Resident Evil Apocalypse is better than women

I've been busy all last two weeks, but yesterday I had one of the best days of my life so far; it was easily the best in recent memory. There were many reasons for this, including going undefeated in a tournament of some kind, but another little boost of morale was seeing Resident Evil:Apocalypse. The day before we got thrown out of it, but this time we managed to sneak in and screw the system, and man did it rock everything! However, I was unfortunately seeing it on a terrible blind date, and I must say I enjoyed the movie much more than this whiney, stupid cretin that I had to see it with; I personally felt more sexually attracted to Nemesis(character in the movie) than her by the end of it, but if you saw him in action you wouldn't blame me!Anyway, the topic of debate is: Which is better, RE:A or a bad blind date? In an objective analysis I have to go with the former, but I wanted to see what an intellectual and experienced crowd would have to say about this. I'll start with some evidence to back up my statement:REA can: Show an awesome motorcycle scene involving a superhuman with gunsBlind date can:Ruin the awesome moment by saying that the actress is a stupid ugly slut, ignoring the fact who plays a character like this cannot change the awesomeness level.REA can't:Seem to give Jill's character any reasonable dialoge in the first 40 minutes or so.Blind date can't:Shut the hell up.REA can:Show some serious action scenes that are so intense I hardly noticed the fact that the camera shook too much.Blind date can:Scream at every scene with monsters, and say 'oh my God, this is so scary' when I'm busy watching well-intended renegade mercenaries just trying to crack some skull. Poor mercenaries...REA can:Make me laugh and think 'holy f**k that was awesome' on numerous occasions, and managed to make the most believeable female badass(those last three words rarely go together) since Kill Bill's protagonist.Blind date can:Ask me to get her a refill for her coke during a riot at the very end of the movie involving a gattling gun, helicopters, a rocket launcher, and a superhuman.I came to the conclusion that RE was better. Anyone agree or disagree?This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-12-2004 12:11 PM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Okay, first of all we DID pay for tickets. Or more like I did. Ipaid for us to see Bourne Supremacy so we can get through the door and so I wouldn't feel like I was cheating the theatre. Afterwards I got her a large coke and a bag of M'Ms and a large popcorn which she ate well over half of, and by then I didn't have enough money left to pay for that slurpee that I wanted. Then we we saw the movie and the rest is in the OP.Also, when I got kicked out the day before I was with some friends. Didn't work on opening night because they were carding at the entrance and then right before the movie started in the individual theatre. This time I went on a blind date who wanted to see it. I asked her what she wanted to see and that was what she said. Please don't make me look like a jerk.Oh, and I'll admit to acting like an idiot by not expecting Schrafinator to respond to the message...(EDITED IN)By the way, Ebert is a stuck up old guy who has no taste for action. Who cares if it's not encompased by logic? It's a MOVIE that's meant to be all about mindless adrenaline; why expect more out of it?One last thing: Please try to stay on topic instead of making like a creo and picking on Mr. Preach:Which is better, a bad blind date or RE: A?This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-13-2004 01:45 AM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

So I guess you agree with me that the movie beats a bad blind date?
If so, high five!

Yeah yeah, I read that review. Just means he and I strongly disagree because RE2 was one badass movie. The first one did suck by any standard, but this is the kind of improvement that sequels are meant to make. Say what you will; maybe people over 25 or so are just too old to appriciate the new style of action:Moon phyisics, slow motion, lots of explosions, and trick shots. Oh, and let's not forget super-distorted guitar riffs that pick up speed along with the action.Ebert is good at writing witty reviews, I'll give him that. But I think he must've gotten senile or something to give this one such a bad rating when it was so awesome. Like I said, maybe the new styles of action are too intense and frightening to the older folks.This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-13-2004 05:35 PM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

I see some of your points; I thought Scary Movie 3 was a knee-slapper last year, but I wouldn't go calling it anything but trash all the same. I dunno about that. Rambo 1st blood part 2(was there even a part one? I've only seen 2) had some unrealistic stuff, but slow motions and moon physics weren't a part of it from what I remember. I'll admit I don't remember much seeing it was about 7 years ago when I saw it.

And that's somehow bad? I'll have to see it but right now I have my doubts. "The Exorcist" was alledgedly worthy of the 'scariest ever' title, but I was sorely dissapointed when that film scored but a single start from me the whole time.And RE:A was doubtfully intended to be scary. Some scenes were obviously meant to startle you, but that was only to get the blood flowing to make the ass kicking even sweeter. Don't think it's nearly as much as what you don't know about me . Keep in mind I exxagerate and often jest; of course I look like a stupid kid if you take every word seriously. I know you guys are intelligent enough to tell when I'm joking or when I'm not. Just boys, huh? Can we please go just one debate without you going all Femme-Nazi on me??(EDITED IN)And I'm going to shut that can of worms out right now before we go off topic. Please answer the question:Which is better, RE:A or a bad blind date?This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-14-2004 06:59 PM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Before we go off topic about cinema any further, please allow me to bring us back to the original question:Which is better, RE:A or a bad blind date?

