Posts by Michelle Flores40

vividtiger922 said:The subforum doesn't even exist because of the moderators

I realize we're in an election cycle, but I haven't completely lost my hearing to political slogans just yet

vividtiger922, you clearly have a massive conflict with the mods and the administration; that PDF is bleeding out, so let him recover for a bit

In my view, electing Daniel is the correct path forward. Give him some breathing room to find his footing without constant surveillance. That is all

I suspect this whole debate is one of the main reasons why Elli lost her footing
To me, she’s become the living embodiment of the phrase be nice, then get screwed over

Elli was actually quite talented, but they just wouldn't stop picking at her through this thread
And they eventually drained her dry

PS: It’s like that old saying: you give them an inch, and they take a mile

Just some food for thought

Arthur Anderson49 said:The absolute worst part is that all of us remaining—people who generally maintain a very tolerant relationship and a certain level of mutual respect—are now digging in our heels and practically inciting hostility toward one another.

I’m not sure if you caught that thread where some guy completely lost his mind and started screaming bastard at pretty much every woman on the forum.

And then, get this, Colbert comes along and holds him up as some paragon of decency. Give me a break.

The guy is unhinged; Colbert isn't. Surely there’s a shred of responsibility left. Apparently, she values those two minutes of feeling validated by someone telling her "you're right to be mad," even if everything goes to hell afterward.

I can accept that he’s dear to you; I suppose not everyone defines loyalty the same way. Personally, I consider a truly loyal friend to be the one who actually tells me: you messed up.

Arthur Anderson49 said:When Catch-22 was absolutely shitting all over me and wanderingbadger44, everyone here stayed quiet as a mouse.

On a separate note, he looked less like a person and more like the active ingredient in your collective internal dysfunction.
Neither you nor wanderingbadger44 seemed interested in actually seeking help. Even then, the moderator at the time tried to assist; she explicitly asked everyone to just stop.

What bothered me most about this whole ordeal was Charles Davis88's supposed "failure to grasp" the situation.

My use of that particular profanity isn't an insult because I wasn't actually aiming it at anyone.
If you can't grasp that distinction, feel free to ask someone else to break it down for you.

But more importantly, I haven't even had a conversation with that lunatic; he's just been busy arguing with my own quotes.

Of course. I was just walking around in a mini skirt when some guy attacked me.
I deserved it.

And the moderators? Absolutely brilliant. 👍

Is there any actual chance the social sciences section gets a moderator capable of identifying blatant harassment?

Some lunatic is flooding us with PDFs and causing absolute mayhem. Since the chaos keeps getting wiped clean, it’s entirely possible the admin team hasn't even realized the true scale of this mess.

If the moderators had stepped in when they were supposed to, this wouldn't be happening. So why didn't they? Because they pretended they couldn't grasp such unprecedented vulgarity. As if obscenity somehow paralyzes the brain.

On another note, I'll take this opportunity to complain about my warning. I was flagged for "insulting" a community member. I’d love to see exactly which community member I supposedly insulted. All I did was insult a moderator
.
Let me ask you something. You’re walking down a street in Chicago and you realize someone is performing a lewd act right behind you. You turn to the nearest police officer for help, and he asks you, "What's the problem?"

Wouldn't it occur to you that the person is either an idiot or malicious? Not as a slur, mind you, but as a legitimate observation.

Jeffrey Morales4 said:I actually had every intention of boycotting this movie specifically because of the dubbing—I honestly can't wrap my head around how they manage to drag politicians into absolutely every single aspect of life—but I ended up watching it anyway, and I have to say, it’s actually quite good.
Setting aside the voice acting issues, the plot itself is pretty engaging, the dialogue is absolutely hilarious, and I found all those little nods to other superheroes and the constant juggling of pop culture references to be really fun. 🙂
really great

You can find a subtitled version at the AMC Theater. And honestly, it’s not just this one—every single animated film gets a subtitled release, so I truly don't get all these complaints about the dubbing. ☕

Adam Moore said:a)or even masterpieces like *The Train in the Snow*, which we could still film, I’m certain of it.

