MovieChat Forums > Spuds > Replies
Spuds's Replies
Tried to watch it but it's bad.
The biggest fail was his not taking into account the hooker with the old dude. He knows he is looking at a room with two people in it and has plenty of chances to pop the old guy when the hooker is on the other side of the room but he waits until she is nearly in line with the target. No sniper would ever do that, it was a recipe for disaster. Using subsonic rounds he would have known it was not an instant hit from trigger to target and would have allowed for lots of things to mess up the shot. I'm not even sure why he thought a subsonic was going to be worth a damn. Put a subsonic on a rifle along with a silencer and the accuracy is going to suffer and when the bullet hit the glass in the window it could have easily cause the bullet to fragment to the point it wouldn't have killed the guy even if the hooker wasn't there.
Hell if you were going to try to snipe someone from a different building and were using a bolt action gun you would have gotten a much more capable round that could have easily taken out anyone that stood in front of the guy and the guy. This was just sloppy writing.
If he had shot him then yes, big investigation and it would be clear that he was murdered... but he could have just as easily strangled him and made it look like auto-erotic mishap, or tossed him out the window for suicide or banged his head and made it look like he fell in the bathroom and hit his head... There was really no reason to let the last guy live. The last guy may not have known what he was doing when he said clean it up but that was what caused the killers problems so he would have been a very reasonable target.
Lamborghini wasn't a very good movie, it is streaming for free right now on Tubi... but your better movie is Ford vs Ferrari.
I can accept a little pigmy might want to be a womanizer... can probably even find some mentally deficient women he could try to boink... but a woman that has an advanced degree and looks like Hathaway? No change he could get her. The story could have worked but not with any actor shorter than Dudley Moore.
The problem is the spike proteins from the vaccine and from covid are not identifiable as to whether they came from the vaccine or from getting covid. This is then clouded by the fact that the probability of getting covid actually increase after you about 4-6 months of one of the vaccines. Which was the reason they kept pushing booster so hard at one point. The government didn't want to admit that the vaccine had the opposite effect over time and needed people to keep getting additional booster to keep the higher infection chance to kick in. I can't recall if it was an Israeli or Qatar study that found the vaccines had that effect, it is sad that you can't find any honest info on the vaccines in the US and have to scour studies in foreign journals because our government refuses to let the truth come out.
Assume he had a heart attack, whether it caused him to die instantly or slide under water and drown doesn't matter...just assume a heart attack was behind it all... The problem is you have no idea why he had the heart attack... could have been caused by past drug abuse, could have been a genetic defect, could have been related to a vaccine... any number of things could have been the reason for the heart attack, but the coroner wouldn't be able to tell which thing caused it. At best the coroner might determine that heart attack was the cause but not why he had a heart attack... Even if they find cocaine in his system it wouldn't conclusively result in that as the reason for the heart attack.
At best this will likely determine if he had any drugs or alcohol in his system and whether he died before he went under water or if he sucked in water and drowned.
Lameness was achieved... their ratio was high enough.
To me it doesn't matter, but when you have an industry that wants to say the voice actor of a Simpsons character has to be the same as the cartoon, or thinks only a gay actor can play a gay part...well these people need to follow through all the way or just admit they are hypocritical fucks that are just pandering to a few social media mobs.
Okay public school graduate. The land the originally were on was not solely contained in the land purchase from France... Then again even if it were, the land purchased from France was not Frances to sell in the first place. Unless you have full control of a piece of land you can't say that it is Frances or Spains or anyone else simply because you landed a ship on a small sliver of it. It makes as much sense a someone sticking a flag on the beach of Florida and then claiming they own the entire country.
But beyond that, the land in the movie was originally given to the Cherokees when the US forced them off their land in norther Georgia and the Carolinas even though it was in violation of a Supreme Court decision in favor of the Indians. So who would have thought a President would ignore law and just do as they saw fit? But that land was provided to the Cherokees, who then gave it to the US government in exchange for a different chunk of land that they viewed as being worth more because what they gave up was shitty land with little water or anything else of value... Which is why the US government then gave it to the Osage when they removed them from their land in more preferable areas in the Ohio Valley.... With the irony being that the land was worth much more than anyone thought when oil was discovered.... much like some Navaho land that was considered worthless and given to Indians turned out to have uranium deposits on it.
If you want to go down illegally squatting that is what the white did from the start so I'm waiting to see you hand over everything you have in the US and board a flight back to Euro-land.
You never know when you don't look. Besides, her role was pretty limited. It wasn't one that required anything special to do.... but it just shows that Hollywood doesn't want to do real casting only wants to pretend they are being authentic.
Oh the new Sandy Brown movie by Disney?
If someone wants to gripe about something that was wrong with the movie, they should complain about not using an Osage actress for the lead and using some actress from a different tribe. It was like hiring a Korean or Chinese actress to play a Japanese woman. I'm sure a white man isn't going to notice a difference, but if you were Osage you would notice she doesn't look like an Osage. That is a valid complaint about the movie that tried to get the right actors for all the other roles based on their actual race but figured any Indian was just as good as any other and ignored reality that their are differences in tribes.
Anyone that has been in a theater listening to the audience knows it has a strong fan base of gore porn freaks
I don't think she is a staple character. Your main character all appear to be straight, though who knows about Niles kid who could probably go either way the writers might send him.
It basically has become gore porn that panders to those few weird people that get off on gore.... This type of movie popped up in the 70's but fortunately it petered out pretty quick because it really doesn't help the story and only manages to turn off some potential viewers.
This thread is focused on the new Frasier... and it is so heavily reliant on canned laughter that any live audience they might have is pointless. In a perfect world the producers and writers would be using a live audience to ferret out what is and isn't working... but that doesn't appear to be what has happened with Frasier. I've seen better acting in high school plays, I doubt even an AD could get anyone to laugh half as much as you get with some of the laughter on this show... You should watch it and see just how far they have strayed from a live audience that you actually hear.
Some shows have used lots of real audience reaction, but that started declining in the 90's as it required more work than it was worth. If you watch the new Frasier it isn't just that it sounds fake you get so much laughter at things that just aren't funny it is pretty clear they are just adding in the laughs. Reminds me of when I've watch live taping of things and they will have an assistant director trying to tell the audience how to react to different things, which isn't that big of a deal until you get an AD telling people they need to laugh at things that no one in the audience find funny.... once in a while it will be so bad the audience just doesn't do a damn thing.
Unfortunately they aren't able to really record the honest to god audience when filming in front of a live audience. If they did they would catch people coughing, talking lots of things you wouldn't want with the show. So while they did film in front of a live audience they also used a laugh track as well. Yes you get some live audience reactions but it is mixed with a laugh track. In some of the older shows it was very well done and you didn't notice it, but in the Frasier reboot it is so over the top that it might as well have had no audience and just used canned laughter since that seems to be what they are pushing so hard in some of the scenes.
You don't see it as woke because the brainwashing has already infected your mind.