Resident Evil Apocalypse is better than women

Hmm, all I thought by the end of your story was,"Well, I'll bet the woman he was supposed to have been on a date with is glad it's over because, man, he was completely self-centered."

Regarding RE:A, Rodger Ebert said:"The only reason this movie was made was to make money, and the only reason to see it is to spend money."

quote:

---

By the way, Ebert is a stuck up old guy who has no taste for action.

---

Um, I don't think so. How long have you been reading his reviews, junior? It's been about 20 years for me.Ebert LOVES action films, and gives very fair reviews. I don't always agree with him, but to say he doesn't like action movies is just not true. He loved all of the Laura Croft movies, which I thought were pretty mediocre, and he supports nearly every single movie that comes out that is based upon a comic book. He really liked "28 Days Later", "Hellboy", the Spiderman movies, "Alien", and others.You do know that he wrote "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls", don't you?He just doesn't like bad movies. Are you telling me that RE:A is actually a good movie?Oh, and as for him being "old and stuck up", his "young" parner Roeper gave it a thumbs down, too, as did just about every other movie reviewer. Are ALL of them old and stuck up?

quote:

---

It's a MOVIE that's meant to be all about mindless adrenaline; why expect more out of it?

---

Because it costs the same for me to go see a good movie than it does to go see a bad movie. I wouldn't care if the bad movies only cost a quarter to get into. The more people go to see crap movies the more crap movies they will make.Anyway, I think the last paragraph of his review is good, but the last line is especially good:Page not found - Chicago Sun-Times

quote:

---

Like I said, maybe the new styles of action are too intense and frightening to the older folks.

---

But action, even the new styles, isn't really that intense nor frightening. It's all just "wall of noise" video game stuff.Try watching "Alien". There is very little action, but it is one of the most frightening movies ever made.What you don't know about movies and grownups is a lot.

quote:

---

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.

---

Maybe boys under 25 are just too young to have any sophistication and taste yet. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-14-2004 08:14 AM

quote:

---

And that's somehow bad?

---

Well, yeah. It's deadly dull.

quote:

---

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.

---

"The Exorcist" is a psychological horror film. It is supposed to get inside of your head. If I am reading you right, what impresses you and makes you react is unrealistic depictions of explosions and violence rather than rather more realistic depictions of emotion. To have an impact in a movie like "The Exorcist", one must become emotionally involved with the characters so you care what happens to them and feel what they are feeling. If you don't get there, then a movie like "The Excorcist" will not do anything for you.There is a LOT more to producing a truly scary movie than making the audience "jump".

quote:

---

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.

---

Still sounds like a video game to me.Again, are you trying to tell me that RE:A was a good movie?

quote:

---

Don't think it's nearly as much as what you don't know about me

---

I'm sure that's true.

quote:

---

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.

---

I think so, most of the time.

quote:

---

Just boys, huh? Can we please go just one debate without you going all Femme-Nazi on me??

---

What demographic does Hollywood cater and market to most heavily?I'll give you one guess.You know, you never did answer me regarding my question of why you never would think you would take the feminist side of an argument.Just what do you think being a feminist means? I am almost positive that you have some misconceptions.

quote:

---

(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?

---

I would think that a blind date would be better, because it is in your power to affect how the date is going.You can't do anything about the poor quality of the movie.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-15-2004 08:29 AM

quote:

---

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.

---

Yeah, and when I was your age I thought that "I Ran" by Flock of Seagulls was a really good song.It isn't. It's crap. It's really bad crap.But that doesn't mean I don't still love to hear it.Like crash said, eventually you will understand the difference between crap that you love and a really well-made, well-acted movie.

quote:

---

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.

---

Excuse me?Look, I don't mean to be harsh, especially after you basically told me that you are a feminist, but what you don't know about people who proclim themselves to be feminists is a lot.I suggest reading anything that Gloria steinem has written. There are several good interviews on line that you will find if you do a Google search on her full name.She calls herself a radical feminist. After reading her views, come back and tell me if you think she is a "feminazi".BTW, you do know that the term "feminazi" was coined by Rush Limbaugh, don't you?"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream. Women were doing quite well in this country before feminism came along."-Rush Limbaugh"Militant feminists are pro-choice because it's their ultimate avenue of power over men... It is their attempt to impose their will on the rest of society, particularly on men."-Rush Limbaugh

quote:

---

modern feminism (started in the seventies) is a load of bullshit that was responding to the women's own self-loathing after the returned to the home after world war two. they didn't value their work in the home (which was absolutely invaluable and that attitude was reflected in society prior to the 40's) and thus society grew to reflect that dissatisfaction.

