). The thing that made this one interesting for me to watch was the journey for Cassie Jaye herself, who didn't come into this planning to change her own beliefs. Her history shows us that she's not some wacky conservative stooge. And I think that ultimately, the point of the movie isn't about men's rights or anti-feminism. It's about what happens when you stop being defensive, and make an honest attempt to understand the other side of an issue (even if you don't agree with them).

You don't have to be anti-women's rights in order to be pro-men's rights. You don't have to support everything these groups say in order to agree on certain points. You don't have to take from group A in order to give to group B. This has always been my point of view, which is why I don't talk about "cops killing black people" as much as I talk about specific cases, or why I don't support politicians as much as I support points of view (and believe me, the republicans are pissing me off plenty right now).

I see a lot of very angry people who are totally incapable of explaining why they're spewing venom and breaking windows. At some point, it stopped being about any real point of view and started being about whose team can scream the loudest.

Anyway, good movie. Definitely more relevant to politics than to a normal status update or random thought, so I posted it here.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

That's what I thought. Thanks.

I'm in one of those conversations where people are insisting that the old movies are superior, because Superman would never kill. smile


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Does anyone own Superman II? Not the Donner cut, but the original?

If so, could you tell me how things are left with Zod and his team? In the versions I'm seeing on YouTube, they die. In a later televised version, released years later, they're seen getting arrested. In the Donner version, I think Superman reverses time, so they're back in the Phantom Zone.

But I don't know which one is the "normal" version on the modern releases.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)



(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Isn't he signed to play Indy again?


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I guess we don't really have to be for either Gyllenhaal or Gosling. There are tons of actors out there who could have carried the role in another universe. I just mean to say that I like Gosling better. He has a better screen presence and just don't irritate me as much as Gyllenhaal has come to (I did like Donnie Darko and October Sky).

In the end, I just wish that Harrison Ford wasn't so closed off to the idea of returning to one of the roles that made him famous.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The movie does look pretty cool. I'm curious to see where the plot goes.

As for casting... I'm not a huge fan of either Gyllenhaal. I think they're both approaching Matt Damon/Leo DiCaprio levels of over-rated. So I prefer Ryan Gosling by far. smile


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The more I think about it, the more the whole Ares sequence feels like the product of a rewrite. In the beginning of the movie, young Diana sees the god killer sword and is told that only the most capable warrior could wield it (or whatever the phrasing was), and that was not Diana.

Except, none of that is true. The sword is meaningless. The tower that holds the sword was just a waste of construction materials. And Diana is pretty much the only one who could wield the god killer, unless #patriarchy.

Every arc in the movie leads to the point where Diana kills the General and realizes that he was just a man, and then the movie goes totally sideways, with split themes that cancel each other out (is it man? is it Ares? It's both! So, neither!)

Did someone not think that the General was a big enough villain for Wonder Woman, after we had Zod and Doomsday?


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Most comic book fans agree with you, if that makes you feel better. I don't know what it is. Part of me thinks that a lot of people have just gotten used to seeing Superman done poorly, so they have a hard time accepting a version that actually has some thought behind it. Another part of me gets that while I like layers and grounding and all of that, most people just want to have fun and don't think about it as much as I do... which sounds like I'm calling them stupid, but I'm not. It's just that different people process stories in different ways.

I don't know about Steve. Bringing him into the present would be too convenient, and I'd hate that. So now they're stuck with him being dead. He could become the Spectre, but that doesn't really make sense. I just don't get why they killed off Diana's main co-star and love interest when the story didn't really require it. If he were Lois Lane, he'd still be alive.

I agree. Everyone assumed that Marvel's attempt to tie all of its movies and shows together would create a really strong world, but it's become a weakness. I don't buy that Agents of SHIELD exists in the same world as Daredevil, or Guardians of the Galaxy exists in the same world as Iron Fist.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Deep breath...

I saw Wonder Woman...

I didn't love it. <pounds head on desk repeatedly>

Spoilers below...

A couple of things to say before I go into my thoughts on the movie.
First, I've never been a huge fan of Wonder Woman. I've always found her to be a lot of iconic imagery without much character. Her story makes her unrelatable in the comics, and I've never understood why she is the big female icon, rather than one of the better female characters.
Second, I didn't love the movie, but I didn't hate it either. This isn't a negative review. I think Gal Gadot was great in the role.

I'm still trying to figure out where this movie is going to settle in my brain. I guess we'll find out in time.

What are some of the issues that I have with the movie?

