Posts by Christian Taylor3

lonehawk8 said:😂 😂

I’m really not trying to start anything here. 😁 It’s just that, you know that feeling when you watch an incredible movie and you just have this desperate urge to share it with people, especially those close to you? You want to use the movie as this shared experience—sort of "forcing" them to sit down and watch it together, and then having a big debate about it afterward. If I just sit here and dump the whole plot on you, the entire magic of actually watching it is lost, don't you think?

Something else is bothering me, though—did you at least try to convince neonorca4 to finish the rest of the movie in that private message? Please tell me you did. 😁

neonorca4 said:It actually had me in tears within the first thirty minutes. Up until the point I stopped watching—which was about three-quarters of the way through—it was working perfectly, and I was more than happy to trash the remake starring Tom Cruise. Just to clarify for the busybody who seems determined to gatekeep this entire subforum, since apparently every single argument needs a rebuttal 😉

@lonehawk8, thanks for the DM 🙂

Look, the remake, the little details, and all that other fluff don't really matter here, so I’m going to ask you one more time—since you haven't actually clarified anything and I'm still sitting here completely baffled. Was the movie really such a life-changing masterpiece that you now need someone to sit down and recap the rest of it for you? I mean, why even bother watching the movie all the way to the end?Look, it's not like we're living in the 80s where you have to rely on NBC for your entertainment. Besides, trying to recap the rest of Open Your Eyes is basically impossible—it just doesn't make any sense at this point, even if I were trying to type it out in a PDF. Honestly, I bet if someone tried to summarize a novel over on a literature forum that actually blew them away, the reaction would be exactly the same, if not even more intense. We always see these requests to spoil the ending; usually, it’s just because people didn't vibe with the title or they're just too lazy to sit through the rest of the movie. It’s really no surprise, honestly. I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch that. It looks like you might have sent an incomplete message. Feel free to drop whatever you were thinking about whenever you're ready. That’s strange. 😁 Like I mentioned before, this is actually my first time having the chance to dive into something like this around here.

Just a general observation here—and please don't take this personally, I don't even know you well enough to be picking a fight with you, so let's keep it civil. But just imagine if someone fell asleep right before the end of Kubrick's Odyssey, only to wake up completely losing their mind because what they just witnessed was so incredibly breathtaking. So you're actually asking me to sit here and summarize the rest of the story for you? That’s a bold move, honestly. I mean, I appreciate the enthusiasm, but I’m really not sure I have the stamina to be your personal audiobook narrator today.. 😕 I’d honestly just send him straight to the principal's office—and if things got really heated, I might even consider reaching for a ruler, depending on how much we actually like the guy. It’s pure blasphemy, really; just a textbook definition of being lazy. 😬

neonorca4 said:I totally agree—it’s great, though as soon as I started watching, I realized just how much of a mess the American remake, Vanilla Sky, actually is. Honestly, I ended up passing out right before the end last night, so I didn't even see how it wrapped up... Could you please shoot me a DM explaining how it ends and how everything gets untangled?
I was actually paying close attention this time (I was way too young to grasp what was going on when I first saw Vanilla Sky), but I just drifted off at the most crucial moment.

Honestly, what is there left to say? This thing is so incredible (and genuinely good) that someone actually needs to summarize the ending for you? Welcome to the modern age—just download the movie and finish watching it.

Yay, a brand new issue of Variety is finally here!!!

🙂

Quote: Now

rowdyowl said:Man, Gibson's career is basically over. It's a great movie, but it's practically banned in the USA.
I heard it was on the blacklist, but this is just terrible.

Good grief, that is just the most basic, mindless nonsense I've ever heard. 😁 How I Spent My Summer Vacation It set him back about $20 million, but since Gibson's Icon Productions is calling all the shots, they're the ones holding all the cards. under control The film is probably going to pull in at least three times its budget once it hits the market. We all know exactly what he did with his previous work. passion Given how much of a mess things were—I mean, not a single major studio in Hollywood was willing to touch his distribution deal—he somehow managed to claw back a decent chunk of that $30 million investment.611,899,420I'm just doing my own thing, completely independent of all that Hollywood nonsense. 😬 It’s a pretty similar story to what I’ve been seeing elsewhere, honestly. Apocalypto.

