Jump to content

mojo_bones

HERO Member
  • Posts

    1,996
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mojo_bones

  1. It is available on Netflix. I have watched it because I will watch or read anything Watership Down related (there is another book called Tales from Watership Down btw) I felt they changed some of the story unnecessarily but other additions I thought were ok. I didnt really like the "love story" stuff they added in. Overall it was...meh. I liked the original traumatizing animated movie better.
  2. The Bird Box. It is a netflix original movie. Think of A Quiet Place only no sight instead of no sound. My wife and I enjoyed it.
  3. on both the stiff arm and Bell subject- this is why the Steelers miss him
  4. We just finished watching season 1 of The Good place. I really enjoyed it.Glad to hear season 2 is now on Netflix. My wife and I will start it this weekend I'm sure.
  5. I enjoyed the first season. It's not typical Bateman stuff. It's more Breaking Bad than Bad Words. So less humor and more crazy violence. Still well written and good acting.
  6. On conspiracy - the facts we have is that 3 high ranking members of the campaign knowingly met with someone who represented a foreign government for the purpose of gaining assistance from said government. The Trump Jr. emails show quite clearly that is the original purpose of the meeting. We also know that the campaign, including the President himself, has consistently lied about the meeting taking place, the purpose of the meeting and when they had knowledge of the meeting. We know that a 4th member of the campaign also had contact with an agent with known connections to a foreign government for the same purpose and lied to FBI agents about it. George Papadopoulos in his plea admitted that a person he knew to be tied to the Russian government discussed information about the other candidate AFTER he was part of the campaign. He sent emails to several high ranking officials in the campaign to discuss a meeting between Trump and Putin and later between high ranking members of the campaign and Russian officials. He also lied about having contacts directly to people he believed were Russian officials. Again none of this is conjecture but just facts currently in evidence. We still do not know what other evidence Mueller's investigation has. While one may be able to say there is no smoking gun evidence of collusion, this is without a doubt against the law. The campaign knowingly solicited something of value from a foreign agent. They met with the express intent of gaining something of value from a foreign agent. The law is pretty clear that just setting up a method to get something of value from a foreign agent is illegal. As soon as the campaign set up a time and place to meet at Trump plaza, and went to the meeting, they broke the law. And for a charge in court the bar for conviction is reasonable doubt. I do not find it reasonable to believe that somehow several high ranking members of a campaign that was a much smaller group than most presidential campaigns, knew about these illegal activities but somehow the candidate did not know. That his son and son in law would do these things without knowledge and consent from the candidate in the candidate's building. A candidate who prided himself on being involved in every aspect of his campaign. YMMV but for me no it is not a reasonable conclusion. Of course Congress doesn't even need to be that certain (although I agree it should be) to begin impeachment hearings. No convictions or even charges are needed.
  7. I was late to the party but I have been playing it for about a month or two. I finished the story but still like picking up different mechs or even duplicates and changing up their weapons. Right now I am running 2 King Crabs, one with 2 AC 20s and some other close range weapons and the other with 4 racks of LRMs that all have plus to stab damage. I mix around the other 2 mechs but these 2 are quite a nice paring.
  8. Ozark (Netflix). I am a big Jason Bateman fan and knew a bit about the plot before watching it. I really enjoyed it and season 2 comes out later this month. Basic synopsis- Guy who launders money for a drug cartel has to move his whole family to the Ozarks and try to pay off his debts to the cartel by laundering money there. Of course the local criminals don't like him moving into their territory.
  9. I wish I could understand the Roman Reigns hate. He is good in the ring when not paired with Brock Lesner. He has gotten better on the mic and again is a ton better than Brock (hence Paul Hayman). He not only loses matches as much as other "Upper card" guys but loses fueds to people like The Miz (not a shot at the Miz, just pointing out he loses feuds to guys who aren't in the Universal title picture). He was not part of a universal title match for quite a few months as people like Samoa Joe and Braun Stroman went after the title. And before that it was Seth Rollins fighting Fin Balor for it right? Didn't Kevin Owens hold it and then Goldberg and then Brock? It seems like it's been even longer than I thought since Roman was in a match for the main belt. I was actually quite happy to see him win the title as it really needed to come off of Brock about 6 months ago.
