Armstrong 1st MRB

We can include science fiction on here as well, but I will say that I believe Science Fiction is being far more original than Fantasy right now in my opinion. As for what I mean by Fantasy, I'm talking about everything from Game of Thrones which I consider to be almost alternate mediveal history to Tolkien's works, whom I basically consider the father of modern fantasy. My problem isn't the movies themselves, its the fact that Hollywood seems incapable of pulling off and/or starting up any original Fantasy series particularly in literature since Harry Potter or Twilight despite numerous attempts. I wondering why they can't, and although I have my own theories on the matter, I was wondering what you guys think.

Is anyone besides me whom is interested in the fantasy genre worried about the direction it is taking in film? In this regard I am taking about Films being shown in theatres, why are they still carrying on with making crappy 'modern' adaptations of fairy tales? Has Hollywood's skill fallen so far from grace that we cannot make any decent series off of modern fantasy stories rather than one-off flicks that will be here today and gone tomorrow? I don't know about you guys, but I don't have high hopes for the genre after The Hobbit is finished, and I believe its a great shame since so many great stories and series have been made in the genre. What do you guys think?

OMG, where the heck is that? Moreover, who took the time to paint a mural that big? Or am I just a stupid ass and that's a fake.

I'm buying Season 2 tomorrow or the next day when it comes out, I must say I'm very impressed with how close HBO is being to the books, and I'm glad Martin is personally on board for them. As for favourite chars? I have way too many that span into too many families and groups to put on here, so I'll just put a couple of my favourite families: Stark, Targaryean, Martell, and Lannister in that order. Martin is definately the Tolkien of our generation with these books, but even he cannot match the level of depth that Tolkien went into, which is good because too much can bore your reader. I hope HBO continues with the series all the way though, I'd hate for them to end it after the third book (they originally only confirmed three seasons, but since they are splitting the third book in half with a fourth season, I'm encouraged they'll go the whole way with it).

I never said Canada was socialist as a country, I know its a social-democracy. My point was that we have far more socialist tendancies than the U.S. I think they could benefit from caring for their society as a whole is all I'm saying, rather than heading further down the road of individualistic captialism. That's just what I think though.

HBO, I watch The Walking Dead, and its pretty damn good. But in terms of the first season, Game of Thrones impressed me more than The Walking Dead and its first season. I'm biased though since I've read all of Martin's books and love them, I still have to read The Walking Dead. I also prefer HBO since they don't censor much of anything, and I'm not talking swear words, violence, or nudity, I'm talking about ideas and concepts that many Television companies wouldn't allow on their station' programs, which could be why they aren't publisized as big as other companies. They aren't afraid to show programs that could be a bit edgy (though even they have limits, as shown in the few changes they did make to GoT.)

I don't know why you guys in America are so afraid of socialism, and I'm not going to get too far into it, all I know is that it has worked fine up here Canada.

And why didn't that happen when the Soviet Union split? Terrorists could have probably been able to get a hold of a stray nuke easy if they had wanted to when the Soviets dissolved. Its because nukes are not the best terror weapons for small groups like them. If they set off one, they'll just turn the public opinion of that country into a frenzy against them. So maybe if they want to frame a country and start WWIII, but still, you have to would how no extremist group has not gotten hold of one yet, or used one if they do have one.

I agree with Legend, I hate the hosts of The Young Turks(which you are right Logue, the last group in history that used that name was a pro-fascist group), but I like the content they have. They are so biased in terms of their views on subjects its not even funny, and they pull statistics out of their asses all the time. As for my views on the democrats, I think both them and the Republicans are gonna start another civil war in the States before the century is out since they've successfull split the American ideology in half. I personally hope Jesse Ventura runs for President in the next election, and you guys might see a change from this two-party show.