Well, as I've said before, the interesting thing about Batman and Superman is that they've been done so many times before that the current franchise runners really can't fall back on the basic paint-by-numbers origin stories. They had to find a new style from which to film them, and a new hook by which to tell their stories. This means that the writers and director had to push that much harder to create a world for those characters.

Since Wonder Woman is such an unrelatable character by default, I really wanted something like Man of Steel, to make that character come alive for me and make me believe in the world that she lives in. While the opening scenes on Themyscira were beautiful and drew me into Diana's world, something shifted once they went back to the "modern" world. Suddenly, every character that surrounded Diana was comic relief, constantly bantering and joking in ways that made them feel like characters, rather than people. I couldn't imagine many of those characters existing off screen. They existed to serve Diana's character.
In Man of Steel, you get a sense of Martha's life without Clark around. You see Lois' life without him. Every character on screen has their own world and their own personality that makes the world full and complete. I just didn't feel that, even with Steve.

In many ways, Wonder Woman has a lot of the same problems that I find in Marvel movies. But I'd still say that this movie was better than the Marvel movies, because while I didn't like it *as much as* Man of Steel or Batman v Superman, I do think that there is more substance and more interesting ideas here. And visually, it just looks better.

Though I don't get why people are saying that it's so much more colorful than Man of Steel. Did I have my sunglasses on during the movie or something?

There was a moment that I thought the movie was taking a really interesting turn. As Diana tracks down General Ludendorff and kills him, she realizes that nothing changes. And Steve tells her that maybe it's not Ares, maybe it's just people. Bad people do bad things, and good (though still not perfect) people fight them, and that's the point of this. We keep fighting, because it's the right thing to do.

Right there, I thought that this was something unexpected and interesting, and a truly hero-creating moment. Diana can't rid the world of all evil and war by killing one bad guy, it has to be a life-long mission (especially since... spoiler alert... there's another World War).

Then the real Ares shows up, that moment from a few seconds ago passes, and we get a big battle that is exciting, but less meaningful than what almost happened.

It's almost like there was a whole other direction for the movie, and it was changed later in the process. In this alternate version, Steve's message to Diana sticks and she realizes that there is no simple way to kill one bad guy and be rid of evil. They off the general, and fight some soldiers as they work to blow up the poison gas, and the day is saved. Yay!
There was also this running question of what a normal life looks like in this world, in between wars. Neither Diana nor Steve know the answer. So in my alternate version, we leave with them together, off to discover what that normal life looks like and whether or not people are actually happy to be married.

There's no reason to not do this. Diana isn't frozen and thawed out decades later. She will live those decades, so why not with Steve? Why did he die in this movie, except because they want to set any sequels at a later point? Diana could have lived with him for at least a couple of years, and at most a few decades, and it wouldn't have done any harm to the character. In fact, I think it would have helped. Wonder Woman is always so unrelatable, but if she had that time with Steve and outlived him, we instantly have something that we can relate to!

This part frustrates me.

Instead, we get a big Ares battle, a dead Steve, and... I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out what I'm going to take away from it in the end. Maybe I need time to get past the "what I wanted to happen" part of my reaction.

Right now, my movie rankings are...

Man of Steel
Batman v Superman
Suicide Squad
Wonder Woman

But just to be clear, Wonder Woman still beats out the Marvel movies. I don't think it was bad. I don't think it was full of plot holes that render the whole movie useless. I don't think it was poorly acted or directed (though I strongly disagree with those who say that Jenkins did a better job than Snyder). It was a good movie. I just have to see where it settles once the dust clears.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Hey, there are a few things I'd change about the movie (bigger than the "Is she with you" line). I acknowledge that. I would change the Save Martha scene a little, because I like the concept but the execution was a little off. And I'd change Superman's attempt to talk to Batman as he arrives at the battle, because the "We need to talk" and "You don't understand" thing is a peeve of mine from movies in general.

The movie is very, very good, but it isn't perfect


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Maybe Bruce assumed that all superpowered people knew each other smile

Got my tickets for Wonder Woman. Going tomorrow! I hope this doesn't suck!


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Batman v Superman rewatch thoughts:

Still great. And probably the most truthful exploration of the news media/public relationship that I've seen depicted in film. I'm not even joking. Superman saves 100 people, but the story is about the 10 that he couldn't. They want him to be a villain, so they report that while there is no evidence, there are still questions about his involvement in the bombing. The facts don't matter as much as the story. And the people either hate him because of the monster in the press, or they worship him in spite of it, an neither side is remotely realistic in their view of the man.

