ribboninthesky1
-
Posts
2.2k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by ribboninthesky1
-
-
Oh yeah, I read elsewhere they had beef. I vaguely recall rumors about Diesel not being that easy to work with (allegedly, he and Paul Walker didn't get along at first, either). I figure there's a reason he's not done much beyond this franchise in recent years. He could have had a career like The Rock. Then again, I think Dwayne has a charisma that Vin doesn't.
Statham vs Johnson? Why do I still believe that Statham would win? I'd like to see them in a film together outside of this franchise.
QuoteThey announced about a year ago that the new film would be the first of a trilogy that would supposedly conclude the series. No word on future titles, though.
Ah, thanks. 2021 will mark twenty years! Ay!
-
On 11/28/2016 at 10:43 AM, hendersonrocks said:
I also wondered if I was being hypocritical in seeing this, since I refused to see The Birth of a Nation because of Nate Parker & his co-writer's past & total inability to handle the situation with any sort of grace. #tangent
Beyond the usual white male privilege and racial dynamics, I believe there are a few differences between the two:
- This film, to my knowledge, wasn't hailed as some revolutionary game-changer with early Oscar buzz.
- The article posted upthread was from 2010 (and the alleged assault and harassment seem to have occurred in 2009) - social media didn't have nearly the influence on mainstream news and popular culture that it does today. I suspect the allegations would have been much more high profile if they came to light this year, especially in contrast to Nate Parker.
- To my knowledge, Casey Affleck has not given utterly and completely tone deaf interviews specifically about the allegations in an attempt to "get ahead" of the bad press.
- The allegations against Affleck, while gross and disturbing, are tonally (in public perception) less severe than Parker's. I've not found anything that specifies Affleck was brought up on criminal charges.
-
3
-
I don't get it, either, but at least JP and Ashley have been married for a few years. Jade and Tanner signing up was baffling - had they been married even six months before filming the show?
-
20 hours ago, Trini said:
Wait -- there another F&F movie coming out? I know they're always making sequels, but I hadn't heard any thing about this at all.
Right? I saw the thread title, and thought it would be some period film. I'm curious if they'll get to 10 films in the franchise, and what said titles of 9 & 10 will be.
-
12 hours ago, scriggle said:
I like Tony Stark but he's over-exposed. I hate that Marvel gives Tony so much screen time in movies that are not HIS MOVIES. He takes over the spotlight of the character the movie’s actually about (case in point Cap3 - yes, I'm still bitter). I’ll probably still go see Spiderman but I’m not thrilled with Tony being part of it and pulling focus from the other characters.
I had no interest in Spiderman anyway (I've only seen the Toby Maguire films), but even I was rolling my eyes at Stark in the trailer. But I've been pretty direct in my loathing of Tony Stark. It's more popular to tire of him now, but I've hated the guy since the first film.
I think some of that is because I don't believe being a superhero/vigilante should be "fun." Not that it has to be all gloom and doom and angst, but it's far from child's play. Thinking on it further, it's also why I've never cared to see younger versions of such characters.
-
4
-
-
13 hours ago, slf said:
Their "love" came completely out of left-field. Like she honestly seemed like she wanted to sock him one more than anything else until all of a sudden she's upset that he might die? Super weirdly written.
Even in the sequel, she seems mildly annoyed with him. Yet, their relationship is the lynch-pin of the franchise. Weird indeed.
-
2
-
-
15 minutes ago, slf said:
Rewatched Underworld the other day and was still taken by how little chemistry Scott Speedman and Kate Beckinsale had; little wonder, tho, given how bland Speedman generally is. And while I could see what he might find appealing about her (she's hot)...what was his appeal to her? Bland, slow on the uptake, okay-looking in a generic way (I'd have gone for Lucian m'self), not especially anything...
Yes, I just rewatched it the other day, and had similar questions. I don't get what is supposed to be so epic about their love. Even the mediocre actor who played Kraven was hot, at minimum. And yes to Lucian. I think Beckinsdale and Michael Sheen were a couple at some point, though I'm not sure if that was during filming. I never stop laughing at Speedman's acting during the "change" and when he "transforms" into the hybrid. I've never understood his appeal, or how he ever got acting jobs. God bless Michael Sheen who managed to class up the joint for the men.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, possibilities said:
That's not the only example, but it's one of the ways I think the show does call them out for being lazy and stupid as parents in an interracial parenting situation, and shows how their oblivousness to their own unexamined attitudes causes harm. There is no way they didn't know whether their white kids needed sunscreen or not, and we're shown very explicitly that they care about that. Being "colorblind" is not really being praised on the show; I think it's being shown to be straight up bullshit.
