Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Catelyn finds her.While Brienne is exploring Westeros in search of the girls.
If they don't bother properly establishing Batman as a character, or his motivations as a superhero, then he can be pretty boring. Same as any other superhero, really, but the media seems to care a lot less when it comes to Batman. Is Batman Begins the only film/television version where they bothered to actually explain his origins?Origins in regards to his training with Ra's al Ghul? Cause I'm pretty sure almost all Batman shows/movies cover the fear of bats/parents dying part.
Totally forgot about that piece of shit. Way worse than The First Avenger.He can't fuck up like Shyamalan did with TLA, so who cares?
How do you know that?
Because to do that he'd have to change actors nationalities, change character's names, write a shit screenplay and make the whole movie delivered in exposition with 1 big fight scene. Man of Steel was a weak movie but it wasn't anywhere near as soul crushingly shit as TLA.
Naw, the books don't have a whole lot of sex in them. They have some nudity and adult themes, but most sex is implied or happens behind the scenes. Actual sex scenes only happen a few times.I think I'm going to double check this. Maybe it is that it's just implied, but it's certainly implied as much as it happens in the show. I remember some pretty graphic instances though.
Does this series still suck?10-20 minute sex scenes? No.The boyfriend can't get into it and he loves fantasy, he just isn't much of a character-driven drama person.
For me it has nothing to do with drama. I love good character drama, it's what makes a series for me. Your generalization is incorrect.
It's probably because of all the gratuitous sex scenes. It is extremely unnecessary and adds absolutely nothing to the plot other than "omg so edgey HBO lol". That is my #1 issue with the series. I have no problem with sex scenes normally, however, there are ways to imply sex or show romance or betrayal without showing a 10 minute scene of the characters doing it. It is extremely distasteful and uncomfortable to the point where I cannot and will not watch it.
The very possibility is probably quite frightening to politicians.That I can definitely understand. It's been a long time since anything like this happened.
I can't see any way for the government to quickly resolve this situation that doesn't involve them slaughtering the militia.George Washington would have done it.
President Washington, confronted with what appeared to be an armed insurrection in western Pennsylvania, proceeded cautiously. Although determined to maintain government authority, he did not want to alienate public opinion. He asked his cabinet for written opinions about how to deal with the crisis. The cabinet recommended the use of force, except for Secretary of State Edmund Randolph, who urged reconciliation. Washington did both: he sent commissioners to meet with the rebels while raising a militia army. Washington privately doubted the commissioners could accomplish anything, and believed a military expedition would be needed to suppress further violence
...
The Washington administration's suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion met with widespread popular approval. The episode demonstrated the new national government had the willingness and ability to suppress violent resistance to its laws. It was therefore viewed by the Washington administration as a success, a view that has generally been endorsed by historians
That is political suicide.But you're right, I guess we should just let a militia hang out in Neveda because no one wants to be the person to restore order.Reality sucks sometimes. Most politicians value their job more than their constituents.
Not sure about "outrage" it would definitely be heavily covered. But you're right, I guess we should just let a militia hang out in Neveda because no one wants to be the person to restore order.Only the really crazy right minority would say something like this. How would a SWAT team be too much force after everything this guy has said and done? He has a fucking militia. No one would think "man, the local beat cops should have tried to just walk up and handcuff him."Your argument defeats itself. He has a ton of people willing to take arms against the government for him - logically there are many more people who support him but don't have a deathwish. Sure, it would be a minority, but more than enough to cause a media outrage.
Only the really crazy right minority would say something like this. How would a SWAT team be too much force after everything this guy has said and done? He has a fucking militia. No one would think "man, the local beat cops should have tried to just walk up and handcuff him."If they try to arrest him and he starts shooting then it's definitely not political suicide to shoot back.
"Cliven Bundy is dead. Shot while defending his home, Cliven Bundy and 4 other members of his militia group were killed by SWAT teams from the local county's office. Sources say that the SWAT team entered the house at 10:05am after repeated attempts to get Mr. Bundy to surrender failed.
'This is a tragety that should never have happened' said some republican senator 'This man was a patriot to America for standing up to the corruption in Government, such as what I fight every day. That kind of force for one man is unacceptable.'
A vigil is being held and an estimated 1,000 people are arriving. Police are keeping a large distance from the farm as many of these people appear to be armed."