Great themes in the story. Great character arcs. It's just a great movie (talking about the Ultimate Edition here). I wouldn't put it on the same level as MoS, because there are some things that I would change with BvS (particularly in the Batman/Superman fight), but it's a very well crafted story and a well made film.

And the Wonder Woman arrival was just cool.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

One of my favourite games is to keep track of the kinds of people Informant considers to be above reproach. You either have to be the laughingstock of American politics (Sarah Palin), a noted fraudster (James O'Keefe) and apparently, supporting moronic conspiracy theories of zero-evidence but plenty of hatred for black people is also an excellent way to win his approval.

I think that there is a phantom me living inside your head. Because most of what you say about me isn't based on anything I've ever said. In fact, it often runs directly counter to what I've said.

Phantom Me stands behind you, whispering evil little things into your ear as you read my comments, giving you the impression that I'm saying them, even if it's not true. But hot-damn is Phantom Me starting to annoy the real me. Now he's a racist?! I fucking hate this guy!!! Can we ban him from the board or something?

And if you can also be an incompetent US President who blurts out classified information and thinks the best way to avoid obstruction of justice charges is to fire an FBI director in order to obstruct an ongoing investigation, Informant will claim all your problems are someone else's doing!

There are man reasons why Comey was fired, and many of them should have had him fired months ago. Some of them should now have him investigated for crimes. I'm not going to shed a tear for weasel. I know you love ignoring the misdeeds of anyone that sympathizes with your cause, but I'm not as easy to win over. Also, you love racists. 

Leaks to the press are currently one of the few means of holding Trump accountable for his actions given his current hold of the White House, the Senate, Congress, the Department of Justice and his personal wealth. The press is one of the few avenues in which he does not have a high level of control. Furthermore, none of these leaks are in any way illegal because the information is not remotely classified. Is it a firing offense? Certainly. A criminal one? If it were, anyone angsting in a bar about a lousy day at work would be sitting behind bars.

I've already said that not all of the leaks are criminal offenses. However, some of the leaks that have come out of this culture of leaky sources have been illegal.

If you think that Trump is currently commanding that much power, you are watching the wrong news. Seriously, even Grizzlor has referred to him as a lame duck president at this point, because the man can't get a second scoop of ice cream without it becoming a national scandal. Sorry, but you're projecting a Lex Luthor image onto him, and it doesn't really gel with reality (not Winner... just actual reality).

The press isn't holding Trump accountable for his actions. Oftentimes, they are making up the story and creating facts to back it up. There is a difference between reporting truth, and creating stories that will give the public the image of the truth that you want them to believe. How many people do you think even know what Russia did when they "interfered" in the election? Do you know?
And how man people believe that Trump was absolutely involved, despite having absolutely zero evidence? This is because of selective leaks of suggestive "facts", and the withholding of any information that wouldn't support the story.

Trump may not have control of the press, but they have lost their control as well. They're every bit as juvenile and insane with their reporting as Trump is with his Twitter account.

Furthermore, Trump has confessed in one of his random outbursts that he fired the former FBI director to impede the investigation into suspected collusion with Russia. It is illegal to engage in obstruction of justice and to interfere with a criminal investigation regardless of being innocent of the suspected crime. The tradition of the White House and the FBI staying on separate paths is to prevent the executive branch from influencing the Department of Justice for the benefit of the executive branch because it can lead to criminal actions like curtailing proceedings that threatened the commander in chief's legal standing.

Except that Trump wasn't under investigation... something which the leakers just happened to leave out of the newspapers. Comey (by virtue of being one of those leakers, which he has admitted) has misled the American people into believing something that he knew was not true. This is on top of his lying under oath about Trump being the only president that he ever felt a need to take notes about after meeting with him (references to such notes being written after meeting Bush are in the book "Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency", released in 2009)

We did learn some interesting details about Comey's work under the previous administration, in regards to the Hillary Clinton investigation, but how much of that can be trusted? The man is a liar, with zero credibility. He absolutely deserved to be fired. And while I'm not sure that Trump can be found guilty of trying to put an end to an investigation into himself, which was neither taking place at the time, nor seems to be going away anytime soon, I'm sure that if he is guilty of trying to interfere with an investigation, he will pay the price for it. Just like all of the other presidents who have done such things... right?

Also, you love Sarah Palin. I don't know why, but you seem to really love her. A lot. It's not healthy.