Yeah, O'Hare no offense, but I don't know what you meant by the democrats/communists comment and then relate how the National Guard took guns from law-abiding citizens in New Orleans after Katrina (which was during Bush's Republican Administration). I will say that I disagree with banning guns totally, you guys just need a much more extensive screening process around how people get their hands on guns and have the owners be more responsible for the security of their own guns so that people who are incapable of using guns professionally or maturely cannot get their hands on them. Because you guys aren't going to get all these high-powered guns off of the streets now even if you tried, because they are so proliferated throughout your society. People can and will get their hands on these guns no matter how many laws the government passes regarding assault weapons, gun sales, or weapon clips. Moreover, you've got so many people so radically against and for this issue, I fear you guys could start another civil war just to get rid of them. Just deal with the horrid social conditions that infest the United States and you'll deal with not just gun problems but a multitude of others, because the guns can exist and not kill anyone, they need a human to have a reason to use them for the malicious purposes that they are portraying in all these extreme cases throughout the states. I also don't think you guys should get rid of conceal and carry permits, just make the process so extensive that nobody of nefarious intent can possibly get their hands on one legally. (which from what I've seen is mostly the reality) However all of this is moot because your government agencies around gun crimes have not kept accurate statisitics for the past decade or so due to a decline in funding, so now you guys can't even prove whether banning guns makes a difference or not with any definative answer. So I would scrap the debate until they have the Universities or the agencies do the proper research again, but that won't likely occur will it?

North Korea's regime is all about its propoganda and brainwashing its population into believing what their leaders want them to believe. They have a large, but virtually untested military force, their economy is shit, they have people starving to death from widespread poverty, and their leader is living in luxury buying tons of foreign products. I hope that the world teaches them a lesson and shuts them up, because they are just trying to scare everyone into loosening their grip on the economy or give relief aid and get enough to keep living before doing it again. I'm actually learning about the concept of Nuclear Deterrance which was used in the Cold War, and if North Korea truly does care about maintaining their power as a state, they will not do anything as rash as actually firing a nuke on a country. However many nukes they have, they do not have as many as the U.S. or any other country they could fire them on I doubt. So in short, I think North Korea is just doing a bunch of prick-waving to try and make them appear big to both their own people and the wider world.

Over 5 days and still we haven't even heard any demands? This guy didn't plan this out for any huge goal by the looks of it and doesn't have a clue what the hell he wants.

Geez, that space battle put Star Wars to shame. I've seen some pretty big EVE Battles, but that looked crazy.

Heh, yeah. Well yea, as far as is known, the kid does not know the man and the man doesn't know him so its doubtful that he'll hurt him for any personal reason. I do find it strange why the guy supposedly hasn't given any demands yet. You'd think that if someone was going to do this they would have had some sort of plan or goal that they wanted to achieve by kidnapping someone, especially a child. As for who this guy is, he has been described as a survivalist(I'm gonna guess that you are right and that he is a doomsday survivalist specifically) who torn up all the trees on his property, put up barbed wire all around his property lines, and put up a bunch of tresspassers will be shot signs along with building his one bunker (we can assume he's stocked it pretty well if other doomsday survivalists with bunkers are anything to go by). He's defined as reclusive, anti-american(whatever that means to his neighbours) and a bit of a loner. All interaction that I've heard with other people has been negative, in fact one interaction he had recently with a neighbour ended with him pointing a pistol at the guy and shooting at his truck as the guy drove off. He was supposed to attend a court hearing for that incident before this happenned, but that doesn't seem reason enough to explain this. I'm not familiar with law in Alabama, but I don't believe that aggravated assault with a pistol would give a person that big of a sentence, but who knows.

This may not be completely Political right now, but I have the feeling that it is going to become political. Any of you seen what's going on over in Alabama with the Survivalist kidnapping a 6 year old boy off a school bus after shooting a bus driver? He's right now locked inside his bunker with the kid (and has been for the last 2 days), whom he allowed to obtain his medication and some colouring books. Any thoughts on what is going to happen, or what his demands might be? -had to write this quick, may write more later.

Even the most nefarious political leader with an ounce of intelligence in their skull is smart enough not to do something that would be tanatmount to their own destruction. Regardless of how many nukes they have, there is no logistical way their arsenal outmatches that of any other nearby. Since that would mean that they cannot cause as much damage as their potential enemies around them, logic would dictate that they would find ways other than nuclear war, leaving aside the fact that whoever uses one first will be a Pariah among the world's nations. There is a reason why not one has been used in war since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, world opinion has judged that the damage is not worth the power it enables. That doesn't mean that fear cannot be utilized, which is exactly the mess we are in now. No country has the cajones to truly call NK or Iran's bluffs with nukes, so they'll keep getting their way until they either give in to reason and accept UN Inspection in Iran's case (which is doubtful unless their minds change), or if North Korea cleans up its administration (which is even more unlikely given the propaganda and military power that their leaders wield).

