|
|
Ghostbusters (2016) (Page 2)
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
pop culture
Originally Posted by ort888
popular entertainment.
10/10 reading comprehension.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
10/10 reading comprehension.
I sure wish our entertainments were an intrinsic part of our culture, they're so divergent.
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
I've always thought that the test means more on a larger scale. Of course you can cherry pick single shitty movies that pass and classics that don't - none of that negates what the test measures.
But what if only 5% of movies that came out this year pass the test? 50%? 75%? What does it say about the state of entertainment? What does it say about the roles that young girls see and model themselves after? What does it say that we've seen a steady increase in movies that pass, especially over the past 30 years?
It says nothing.
If the movie is about two friends and one has a brother, and they talk about him, the test fails. That's what's so stupid about it. The test almost makes you want to believe men don't exist in these movies. Guess what? They do. So how can the test even think about passing most of the time when, by default, all women have fathers? Women don't talk about their dads/brothers/roommates/boyfriends/landlords/nephews/cousins?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
The point of the test is highlighting when women have more to talk about than just men, or more distinctly, men they find dreamy. It doesn't mean men don't exist, or they can't talk to/about their fathers, (sigh) it means that, do women exist as more than a personality-less cardboard cutout for a) the male main character to "win" or b) male viewers to fantasize over?
The higher bar for me rather than breaking down men into love interests/family/friends/coworker categories, it is impossible for two women to have a conversation, because there are rarely two women with speaking roles, or are they deemed important enough to the plot to have them talk. Even the Avengers, do Black Widow and Hill ever chat? Pepper? I'm sure the internet knows, I don't recall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
So, the sooner we kill romcoms, the better off we'll be? I concur.
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by andi*pandi
The point of the test is highlighting when women have more to talk about than just men, or more distinctly, men they find dreamy. It doesn't mean men don't exist, or they can't talk to/about their fathers, (sigh) it means that, do women exist as more than a personality-less cardboard cutout for a) the male main character to "win" or b) male viewers to fantasize over?
But that's not what the comic/test says, so....
EDIT: Example - S vs. B passes. Why? Because Lois never talks to Diana. Therefore, the movie passes despite weak female roles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
I've always thought that the test means more on a larger scale. Of course you can cherry pick single shitty movies that pass and classics that don't - none of that negates what the test measures.
But what if only 5% of movies that came out this year pass the test? 50%? 75%? What does it say about the state of entertainment? What does it say about the roles that young girls see and model themselves after? What does it say that we've seen a steady increase in movies that pass, especially over the past 30 years?
This. To use the test to judge single movies goes wrong - Gravity famously fails both the Bechdel and the reverse Bechdel test, but that is hardly they type of movie this test is supposed to criticize - but it is useful as a statistic.
|
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
But that's not what the comic/test says, so....
EDIT: Example - S vs. B passes. Why? Because Lois never talks to Diana. Therefore, the movie passes despite weak female roles.
I haven't seen that movie, but you're misreading the test. The requirement is that a movie must have two women who have a conversation about something other than men - that is, count the number of conversations between women and subtract the ones that are about men.
|
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by P
This. To use the test to judge single movies goes wrong - Gravity famously fails both the Bechdel and the reverse Bechdel test, but that is hardly they type of movie this test is supposed to criticize - but it is useful as a statistic.
Have you even SEEN the spin on bechdeltest.com? "This movie fails, but it passes in the spirit of it". What's the spirit, exactly? They give Ghostbusters a pass despite the women talking about men several times. How does that happen when Wiig is ALL. OVER. Hemsworth? And they talk about him and several other men multiple times?
Yeah, the test doesn't mean jack. It's a publicity vehicle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Ghostbusters, going by the test, fails spectacularly, but is given a pass because "girl power", or whatever.
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Ghostbusters, going by the test, fails spectacularly, but is given a pass because "girl power", or whatever.
Exactly this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's not that they can never talk about a man. It's that at some point, they talk about something other than a man. Ghostbusters very easily passes the Bechtel test.
The test itself is a silly little distraction. When you apply it to any one movie, it means very little.