I haven't really watched the show since that episode, so perhaps there have been other incidents. But I didn't get the sense that the show called them out for being lazy and stupid in that context. Clueless, perhaps, but not lazy or self-indulgent in Randall's case (Kevin is a different matter). In addition, given the response on the thread at the time, it felt like the vast majority were more sympathetic to Rebecca and felt Yvette was out of line. To the point of missing how Randall was impacted by his parents' ignorance. I never saw a post about the way Rebecca barged into the area of black parents, particularly Yvette who she had to walk around to get Randall, and completely ignored them to drag her child away, even though he was perfectly safe and sound. How Randall must have suffered with poor haircuts and skin issues for years. But hey, Yvette didn't introduce herself and wasn't nice to Rebecca, so she's in the wrong.
There also seemed to be a lot of excuse-making of them not having the "opportunity" to interact with black people before the pool incident, which made zero sense to me. If Randall kept a book tally for when he met black people, if he knew black kids would be at that pool, then obviously....they're meeting black people. They just chose not to engage them. That's on Jack and Rebecca. Anyway, that show and some of the discussion got my blood pressure up, so for my own sanity, I moved on.
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:
What the heck was that? And why is Sofia Boutella perpetually cast as alien/foreign/abnormal? I'm probably one of the few Americans left who still finds Tom Cruise to be a decent actor, but I don't know what this is. Tom, you could have given me a sequel to Edge of Tomorrow, dammit!
If loving 90s/00s The Mummy is wrong, I don't want to be right. They hold up very well - the cast is great, and they're entertaining. We shall not speak of the 3rd.
-
5
-
-
5 hours ago, LydiaMoon1 said:
The above has ALWAYS bothered me, but Nova’s SJW storyline mainly bothered me for one very specific reason. To me, social justice is a mirage that keeps people busy, but not productive.
Take Nova for an example. She ran around visiting jails and hospital and writing articles…and for what? Yes, it was nice that Nova was able to help get Too Sweet’s charges dropped (with an able assist from Calvin), but the system is still intact. If that drug dealer and Too Sweet are pulled over by the cops on their way to Alabama, Too Sweet can easily be right back in the same situation (or worse) all over again. It’s like Charley and RA’s argument regarding the mill. RA was probably right. Earnest probably did envision RA living on that land the same way he did, eking out a living on that farm year after year. They consider that a win. Charley, OTOH, is thinking in terms of economic empowerment. RA was right when he told her that building an empire was her dream. I’m with Charley. If you truly want to change your circumstances, you have to begin with a strong economic base and you must build a solid infrastructure. Queen Sugar is infrastructure.
Basically, I look at it this way: Social Justice = give a man a fish. Sure, he’ll eat today, but he’ll be hungry again tomorrow. Economic Empowerment = teach a man to fish. He’ll never be hungry again.
Good points, especially the bolded. I feel that Nova, and perhaps because she's not a character from the book, suffered a lot in characterization because Ava and team were using her as a cipher for the current social climate and what's hot on Black Twitter. I'm conflicted about that because, while it's not wrong to incorporate it into storytelling, I wasn't interested in that angle on this show. The issues with the farm were more relevant and served the same purpose. There was also an element of magical realism with Nova that felt tonally off to me.
Also, hot as Nova and Calvin are, we barely saw them interact this season. The actors made the most of their time on screen, which is what saves the pairing for me. But I am curious to see what they will do with them next season. As for their drama, none of the women on this show get to be happy in their romantic relationships.
-
20 hours ago, GodsBeloved said:
Would you mind sharing those reasons?
Most of my reasoning I shared in a post from episode 7:
On 10/21/2016 at 2:54 PM, ribboninthesky1 said:My main problem with it is that it is very male-centered. As if black girls and women are impervious to the same conditions that these black men and boys have experienced. Not nary a mention of the black girls and women who have been beaten, shot, raped, and murdered, not just by police officers, but by the men in these very communities. I mean, if you're gonna go there, then go all the way there and be circumspect with it. I expect that kind of myopia on shows where the leads are primarily black men. I expect better from this show.
