- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#1
Television / Re: Joel sells out!
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:00:32 AMI won't be seeing it in the theater so if you report minimize spoilers, please.
#2
What Was That Film? / MOVED: Cartoon about a villain...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 08:59:32 AM #3
What Was That Film? / MOVED: Movie about a male ball...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 08:59:14 AM #4
Games / Re: Movie Title Chains
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 08:58:07 AMRalph Breaks the Internet
#5
Entertainment / Re: The Wachowski Sisters..Has...
Last post by M.10rda - Today at 08:03:35 AMI am familiar w/ the place you refer to that Robert Rodriguez is from, and I understand that many people who live in that place might feel concerned about the influence of the Wachowski Sisters on the sexuality or gender identity of impressionable young people.
And yes, I am familiar w/ some crude comments online about the Wachowskis, generally. Ah, the internet.
.......
So, back in the early 80s, my Great-Uncle - a grumpy curmudgeonly guy who'd had a very sad, lonely life, and read Trump's "Art of the Deal" and listened to Rush Limbaugh and talked about how smart they were and what great ideas they had, and yet in spite of all that was an incredibly kind and compassionate person to those around him - learned that I was involved in theatre and wanted to go to film school for college. He solemnly advised my parents that they should reconsider allowing me to pursue these career paths because I might become gay.
Well, I went to film school anyway. There were some LGBTQAI+ folks at my central NY, extremely liberal/hippie college... in fact I asked one out on a date to see THE USUAL SUSPECTS when it opened in September 1995 and it wasn't until the credits started that I realized I wasn't going to get anywhere with her.
In spite of graduating from that film school, working in theatre professionally for 35 years, working with and being friends with countless gay people, being propositioned by gay men, getting drunk in gay bars a lot 20 years ago, and watching plenty of films and plays where men had sex with other men (simulated and real)....... somehow I'm still not gay! I've only ever had intimate relationships with women and I'm just fine with that.
I've unfortunately had to confront the idea that being around LGTBQAI+ will make children LGTBQAI+ now and then while running my theatre summer camp. Alas, correlation doesn't equal causation. Being around gay and trans theatre kids won't make a kid gay and trans....... though, for what it's worth, it also won't stop 'em from being gay or trans, if that's already the path they are on.
One of the primary reasons my program exists is so teens can be themselves around other people like them or people who are tolerant of them. We're very open with parents about this reality and if potential customers have the same fear as my Great-Uncle, no one's forcing them to enroll. Sometimes kids will play around w/ pronouns for a year or two, or identify as gay without actually dating anyone, and then eventually they arrive at a different identity or just settle into their original cishet life. Some of them remain heterosexual forever 
which of course is also just fine.
I have a female cousin who never did theatre or studied film and was always into sports. She came out in the mid-00s and another Great-Uncle (the first one's brother) - another kind, loving, nominally Christian man - couldn't restrain himself from telling my cousin's Dad (his nephew, my Uncle) that he disapproved of my cousin's lifestyle. My Uncle never talked to him again and my Great-Uncle died estranged from my Uncle. That's unfortunate, but - y'know - like David Lynch said - "Fix your heart or die!"
And yes, I am familiar w/ some crude comments online about the Wachowskis, generally. Ah, the internet.
.......
So, back in the early 80s, my Great-Uncle - a grumpy curmudgeonly guy who'd had a very sad, lonely life, and read Trump's "Art of the Deal" and listened to Rush Limbaugh and talked about how smart they were and what great ideas they had, and yet in spite of all that was an incredibly kind and compassionate person to those around him - learned that I was involved in theatre and wanted to go to film school for college. He solemnly advised my parents that they should reconsider allowing me to pursue these career paths because I might become gay.
Well, I went to film school anyway. There were some LGBTQAI+ folks at my central NY, extremely liberal/hippie college... in fact I asked one out on a date to see THE USUAL SUSPECTS when it opened in September 1995 and it wasn't until the credits started that I realized I wasn't going to get anywhere with her.
In spite of graduating from that film school, working in theatre professionally for 35 years, working with and being friends with countless gay people, being propositioned by gay men, getting drunk in gay bars a lot 20 years ago, and watching plenty of films and plays where men had sex with other men (simulated and real)....... somehow I'm still not gay! I've only ever had intimate relationships with women and I'm just fine with that. I've unfortunately had to confront the idea that being around LGTBQAI+ will make children LGTBQAI+ now and then while running my theatre summer camp. Alas, correlation doesn't equal causation. Being around gay and trans theatre kids won't make a kid gay and trans....... though, for what it's worth, it also won't stop 'em from being gay or trans, if that's already the path they are on.
One of the primary reasons my program exists is so teens can be themselves around other people like them or people who are tolerant of them. We're very open with parents about this reality and if potential customers have the same fear as my Great-Uncle, no one's forcing them to enroll. Sometimes kids will play around w/ pronouns for a year or two, or identify as gay without actually dating anyone, and then eventually they arrive at a different identity or just settle into their original cishet life. Some of them remain heterosexual forever which of course is also just fine.I have a female cousin who never did theatre or studied film and was always into sports. She came out in the mid-00s and another Great-Uncle (the first one's brother) - another kind, loving, nominally Christian man - couldn't restrain himself from telling my cousin's Dad (his nephew, my Uncle) that he disapproved of my cousin's lifestyle. My Uncle never talked to him again and my Great-Uncle died estranged from my Uncle. That's unfortunate, but - y'know - like David Lynch said - "Fix your heart or die!"
#6
Bad Movies / Re: Generate Movie Poster with...
Last post by bob - Today at 07:21:51 AM
young me would've loved to have seen this
#7
Television / Re: Joel sells out!
Last post by Sitting Duck - Today at 07:11:48 AM #10
Off Topic Discussion / Re: Alex's even longer post th...