It's just pointing out a trend. Most films are driven forward by the actions of men. Most movies are primarily about men and what men are doing. Women frequently serve as nothing more than motivation for men or as a reward for men. They may as well be a prop.
Again, this doesn't mean that all of these movies are bad, or that men are bad, or any such nonsense. It's just bringing attention to something that is viewed as a problem by many people.
|
My sig is 1 pixel too big.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
^^yeah that!
The test doesn't say they can *never* talk about/to men, but that they need to have one conversation, in the whole movie, that is not about men. I'm pretty sure that Ghostbusters had that all over. They talked about publishing that book, they talked about building gadgets, they talked about all kinds of things.
Now, "about men"...
Pam: "Susan, I need to give these reports to Commander Riker today."
Pam: "Susan, doesn't Commander Riker look fiiiine today!"
which of these is about men?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ort888
It's not that they can never talk about a man. It's that at some point, they talk about something other than a man. Ghostbusters very easily passes the Bechtel test.
The test itself is a silly little distraction. When you apply it to any one movie, it means very little.
It's just pointing out a trend. Most films are driven forward by the actions of men. Most movies are primarily about men and what men are doing. Women frequently serve as nothing more than motivation for men or as a reward for men. They may as well be a prop.
Again, this doesn't mean that all of these movies are bad, or that men are bad, or any such nonsense. It's just bringing attention to something that is viewed as a problem by many people.
Still stupid. Back to the Future fails. Why? Because Jennifer only talks to men. However, the whole motivation of Marty to get back is because of Jennifer! So in this case, the male lead's motivation (apart from getting back to his life), is because of that girl.
If you look at the construction of a movie like that, when would these characters have the time and/or motivation to talk about something other than Marty (or the little cousin)? And who cares?
The test is still stupid.
EDIT: Is the test a distraction? Maybe, but someone (male) at a party last weekend was pushing it in people's faces like it's the law or something, until I shut his ass down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
But that's not what the comic/test says, so....
EDIT: Example - S vs. B passes. Why? Because Lois never talks to Diana. Therefore, the movie passes despite weak female roles.
Originally Posted by starman
They give Ghostbusters a pass despite the women talking about men several times. How does that happen when Wiig is ALL. OVER. Hemsworth? And they talk about him and several other men multiple times?
Hahahaha you think the test means that women can't talk about men. It's hilarious seeing you so up in arms about this when you don't even understand how it works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
I sure wish our entertainments were an intrinsic part of our culture, they're so divergent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
Hahahaha you think the test means that women can't talk about men. It's hilarious seeing you so up in arms about this when you don't even understand how it works.
Have you even looked at some of the comments on the web site? The people running it can't even agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
<gasp> no one agrees on the internet? say it ain't so!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
Still stupid. Back to the Future fails. Why? Because Jennifer only talks to men. However, the whole motivation of Marty to get back is because of Jennifer! So in this case, the male lead's motivation (apart from getting back to his life), is because of that girl.
If you look at the construction of a movie like that, when would these characters have the time and/or motivation to talk about something other than Marty (or the little cousin)? And who cares?
The test is still stupid.
EDIT: Is the test a distraction? Maybe, but someone (male) at a party last weekend was pushing it in people's faces like it's the law or something, until I shut his ass down.
That's exactly what I'm talking about though. Jennifer has nothing to do with the movie. She's not his motivation. He wants to go back because A.) he doesn't belong in the 50s and b.) (as he later discovers) he's going to cease existing. What role do women play in Back to the Future? You've got his girlfriend, who has nothing to do with anything at all. You have his mom, who's role is to fall in and out of love wth various men. And then you have a smart male scientist helping a male protagonist help another nerdy man in his struggles with a bad male bully... You have this cast of diverse interesting men, and one woman who does nothing and one woman who's role is to fall in love with men.
And look, I love Back to the Future. It's a great movie. It's just another example of how many movies are constructed around men.
Let's move on to the second movie. They had so little need for Jennifer, that they literally had to knock her out and have her miss the vast majority of the movie. It's almost like the couldn't figure out what to do with her, so they just wrote her out.
You picked a really bad example to try to make a point.