  10. So I am curious what people think it will take to have a serious national discussion about the big "I" word for the current president. I have been of the opinion that the current investigation needed to be concluded before that was had, but now I'm not so sure. Today the president's personal lawyer pled guilty and in doing so said he committed crimes with full knowledge and approval from the president. Should we still wait for the final report from the Mueller investigation? Again I'm on the fence.
  11. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone CM Punk on the BS report. http://espn.go.com/espnradio/grantland/player?id=6808291
  12. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone So far I like the Punk story. Many are complaining that his return happened too fast, but I think that is easily explained by the whole "new management" stuff. Punk came to an agreement with HHH that he just could not with Vince. He's got new merchandise (the shirt), new "old" theme music, and new Jumbotron entrance, and I am sure he will be on the opening clips more now too. He even got Zack Ryder on raw after asking for it at comic con. Now they i just hope they to turn him full face and Cena heel which is easy to do at this point. Punk earned his title shot, fought for it and won the belt even when others tried to interfere. Cena won his title from a guy who wrestled twice the week before and once just 90 minutes earlier. Cena has been fired and returned just 1 week later, was told he would be fired if he lost to Punk and was not. If Punk confronts Cena with all of this and Cena goes nuts and beats Punk down, the switch would be done. Punk would be your People's Champ and Cena you corporate one. Well, here's hoping. I think Punk is gold right now and to keep him heel would be a mistake I think.
  13. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone Punk was really the best thing on Raw again this week by a mile. If he is really gone or even just taking an extended vacation, that is going to hurt the show. I mean, did he really get the Raw audience to chant both "Colt Cabana" and "Ice cream bars" during that show?? He is crazy over right now. Wasn't he supposed to be the heel? And the Boston sports underdog stuff was so spot on. Cena, like the Redsox, have become the NY Yankees.
  14. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone I have watched parts of TNA over the last month (I think i saw a full episode once) and I have enjoyed the Sting stuff in general. I am not sure they needed to go full Ledger Joker with his makeup, but I see why they did it. It really shows just how over the top he is right now. I can see this ending with him going too far and Hogan finally realizing he needs to be the "good Hogan" again, which would be fine with me. I would rather have a good or at least impartial owner figure than an actively "evil" one. I think it really pushes the boundaries of making any sense at all. I mean at any time he could jsut fire all the babyfaces and have nothing but his bad guy friends. I always had that problem when Vince was revelaed as the big baddie behind the Undertaker's group in WWE. it just really made little sense. Have Hogan go good, stop interfering and just be a McMahon type figurehead. Here's hoping they can do that as I really don't like the whole Immortal stuff in general.
  15. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone Ever since Punk was injured and doing commentary for Raw, I have slowly grown to really enjoy his work. I was thinking a few weeks ago when he wrestled in a match where Brett hart was the referee how he is becoming the new Jericho. The difference being he does more of the smark stuff in the ring rather than just in awesome promos like Jericho did. In that match he continuously used some of the classic Brett Hart moves all while glaring at the Hit Man. It was some great subtle stuff. From his "what?" skit with Steve Austin to his announcement that he would leave with the belt to his really good matches with Rey Mysterio he has been involved in just about all of the best moments of Raw for the last month or so (well, except the R Truth stuff. His promos really crack me up!). I hope this goes better than the last "OMG did that really just happen??" moment that ended a Raw. Strange how both kind of involve the same group (Nexus).
