Posts by LoveUniHateExams

15

Trying to imagine living under Jehovah’s Theocratic Rule!

imagine living in a time when medical facilities weren’t even a concept.

imagine living during a time where a police force didn’t even exist.

imagine the culture you lived in was that you have as many kids as possible and hopefully none of them were girls, or at least just a few girls, like jacob who had twelve boys.

LoveUniHateExams

Living under JW 'Theocratic Rule' ...

34

As A Former JW Are You Patriotic At All?

by minimus in

jw
friends

jehovah’s witnesses were drilled with the idea that all governments are from satan and that we should have nothing to do with anything involving support of the government, voting, or political talk for one party or another.. now that you are out, is patriotism important to you?

is voting important to you?

are you supportive of your country?.

LoveUniHateExams

Although I think blindly loving your country is foolish, I am quietly patriotic. I don't bother having an England flag or Union Jack hanging from my window.

There are too many 'activists' who hate western countries. I will always oppose these politically-retarded people.

Western countries, technology and culture are all great, probably the best in the world. (If it wasn't, you wouldn't get immigrants risking death to get here - see the Salvadoran father and daughter who drowned in Rio Grande; the frozen Kenyan guy who tried to stow away in an airplane's landing gear and dropped 35 thousand feet onto some guy's back garden in Kent, etc. etc.)

In fact, I'd say that western culture/technology is the 8th wonder of the world.

36

If you saw a governing body member being pummeled would you help them?

by Tenacious in

before you answer; .

think about how they could care less how many families are broken up just to retain their power.

how they could care less if members are driven to suicide because of the deep programming and severe depression or strained family situations.. how they would rather let members die in order to retain their power and refuse to acknowledge their faulty bible reasoning regarding blood.. i could go on and on and on.

LoveUniHateExams

I like how everyone's afraid to correct Simon for misunderstanding my post - nope.

My comment was simply answering your question in the OP ... nothing more, nothing less.

19

press freedom

by zeb in

reported by a canadian journalist name of levant.

he was reporting on the second trial of t robinson for the same offence that being reporting from outside a court house after the trial in question was over.

this defendant tr has been found guilty and if sent to prison he will face the real possibility of being murdered inside.

LoveUniHateExams

He prejudiced the chances of a fair Trial for the defendants - but journalists report outside courts all the time, don't they?

41

Why Aren`t The G.B Members Representive Of All Nations ? and not just America ?

by smiddy3 in

are all of the governing .body .members american citizens ?

shouldn`t they at least represent a greater proportion of nations in light of jesus being a saviour of all the world ?.

god loved the world of mankind right ?

LoveUniHateExams

Wow, aren't they a cheerful-looking bunch - and so representative of all nations.

Er, yeah, the JWs aren't an American religion, not at all ...

41

Why Aren`t The G.B Members Representive Of All Nations ? and not just America ?

by smiddy3 in

are all of the governing .body .members american citizens ?

shouldn`t they at least represent a greater proportion of nations in light of jesus being a saviour of all the world ?.

god loved the world of mankind right ?

LoveUniHateExams

The OP is bang on.

Out of the current GB members, one is a white Australian and one is a mixed race American. The rest are white Americans.

And then there are all the deceased/former members - all Americans, I think.

Yeah, the JWs are an American religion. It's so obvious.

36

If you saw a governing body member being pummeled would you help them?

by Tenacious in

before you answer; .

think about how they could care less how many families are broken up just to retain their power.

how they could care less if members are driven to suicide because of the deep programming and severe depression or strained family situations.. how they would rather let members die in order to retain their power and refuse to acknowledge their faulty bible reasoning regarding blood.. i could go on and on and on.

LoveUniHateExams

Yes, I would try and help them myself or, better, call the police.

I want the GB to be properly punished for what they have done and are doing.

A street pummeling isn't proper punishment - it's actually a crime.

I'd much rather the GB members spend the rest of their lives in a jail cell.