As for the complaint that people wanted to impeach Trump before he'd even been sworn into office -- part of it was indeed sour grapes and it'd be silly to think there wasn't a desire to impeach in advance of finding cause. But Trump's behaviour in his business dealings have largely been through fraud: encouraging investors to fund real estate deals designed to collapse with Trump taking their money and running, a fraudulent university, engaging the services of construction and law firms and refusing to pay.

Trump earned his fortune on cheating people and students of his past had a reasonable expectation that Trump take improper advantage of his presidency for personal gain on criminal terms

Yup. He's not a man that I like. Still, I don't put the cart before the horse. Obama gave many people many reasons for wanting to get him out of office, but we still had to be realistic about it. I like to make jokes about the fact that he didn't even know how many states there were when he was running for office (he said it was he'd been to fifty-seven, with one more to go... Hawaii and Alaska. Seriously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws ) but I would have thought it was stupid to make an actual scandal out of it, the way "legit" news sources tried doing with Trump's Twitter spell check error.

Shooting Republicans is wrong. Trying to run them off the road is wrong. I'm also uncomfortable with punching Nazis unless it's a time of war. However, it is intriguing that the people who cite acts of Liberal on Republican violence have next to no comment on the burst of hate crimes in the wake of a Trump presidency. The truth is likely a middle ground where anger and partisan rage against either side has led to people revealing their most hateful, volatile and aggressive instincts whether it's on one side or the other.

The problem is that we have celebrities, journalists and even politicians urging violence. Who, on the right, has called for violence? And in regards to hate crimes, there is a lot to look at there. First of all, I know of several cases of hate crimes being reported and heavily covered in the media, only to turn out to be false in the end. So, just like with "cops kill black people!" outrage, I would have to look at each case individually.

What can I say about hate crimes under Trump? If there are more, I don't get it. Trump isn't saying anything racist or homophobic, and none of his policies have reflected any sort of hate. I don't get the connection between Trump and hate crimes.

But regardless of where we stand politically, the US election was subject to a blatant attack on a democratic electoral system by a foreign power that did so to the benefit of a particular individual, possibly in tandem and possibly not, but the truth must be found because this isn't the end. The Russian administration will only increase and further advance their methods of interfering in the process of US government and the consequences will be severe for everyone whether we live in the States or don't. Like it or not, America has led civilization into freedom and progress for over 240 years and it must be defended and protected not just geographically, but ideologically, politically and therefore technologically. I'm not an American, but if you go down, we all go down.

I agree. Russia needs to be stopped. Perhaps this problem wouldn't exist if Obama had taken the Russia threat seriously, instead of making a "The 80's called..." joke when Romney brought it up, but here we are. It's a problem. It needs to be dealt with. But instead of dealing with the Russians, the focus is on our own President, who was legally elected, since there is zero evidence of actual voter fraud. The Russians released incriminating information about the democrats (who were themselves trying to manipulate the election). What Russia did was wrong and should be dealt with. But... the democrats were also really wrong there and still deserved to lose. As of right now, there's more to incriminate Hillary of trying to sway the election than there is Trump, but nobody is mentioning that.

A supposedly innocent President should welcome a full and invasive investigation in order to clear himself and his office, as opposed to firing the former lead investigator and hoping to fire the next one. It's not only the behaviour of a guilty man, it's arguably illegal if evidence can establish the intent to block the investigation. Mueller is a registered Republican who was appointed by George W. Bush as the sixth FBI director. He won universal acclaim from both parties upon his appointment and he should be encouraged to conduct his investigation and find the truth. A person who objects to his investigating Russian interference, potential collusion with Americans and the president obstructing justice is a person afraid of the truth.

As I've said before, there are many reasons why Comey deserved to be fired. Trump firing him in order to end an investigation into himself, which wasn't taking place when Comey was in office... doesn't make sense.

I'm concerned with finding the truth. I want to know if Trump did something wrong. However, I don't want a witch hunt. I don't want to waste time and money, just so the press can keep spinning out Trump-bashing stories about something that they have no evidence of. When did it become wrong to want actual information before drawing conclusions?

The fact that Informant is against a full investigation of the Russian assault on the American electoral process and the potential involvement of the President makes me wonder if Informant loves America as much as he likes to say he does.