I'd add that, historically, black women have usually been on the front lines with civil rights and social justice, and are almost always unsung, or their work minimized (example: Rosa Parks did a helluva more than take a seat on a bus). And they did so at even greater risk to themselves than men. That was largely ignored on this show because Ava and her team wanted to make a point of primarily men as victims of corruption. Even the undocumented workers featured in episodes 8 and 9 were all men.
Finally, I prefer social justice that truly empowers without seeking acknowledgement and validation from the very people who perpetuate it. Fact is, white supremacy is woven in the fabric of American society, law, economy. While not all whites perpetuate it, I don't think that those in positions of power who do are ignorant of their own bigotry. They know it very well, and knowingly operate in it. Unless you hit them economically or legally, there's no reason for them to change. It's why I prefer Charley's approach with the mill - instead of trying to operate and be successful with the current framework, which hasn't benefited the black farmers in that parish - she's looking to build a new one that enables them to be self-sustaining and profitable. And also, the farmers she met with? Men and women. Her approach is just as difficult, perhaps even more so, but there's a long game that's more beneficial, IMO.
20 hours ago, Neurochick said:The scene that really moved me was when Nova was spat upon by that piece of human excrement (I'm sorry to offend pieces of shit). When that happened it was Calvin who went after "him." I liked that because so often black women are shown as "mules" and "soldiers", thinking nothing of attacking a grown man. Nova was frozen and it was Calvin who did the chivalrous thing, to go after the "male" who assaulted her.
IMO though, the bouncers should have thrown the "male" out of the club on his ass.
I agree, though it seemed like the spitting in her face affected her much more than the physical assault. And Calvin was being restrained at that point, thus couldn't put a further beatdown on his co-worker. Nova seemed very alone in that moment, and it was sad.
-
9
-
-
8 hours ago, rozen said:
Charley is literally never going to love like that again and Remy was just setting himself up for heartache if he thought could get even a fraction of what Charley gave Davis.
This reminds me - I like Remy. He's a mature, reasonable, intelligent man. But I've never been that invested in Remy and Charley as a couple. (As I'm writing this, I realize that I'm not invested in any of the women's romantic relationships because of the writing). I've no problem with Charley moving on. However, Remy has known from the beginning that she's in a messy situation. He knowingly chose to pursue a woman who is still technically married. I don't agree with Charley playing both sides, but this is what I meant by women playing a little dirty. I wrote a couple of episodes ago that I would have been fine with Charley remaining married to Davis for access to his money. I like the way she played it with Felix and and Frank, but I think she pivoted when it was clear that Davis wanted more than a performance for the cameras and wouldn't stay in NOLA to play house. I hope we're not subjected to lectures next season because she doesn't play nice in business when it comes down to the wire.
Two things I did appreciate about the finale:
One, Charley's chess moves weren't just to benefit her family - she had a larger vision in uplifting that entire community in concrete, economic ways. That's the stuff the draws me to this show. Nova's take on social justice, while valiant and relevant and necessary, bothered me for reasons.
Two, Nova and Charley are solid with each other and with Vi. Please, showrunners: they can argue, disagree, whatever. Just let them remain close. I never knew how much I needed to see black women have healthy, functional, supportive relationships with each other on TV. But I do. The most impactful scenes for me in this episode involved Nova having Charley's back.
I'm not looking forward to the Ralph Angel vs Charley (and Nova?) conflict because the show has already demonstrated that it's entirely sympathetic to him. I don't have much confidence that it will be a circumspect, rounded conflict. Anything's possible, though.
9 hours ago, rozen said:This is some Montague vs Capulet shit, it's not going to be resolved because y'all woke up one morning deciding to screw around like respectable people.
I.am.unable, rozen! In truth, I always wondered why Nova wasn't threatened by local officers after she wrote that article. Calvin is all kinds of sexy (didn't know Greg Vaughan had moves like that - I may have watched the dancing a few times, ahem). We'll see how it plays out. I'm praying there is no confrontation with the ex-wife. I don't want to see her, and don't care about her perspective. Not sorry.
Side note: Nova's outfits in this episode were everything. I normally don't pay much attention, but her styling really popped for me.
-
9
-
-
After watching the preview for this episode, I knew the "Ernest really wanted Ralph Angel to have the land" was coming. The same Ralph Angel that was completely down for selling the land to the Boudreaux family, sight unseen, a few episodes ago. And that's not to mention the criminal activities he engaged in AFTER his prison release. Chile...