(
Last edited by ort888; Jul 28, 2016 at 04:48 PM.
)
|
My sig is 1 pixel too big.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
they're so divergent.
That movie sucked, I don't care who talked to who.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
If talking about something other than a man is OK, then all you have to do is end the conversation with "Want to go shopping tomorrow? I totally need new shoes".
See what I did there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
Sure, that works. Was that hard?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by andi*pandi
Sure, that works. Was that hard?
You're completely missing the point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
That it's a stereotypical girly fluffy conversation? Sure, I saw what you did. Works for a movie like Clueless. Would not work in Star Trek. Fits the test though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by andi*pandi
That it's a stereotypical girly fluffy conversation? Sure, I saw what you did. Works for a movie like Clueless. Would not work in Star Trek. Fits the test though.
Right, but doesn't that negate the point of the test?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status:
Online
|
|
The point of the test is that even trivial conversations like that don't happen. In most modern movies, there is only one woman, the love interest, who has little to say and no other women to talk to... or if a rom-com, the female heroine has a sidekick that she unloads her romantic angst on.
In most movies, men talk about tons of things besides romance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by andi*pandi
The first was okay popcorn fare. After that? *shudder*
Originally Posted by ort888
Ghostbusters very easily passes the Bechtel test.
Tell that to Hemsworth, I hear he had to clean drool off his shirt between takes.
Originally Posted by Laminar
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
You're completely missing the point.
And yet 40% of movies today don't even give women that tiny amount of dialog.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
Which, therefore, dilutes the test itself.
Compared to what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
You're completely missing the point.
No, I think that you are. The original complaint is that a lot of blockbuster movies are formulaic to the extreme, and one result of this is that there is frequently only one woman who is there to play the love interest - or it is a rom on, which is all about love. The test itself - which, as already said, began as a punchline to illustrate the issue - is just one way to detect that type of movie. It is imperfect, as most such simple tests are. There are many movies that fail it that are far from formulaic, and there are others that pass on a technicality that probably shouldn't. And of course you could cheat the test, as you described. That no studio cares to do that shows how little they care.
To decide whether to see a movie based on that test alone is silly, but most of the reasons we see movies are silly. I will freely admit that I skip anything with certain actors in it because they usually don't make good movies, but that is probably even less accurate than that test. I have been wrong several times - Deadpool being the most recent example, I was laughing out loud at that - but it is a useful filter. If the Bechdel test usually works, it remains a useful filter for people who don't like that type of movie - and they can then pick up whatever it misses (like Gravity) based on reviews.
|
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by P
No, I think that you are. The original complaint is that a lot of blockbuster movies are formulaic to the extreme, and one result of this is that there is frequently only one woman who is there to play the love interest - or it is a rom on, which is all about love. The test itself - which, as already said, began as a punchline to illustrate the issue - is just one way to detect that type of movie. It is imperfect, as most such simple tests are. There are many movies that fail it that are far from formulaic, and there are others that pass on a technicality that probably shouldn't. And of course you could cheat the test, as you described. That no studio cares to do that shows how little they care.
To decide whether to see a movie based on that test alone is silly, but most of the reasons we see movies are silly. I will freely admit that I skip anything with certain actors in it because they usually don't make good movies, but that is probably even less accurate than that test. I have been wrong several times - Deadpool being the most recent example, I was laughing out loud at that - but it is a useful filter. If the Bechdel test usually works, it remains a useful filter for people who don't like that type of movie - and they can then pick up whatever it misses (like Gravity) based on reviews.
Exactly.
The point is that generally speaking, these trends exist, which provides a basis for this test existing in the first place. Whether the test is flawed, there are semantic issues, inconsistencies, language that is not literally accurate, etc. is completely missing the overall point. MacNNers are great at blowing off the overall gist of something because of these sorts of issues, and using these issues to create massive distraction, while losing track of the basic premise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Sorry, I just want to make sure that everybody remembers that starman thought that a test existed where a woman talking to a man made the movie fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's easy to be angry about something you know nothing about. Example: Trump supporters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
Sorry, I just want to make sure that everybody remembers that starman thought that a test existed where a woman talking to a man made the movie fail.
