Dargo2
-
Posts
5,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Dargo2
-
-
"Gila Monsters"???!!!
Why, I had NO idea Fred lived near me here in the Southwest!
(...the Southwest of the good ol' U.S. of A that is...NOT the Kelowna B.C. area of Canada, of course)
-
>lime eating?
LOL
Hey! I didn't say it...BILD did!!!
But, you know what he meant, right?!
-
>I'm glad we gave the lime eaters the heave ho way back when, but the Founding Fathers had a very narrow view of 'men' and 'equality.'
VERY ture, and you'll get no argument from me on this point at all. Though as I'm sure you know, there presently seems afoot the idea in our country that those aforementioned Founding Fathers were somehow "infallible" in ALL things.
(...aaah, but maybe we should end this little sidetracking of Dicky's thread right here, 'cause I'm sure you know what kind of a discussion of THAT would probably lead to TOO around here, don't ya...and it probably wouldn't end up being "pretty" EITHER!)
LOL
-
While I have to admit I'm not as big a fan of this movie as you appear to be MissW, I've always appreciated the dichotomy of contrasts inherent in this film and in its depiction of a society beginning its road to the abyss on the one hand, and then the somewhat nonchalant atmosphere present inside the cabaret exhibited with an almost "Nero fiddling while Rome is burning" feel on the other hand.
And while I suppose I can KIND of see Fred's point about the "early '70s look" of it(I suppose his meaning might be something to the same effect as how many Westerns made before the '70s had characters that looked as though they had just had a shave and nice clean razor-cut haircut down the street on Burbank Blvd before filming started for the day...case in point: Kirk and Burt in "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral...but I digress), but I also would like Fred to expand upon his premise that somehow "Nazis make the film seem dated"...'cause I ain't gettin' THAT idea of his at all, either.
-
Btw Fred, and to attempt to seriously answer your "DNA testing of the Shroud of Turin" question here...as far as I know there's only ever been radiocarbon dating tests done of that object, which as I recall came to the conclusion that it dated to the Middle Ages and not as far back as biblical times.
And, seeing as how Jesus never had children(well, according to presently held chuch doctrine anyway), you have to wonder who they'd find in the modern world in order to run DNA tests against any specimens they'd find on said shroud, right?!
(...and on a side note here, I once found a pototo chip in my bag of Lays that looked JUST like the Blessed Mother...it tasted like all the rest, however)
-
Well Fred, according to MM here, there's not a "shroud" of evidence that this whole DNA thing even works at ALL!!!
-
Eeh, now don't you fret, Hibi. Ya know with the advent of this whole DNA stuff, they can now clone people TOO!
And so MAYBE just like the King of the Dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus Rex in those Michael Crichton flicks, they'll one day make another Plantagenet TOO!
(...hey, just tryin' to make ya feel better here, THAT'S all!)
-
Bingo! Good use of deduction there, Hibi. Yep, it's Allison Hayes.
-
How about...
(...oh, and Fred if you're out there...NO CHEATING!!!!)
-
Really into these sorts of conspiracy theories, are we MM???
Just do us a favor here and lets keep this baby firming on the fields of Bosworth England and away from the direction of Dallas Texas and certain "Magic Bullet" theory, okay?!
(...'cause I remember the last time THAT happened around here, and it wasn't pretty!)
LOL
-
Yeah Hibi, you may be "offended"
, but considering the topic of MissW's thread here, at LEAST you're not bored, RIGHT?!(...'cause I certainingly can't recall the last time I WAS both "offended" and "bored" at the same time anyway!)
-
>I never use the ignore button either. If the post is longwinded or boring after a few lines, I just skip reading it. I'm too nosy to ignore people. Even if I may not like the person (and that's pretty rare) they may have something interesting to say from time to time.......
Kindred spirits we in this regard, Hibi. I've also never used the ignore function on any website of which I've been a member, and primarily because, as you stated, sometimes some of the people we may not especially care for, possibly due to clashing styles or some such issue, CAN post something of interest and which we may not have known beforehand.
(...and I'm always up for learnin' new stuff!)
-
>Sounds to me more like you're skeptical of scientists, and science.
Oooh VX, I'm SO hopin' MovieMadness replies to ya with somethin' like:
"That's right, shweetheart. I've been shkeptical of dem shcientists ever shince the Dodson Case, and when that dame in the lab coat shent me on that wild goose chase down to the Shan Pedro docks!"