12

The problem with movies this last decade or so

by LoveUniHateExams in

actually, i think i've discovered two issues.. the first is that there are too many soft reboots, remakes and re-imaginings.

don't get me wrong, hollywood has always done remakes and some remakes work very well.

the fly (1986) and the thing (1982) are actually remakes/re-imaginings of the original 50s films.

LoveUniHateExams

I think another misconception is that running time makes a movie respectable - yeah, I think you might be on to something. I hadn't thought of that before.

Longer run-time doesn't necessarily equal better movie. Although most movies are at least 90mins, there are some very good movies that fall short of even 80mins. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) is just 79mins long, start to finish, not including end credits. And Red Eye (2005) is just 74mins long but it's actually pretty good.

Obviously, feature-length films have to be over a certain run-time but you're right - the longer the run-time might be, means nothing in the scheme of things.

All movie companies have to do is make a good movie, with decent characters and a solid plot, and tell that story taking however long they like. It helps if you make the good guys or hero relatable, too.

12

The problem with movies this last decade or so

by LoveUniHateExams in

actually, i think i've discovered two issues.. the first is that there are too many soft reboots, remakes and re-imaginings.

don't get me wrong, hollywood has always done remakes and some remakes work very well.

the fly (1986) and the thing (1982) are actually remakes/re-imaginings of the original 50s films.

LoveUniHateExams

Actually, I think I've discovered two issues.

The first is that there are too many soft reboots, remakes and re-imaginings. Don't get me wrong, Hollywood has always done remakes and some remakes work very well. The Fly (1986) and The Thing (1982) are actually remakes/re-imaginings of the original 50s films. But they are radically different from the originals and it clearly works having these remakes.

Compare those movies to the endless, mind-numbing procession of remakes and reboots that we get today.

Jurassic Park (1993) was a very successful, decent movie so the big corporation that owns the Jurassic Park franchise thought to themselves, 'let's do that again', so they did. We got Jurassic World (2015). Strictly speaking it's a sequel but its plot is so close to the original film that it can be thought of as a soft reboot. The main difference is that the dinosaur theme park is up and running this time around. Oh, and we also get a stupid, clichéd 'we can use raptors in the military' sub-plot - yippee!

Another example of the soft reboot corporate cash-grab is Star Wars The Force Awakens (2015). It's supposed to be the 7th movie in an already established franchise but it's basically A New Hope (1977) all over again, the differences being it has an altered tone and a stormtrooper who defects (<---- actually quite a good idea but it wasn't particularly well-executed). There's a youtuber named Banditincoporated and he did a full analysis of A New Hope and The Force Awakens, posing the question: if George Lucas took JJ Abrams to court for plagiarism, could Lucas win? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ngg2uBK2j8s

And then there's the shitshow that was Ghostbusters (2016), the remake nobody wanted. I don't think I need say anymore on that embarrassment of a movie.

Think of all the horror classics of the 60s, 70s and 80s. They have all been remade. And the remakes have been mostly pointless.

So, all this and more leads me to conclude that there just aren't many good original ideas floating around Hollywood at the moment.

My second issue is this: I think screenplays aren't well-written nowadays. Decent, well-written characters with decent character development aren't exactly common-place nowadays.

Plots, too, are often substandard. Directors seem to think that if they chuck in a few more explosions then that will cover up their steaming pile of a plot (I'm thinking of you, Rian Johnson). Well, it won't work, at least not for me.

32

What current movies have you seen? Give a little review if possible, aye or nay

by blondie in

jw
friends

newest mib next for me.

i brought myself up-to-date on the older ones on cable.

here's a trailer:.

LoveUniHateExams

Here's the official trailer for Gone Girl (2014). It stars Ben Affleck as a married man who reports the disappearance of his wife on the day of their 5th wedding anniversary.

Yeah, it's pretty good. I don't want to spoil it for anyone so I just recommend that you watch it ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-_-1nJf8Vg