1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: ARGO

    In response to softlaw2's comment:


    Or rather, you responded incorrectly by saying I didn't comment on the subject matter. 

    You didn't comment on the subject matter, you immediately went to invective and a cataonic diatribe that had nothing to do with the subject. 

    The subject was dealing with your treatment of Afleck and what he should do with his money

    No, the subject matter was not "my treatment of A-Fleck". Your emotional invective and meaningless "judgment" comment isn't the subject. My comment wasn't "what he should do with his money", it was that he needs to do as he says, not as he does.   

    As you lawyers would say, you introduced the "evidence" or the subject, thereby making it germain.   The subject of hypocrisy you didn't miss.  Seems to have stung you.  That was the point.


     evidence. "Germane" has nothing to do with evidence admissibility. 

    Try not to play like a bully. 

     This from a poster who opens with "maniacal" and then pontificates about "judgmental". The bully is you, and the censors who are trolling along with you.






         This was fun.   Try again.  

         Very proud of you catching the homonyms and typos.  You aren't a complete maroon after all.

         But you still are wrong.  You brought up the subject I responded to.  The onus is on you.

         Give it another try. 

         Look up diversion while you are at it.  You use it all the time, but don't allow others to us it.  You go off subject and interject all manner of inflammatory stuff ... and think we should sit here and take it. 

          Typical bully.



    Oh ... just in case you wondered were wondering, I was laughing at you, not with you.*



      *See, I can correct my grammar as well as my spelling.   Not hard.  Easy, like you.

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jackbu. Show jackbu's posts

    Re: ARGO

    In response to mryazz's comment:

    In response to jete02fan's comment:


    In response to softlaw2's comment:


    Affleck is an embarrassingly bad performer. As for the film, itself, I saw the independent review of the film, as well as the feedback from various blogs. The film projected a fantasy that is a complete distortion of the facts and protocol for intelligence professionals.




    he was pretty good in "The Town"



    the academy, as usual, doesn't have a clue. i'm glad LINCOLN lost, along with LES MISERBLES.


    leave it to TARANTINO to steal from the spaghetti western gender and still produce  the best film of 2012. imo, quentin has yet to make a bad movie. i loved the scene in DJANGO UNCHAINED where the KKK couldn't see thru the eyeholes of their head covers. i immediately thought of mr. softy and mr.bill. 

     as far as distorting the facts, no film will ever beat out THE UNTOUCHABLES. in this embarrassingly

    inaccurate waste of film, frank nitti, portrayed as a rat-faced psycho, is killed by being thrown off a building by elliot ness. in reality, mr nitti ran the mob for 9 years after capone was imprisoned. also, in reality, ness never killed anybody in his entire life. he died an alcoholic in cleveland.

    i know there's a term called 'dramatic license', but in the case of ARGO and THE UNTOUCHABLES, their licenses should be revoked.

    He has had bad movies but Argo was fantastic.  He was also great in Good Will Hunting, especially the scene later in the movie at the construction site, where he tells Will why he needs to persue his talent.

  3. This post has been removed.

  4. This post has been removed.