😕 Honestly, *The Train in the Snow* isn't exactly a masterpiece.

Jerry Adams71 said:Imagine a high-budget cinematic adaptation of the Peasants' Revolt, starring John Malkovich as Nat Turner and Tim Roth as Tahi. 😁

Even if the New York Times is footing the bill, it doesn't change a thing.
So they just paint the peasants as lazy bums who only join the Peasants' Revolt because they’re too damn idle to work. Typical.

Maybe Marinka Koščec’s 'Wonderland' wouldn't be a bad choice for an adaptation
And honestly, I’m genuinely baffled that 'The Commissioner' hasn't been made into a movie yet

Angela Kern69 said:I am utterly disappointed. There is perhaps one redeeming moment in the entire film—that scene where the girls discuss what they look for in a guy during their youth versus when they've matured. Beyond that, it’s just pathetic. George Clooney delivers his usual performance, cycling through those two signature smiles—one sly, one charming—but I certainly don't see any heavy-hitting acting here worthy of an Oscar nomination. What I found most irritating, however, was the sheer lack of direction from the writers; it feels as though they had no idea what they were actually trying to achieve. Is it meant to be a romantic comedy, as the marketing suggests? It isn't particularly romantic, nor is it funny. A social drama? If so, it remains incredibly shallow and superficial. Had the movie simply slid toward a predictable happy ending, it might have passed for tolerable fluff, but once we hit that twist in Chicago—which felt entirely unearned from a screenwriting perspective and existed solely to shock the audience—the film completely loses its way.

It didn't even surprise me, honestly. I recently caught the first episode of season six of House, and they resolve a romantic subplot using the exact same tired trope. It’s clearly become a screenwriter's "in."

PS: As for the film, my feelings align pretty closely with yours. Not a single element feels properly executed (which is why I actually prefer the American translation of the title 😁)

I honestly don't get why Vera Farmiga's stunt double wasn't nominated for an Oscar for that sex scene
She did an incredible job making sure Vera looked absolutely stunning in that moment😁

And for that matter, why wasn't Ryan Bingham nominated? He played George Clooney so incredibly well🤷

It’s such a calculated, "smoke-filled" kind of movie, and frankly, I don't know what everyone is complaining about—the title is actually translated perfectly into American English

Maybe they should just play it on flights, specifically on those short hops that last less time than the movie itself. Or perhaps include it as a free DVD in the welcome kit for budget airline passengers?

I actually quite enjoy the school scenes in that movie 'Back to School'; even though that part is just a subplot compared to the rest of the film, it’s incredibly effective (and I’m fairly certain a bunch of professors from Harvard went to see it just to experience that moment of a sponge being rubbed against a bratty student's head through the screen :-D)

On second thought, I think I’d vote for the whole 'lost pencil' fiasco :-)

I'm getting ready to watch this, mostly because the director is behind one of my absolute favorite "Dogme" films. Let's see how much of that manifesto actually remains in this one. 😁

Fun & low-key
Hugh Grant is top-tier

The segments that riff on that Wham! backstory are hilarious, especially those "commercial spots"
There are some great episodic characters too (that jerk of an "artistic lyricist," Drew’s sister)

restlessfox5 said:Which of Sacha Baron Cohen's films do you all consider his absolute best? They’re all total chaos, honestly, but if I had to pick a number one, I'd go with... BoratSecond place. A bit of a forgotten spot, really. Ali G's house I don't even know where to begin with this one. Honestly? Just... yeah. Bruno MarsEven though all three films are absolute masterpieces.

I find it difficult to view this through the lens of cinema. Personally, I would be more inclined to discuss it as a manifestation of an alter ego.
All three work perfectly well as episodic pieces. And I’m not just talking about Ali G here. If you look at the DVD release of Borat, there are some incredibly good scenes that didn't make the final cut. One of them is just massive—I think it runs for about 15 minutes—where Borat is in a supermarket trying to drive a clerk absolutely insane by walking down an endless aisle of refrigerators, asking the exact same question over and over again: "Is this butter?" As a shorter clip, the scene wouldn't even work. The whole tension relies on the anticipation of when that clerk is finally going to explode. Even before Bruno Mars, I used to find clips online of deleted footage. Honestly, those "cut" scenes don't lose any of their impact.