I actually doubt that now that Netenyahu is no longer in complete control of Israel, and since the Ayatollah of Iran has spoken out against the use of Nuclear weapons, stating that they are against Islam, so I doubt we'll see Nukes going off if anything does break out. In any case, even if Iran has a nuke, they won't be stupid enough to launch it against a country that has thousands more than whatever they have. Nah, I think we'll just keep seeing the Arab Spring's effects continue in the Middle East, Egypt and Syria will eventually become something other than a dictatorship, and NK will continue to act all big in front of everyone else because they have no other way to sustain themselves than to scare people into giving them handouts.

I sincerely hope we can sort out these problems with nukes and useless posturing between countries when we have bigger problems, namely our environment, and the growing social divide between the rich and the poor.

Of course, any country who uses a nuke against any country in this day and age will instantly become a Pariah. I don't think the majority of the world's population wants a nuclear wasteland for a world, much less a country.

Is anyone else besides me getting sick and tired of this North Korea-Iran show here? If you notice, everytime one of them dies down in terms of media attention, the other one jumps back up? That's what I've noticed over the last couple of years. We'll hear about NK testing out missles, there'll be a big scare and it'll die off, then Iran raises up the rhetoric about their nuclear projects, and then it'll die down again and switch back over to Korea within a few months tops. Can't we sort this shit out instead of having people all over the world live constantly looking over their shoulder for one of these guys to do something? If North Korea does anything stupid, the only one they have to turn to is China, and I doubt even they would support North Korea firing a nuke at the U.S. or any of the other major nations. As for Iran, the Ayatollah (whom is basically the leader over there, screw the President) condemned the use of nukes as being against Islam, so I doubt they'll use them unless pushed really hard by Israel. I just think this back and forth between the two countries needs to stop, its getting to the point of ridiculousness why the these countries can't stop acting like a bunch of kids in the playground and reach some sort of arangement.

I don't live in America, I'm Canadian, but I do have an opinion on this. I think its unrealistic for the U.S. to start trying to put a control on guns now, they've already become proliferated throughout the entire country, and there is enough opposition towards the removal of gun rights of any kind that legislation will not be enacted to full effect, I think. Moreover, its not going to stop these shootings from happening. Even in the UK, where they have some of the tightest gun controls in the world, people have gotten a hold of guns for nefarious purposes. If they want to get fully automatic weapons or larger clips, laws be damned, they'll find a way. Besides, guns alone do not determine the severity of crimes, look at Switzerland. They have like 1 automatic assault rifle for every 10 people there, and when was the last anyone heard of a mass shooting in Switzerland? Look at the shooting in Colorado, the guy picks the only Theatre out of like 12 in the area that does not allow Conceal and Carry permit holders, is it any coincidence that he picked that one to shoot a bunch of people? I don't think we should mess with people's rights to arms in America, I believe its going to be too much effort to control them, and its not going to be worth the effort in my mind when there is not much evidence to support any major positive effects. And I agree with the idea of people with conceal and carry permits being able to take the law into their own hands in regards to situations like these shootings. These people who do have them have gone through extensive training, examinations, and background checks in order to obtain them, and I've only heard good results out of what I have seen in incidents involving people with conceal and carry permits. Piers Morgan's argument that such a situation can turn into the Okay Corral shootout is unfounded, and I'd rather have someone trying to kill these nefarious people before they get the chance to kill 50 people. Mark my words, Police are just a reactionary force, they will never be there right when an incident is occuring, which means that the criminal is basically free to do what they want for at least several minutes (more in most cases). I'd rather put faith in the goodness of people with guns among us than to have us all be unarmed against criminals like these ones who have murdered so many men, women, and children.

I hate these guys who want to dumb down our literature and our artistic creations just to suit their ideals. Tarantino, and anyone who participates in any of the arts is an artist, and an artist is always conscious of everything that he or she puts into their creation. Using language like the N-word is a deliberate attempt not just to be historically accurate with the language they would have used for blacks at the time, but its meant to be shocking on how blatantly they use it, we are meant to feel the emotional response of shock at the language they are using because it is so derogitory. You cannot create the same response with softer language, that defeats the purpose. I personally don't think anyone should meddle with any artist's work, because then they are altering what the artist wants to achieve by making it in the particular way they are. If they don't like it, then go look at something else that is more to their tastes, but they shouldn't critisize something as bad because they personally don't like it. That's the way I feel about this.