I'm not opposed to an investigation into the Russian assault on the American electoral process. And if that investigation turns up evidence that Trump was involved, boot his ass out of office, by all means. But right now, everyone is playing that Dr. Google game, where they read a bunch of random symptoms that sound vaguely similar the the itch they have on their ass, and decide that they have incurable cancer before they so much as schedule an appointment with an actual doctor. It's hysteria, and I'm not going to feel bad for not jumping into that.

If these Trump-hating investigators had some damning information that linked Trump to the Russians, we would know about it by now. They're not great at keeping secrets. Or, they would do their job and go through official channels, in which case they wouldn't need to schedule a clandestine meeting with a NYT reporter every time Trump takes an incredibly suspicious piss.

I love my country. It's the greatest country on the planet. And from where I'm standing, the people who are crapping all over this great nation are the people who are willing to destroy the system that has made us great, just because they don't want to end their truly epic post-election tantrum.

An I don't know what your obsession with Dick Cheney is, but your fanboy drooling over his time as VP is both disturbing and, frankly, inappropriate.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Rewatched Man of Steel today. Now, I haven't seen Wonder Woman yet, but MoS remains the best superhero movie ever. It really is one of my favorite movies overall. Beautifully show. Great character work.

Awesome movie.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Sorry for my late response. For some reason, I thought that summer would be the best time to build a retaining wall, so I've spent the past week outside all day and wanting to do as little as possible once I got inside. For the record, it's hot in Texas. Go figure.


No, not all of the leaks have been illegal. Some of them have been (even before Trump was President), and those people need to be thrown in prison. While other leaks may not be illegal, they should not be without consequences. People should be fired. And I'm not just talking about the lowly clerks who leak things to the press because they want to feel important, I'm talking about the high ranking officials who don't have the evidence that they wish they had to prosecute someone officially, so they decide to destroy them in the press instead. This is happening a lot with Trump.

As I've said before, I don't like Trump. If it comes time for him to get gone, so be it. However, I don't like being misled or blatantly lied to. I like facts, and people working for our government are supposed to be serving the people, not their own opinions and interests. When government are actively working to legitimize the President for no reason other than the fact that they think he's a creep, we have a problem. And it's not the President.

You say that Trump is a lame duck at this point. That may be true, but it's not something to celebrate, no matter how you feel about Trump. He can't get anything done because people don't like him as a person and they're throwing the most epic tantrum imaginable. This will cost us a lot of money. It will do harm to the American people. It could cost lives. This isn't the prom that we're talking about, it's the free world, at a time when there are a lot of bad people who want to kill as many of us as possible. And I'm not blaming the democrats for this. The republicans are equally to blame, if not more. Conservatives should be having a field day right now, but our own damn people are getting in the way of doing anything. The establishment republicans might as well be democrats at this point. They need to go.

A President shouldn't be able to do whatever they want without any question or debate. We've seen that happen in the past, and it usually doesn't result in a good outcome. Issues should be discussed and debated before they're voted on, and I'm not saying that Trump should be given a blank check. But the way this is happening is wrong. We have politicians working with the press to actively mislead (and by this I mean that they're blatantly lying to) the American people, not just about the issues, but about the President himself. At this point, the New York Times could publish a picture of Trump shooting an elderly woman and I probably wouldn't believe them, because they've lied too many times.

How is any of this productive? How is any of this good for us? Barack Obama was a self-absorbed idiot who did a lot of damage to this country, but we didn't see this level of effort going into destroying the office of the President in order to take down the man who was occupying it. The branches of the government are supposed to regulate each other, but they're not supposed to each work toward building their own shadow government.

And sorry, but this is nothing like Obama's birth certificate. Obama actively worked to keep his birth certificate from being released, despite many requests by people who had a right to confirm the eligibility of a man who has a pretty unique background when it comes to citizenship. John McCain had to show his birth certificate, and his citizenship was questioned as well, despite the fact that there really was no question about it. Obama could have put that issue to rest within a day, but it made for great press, painting his opponents as racist conspiracy theorists. That whole scandal was of Obama's making.

The system is a mess right now, and a lot of people want to put the blame for that on Trump. Sorry to say, but he (and his stupid twitter account) is probably the least of the problems that we're facing right now. People are trying to pin a lot of Hitler-y stuff on him, just to make the "rebellion" look less batsh*t crazy, but none of it holds water. And while they throw their tantrum, their followers are still assaulting people, burning things, tipping cars, and shooting up baseball fields. And I'm going to include that because you know that if that wacko had worked on Trump's campaign, he'd be forced to own that shooting.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

These leaks and anonymous sources need to end. People need prison. Because it not only proves that they're more interested in destroying Trump (if not legally, then in public opinion) than seeing justice served, but that they are willing to ignore laws, violate the Constitution, and endanger the country in order to see Trump destroyed.