  16. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone Steve Austin really makes Tough Enough work. They did another show like it before and it did not have the same appeal to me. I mainly watch the show just to get to the final 10 minutes when he has the bottom 3 in the ring. I love hearing him chew out the 3 "bottom feeders". He is just damn entertaining.
  17. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone I agree 100 percent. I always thought it made the most sense seeing that each belt is not separated by a weight class or regional restriction. That would be tough for TNA though with 3 belts out there. What is the order between X division Champ and TV Champ? Maybe they could leave that vague so you could have the occasional dust up between "secondary" champs as to who is the real #1 contender. But for WWE, it would be a little easier and would make the belts feel more important again.
  18. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone And if you believe it wasn't, you really need to watch NXT season 1 again. I mean either WWE pays no attnetion to the "other companies" and thus would not care about his name in the indys or they do and would name the guy Daniel Bryan, make comments about his "wrestling background" and "internet status" week after week while giving him a losing streak gimmick to further make fun of those "other places" he wrestled. You really can't have it both ways.
  19. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone It seems to me that Undertaker will put on a good show when it comes to the big PPV events. Over the last 5 years or so, his matches at Wrestlemania and even at other "big" PPVs have been pretty good with him pulling out some of his old school stuff. The X factor will be HHH I think. How good a shape is he in and how many matches he has to shake off the ring rust between now and wrestlemania will determine how good the match will be. I also wonder if there will be any sort of "retirement" stipulation for the match. I mean last year Taker would not give HBK a rematch so why would he give HHH with nothing on the line? I guess we'll see what happens tonight.
  20. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone I know they change names all the time, but in this case they made the new name so incredibly close to the old one which they don't usually do. Clearly here they did it to play off his "indy/internet (ROH)" background since they even made it a point during the show over and over again. And as I pointed out, the WWE does this stuff as well. They have in the past and I am 100% sure they will in the future. So when Punk makes reference to Hardy, or DX "invades" the competition, or make they an entire "era" based around another company (ECW), or they suddenly have a new weight class when another company is having success with "cruiserweights", or they name a guy his old name reversed and bring up his past and have him lose a ton to put over the fact that the "other shows" guys are not nearly as good as our guys, how is it different? I would also point out I have no problems with WWE doing this stuff. They did it more in the past when the competition was fiercer, and if any company gets close I am sure they will do it more again. Doing these things has usually made the product better while the times when they have had no real competition tended to be stagnant. But do it they do. Plain and simple. And I agree that the whole NXT Bryan stuff was the origin of Cole turning bad guy (and even said so in my post), but I do not believe for one second Miz did all that without approval from the bosses. And I did not say internet, I said fans (live audience included) hated the stuff and loved Bryan. WWE clearly adjusted how the announce team reacted to that after a few weeks. Striker went from only somewhat disagreeing with Cole to outright hostility and Cole's hostility became more intense. WWE (especially with a new show) pays attention to what the audience reacts to and will change to fit that. And again, good for them, but it is clear they knew what the fans (both live and internet) were reacting to. It wasn't just Miz.