We shouldn't forget that Gibson is still moving forward with his collaboration with Warner Bros. to adapt the story of Judah Maccabee—it was only Joe Eszterhas who got the axe. Nuff said. That should settle any debates about blacklists or career endings. Gibson has already proven he can thrive without Hollywood, and honestly, Hollywood can't really function without him.

briskhound2, if a movie kicks things off with that kind of narration, the golden rule is that you stick with it all the way through to the end. In this case, I think it works pretty well—it’s subtle and keeps the story moving (and don't forget, everything was already set up from the very first foreshadowing, so it feels seamless right from the jump). I also don't quite get that "patronizing" vibe at the end, where he goes, "Well boys & girls..." It’s a bit much, Walter Grant5. 😁

And that's my sign-off on Lou's take.

Joshua Smith5 said:Gibson’s charisma is undeniable. It really is. Despite being a fundamentally prosaic action flick with a few decent bits, Gibson—with all the sincere help from debut director Adrian Grunberg—managed to craft one of the better action movies in recent years. Everything is exactly where it needs to be. From the Mexican actors to Mel's Spanish, the cinematography follows the vibe of Scott's Man on Fire... Excellent, excellent, excellent. I'm satisfied. An 8/10 for me.

The main thing is that we can all agree on one point—Mel delivers. 😍

Frank Williams7 said:Oh, that’s not what we’re waiting for.

We're waiting to see where the line is drawn on personal attacks on this forum.

I honestly have no clue what everyone is waiting for; all I know is that people need to learn how to say "enough already." I’m talking morning, noon, night, afternoon, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis, small and thin penis. Nobody is stopping you from posting in the men's corner, but if you have a specific question for the admins, keep it to one single post here. If you want to go off on a tangent, just head over to "comment and off-topic"—you can even wait until the day after tomorrow for all I care. This thread hasn't been used to clog things up or drown out actual discussion before, and it isn't starting now. Over there, nobody is going to sit around counting your outbursts or shoving them in your face by asking, "How many penises is that?"

We're waiting for the boundaries of verbal forum ad hominem attacks to be established.

We're basically just waiting for rustydrifter10 to get back from vacation and put an end to these "dick" debates with a single post. Like I said, everything else belongs in "comment and off-topic." Please just stick to that, and that goes for the mods too.

Thanks for listening. 🙂

p.s. No, I don't have a small one.

Kimberly Anderson22 said:With my first post, I achieved what I set out to do—making an appeal to the moderators.

Maybe further discussion doesn't serve much purpose, and it probably doesn't belong here anyway, but I'll give you a brief response regardless:

I personally feel that an author's persona and their views are inseparable from their work.

It is possible, I suppose, to imagine a situation where someone sings songs about little birds and flowers, and you could claim that the work has nothing to do with whether the songwriter cheers for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You could tell the participants not to stifle a meaningful discussion about daisies by bringing up Mamić.

But that isn't the case here.
If someone is a member of Maddox's party and makes a movie about warriors, then it seems a bit silly to ban discussing how that fact might influence how the film was made or how the characters were portrayed.

Smoogj told me straight up that he thinks the movie is garbage. So, I think it's pretty obvious that his issue isn't just being annoyed because a "valuable" debate is being stifled. How could a discussion about a garbage movie be considered that precious??

Basically, he was irritated because politics kept bleeding into a conversation about a film that is inherently political! Between the "warrior" themes and the depiction of homosexuals, it's all tied together.

The level of sensitivity here is just wild. We honestly have more freedom in discussions on much "fancier," more controlled media outlets like TV.

Just let us have some freedom on this forum. Especially on threads that you consider to be about garbage. (Assuming you haven't already automatically banned and deleted the whole thread).

P.S. Regarding that poet who sings about birds and flowers...
If we were discussing a poet who mostly writes about, say, white lilies, I wouldn't stop a user from suggesting a theory that they write that way because they root for the Atlanta Braves. Where else would we hear a theory like that if not on a forum 😁?