This is not legitimate investigation.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I forgot to reply about the Dark Universe.

DC/Warner has also been working on a Dark Universe project for a long time and I think there is a lawsuit over the name. If Universal's project isn't making them a lot of money, it may not make sense to fight for it.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-f … ls-1001345

I learned about this a while ago, but got distracted by life stuff.

Can't wait to see what they do with this! I'm going to need a pineapple (pizza? Or maybe upside down cake), cinnamon pie, and Quatro Queso Dos Fritos!


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I always did kinda want them to revisit Bennish on Earth Prime and keep his story going. But at the same time, tethering us to Earth Prime in such a way could make us feel less loss when it comes to the Sliders feeling lost.


(11 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm really curious to see how Sabrina would work in this world. She can't be overtly magical, but she could have intuition and be a mystic type.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I just think that today's viewers expect the story to go somewhere. Supernatural's best episodes are their stand alone episodes, I think, but we still want to see them going somewhere. I think the show's weakness has been that the characters haven't been allowed to grow and mature as much. They tried it with Dean in season 6, but the fangirls on the internet  went nuts and demanded that they go back to the way things were before. Ultimately, it weakens a show.

I don't think that Sliders should be too arc-centric. However, like Lost, I think that they should make an effort to ground the series and make us feel like each universe is realistic, even if it isn't. The writers have to believe in it, in order to make us believe in it. And even if the characters move from world to world, we are watching the same people. Those experiences have to leave a mark and the characters have to progress. I don't think that jumping in at episode 37 should be as simple as jumping in at episode 1.


(11 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)


The teacher was hinted at as being a predator, but in a sort of indirect way. I would have preferred that lesson to be more firmly learned.

As for the finale, I thought it was good, but there were a few beats that felt a bit awkward.

Why would Jughead take the jacket? It didn't feel like something he'd do unless he wanted to go undercover for some reason.

Why wasn't Cheryl hospitalized? If someone I knew tried to drown herself like that, I would call 911 or take her to the hospital, not warm her up and send her on her way. Did these kids not see Thirteen Reasons Why?!

It seemed like the shot of Fred on the ground at the end was added to avoid a "Was Archie shot?" cliffhanger, but I'm not sure why. That cliffhanger was clearly set up and they should have ended with the exterior shot of the diner.

Overall, it's a fun show. I'm already wondering how long it will take for Sabrina the teenage witch to show up.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I guess. To me, it just looks like the DCEU is performing consistently. WW will probably end up making about as much as MoS. That's pretty good. It's weird that the DCEU appears to be doing really well, but there is a constant need to portray BvS and SS as failures, even though they weren't. Critics didn't like them, but that doesn't appear to have stopped the movies from being successful. They're also doing really well in home video sales.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Someone help me out. I was just looking at boxofficemojo.com and comparing numbers to see how Wonder Woman is doing. To me, it looks like the weakest of the DCEU openings, but the headlines are calling it a box office smash and the savior of the DCEU. Am I missing something, or is this more about critics than numbers? I'd say that it could have been about when it opened, but Man of Steel opened around the same time and seems to have made a bit more.

I'm not trying to say that WW isn't a success. It is. And I haven't seen it, so I have no opinion on the movie itself. I'm just trying to understand the headlines. I honestly don't know if I'm missing something, so I'm not being sarcastic about it.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

For rational people, maybe. But there is a big problem with people who are completely unwilling to address the problem of terrorism and the community that is stems from. Obama wouldn't even reference Islamic terrorism because he was afraid of offending the nice Muslims. We have first-world politicians who are more likely to be outraged by a Trump tweet than to be outraged by the fact that entire communities in Europe are turning into third-world style no-go zones, run by largely-Muslim gangs that rape, kidnap and assault people who enter their territory.

Not talking about people on this board, but I have been called "literally" a Nazi sympathizer, because I voted for the "racist", "fascist" and "dangerous" Donald Trump and his "Muslim ban", by people whose response to these endless terrorist attacks is to post a hashtag and insist that we must support the Muslim community, or else the terrorists have won. My mind is officially boggled. People will physically attack people over relatively small political differences, and then turn around and demand sympathy and tolerance for communities that believe in honor killings.