Um, that's not what I said. Show one example of where I said that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
And yet 40% of movies today don't even give women that tiny amount of dialog.
And yet, you're wrong. Bechdel Test Movie List
Look at 2016. Far more than 40% pass. Even 2015.
So, where did you pull that statistic out of? Oh, I know...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by P
No, I think that you are. The original complaint is that a lot of blockbuster movies are formulaic to the extreme, and one result of this is that there is frequently only one woman who is there to play the love interest - or it is a rom on, which is all about love. The test itself - which, as already said, began as a punchline to illustrate the issue - is just one way to detect that type of movie. It is imperfect, as most such simple tests are. There are many movies that fail it that are far from formulaic, and there are others that pass on a technicality that probably shouldn't. And of course you could cheat the test, as you described. That no studio cares to do that shows how little they care.
To decide whether to see a movie based on that test alone is silly, but most of the reasons we see movies are silly. I will freely admit that I skip anything with certain actors in it because they usually don't make good movies, but that is probably even less accurate than that test. I have been wrong several times - Deadpool being the most recent example, I was laughing out loud at that - but it is a useful filter. If the Bechdel test usually works, it remains a useful filter for people who don't like that type of movie - and they can then pick up whatever it misses (like Gravity) based on reviews.
Explain what the "type of movie" is, please? Back to the Future fails, what "kind of movie" is that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
And yet, you're wrong. Bechdel Test Movie List
Look at 2016. Far more than 40% pass. Even 2015.
So, where did you pull that statistic out of? Oh, I know...
You're on a roll here!
If 40% of movies don't give women dialog that constitutes a pass, that means 40% fail. So 60% pass. Which is roughly what it was 2014-2016.
These rampages aren't working out well for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
You're on a roll here!
If 40% of movies don't give women dialog that constitutes a pass, that means 40% fail. So 60% pass. Which is roughly what it was 2014-2016.
These rampages aren't working out well for you.
Are you drunk? I said "far more than 40%". Why are you stuck on 40%?
I'm also waiting for where you think I said something about "talking TO a man" as you wrote above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
You're reaching CTP levels of deflection here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
You're reaching CTP levels of deflection here.
I'm sorry, you made two accusations. You can easily scroll up and either quote them or admit you have low reading comprehension skills. Pick one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's running 57.9% passed among all movies rated. Above 60% for movies in the last few years. 2016 is showing almost 2/3 passing.
Bechdel stats and graphs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by reader50
It's running 57.9% passed among all movies rated. Above 60% for movies in the last few years. 2016 is showing almost 2/3 passing.
Bechdel stats and graphs
Yup. Higher than Laminar's mysterious "40%".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
Yup. Higher than Laminar's mysterious "40%".
Yikes. 40% fail = 60% pass. Keep it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm still waiting for you to quote me where I said "talk to".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
No way. I've learned that the best thing to do when you're wrong and being cornered is to deflect and insult and pretend not to care. So...YOU'RE DUMB AND STUFF. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON DUMB PEOPLE LIKE YOU, I'M MUCH TOO BUSY AND IMPORTANT AND SMART.
(
Last edited by Laminar; Aug 5, 2016 at 12:03 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
You're reaching CTP levels of deflection here.
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
No way. I've learned that the best thing to do when you're wrong and being cornered is to deflect and insult and pretend no to car. So...YOU'RE DUMB AND STUFF. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON DUMB PEOPLE LIKE YOU, I'M MUCH TOO BUSY AND IMPORTANT AND SMART.
You no car? O reely?
|
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Laminar
No way. I've learned that the best thing to do when you're wrong and being cornered is to deflect and insult and pretend no to car. So...YOU'RE DUMB AND STUFF. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON DUMB PEOPLE LIKE YOU, I'M MUCH TOO BUSY AND IMPORTANT AND SMART.
Mmhhmm. Thought so. Thanks for admitting you're wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah, I totally misread what you said and it was a dick move for me to keep harping on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by starman
Explain what the "type of movie" is, please? Back to the Future fails, what "kind of movie" is that?
An action-comedy based on a hero's journey.
|
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|