I guess I should probably give credit where it's due and say the admins and moderators over at Movie Forum generally do a decent enough job, though if we're being honest, there is one glaring stain on their record... The shameless self-promotion of that market research agency is getting a little out of hand.Nobody even bothered to reply to that, not even the admins. I gave you an example involving the topic of Angelina Jolie's movie, which just isn't tolerated over there—not in the other mode, anyway—so why on earth would they allow it in the "Parade" section? It felt like half the North America went out of their way to trash that Angelina Jolie movie, using nothing but non-cinematic arguments to do it, clogging up every single forum from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Rainier, and they even tried to bring that same nonsense here to the Movie section. They just won't let it go. 😁 Look, nobody is stopping you from mentioning that the director is a member of Maddox's party as part of your review or impressions, but every time you backpedal on that "argument," it starts looking like pure trolling. It’s not because *Parade* is bad just because Dragojević belongs to that Maddox trash heap; if anything, the movie fails because the script is a total disaster, the character motivations are non-existent, Kojo is stuck playing the exact same role yet again, and the members of the gay community I know are actually pretty disgusted by how homosexuals are portrayed here. Plus, from a purely dramatic standpoint, trying to mash comedy and drama together like this just doesn't work. You should lay out all those cinematic flaws and then just drive the point home: "And because of that shameful attempt to bridge the gap between American and Mexican warriors, he can shove it." Dragojević can sell his nonsense to Japanese tourists in Berlin for all I care, but I'm not buying it. Just stop there—don't drag that unfortunate Maddox through the next ten posts in this thread.

Maybe there isn't much point in dragging this discussion out any further, and honestly, it probably doesn't even belong here, but I figured I'd give you a quick response regardless:

I honestly can't help but feel that you just can't separate a writer's personal character and their underlying views from the actual work they produce..

It’s actually entirely possible—and honestly, quite a feat—to imagine someone singing about sunshine and wildflowers while insisting their little tunes have absolutely nothing to do with whether they root for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You can almost see them trying to convince everyone in the comments to stop talking about Mamić so they can get back to a "meaningful" debate about daisies.

Nah, that’s just not how things work here.
If someone happens to be a member of Maddox's party and decides to direct a movie about warriors, I honestly don't see how it's stupid to discuss whether that connection actually shaped the way the film was made or influenced how the characters were written.

Just imagine some random person jumping into a thread about the movie Carnage just to drop a hot take claiming Polanski stole his pedophilia. Carnage That whole debate about Polanski’s masterpiece, *Satan*, being a fugitive from justice is one of those things where there really isn't much point in arguing. I mean, honestly, how can people even sit through a Polanski movie without feeling like they're losing their soul? 😬 And if he keeps going like that, honestly, how long do you think his username would even last on a film forum? We actually had a similar debate over there once, though there was one major difference—it all went down in the live chat. It was totally wild, too, since the mods didn't step in to shut anything down. I mean, what’s stopping you from just popping into that movie chat and giving your soul some peace by finally settling the whole deal regarding Srđan Dragojević's political leanings?

@Kimberly Anderson22

I basically get "slaughtered" by Smoogj at least once a year, so I feel like I have plenty of standing to say that the "Parade" thread is actually moderated quite impressively. It’s the exact same thing that happened over in the thread for the movie in The Land of Blood and Honey Angelina Jolie—Deckard was busy scrubbing (and maybe even punishing?) every single one of those politically charged jabs that had absolutely nothing to do with the film itself. He didn't just delete them; if you really wanted to obsess over Angelina's leg, her diet, her eating disorders, or politics, all of those posts should have been moved over to an Angelina Jolie fan thread instead.

You shouldn't be using the "Parade" thread to lecture everyone on Srđan Dragojević's political leanings, post after post. Honestly, any sanctions handed out for that are completely justified. If you're that invested, feel free to start a "Srđan Dragojević" thread and carry on there; nobody is going to touch you. Ideally, make it "Srđan Dragojević's Films/Filmography," because we are technically on the Movies forum, and for everything else, you've got the Politics section.

Austin Alvarez62 said:Yeah. He used it—if I recall correctly. Like I said, there are two documentaries out there. Here’s my take on them. The first one is better.

My review of the two Kuklinski docs

But that's not even what I meant. What sticks with me most is Kuklinski recounting how he once shot a guy in the head with a rifle just to test the weapon out. And then there's that part about leaving a guy tied up in a cave while filming the rats crawling over him. (There go those rats again.)

