swamprat_basic's forum posts

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#1 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

I would watch Inception first, if you have to watch the movie. I found it to be really uninteresting.

The Dark Knight is much better, so you will be left with a better taste in your mouth at the end.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#2 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

2001: A Space Odyssey

The Godfather: Part II

Kick-Ass

Clerks

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#3 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

The usage of the f word in a period film annoys me no end. th3warr1or

The F-Word has been in use for at least 500 years, and historically people used far more profane language than they do in modern times.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#4 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

Best news of the day

Nathan Fillon has a chance!

planetjumper

Dude never thought about malcolm reynolds as Nathan Drake would be a good choice

uncharted seems to be a movie where you need a big star to headline or else its gonna fail...like rocketeer, nathan fillon though a talented actor in firefly, he wouldnt be able to garner much more than his firefly fanbase...and not even they could make a profit on the movie serenity

"Castle" is one of the most popular shows on TV at the moment, and that is entirely because of Nathan Fillion. I'm pretty sure that he can draw a bit more than just the Firefly crowd.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#5 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

still saying bradley cooper should be drake

and i heard they want the movie's to be different then the game series.

gotdangit

Bradley Cooper is in everything....

I'd say Jensen is a good Nathan, but that picture at the top does kinda remind me of Nathan Drake. I wonder who they'll pick now.

Bradley Cooper would be a terrible choice, unless they want the audience to dislike Drake. Cooper can only play douchebag.

Honestly there really is no better choice than Nathan Fillion. His sense of humor and comic timing fits Drake exactly.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#6 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

I am quick to gag on things like fat and mucus, and I experience pretty bad motion sickness, but I have never in my life gagged at the sight of something.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#7 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

Russell's involvement with the Uncharted movie was the only reason I was interested in it. Now they are using the script made by the writers of Sahara, my expectations for this to be a good movie just took a nose dive.

SirWander

I'm not sure I understand your complaint, considering "Sahara" is far closer to what the Uncharted games are like than David O. Russell's odd concept.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#8 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

[QUOTE="swamprat_basic"][QUOTE="dodgerblue13"] Do you realize that LeBron couldn't have done much more with the Cavs than he did? He made them contenders and look at them without him for one year. Horrendous. Compare the early Bulls (Jordan's first seven years) to LeBron's Cavs. Nobody is winning the finals with those Cavaliers. Thing is, LeBron came close.eboyishere

Fact of the matter is that the Cavs team was good enough to get LeBron to the NBA finals, and then they got swept. A GOAT contender would have gotten his team a win or two, even if they were outmatched, even if it required pulling a Kobe and scoring 81 points. GOAT contenders do not lose when the game is on the line.

GOAT contenders dont win unless scotty pippen is on the team:lol:

There are a lot more GOAT contenders than Michael Jordan, and Scottie Pippen didn't play on all of their teams.

Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#9 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts
[QUOTE="lowkey254"]

I disagree with Pippen.

For my own reasons why MJ is and always will be better, MJ never sold out his draft team for a ring.

LBJ has the potential to win more than MJ, but even if he does, "The Decision" will always taint him in my mind.

dodgerblue13
Do you realize that LeBron couldn't have done much more with the Cavs than he did? He made them contenders and look at them without him for one year. Horrendous. Compare the early Bulls (Jordan's first seven years) to LeBron's Cavs. Nobody is winning the finals with those Cavaliers. Thing is, LeBron came close.

Fact of the matter is that the Cavs team was good enough to get LeBron to the NBA finals, and then they got swept. A GOAT contender would have gotten his team a win or two, even if they were outmatched, even if it required pulling a Kobe and scoring 81 points. GOAT contenders do not lose when the game is on the line.
Avatar image for swamprat_basic
swamprat_basic

9145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#10 swamprat_basic
Member since 2002 • 9145 Posts

The John Jay Criminal College examined the issue and found it had Nothing to do with Celibacy.

" a landmark study by researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York, which examined the causes and context of the clergy sexual abuse crisis in the U.S. Catholic Church, concluded that there was no single cause or predictor of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. The report added that that situational factors and opportunity to abuse played a significant role in the onset and continuation of abusive acts.

"The bulk of cases occurred decades ago," said Karen Terry, PhD., John Jay's principal investigator for the report. "The increased frequency of abuse in the 1960s and 1970s was consistent with the patterns of increased deviance of society during that time." She also stated that "social influences intersected with vulnerabilities of individual priests whose preparation for a life of celibacy was inadequate at that time." Terry also said that neither celibacy nor homosexuality were causes of the abuse, and that priest candidates who would later abuse could not be distinguished by psychological test data, developmental and sexual history data, intelligence data, or experience in priesthood. The development of human formation components of seminary preparation for priesthood is associated with the continued low levels of child sexual abuse by Catholic priests in the United States, she said"

whipassmt

No, I do not mean that the Priests being celibate for so long is what causes this to happen. It is a natural inclination for a human being to desire a spouse and children, and the requirement of celibacy deters most of these normal individuals from joining the priesthood. So then the only people who join the priesthood are the absolute most devout or those with other urges. Unless they're saying that the offending priests started out as normal and became twisted over time, in which case that's an even bigger sign that the Church is doing something wrong.