Quake3World

Captain Mazda wrote:

feedback wrote:Che was a murdering cunt.

Che executed the corrupt politicians, murderers, and puppets who served Batista's US-backed dictatorship. Batista was the murdering cunt who killed civilians at random, not Che.

PS. fuck u...

che became a murderous piece of shit. Read and learn:

http://vcrisis.com/index.php?content=le ... 0507081316

Pro-neocon propaganda much? The articles on that site may as well have been written by Batista himself.

If that's the kind of bullshit you feed into your head, no wonder you splash your ass with filthy shitwater

Captain Mazda wrote:Pro-neocon propaganda much? The articles on that site may as well have been written by Batista himself.

If that's the kind of bullshit you feed into your head, no wonder you splash your ass with filthy shitwater

the thing about that article is that it's backed up by quite a few facts, in particular excerpts of che's very own diary. Do you contest any particular claims that the article makes?

Or are you just gonna assume that the message is false because of the agenda of the authors?

this just goes to show you - get your face on some t-shirts and people quickly forget that you were a brutal maoist revolutionary.

Captain Mazda wrote:Pro-neocon propaganda much? The articles on that site may as well have been written by Batista himself.

btw you just proved that you didn't even read the article:

(look at italicized section)

Guevara was certainly bold and courageous, and quick at organizing life on a military basis in the territories under his control, but he was no General Giap. His book Guerrilla Warfare teaches that popular forces can beat an army, that it is not necessary to wait for the right conditions because an insurrectional foco (or small group of revolutionaries) can bring them about, and that the fight must primarily take place in the countryside. (In his prescription for guerrilla warfare, he also reserves for women the roles of cooks and nurses.) However, Batista's army was not an army, but a corrupt bunch of thugs with no motivation and not much organization; and guerrilla focos, with the exception of Nicaragua, all ended up in ashes for the foquistas; and Latin America has turned 70 percent urban in these last four decades. In this regard, too, Che Guevara was a callous fool.

A corrupt bunch of thugs with full US support and enough organization to make Batista a favorite of the mafia

i don't get your point. The article isn't denying the corruption of batista, or the US' involvement.

it's talking about che.

The article even implicates the US as a backer of nasty regimes:

Particularly disastrous was the Congo expedition in 1965. Guevara sided with two rebels--Pierre Mulele in the west and Laurent Kabila in the east--against the ugly Congolese government, which was sustained by the United States as well as by South African and exiled Cuban mercenaries.

as far as i'm concerned, ppl who idolize che because he stands for revolution and justice are the same ppl who wave the US flag because it stands for freedom and justice.

maybe, for onece, instead of always atempting to make others work and work thier "point" for you or thinking ur entitled to having people do this work for you, you urself should work to "see their point clearer"

you could work to reason how

oh wai...



or is its frequentsy an indication of just another cheap tactic?

wouldnt be the first u see?

as much as i enjoy soderbergh's movies (just finished part 2) i came away with no flesh and blood sense of what made guevara tick (by flesh and blood i mean: as opposed to revolutionary slogans and catchphrases), and the distinct impression that what i've just watched is an airbrush job (it was based entirely on guevara's books, which might explain the bias). the whole story of the cuban revolution seems to ram home once more the point that hayek made about socialism, namely that however many internationalist trappings it acquires, it is inevitably nationalistic. cuba replaced a foreign-backed dictatorship with a homegrown one. significantly, the cuban national anthem is Patria o Muerte

not exactly Workers of the World, Unite!

Harry Potter: Half-Blood Prince 4/10
very dull, and god could radcliff please learn how to display some kind of emotion or acting talent what so ever? after 6 movies you'd think he would have a clue by now.

Blindness 3/10
And I thought nothing happened in harry potter. 2 hours of predictable scenarios with piss poor characters and a plot that never develops.

Terminator Salvation 7/10
Nicely done; this and star trek are easily the best action movies of the year. Which is amazing considering they were both resurrecting dead franchises. Only two major gripes... wtf was up with "star"?? kid needed a point for all the goofy screen time she got. Also the "jump start" + transplant at the end of the movie is fucking lame.

Balls of Fury 7/10
Shockingly funny. I thought it was going to be some "kung pow!" slapstick crap; but it was actually a pretty well executed farse.

i liked blindness - was a very intense movie experience.

agreed, harry Potter 4/10/ Boring!

The Watchmen: 8/10 Aside from some clunky narrative jump cuts, this was excellent.

edit: watched it again. Definitely an 8. BTW, this is one of the best blu-rays I've seen so far this year (great transfer, 24 min of added footage, nice supplements).

Taken - 6½/10 - pretty brutal, and the family bits weren't well done, and the holly valance thing was dumb, and liam neeson is too old for this shit, but otherwise entertaining

in the loop - 7/10
really entertaining and kept me laughing all the way through.

In Bruges - 5/10 - not exactly a laugh a minute, rather like belgium generally

In Bruges - 5/10 - not exactly a laugh a minute, rather like belgium generally

The Hangover - 6.5/10

Crude but funny. Soundtrack during the entire movie was awful though.

Timecrimes (or 'Los cronocrímenes'; it's a Spanish flick, but don't let that deter you).

Solid time travel movie (only 1 hour into the past).
They pretty much get it right, with a good, methodic approach. At least, I couldn't shoot holes into its logic.

Better than Primer, imo.

Watchmen -

5/10. Never read the comic so I guess I don't see the greatness in it.

Madagascar - 2/10
Madagascar 2 - also 2/10

Quite shit really. Aside from Chris Rock, I hate the jackasses that did the voices for the other 3 main characters, especially Ben Stiller. Predictable dumbassery through and through, with Madagascar 2 being a Lion King clone to boot. Don't get me wrong, I still love watching good animated stuff, but this stuff was just so lame and insipid.

Still, they both get 1 point each for the following:
Sacha Baron Cohen as King Julian
The Penguins

And they're both worth watching only for those 2 things. Julian had me in fucking stitches when he was going on about the sacrifice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K9fC29Dhno

mmm very nice thank you for the sacrifice
here have another sacrifice
no I've had enough for today

Fucking lmao

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

I'm no Harry Potter buff in the least and I normally wouldnt go to the cinema to see part 6 (or whatever) in a series, but the inlaws wanted to see it so.
Why the fuck was this called 'the Half-Blood Prince'? The name is introduced in the first 20 mins or so, all ominous like. 1.5 hours later someone mentions the name again and how noone ever heard of him. And another hour later someone reveals that *he* is the HalfBlood Prince, like Darth Vader just reveals his relation to Luke. plottwist failed.
They shouldve called it Harry Potter and the Quest for Forbidden Artifacts since that is what it's really about. But no they couldnt cos at the end of the movie it is shown that the artifacts were fake, making the entire past 3 hours worth of movietime meaningless.

2 out of 10 "wake up!"-nudges.

BAM

http://www.collider.com/2009/05/29/excl ... a-prequel/

Last Action Hero - 7.5 / 10

Classic cheesy over-the-top action. I hadn't seen this movie since the mid 90s and forgot how funny it was.