Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

558 Excellent
  1. Is anyone still debating Cosby's guilt? He was found guilty by a jury of his peers. He is hideous, Job done.
  2. The likes of Cosby and Weinstein can't be aware of any wrongdoing outside of society's legal constructs, otherwise they would not commit repeated premeditated crimes. Even when they display contrition, it is always of the self-pitying variety because they got caught and fell from status; just look at Weinstein's grovelling appeals for support from the upper echelons of his industry, while he sought "therapy". That he entertained the notion that therapy would be considered an appropriate response by the public reveals the depth of his delusion, a situation exacerbated by the gutter-morals prevalent in Hollywood. I don't think they will ever feel or express remorse other than as a PR exercise; I tend to see more of a contempt for their accusers followed by a conceited sense of injustice. Either way, prison is the appropriate place for them.
  3. There are many opinions masquerading as facts in this debate. I won't impugn Ronan's motives, but even if he is a fame-whore at least it enabled him to get a story published that media outlets had been well-aware of and ducking for over a decade, so he put it to good purpose.
  4. I have been re-watching TNG on Netflix. The major glaring difference between the two shows is in the command structures. In TNG, the command structure is fairly flat and collaborative, with every senior crew member offering advice and information, allowing Picard to come to an informed decision, or defer to someone else's when they have a better understanding. In STD the command structure is hierarchical and combative, with no stock given to the advice of underlings and most relationships between senior crew members being polarised and defined by conflict. It feels very reflective of the societal and political changes in the real world between the two shows. I would like to see a return to the TNG command structure, with a competent leader who recognises that they are only as effective as the sum of the people they work with. The second major difference is that TNG actually explored philosophical questions, interesting scientific phenomena, diplomacy and cultural clashes and the wonder of physical and intellectual exploration; whereas STD is more interested in shooting things and explosions. I would also like a return to TNG on this front.
  5. I stopped watching long before Neegan arrived, and the reason... Rick Grimes. What began as a compelling and well-portrayed character became a tedious, circular, sub-soap opera lurch from one existential crisis to the next. Actually the decline of Rick’s character is largely representative of the show as a whole.
  6. I never understand how these stories remained untold for so long, but it must at least in part be blamed on a weak, cowardly and strongly partisan press (which seems more interested in hit-pieces against those on the other side of the political divide, than exercising their freedom to reveal issues in the public interest). In the UK we had Jimmy Saville who practised paedophilia for years within the BBC (our state news provider who give lip-service to being impartial), When his actions were finally revealed, it transpired that doctor's who had no connection to him had refused him access onto their children's wards as part of his charitable work, which indicates how widely known this was, and how senior figures within the BBC must have been aware and covered it up/ refused to take action. It took decades for anyone to introduce it into the public eye, and that it was specifically a publicly funded news organisation that were so willing to discard all journalistic principles, is crazy.
  7. Yes, his apparent character arc seems to have been driven entirely by self-pity since losing his hand. I don't really see that as a noble motive, quite the opposite. But since you have not watched beyond season 4, you should probably be warned that consistent characterisation does not really exist in the later seasons, particularly in the most recent season where half the characters are entirely unrecognisable from one scene to the next.
  8. I feel odd about Ozzy and Sharon... I might get lynched for this, but sod it, opinions are opinions... they were both kinda mad, they both kinda knew what they were getting into... does this excuse Ozzie's behaviour? Of course not. Did Sharon accept it as part of the relationship? Probably. OK, now I will get shot down.
  9. Yeah, it was probably poor terminology on my part. But there seems to be a general mouth zipper applied to anyone in the public eye- you follow our rhetoric or you feel our wrath!
  10. I don't use Twitch, the idea of watching other people playing games never appealed to me, so I can't really comment.
  11. Most of us just sit somewhere in the middle. We look at the arseholes who do this as the criminals they are. We look at the pandering betas as the pathetic try-hards they are. Most of the conversation is by people with far more privilege than us. We go to work for long hours, we eat, we sleep.
  12. Yeah, they kinda hand-waved that with the Netflix montage at the start of the first episode. In terms of my comment, I meant both the various blackmailed students agreeing to cooperate with the turdburglar, and the various students/staff/police cooperating with the film-makers. Both seasons rely upon people revealing things they simply would not reveal, whether through human-nature, or because their job would strictly prohibit them from doing so. A policeman would not reveal the details of an ongoing investigation. A school secretary would not reveal the details of a student's calendar... etc, etc ...
  13. Just watched it all, and my thoughts below: - This season was as fun as the last. As with the last season the manner in which events unfold stretches credibility, and relied on excessive coincidence and cooperation from people who simply would not be so cooperative. As with last season, there were also moments of hammy acting. The characters and the subtlety of the hardships suffered and privileges each of them enjoyed were nuanced and well-written (where they could have easily been dumb and reductive), and this elevated the show above the premise. I had two issues with this season (apart from the unlikeliness of the central crime noted by @Miles above), the first is that the culprits were the obvious, and only feasible, suspects from the early episodes, and the wild-goose chases and red herrings were so clearly flagged as such that they never provided a convincing alternative. The second issue was that the final reveal felt as if it were lifted straight from Black Mirror: Shut Up and Dance, only Black Mirror did it with much more poignancy, wit, pathos and in a far shorter running time. The voice over at the end also felt entirely unnecessary and tacked-on, and even undercut some of the nuance and subtlety in the earlier episodes.
  14. Apologies if I wasn't clear enough, I have a tendency to just type. It seems that the powers that be have long enabled Hollywood to get away with unacceptable behaviour. Having recently been found out, the participants and enablers have the audacity to moralise over the issue. This is also unacceptable behaviour. There are many people in Hollywood who are still free, who should be charged. This is exceptionally unacceptable.
  15. This seems a very polarising article. While anyone reasonable absolutely agrees that women (or men) should be able to raise these issues, we should not automatically believe one party to the detriment of the other. We should weigh the evidence as all rational and lawful societies do. I believe that it is also a common sentiment that you do not have a right to riches and privilege. If you squander that right, then you do not get to return. That is not a debated point. To suggest it is, is odd. I am not sure who this article is aimed at, but it seems a phantom antagonist.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size