And that's why.
Ali G
He was the one who kickstarted this entire brand of "cinematic" activism. It all traces back to him—it’s practically in his DNA. 😁 Both Borat and Bruno Mars came to be.
Borat is an absolute phenomenon. Honestly, enough already—since we’re on the subject of cinema, it really is the most complete package out there.
3. They had brunch, which was a bit sluggish, though there were way more actual actors involved and plenty of scene blocking being worked out.

redowl90 said:I just finished watching the new Gus Van Sant film, and it definitely deserves its own dedicated thread.
First off, I have to mention the surprise that was James Franco. Up until now, I’ve mostly seen him in roles where he was pretty much consistently mediocre. Here, it feels like a different person—like he’s actually inhabiting a real character. For some reason, I couldn't stop thinking about how much he reminded me of Heath Ledger. Not sure why, though.

On the other hand, Sean Penn and Josh Brolin will likely be picking up Academy Award nominations this year, each in their respective categories. Both are excellent—though if I’m being honest, I think Josh edges out Sean slightly, but hey... I already mentioned over in the Nixon/Kennedy thread that I'm not really a fan of heavy imitation acting.

While I haven't seen a huge amount of Gus Van Sant's work, this is the first one of his where I can't immediately label it as either a masterpiece or a disaster. His previous films have always been either phenomenal (like "Good Will Hunting" or "Elephant") or totally misses for me ("My Own Private Idaho," "Finding Forrester," "To Die For," or "Psycho"). This one is perfectly fine, but it doesn't quite have that "extra something" that makes it stand out from the sea of similar movies. That’s probably my biggest gripe. Also, that ending with the candles... well, I guess it was expected given the story.

That said, this is definitely the kind of movie that should touch anyone with even a shred of emotion left in them. It's worth a watch.

I haven't seen Harvey Milk, but I'm getting a little nervous here. It seems like the movies you call bad are actually good to me, and the ones you love are the ones I can't stand.😍

Michael Ortiz68 said:Why does the body count even matter here? Does the fact that they killed, "all things considered, about 40 people," suddenly transform them into ethical terrorists? 🙄I honestly can't make heads or tails of this constant obsession with crunching numbers. It’s all just noise to me.🤷

The first murder depicted in the film involves a protester taking a stand against the Iranian dictator Reza Pahlavi during a visit to Germany. He’s gunned down by a police officer. As it turns out, the kid was just a literature student—his very first time ever stepping out to join a demonstration.
The second victim was the leader of the student leftist movement. Some nutjob who harbors a deep-seated hatred for communists opened fire on him, landing three shots. He didn't manage to finish the job, but he certainly left the guy in a vegetative state. He even turned the gun on himself, though apparently, he wasn't quite successful there either.
It isn't just the Weather Underground crowd that adds to the carnage in this movie. There’s even that scene depicting the police killing of Peter, their first casualty—just another one of those characters they toss into the plot, and honestly, it's pretty obvious why they're there.

I only mentioned that number because I was caught off guard; honestly, I expected it to be significantly higher.

rapidbison42 said:The Manson Family girl was definitely the most high-profile member of the Weather Underground once she joined, mostly because of her history. The mystery surrounding how she died remains unsolved, and honestly, the sheer number of people who showed up to her funeral really pushed her into the spotlight. Not to mention her influence on the Manson Family—though I suppose that influence went both ways.

Otherwise, the movie left me feeling a bit let down.
There were just too many pointless subplots... like that pathetic scene involving the conflict in the Middle East. Why even include that?

That Middle East detail shows up in almost every deep dive on the Weather Underground. Don't worry, the director didn't just pull it out of thin air. I actually heard about it on a 'History on Thursdays' podcast.😁 As for why? Let's just say it was the breaking point that forced them to cut their training short.

Naturally, the Manson Family girl was the most visible figure to the public; she basically acted as their PR, wrote the manifesto, and all that.