  21. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone Your memory of those days are very different than mine. I seem to remember them referencing things that happened in the "other show" during their skits about Turner, Hogan, Macho Man (I mean Nacho Man who for some odd reason talked about Slim Jims; a clear reference to what he was doing at the time) and others. I also remember DX actually doing an entire invasion skit from right outside of a WCW event. And again, I did find it funny and very tongue in cheek as do others I know. Just because some didn't get it, does not mean it wasn't a spoof. Sometimes a spoof can be a bit too spot on and lose some people. I think this is what happened here. So then it was the degree of mockery you didn't like? Or was it the timing? I am just not sure anymore. The CM Punk stuff was pretty obvious I thought. Just as calling Brian Danielson Daniel Bryan and having him the butt of several jokes for the first month of NXT was pretty clear too. I remember not just Cole and Miz making fun of him, but others as well. Cole only became the "bad guy" when it was clear the fans were on Bryan's side. At first the other announcer was very wishy washy about the stuff Cole was saying and even agreed sometimes, but once WWE realized folks HATED what Cole was doinge Matt Striker finally started insulting Cole. And it is pretty extreme speculation that without the tie incident he would be further ahead. I would point out that no other member of Nexus besides Wade Barrett has done much of anything of note. It appears from what has happened to everyone else in Nexus that Bryan caught a pretty lucky break by splitting from the group. Again, they clearly know ROH. If McMahon knos anything about wrestling, it is keep an eye on the entire product. He has been doing it since back in the 70's and I doubt he stopped after the 90's. The man knows his business. And what the announcers or owner tweeted about the Undertaker promos is not really the point. The point is that WWE has in the recent past done some of the same types of stuff. As I said with Punk and Bryan, and even the 2-11-11 promo and you don't have to be a "smart" to get a lot of it (like the Bryan stuff and the Punk stuff). They used some of the same imagery for those promos as was used in the old WCW Sting promos which is what lead to so many people thinking it was Sting (the long coat didn't help) and to some STILL thinking it was going to be Sting but the deal fell through (not me, but it has been said.) Poking fun at the competition has a long history in wrestling. WWE/WWF did it, WCW did it, NWA did it, WCCW did it. I am sure it was done before that even. Why so many feel this is somehow "different" and "wrong" I just don't get. And again saying TNA is "worrying about/trying to be WWE" with a 1 minute promo at the end of a 2 hour show is pushing it a bit, don't you think?
  22. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone See, I remember the WWE vs WCW days. BOTH companies did this all the time. It was not the reason either company won or lost that war and I always thought it was usually entertaining. I think it would be silly to pretend the competition did not exist. And WWE STILL pokes fun at TNA and other companies from time to time. Watch the CM Punk bit when he was up on top of the set about a month ago. He was clearly talking about the then TNA champ Jeff Hardy with the whole "Who would be dumb enough to jump off something like this?" stuff. Also during the first season of NXT, Cole and others ripped the idea of Daniel Bryan being some darling from the indies. The WWE made him have a long losing streak to start his WWE career and mocked the "indy scene" the whole time. Did fans really not know they were mainly talking about ROH? And the 3-3-11 promo was about the same as the promo for Undertaker in the "big surprise" thing as well. WWE played these little promos as if some mystery man was coming, and it was Undertaker...again. And I heard no big outcry for it being ridiculous to have that be the surprise behind the promos. TNA did not hide who it was. Everyone knew it would be Sting. I am thinking the whole "shocking surprise" was also tongue in cheek. Simply put, it was funny, it was sarcastic and it took all of 1 minute of a 2 hour show. TNA has a lot of issues, but this promo is not even close to being one of them. It is something people who already dislike the company jump on and pretend WWE doesn't do the same stuff. As far as poking fun at internet fans, go back and watch the first season of NXT. The WWE made fun of those same fans for almost an entire season. Again, I heard no major griping then. Now that it is TNA, it's a dumb thing to do? I think if you are a fan of wrestling (or a gamer for that mater) you have to be able to laugh at yourself considering most of the rest of society does. I think both TNA and WWE recognize that as well.
  23. Re: WWE Snark-Free Zone Actually, I thought the promo was pretty damn clever. Right after the first 2-21-11 promo almost all of the internet sites were filled with comments about how it was clearly a promo for Sting's arrival. Even people who write for the sites were saying it was a promo for Sting. And while I thought the return was done well, that was mainly due to HHH rather than the returning Undertaker. So the 3-3-11 promo is poking fun at the wrestling fans who "knew" TNA had lost Sting, as well as the WWE for not getting Sting and using some of the old "Sting WCW" imagery for the first 2-21-11 promo. Some people still believe Sting was the original plan for those promos, but I doubt it. I am pretty sure the Undertaker has gotten these types of promos for most of his recent returns.
×
×
  • Create New...