I don't care about Hollywood and Vi. I hope Vi moves on. If that man is willing to jump ship because he saw you dancing with another man, then let him. It really annoys me that that Hollywood is expected to be forgiven (per the writers) for lying about being married, not to mention financially and legally supporting said spouse via his insurance, because he was "good" to Vi. I could write a dissertation about the bullshit that women, especially black women, are expected to tolerate in their relationships. And if they do play a little dirty, they are certain to be held accountable in a way that men rarely are.
I think there were strong performances by all, but I feel like the show didn't really know what it wanted to be and particularly who Charley and Nova are meant to be. I'll never understand why they had Calvin be married in the first place. As I've shared from the beginning, Nova and Calvin had plenty of realistic, meaty conflict to mine without throwing in an extramarital affair.
Maybe next season will feel more grounded? I was hoping for more family cohesion in the 2nd season, and certainly less Rah whining. I doubt that will happen.
-
8
-
-
12 hours ago, memememe76 said:
It's not just This is Us. Pretty much every show, movie, song that tries to get the audience to cry is accused of being manipulative.
Guess it's a matter of perception. It feels like the shows that go for shock value/twists are accused of audience manipulation, probably because those shows tend to be the more critically acclaimed/popular at the present.
I agree with @Enigma X that TV in general is manipulative. For me, if it's becomes very obvious that's going on, I get annoyed. Allow me to be blissfully ignorant in being manipulated, please and thank you.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, memememe76 said:
My unpopular opinion: I don't fault shows for trying to make me weepy. Other shows try to make me laugh, or cringe, etc. Not sure why sentiment is so shunned.
Given the success of This Is Us, how is that sentiment shunned? Because a few people on a thread don't like the show?
-
3
-
-
I haven't watched the show in several episodes (@lordonia perfectly summarizes why), but since I'm visiting family for the holiday, they had it on. I decided to catch up on some of the discussion, and was surprised at the level of dislike/hate towards Miguel. I assumed he did something in some episode I haven't seen.
Anyway, watching the latest episode made me appreciate Beth all the more. Her in-laws are a hot mess, and Randall is intense all on his own. I didn't find Randall's enthusiasm about Thanksgiving all that endearing. He really lost me by not only waking William up, but dragging the cancer-ridden, obviously weakened man out on a 3 mile hike. If you wanted him with you, why not get the man a wheelchair or something? I don't know...maybe I'm just not a Randall fan. *shrug*
-
3
-
-
14 hours ago, pinetastic said:
First off Charley doesn't have the best history of staying calm in response to good ole boy tactics.
I think there's a difference between being stubborn and overpaying for a tractor, and being physically threatening towards the man with a controlling stake in all the mills in your parish, and you haven't secured a deal with a mill, let alone secured the loan you need to continue farm operations. Boudreaux was trying to intimidate, no doubt, but it was much more passive-aggressive. Gotta know how to play the hand being dealt.
2 hours ago, withanaich said:I worried about Ralph Angel flipping out too, not because the two parties are trying to negotiate, but in his anger RA tends to show his hand. I was cringing, waiting for him to give Boudreaux a bunch of details like which mill they're going to use and the exact date and time they're leaving. It's better to make Boudreaux think they're still considering his "offer" for now so he doesn't do something like buy the other mill out from under them or sabotage their equipment.
Yes to the bolded. You were in my brain, as I was going to mention something similar in my original post, but decided against it.
QuoteI wish the siblings would sit down and discuss how they will handle any future confrontations, both alone and separately, now that they know how dirty the Boudreaux/Landrys want to play.
I wonder if the second season will show more of this. Like you, I was hoping to see more of that in this episode. I can see this first season being the foundation to air out grievances, reveal family secrets, and grow/repair relationships. I hope we see more sibling cohesion in the second season.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:
I don't care what a character is wearing unless it is important to the show. The page long discussions on a characters clothing confuse me at times.
This reminded me of something: I don't care about product placement on a show. Short of the actors stopping a scene or breaking the 4th wall to shill a product, it's all good to me.
-
19
-
-
Maybe it's 16 hours because it's in northern Louisiana? Okay, no, that doesn't work, either. Maybe they have to drive really slow to keep from disturbing the cane in transit. I also thought they had bought farm equipment awhile ago. In addition, it begs the question of how Ernest was able to mill his harvests all those years. But I suspect we're not meant to question the storylines too deeply.