I am not saying that every Muslim is evil. I am saying that there is a clear and dangerous problem in the Muslim community, and it reaches beyond those who plow down crowds of people at a time or shoot up night clubs. A lot of these communities are made up of people from nations that do not live by the standards of the modern world, and pretending that they are the same as the rest of us, just because we don't want to sound racist, is insane. You can't just grab people from one land and throw them into the middle of a foreign and fundamentally different community, and expect it all to go swimmingly.

There is a huge issue here that people are not discussing, because it requires being blunt and potentially offensive. In other words, it's a grown-up conversation about real world issues. Until that issue is addressed and dealt with, there is not going to be an end to these attacks. London, France, Australia... and these are just the ones that are still in the current news cycle.

People have a right to free speech (in the US. In London, saying that you want to end terrorism will have you investigated for hate crimes) and the right to practice their religion. I'm not saying that they don't, and I'm not saying "every middle eastern person..." I am saying that there are *cultures* that are simply not compatible with our culture, and we can't pretend that they are. The comes a point where trying to be inclusive just gets people raped and/or killed.

It's amazing how much of this post is made up of me trying to explain a rather obvious opinion in a way that doesn't set off "racist" alarms in peoples heads. It should  have been a three sentence post! smile


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Wow. You're fancy folk! The only person I've ever known in that area was an au pair from South Africa.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I do find House of Cards interesting, despite the fact that I dislike almost everyone. Also, I couldn't stop laughing at their version of Highland Park when they showed Claire's childhood home. It was as bad as Supernatural's version of Richardson. They must have just looked at the carefully framed Google search images.

With Breaking Bad, it's like we were supposed to feel for Walt and then witness his downward spiral, but like you said, he started out pretty unlikable.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, I thought I'd love The Leftovers too, but I just have a really hard time connecting to the characters and everything that happens to them.

I'm the same way with Breaking Bad. Everyone says that it's the best show ever, but I can't watch it. I want everyone on that show to die.


(536 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

So I didn't get around to watching the DC movies this weekend as planned, dangnabbit. I found a 55" Samsung 4K TV at Walmart for super cheap ($250) and setting that up took more time than I expected.

The movie is going to look amazing on this TV when I get around to watching it, even at 1080p (there's upscaling that seems to work pretty well), but I need to find the time. I did watch the Justice League trailer in 4K a few times. Damn that looks good.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Sliders could have gone down a more Lost path, perhaps. The concept of the show was crazy, but it was taken seriously, so the strange, twisted, crazy elements seemed somehow believable. If Sliders were done with a bit of restraint and style, that "slightly askew" approach to alternate histories could be really interesting. If they could achieve the feeling that we're on the wrong world through camera angles, set dressing, lighting, etc, it could make the audience really feel that disconnect that the Sliders were feeling.

The Leftovers... I got halfway through season 2 and then forgot to finish it. It just didn't pull me in.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

You're projecting onto most religions. Clearly, one of these things is not like the others.


(730 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Crazy week in news.

Black Lives Matter awarded a peace prize...

The mainstream media turns a Twitter typo into an espionage conspiracy.

Kathy Griffin starts a sh*tfire and then holds the most hilarious press conference ever in order to manage the backlash (exclusive footage available here: https://youtu.be/aUFdnPLHX-g )

And another terrorist attack. I've run out of ways of expressing sympathy and outrage. I'm sure that the hashtags and apathy will put an end to terrorism eventually though. If they don't work, maybe I'll change my Facebook profile pic. That'll show them.

I don't mean to make light of these attacks, but I find it absolutely baffling to see people carefully stepping around the extremist elephant in the room as they discuss how we should be addressing terrorism going forward. Some have the nerve to say that we should get used to it, or we should have sympathy for the hardships that the terrorists have faced. Screw that. All of my sympathy is tied up elsewhere.

The world has cancer and far too many people are putting their faith in happy thoughts and well wishes to eradicate that cancer.


(116 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I watched season 1, but haven't been able to see anything past that yet. Hopefully at some point.

Has anyone here ever shopped through iOffer? I was just looking at the site because I was running random searches on old TV shows that were canceled after one season, and they have sellers with a lot of those complete seasons. It'd be cool to buy a few (VR.5, Strange Luck, Freakylinks, etc.) but I've never even heard of the site before today, so I probably wouldn't actually shop there (for my bootlegged copies of long forgotten tv shows)


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Agreed. I generally try not to compare the DC movies to Marvel movies, because they are so different that it's silly to compare. And you also have several decades of DC movies and shows with these characters, so that is a whole other layer to consider.