---

Huh, and here's me foolishly thinking that modern feminism (continuing right now) is about being able to choose to do what you want to regardless of your gender.

quote:

---

Modern feminism seems to be about women thinking about and with their vaginas

---

I don't think that, and neither do any of the women I know who also call themselves feminists.What kind of feminists are we, then, brem, crash?

I guess I don't see this obsession with vaginas and sexuality. I see lots of activity regarding abortion rights, but not quite enough regarding pay and benefits equity.I think we need to, unfortunately, make a division between academic feminism, in which these poor women seem to have to make their writings as unintelligable as possible in order to gain approval, and the regular, everyday, common sense feminism which is about fairness.I know you're with us, brother.

quote:

---

wait. are you male? you can't be a feminist!! evil! man!

---

I think it's you who are stuck somewhere, bren, WRT your view of feminism.In my entire circle of many friends, coworkers, and aquaintences who call themselves feminists (there are many men among them), none of them think men are evil or can't be feminists.Oh, and I think that contracycle has a good point WRT the valuation of woman's work in the home.Remember also, that when they were needed to work in the factories during WWII, many women got a taste of what it feels like to earn their own money and work outside the home and many realized that they liked it.Were they given a choice to keep their jobs when the men came back? No, they were forced out simply because they were women.I agree with you that there was a misguided attitude in which the job of homemaker was disrespected by the feminist movement during the 70's, but previously it wasn't even considered an option for a man to stay home with the kids and for the woman to be the primary breadwinner of the family, let alone expect him to do any of the housework or the childcare, let alone for a woman to want to not get married and concentrate on her career, etc.I would actually say that the seed of the 70's faminist movement was planted in those thousands of women who were forced out of those jobs
after WWII.There is an intersting book called "Perfection Salad" which examines the way US society tried to keep the 50's housewife happy by providing her with every modern convenience applience and food and by promoting the "domestic arts" and "home economics".Just who are these feminist who advocate the hatred of men?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-17-2004 09:22 AM

quote:

---

so you want people to pay their wives to work in the home?

---

I think that we should include it in the gross national product, and we should also compensate for the lack of a social security payment that women/people who are homemakers do not get to contribute to, thus having "worked" their whole lives but not getting anywhere near as muchfrom the government.Oh, and fuck you. I'm not brain washed. Are you usually this insulting and angry around this issue?You don't care what me and my coworkers and frinds think? Fine, I care even less about what academic feminists think.

quote:

---

I think there is such a division (which explains perhaps the goofiness of college feminism) but unfortunately it seems to be the academic feminists who get in the papers and are allowed, for some reason, to be the public face of the movement.

---

But Gloria Steinem is probably the most famous feminist activist of all time, but she is neither an academic, nor a fan of that silly academia.

quote:

---

yes it is a flaw in their worldview. they just don't see it. take a women's studies class. it will confuse the hell out of you.

---

So, you didn't answer my question.Many of my friends, coworkers, and aquaintences, some of whom are men, consider themselves feminists.We don't know anything at all about "women's studies" academic feminism.What kind of feminists are we?Also, could you please substantiate the claims you made regarding how valued women were before the second wave of feminism in the US and why it wasn't a big deal that they were discriminated against based upon their gender in college admissions, hiring, career advancement, and wages?

Can you please answer my question about who these "mainstream" feminists are who are advocating the things you say they are?Perhaps some citations, links, names?I hear this kind of thing all the time about "those feminists who hate men and blame them for everything" but nobody can ever seem to name them.I'm not saying they don't exist, but come on, name them, and please show how they are considered part of "mainstram" feminism and not part of some academic, largely irrelevant and ignored fringe.

quote:

---

Maybe you hadn't heard, but women still get paid less on average in basically every single field. Something like 79 cents to the male dollar, or so.

---

There are two fields where women have nearly always been much better paid than men in the same occupation:1) modeling2) having sex for money, in theater settings or film