Of course, if they'd known about the Boudreaux connection before planting, perhaps they could have secured a deal with a closer mill and had more time to strategize. I know, dead horse...what's done is done.
3 hours ago, Arcadiasw said:I think Ralph Angel gave away their hand when they talked to Boudreaux. Ralph Angel was understandably aggressive to Boudreaux but he should’ve let Charley do all the talking. I think she would’ve spoke more diplomatically to Boudreaux in letting him know they weren’t going to sell or let him think they were selling but wanted to wait until after they made a profit on the farm. If that worked, that could've save Charley and Ralph Angel from any future hostility. If Boudreaux didn’t buy that and came on aggressive then Ralph Angel and Charley could let him know they are aware of their family’s history and are not selling.
Watching this scene brought this pop culture quote to mind: Don't bring a gun to a knife fight. But this is the same guy who pulled a gun on two men for doing their job. No idea if Darla will relapse, but Ralph Angel is a serious loose cannon. I've given up all hope of the show ever addressing it.
-
3
-
-
I really wanted to like Pitch. I found myself skipping past scenes over a few episodes, which is never a good sign. I wish Kylie Bunbury well, and hope to see her in something I can watch eventually.
I also wanted to like This Is Us. Sterling K. Brown isn't enough to keep me watching.
Both of these are Dan Fogelman shows, so there's something about his TV writing that bugs me.
-
I'm especially looking forward to this because so much of black history that's popularized is male and/or Civil Rights centered. I'm hoping the film boosts the book's sales. I've pre-ordered a copy.
-
13
-
-
On 11/18/2016 at 7:58 PM, pinetastic said:
I'm curious how Micah is going to like the kids at his new school. I have a feeling Keke will not be easily forgotten.
Using sites like kickstarter, or gofundme, they could get the public to donate. Usually its lots of people making small donations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdfunding
Though I can't see Charley doing something like that.
I see your point about Charley. I was thinking of alternate ways to fund the farm, and that came to mind.
-
5 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:
This still goes on to some degree, and it's just ridiculous. For instance, why is Tom Cruise playing the leading man in the upcoming The Mummy remake instead of, you know, the titular mummy? He's 9 years older than Boris Karloff was when Karloff played the mummy in 1932! Hell, he's 23 years older than Brendan Fraser was as the leading man in 1999 version!
*tosses laptop at Wiendish* I cannot stop laughing!
I like Tom Cruise as an actor, but you're right - it's ridiculous. I think he set himself up very well several years ago, so he can pretty much make any movie he wants, no matter how absurd. I enjoy his Mission: Impossible films, but the last two have been been a strain on my suspension of disbelief. Tom isn't going anywhere as long as his can finance his own films, so we have more Cruise inanity in store!
18 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:I kind of wonder if part of the reason why Daniel Craig is so sick of James Bond is because he's getting tired of trying to maintain that bod while he's pushing 50.
That, and the injuries endured while filming. He's the most physical Bond to date, for sure. Compare Craig's films to something like Sean Connery's Goldfinger, where his Bond did virtually nothing the entire film beyond flirting and smirking. I could see Craig doing little beyond independent films after Bond. He's looking rough, and he's financially set for life. It's what I would do. Craig also seems to be among the few men who publicly acknowledge the older man/ever younger woman trope.
-
3
-
-
20 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:
Even if Mel Gibson hadn't gone crazy, I don't think he would have been allowed to keep leading man status because he aged so horribly.
I agree, though I've always wondered if the former heavily influenced the latter.
I think Denzel aged better than most leading men, so it wasn't as visually dissonant to see him with younger women for awhile. At least for me. But Flight promptly ended that. And yet, Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones in Entrapment was unintentional comedy for me.
20 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:Although it does seem like now, the older 40-plus guys are expected to keep up their hunk bods, like Denzel, Liam Neeson Daniel Craig, Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, etc etc.
I'm trying to think of the last time Denzel was shirtless for a role...I wouldn't necessarily put him in with this group. Even in his later action films, he's usually clothed. It seems that a lot of the pressure to stay fit is due to being an action lead. Whereas women are almost always expected to be attractive, regardless of genre.
-
3
-
Baywatch (2017)
in Movies
Not really interested in this, but thanks to the trailer for the 90s Biggie throwback. *goes to listen to Hypnotize multiple times*