Anyway, I'm currently watching a doc about some guy who supposedly killed over 250 people. A professional hitman, you know? Not some amateur like Pedro Lopez.😁

They both work well together since they complement each other.

He seemed like such a family man.

Actually, it wasn't just an act—that was kind of the whole point of the adaptation. Kuklinski really was a family man. He actually loved his kids (totally Father of the Year material), and he never even gave his wife a dirty look, let alone laid a hand on her. It's wild. My late grandad would have said, "Business is business, and nothing else matters."

Maybe fame went to his head a little, so he's playing up the cool factor. I guess you have to sell the movie rights, and honestly, there isn't much difference between life in prison and a death sentence anyway.

There’s no way he’s seeing a dime from this. If this were an adaptation of his own book, maybe, but that's clearly not what we're looking at here.

Well, look at that—two hardcore death penalty advocates in one thread. So why didn't Kuklinski get the death penalty? After allegedly taking out 100, 200, maybe 250 people? Give me a break; he was just a cleaner, using the local mob to sweep all that trash off the streets. Honestly, I’m surprised they haven’t given him an award yet. Is that how the system works these days?

*phew!* 😬

Shannon's sitting there with a drink in his right hand and a box of napkins within easy reach of his left, right? Yeah, I highly doubt it. Long before he ever touched cyanide, Kuklinski was absolutely obsessed with poisoning his targets.

goldenhound32 said:I’m of the same mind.

By the way, my memory might be failing me here, but did The Iceman ever actually use a drill? I can't quite recall. All I remember is that one scene where he shoots a guy inside a car and it just temporarily stuns him.🤣

I don't think a silencer comes up much in the documentaries, but considering he probably carried out over 100 hits, he almost certainly used one.

I remember that one scene where he shoots someone in a car and it kind of deafens him for a second.🤣

😬

This isn't funny (well, maybe for atheists): "God Never Showed Up".

Another documentary to check out: The Iceman Tapes – Inside The Mind of a Mafia Hitman.

Things are finally starting to move— Michael Shannon Isn't Messing Around On First poster for Hitman tale 'The Iceman'.



Michael Shannon. 😍

Honestly, it feels like he just gets better with every single role he takes on; his career trajectory is pretty fascinating to watch.

It’s great to see such solid prep work going into this movie, especially considering the legendary HBO documentary: The Iceman Confesses : Secrets of a Mafia Hitman (2001).

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jxcr1R7o8dc
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr5BfyfaeOs

Sandra Rogers95 said:Honestly, nobody’s actually coming for the mods for no reason.

Nobody is attacking them—well, I can't speak for everyone else since I try to stay out of the fray—but personally, I think all the mods are great (especially the women). 🙂

Brian Edwards6 said:P.S.: Almost forgot to mention...🤦

This was tried before. It didn't lead anywhere.👍

Then fine*, I guess you guys actually do care about (new) users. 👍

Also, if there's an infraction, just send a direct PM to the user instead of leaving a mark on the thread itself. There's really no point in posting those public warnings on someone else's post anyway; nobody is actually going to sit there and properly read what rustydrifter10 is saying. Since they're new to the site, once they realize their mistake... just make it part of that internal warning. Delete their signature and tell them to put together a new one that actually follows the rules. Then, just wish them a warm welcome to the community. It keeps things from feeling too much like being stuck in a bureaucratic nightmare after only two posts.

*Actually, it's still not ideal, because the prevailing wisdom here seems to be that we shouldn't hand out formal infractions to newbies with barely any posts. Just think about how much time gets wasted on this: sending that first warning PM without an official strike, then waiting around for the user to actually follow it (like drifting over to the Sports sub-forum), only to finally have to issue the actual infraction and deal with the inevitable drama on the General Discussion board. It's just a massive waste of time due to unnecessary red tape—classic American bureaucracy.😁 Simply put, handle everything (deleting the bad signature, providing the link to the signature rules, welcoming the new user) within that very first warning PM, without making it a formal strike. Everyone stays happy and satisfied.