I don't really like Angelina Jolie as an actress personally, and I don't think her roles are believeably cool enough to deserve an eyepatch.And yes, zombies are stupid. But that's just all the less guilt you feel, and all the more fun you have. You're not going to tell me that it's not kind of cool or at least funny to see a zombie get snuffed by a rocket launcher?

It does, but I specified that it was a bad blind date.

That's an opinion. Hey now, I didn't say I wasn't moved when Father Marron died. It was an excellent movie and I did get somewhat attached to characters, as I like to do if that's the kind of movie I'm expecting to see. I just said it didn't scare me. Absolutely; I couldn't agree more. In fact, I think a movie that calls itself a horror and can only make you 'jump' is a joke. If there's no psychological element, then there's no real art, just raw power. And anyone can use that. Resident Evil probably used the three or so 'jump' scenes just to pump up the blood to make the ass kicking better, though. I don't think it was intended to be a horror if that's what you mean. Actually, now that I think about it, yes. The special effects, with the exception of Nemesis himself, were quite good. Other than Jill during the first bit, the dialouge was well-acted and sounded like what a real group of people might be saying during a zombie incident(I'm NOT saying a zombie incident would really happen, by the way). It had excellent comic relief, well-coregraphed fight scenes, and realistic motives even for the creation of the T virus:To restore dead cells to help the handicapped etc. Then some people stole it to make money by using it as a weapon, then a lab got raided and the virus manifested in the city. Just by that, it sounds like a police thriller or something. I don't remember you asking me that. But actually, I would and have. Women have the moral and legal right to do whatever they want just like men. However, I also believe that with rights come responsibilities, so I say draft 'em too.If anyone says that 'a woman's place is in the kitchen and not the ring' then I'll either smack him or tell one of my tough lady friends and see what they decide to do. That's just fairness.However, if I hear anything about this 'I am woman, hear me roar', or this 'men are the cause of all the evils in the world' rhetoric then it's gone way to far, and I'll make fun of them the same way I make fun of fundamentalist theists.By the way, I realize 'feminist' just means supporting women's rights according to the dictionary, but the people who have proclaimed such a title have been 'Femme-Nazis' as far as I've known.Anyway, back to the lighter side: You try dating her, then...

Feminism has nothing to do with the fact that RE:A was a kickass movie with a good story despite what critics claim .So far we've got a pretty strong wind going for RE. Anyone else think a bad blind date would be better?And Crashfrog, you're right. It's eerily ironic.

Yeah, that kind of BS about sexuality and anti-male rhetoric is exactly what I'm talking about when I say 'femme-Nazi'.However, there's room to start a thread about that elsewhere.Ned in particular, I'm curious as to what you have to say about the original question of the post.

You're putting words into my mouth right after a whole day of tests so that pisses me off. I'm not talking about assertiveness; that's fair game for anybody. Saying that men are responsible for ALL wrong in the world is not. There are people who say that at my school all the time; a huge group of them in fact.Although I will admit that a highschool sample may not reflect the adult public entirely accurately, keep in mind that we're tomorrow's adults. With that in mind I wouldn't be surprised to see more adults than just my current english teacher who seriously think men are at fault for basically everything. Absolutely not, again putting words into my mouth. Let me give you an example:In Brazillian Jujitsu a common position known as the 'guard' is usually initiated by wrapping your legs around your opponent's waist while he is kneeled over you. From there you can do a billion things that all involve your legs. Now it's a well-known fact that women have more strength in their lower body than their upper body while men are vice-versa, and as such are usually more comfortable using their legs than men. As such, in tournaments women often opt to just yanking you down into their guard rather than trying to take you down as there is some upper body strength involved in that even with the best technique. As such, women tend to be slightly better guard players especially in the lower levels because they take much less time getting used to using their legs in grappling than men, who usually take a month and a half or so to be comfortable with it.Long example, but hopefully the point is presented.EDITED IN:Can we PLEASE just get back to the topic? brenna and shraf can start a new topic but this was intended as a satyrical survey! Now I know how adminmooseus feels...This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-17-2004 08:30 PM

I know it's not my job to babysit people, but you're better than this. Brennakimi has stepped further and further across that fine line since his first post in this thread, and I'll bet saying things like this will just egg him on.Sometimes rude things get typed on a whim, but you'd be pretty low on my 'posters most likely to say fuck you' list. Please don't bother with him; his current arguement is not worth your time or Percy's bandwidth.And I'm sorry if my teasing about your views ever went a little far.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

People that I know of. I realize that those people are stupid and far between as you've pointed out; that doesn't mean nobody said it. Those are who I have problems with and NOT feminism as a whole. Okay, I might pick on feminism as a joke sometimes but it's an easy target. I don't mean it. Well, I'm not opening my mouth while I'm typing. I agree they're stupid, but they still exist. And I know not EVERYTHING I've said in more serious topics was stupid. I agre. However, it's not a 20 year old man's fault what happened back then. It's like blaming a white teenager for american slavery, which was obviously the fault of the europeans.EDITED IN:Hang on, no frickin' way was SC better than RE! Angelina Jolie sucks, and RE had a motorcycle stunt and probably took a LOONG time and a lot of windex to finally clean up. Just those two qualities make it instantly better than most anything you can throw at it right now.This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 09-17-2004 09:40 PM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)