-
>More evidence, not that any was needed, that English royalty is just a collection of bloody awful parasitic scoundrels.
Eeh! They ALL were Bild, and not just the English versions.
And thus why those enlightened gentlemen living a couple hundred years ago or so along the Atlantic coast were so insightful in their words, "All men are created equal"!
(...though trust me, I ALSO have my doubts about the wisdom of Representative Democracy TOO!!!)
LOL
-
Sorry ol' boy, but that looks JUST like a young Jill Ireland, and way before she met and married Bronson.
(...and I ain't talkin' about Michael Parks here EITHER!!!)
-
Yeah Kyle, and to tell ya the truth, and despite my great satisfaction in owning a Chevy Silverado pickup, I thought the Dodge Ram commercial was pretty good TOO when I saw it shown during the Super Bowl.
BUT, once again, THAT wasn't the point last night when I, yes I, called Jake on his posting of it in his thread. Nope, the point was pretty much about him "doing it AGAIN" around here. And in THAT I mean, his occasional less than subtle pressing of HIS agendas. And I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to know WHAT that agenda is, RIGHT?!(no pun intended with the word "right" there, btw)
And contrary to some of the opinion of OTHERS in this thread that "The Powers That Be are somehow taking away our freedom of speech at this website", I would LIKE to remind everyone here that this website's "Rules of Conduct" explicitly state that there shall be no pressing of its individual members' political or religious agendas and/or "heartfelt" opinions on these matters.
Now, I'm sure Jake is probably a very nice guy who loves his God, his country and his dogs, but I for one am pretty darn tired of occasionally running across his posts which just REEK of his political thoughts, either overtly stated, or in rarer cases, subtly suggested.
And while I admit I also have been guilty of the occasional political thought emanating from MY keyboard and sent to this website's message boards, and just as I'm sure many others have done at least once or twice over time, I'm sorry to say that Jake's postings with this intent probably exceed those figures in one WEEK.
I mean, just tonight Jake posted in the "Favorite line from movie" thread a catchphrase of the late RADIO personality Paul Harvey, who and far I know was NEVER in any movies at all. And, it's almost a sure bet that he posted that line of Mr. Harvey's SOLELY because of his "strong agreements" with Mr. Harvey's political leanings.
Now, I DON'T wish to have Jake bannished from here OR feel that he isn't welcomed to add to the conversation about cinema, but GEESH, all I'd like is for him to LIGHTEN UP occasionally around here and STOP with the all-too-often agenda pressing.
(...and if you read this Jake..no, you don't have to start bein' a wiseguy would-be comedian like some of us are here...JUST lighten the heck UP, that's all!)
-
>Maybe something good will come out of all this after all.
Uh huh. Maybe Jake will lighten up a bit and begin to resist his urges to press his agenda around here, such as say whenever he feels like RE-FIGHTING the freakin' CIVIL WAR!!!
LOL
(...I mean dude, it's been almost A HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS since the thing was over for chrissake...move on, my friend, move ON!!!)
ROFL
-
-
LOL
Good comeback!
-
>He was an old English King who looked just like Lawrence Olivier:
...WITH a putty nose!
(...but UNLIKE Lucy's, Bill Holden doesn't set HIS on fire!
-
>FredCDobbs wrote:I never saw that film.
>You should. It's better than Citizen Kane.
LOL
Naaah, as I recall the Vinnie Price flick doesn't have a sled in it ANYWHERE! And EVERYBODY knows puttin' a SLED in a flick will automatically make it MUCH better!
(...it's just too bad most directors today have forgotten this!)
-
AH! I see while I was doin' my Peter Lorre impression, you figured it out, eh?!
Yep, that's Carol.
-
>The star is so distracting.
"Hee hee hee. I put that winking, blinking star in there just to mess with your mind!"
-
OH, and btw Fred, and to answer this earlier question of yours here...
>I didn't mean to offend anyone by mentioning this Oriental movie.
Now, I don't know about anybody else around here, but I certainly wasn't "offended" at all with you mentioning this film.
(...nope, in FACT I was somewhat pleasantly SURPRISED to learn of a film that was made ANY PLACE in the world and decades after Louis B. Mayer was death and buried and that YOU actually LIKED!!!)
LOL
Since they have verified that they did find Richard III ...
in General Discussions
Posted
Yeah...or Jimmy...Hoffa that is.
(...and they'll keep tryin' too!)