By the way, I took a little stroll through your blog. Interesting stuff. Until now, I had this misguided idea that there were only bad, worse, and worst American police officers. It’s a nice change of pace to encounter a good one.

@loneraven25/">@@loneraven25

Over on the Sports sub-forum, one of the best moderators on this entire site in general—and I'm not even exaggerating when I say he could be a role model for all moderators—is Xerxes. You almost never see him here in the General Discussion area, and none of the users ever mention him, which honestly speaks volumes about his style. Just send him a PM (you as a mod talking to a mod) and the problem should be solved.

loneraven25 said:...Christian Taylor3, I was told the warning was logged directly on the profile, along with the necessary details in the user notes.
So, it wasn't posted in the thread itself, nor was it tucked away in some PDF where I wouldn't have access through my moderator tools; the responsible moderator already sent out a report regarding this...

Well, you actually put it right there on the user's profile, whereas here you just dumped it into the thread itself (using someone else's PDF): http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=3...postcount=9844

With brand new users who only have two posts under their belt, you could probably just give them a heads-up via PM. There's really no need to go straight for the ban hammer. Most mods usually play it that way—we don't want to scare off every new person immediately. There’s even an entire Anderson thread dedicated to the new direction of this Reddit. 🙂

Everything else remains the same; this whole thread and the complaint itself were handled the wrong way.

rustydrifter10 said:Any mod can hand out signature cards, but they don't get posted directly to the thread; they go on your profile.

loneraven25 said:...based on the thread title and user profiles, it seems everyone is entitled to a link in their signature,
so I honestly don't see why we even need a dedicated thread for this on PZK...

It goes on the profile, loneraven25. You don't just drop a card in a thread, especially not on someone else's PDF. Hopefully, we've all learned our lesson by now. 🙂

Of course he can't—not that he’d ever be allowed to, considering he’s such a self-important moderator. 😁

Lisa Barnes is back at it again...



😁

rowdyowl said:But fine, I'll try to offer my own little take on what defines Sci-Fi;

Sci-Fi films basically present an imagined, non-existent world—or a state of existence that doesn't currently exist—but frame it as if it were a scientifically plausible reality. This could manifest as an evolutionary leap from our current world (classic futuristic sci-fi), or as a sudden encounter with an unknown contemporary world and its inhabitants, like aliens or parallel universes.

edit:

"Don't be alarmed, people of Copenhagen; I just came to pick up some new toys."

~Darth Vader

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWyt4tpEJWs

I can't convince anyone else either that Toys "R" Us isn't part of the mracni strana. It’s pretty much right on the edge. 😁

Joshua Hall4 said:First off, maybe dial back the colorful vocabulary a bit before you get yourself arrested.
Second, I never claimed the movie was bad. I just shared my opinion. I'm honestly tired of seeing Americans cast as the main heroes in everything from foreign productions to indie flicks from halfway across the world.
Aside from that, the film is perfectly fine. I watched it today. It didn't blow my mind, but it didn't leave a bad taste in my mouth either. It's a solid watch.

Look, this isn't The Council Voice, so you can pretty much say whatever you want—like, "What the hell does it matter if he's some one-eyed Eskimo with erectile dysfunction?" Unless you actually are an Eskimo, in which case, my bad, I apologize.

Secondly, I wasn't even saying the movie was bad, I was just expressing how tired I am of seeing Americans front and center as heroes, whether it's in a production from China, Kyrgyzstan, Uruguay, or whatever tenth country decides to make them the lead.

Personally, I think your take is kind of ridiculous, especially since we're talking about a movie that's 100% a Chinese production. But fine, let's move past that—just tell me, did an American like Gene líng shí san chai actually save the world? 😁

What on earth does it have to do with the fact that he’s just some one-eyed Eskimo with ED? Seriously, once again, we're looking at a Hollywood production where they basically forced him to play an American just to sell this thing—which, by the way, is supposedly the most expensive movie in the history of Hollywood.

The director pointed out that his greatest, albeit difficult, achievement in the movie was crafting John Miller, noting that "having a character like this—a foreigner, a drifter, almost a thug—turn into a hero who saves the lives of Americans... that has never happened in Hollywood, and I honestly don't see it happening again anytime soon."

Just a few lines below. 😬