What I'm loving about the DC franchise so far is the lack of a formula. Each movie feels like it's own film, whereas the Marvel movies have taken the approach of fitting everything into one big picture. That has hurt Marvel more than helped, in my opinion. But again, they are doing what they do.

I am going to try to rewatch the DC movies this weekend. BvS especially. Then we can discuss with it fresh in our minds.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Maybe... but can you really say that the Marvel movies started getting better after The Avengers? Iron Man 3 was just bad. Thor 2 is a movie that I know I've seen, but usually can't remember. I guess you could say that Winter Soldier was okay, but Civil War was an incoherent mess. Really, if you took Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy and possibly Ant-Man out of the picture, the whole franchise would be a disaster. That's two and a half movies out of fourteen or fifteen, right?

I do expect people to like some of the DC movies more going forward. They'll probably not like Justice League (and if they do, they'll praise Joss for fixing the movie), but Aquaman, Batman, The Flash, Cyborg... there are so many flavors to choose from here, so I expect people to find something that the like in the bunch. I just hope that Warner Bros doesn't feel a need to dumb down the DC movies in order to please Marvel fans.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)


I'm having a hard time with a lot of the reviews, because they talk about lack of coherent plots or characters in the other movies, which immediately makes the review useless.

Just tell me, does it have more to offer than the crap that Marvel's been putting out lately? Doctor Strange and Civil War were horrible.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm looking forward to it. I find it funny to see people and ads going on about how it's certified fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. Didn't we already decide not to pay attention to that site? I mean, the last Ghostbusters movie was certified fresh too! smile

No, I think that using Trumpisms when referencing Nazi-like organizations or evil alien invaders is sloppy writing. And I am baffled that 8 years of prime Obama material went completely unnoticed by these writers, but I don't actually expect them to hold their King to the same standards as an American President.

But I have fun, and these lines would be fine with me if they existed as weak spots in otherwise solid shows. But they don't.

See, I'm not really offended as much as I just think it's bad writing. To take subtle jabs at Trump that are hollow, trying to make him seem like some part of an extreme movement to take away rights and all of that... it just tells me that these writers get their news from Comedy Central and have no idea what they're actually talking about. There's no meaning behind it. There is no clever message. It's hollow, which is the problem that I've had with these shows since the start. They have no soul and no purpose.

Ugh. I was going to give AoS a chance this summer, but now I remember why I dropped the show. It's like watching a mouse on a wheel. Cute for a while, but it ultimately goes nowhere and gets boring. Then it craps all over the place and eats its young, because mice are disgusting.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, the sounds of people eating makes me want to shoot myself (I think this is an actual condition with a name, but I forget it), so I don't need more of that in a movie theater. smile

The reviews for WW have been great so far... but all of those reviews also go on about how the other DC movies sucked, so I can't really put much faith in those reviews. Wonder Woman doesn't have the baggage that Batman and Superman have with audiences, and she is an overall happier character, so maybe the movie just has a better chance of pleasing everyone.

Question: Should Power Girl appear on The Flash or Arrow?

The alien thing has already been addressed, right? Would it be cool to see an Earth-1 or 2 version of Kara show up, rather than havin Supergirl cross over whenever they want to use Melissa on the show?


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

The funny part is that a lot of men have purchased tickets to these women-only screenings, and it may be against the law in some states to keep them out based on gender. So this is more publicity than a realistic women-only screening.

Of course, the screenings are raising money for soulless, corrupt organizations, so the other side still gets to laugh too.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

Breaking news: Alamo Drafthouse realizes their mistake in having a single screening of WONDER WOMAN for women and only women. They have come to appreciate that they made a terrible strategic error and have amended it. They're having MORE women only screenings!!! :-D

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/201 … ening.html

I wish them the best of luck with this strategy. It would have been funny if they'd scheduled some men-only screenings as a response, but this seem like doubling down on a political battle that nobody really asked them to fight.

All of their crap is overpriced, so I've never gone to their theaters anyway.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I want a free advanced screening!!! No fair!!!

I really don't go to the theater much either. I used to go to some of the Marvel stuff, usually when one of my brothers was in town. But they're just not worth the time or money anymore. The DC movies have me excited enough to see them in the theaters though, and then I watch the longer versions five more times when they come out on blu-ray.


(616 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

And can I just say how cool it is that we're both being incredibly sarcastic with each other here and it's fine, while that same sarcasm would result in a total meltdown pretty much anywhere else on the internet? smile