Last post by Alex - Today at 06:50:47 AMHad a game of Bolt Action last night, my first in a couple of months. We played a special scenario where the entire table was covered in thick jungle which reduced visibility and movement (unless your army had certain special rules), and the mud had a chance of causing SMG's and LMG's to jam. It's Chindits (British special forces who operated behind Japanese lines, which I played) vs Japanese.
In terms of numbers, this was the smallest army I'd ever played with. My troops were all veterans and had an ability called Fieldcraft (Chindits, Indian and Gurkha troops all receive this) that allowed them to move normally through rough terrain, but this meant they were horrendously expensive per man. Karl went Japanese and had a mixture of regulars and veterans. He'd also went for a couple of very large squads (normally squads cap out at 10 men, but a few can go up to around 20). The mission was to go retrieve up to 4 airdropped supply canisters. If I got one, it was a draw; two, I win. In the end I got 2 1/2 off (they were a few inches from the table edge and nothing Karl had could fire at them).
Rifle Platoon.
HQ section. 4 men.
Officer with 3 men armed with SMGs.
Gurkha special rules.
Chindit Section. 5 men.
2 men with SMGs, 3 with rifles.
Chindit special rules.
Chindit Section. 8 men.
2 men with SMGs, 6 with rifles.
Chindit special rules.
Gurkha Rifle Section. 10 men.
10 men with rifles.
Gurkha special rules.
Gurkha Command Subsection. 8 men.
8 men with SMGs.
Gurkha & Commando special rules.
Sniper. 2 men.
Sniper Special rules.
Indian Special rules.
Heavy Weapons Platoon.
HQ section. 4 men.
Officer and 3 men, all with SMGs.
2 Medium Machine Gun Teams.
3 men each.
Indian special rules.
Karl unfortunately quickly discovered that his non-veteran jungle fighters could only slowly hack there way through the jungle and only got to do anything mid game while I ran in, grabbed my supplies then found themselves out of range while I retreated. My super expensive Gurkha commando's did nothing all game as they got pinned down by mortar fire and took some casualties, but did nothing else. I was most disappointed in them, but they did keep firepower off my other units. Karl's suicide bombers did nothing all game, but we did make a deal that we'd house-rule something for them blowing up if they get shot next time we play. Mostly what happened was my Gurkha's moved up the table to grab the two counters I needed for victory, while my Chindits came in on the left flank with my commandos and an HQ section. The HQ section got wiped out, the commandos pinned down, but my flanking force did remove an enemy MMG and sniper team, then held up that side of the table (including Karl's 20-man squad), allowing one of the canisters to be retrieved much more easily.
Anyway, it was a good game. It took every unit in my army firing at his MMG for two turns to completely destroy that unit and it wasn't finally removed until my flankers got close enough to finish it off. I don't think Karl will try a large squad again, although I think it's a perfectly acceptable tactic. Maybe just not for a battle in such dense terrain where the short-range weapon is king. Unlike the Germans and Soviets, neither British troops nor Japanese can really take armies festooned with SMGs, that being limited to units like paratroopers and special forces.
In terms of numbers, this was the smallest army I'd ever played with. My troops were all veterans and had an ability called Fieldcraft (Chindits, Indian and Gurkha troops all receive this) that allowed them to move normally through rough terrain, but this meant they were horrendously expensive per man. Karl went Japanese and had a mixture of regulars and veterans. He'd also went for a couple of very large squads (normally squads cap out at 10 men, but a few can go up to around 20). The mission was to go retrieve up to 4 airdropped supply canisters. If I got one, it was a draw; two, I win. In the end I got 2 1/2 off (they were a few inches from the table edge and nothing Karl had could fire at them).
Rifle Platoon.
HQ section. 4 men.
Officer with 3 men armed with SMGs.
Gurkha special rules.
Chindit Section. 5 men.
2 men with SMGs, 3 with rifles.
Chindit special rules.
Chindit Section. 8 men.
2 men with SMGs, 6 with rifles.
Chindit special rules.
Gurkha Rifle Section. 10 men.
10 men with rifles.
Gurkha special rules.
Gurkha Command Subsection. 8 men.
8 men with SMGs.
Gurkha & Commando special rules.
Sniper. 2 men.
Sniper Special rules.
Indian Special rules.
Heavy Weapons Platoon.
HQ section. 4 men.
Officer and 3 men, all with SMGs.
2 Medium Machine Gun Teams.
3 men each.
Indian special rules.
Karl unfortunately quickly discovered that his non-veteran jungle fighters could only slowly hack there way through the jungle and only got to do anything mid game while I ran in, grabbed my supplies then found themselves out of range while I retreated. My super expensive Gurkha commando's did nothing all game as they got pinned down by mortar fire and took some casualties, but did nothing else. I was most disappointed in them, but they did keep firepower off my other units. Karl's suicide bombers did nothing all game, but we did make a deal that we'd house-rule something for them blowing up if they get shot next time we play. Mostly what happened was my Gurkha's moved up the table to grab the two counters I needed for victory, while my Chindits came in on the left flank with my commandos and an HQ section. The HQ section got wiped out, the commandos pinned down, but my flanking force did remove an enemy MMG and sniper team, then held up that side of the table (including Karl's 20-man squad), allowing one of the canisters to be retrieved much more easily.
Anyway, it was a good game. It took every unit in my army firing at his MMG for two turns to completely destroy that unit and it wasn't finally removed until my flankers got close enough to finish it off. I don't think Karl will try a large squad again, although I think it's a perfectly acceptable tactic. Maybe just not for a battle in such dense terrain where the short-range weapon is king. Unlike the Germans and Soviets, neither British troops nor Japanese can really take armies festooned with SMGs, that being limited to units like paratroopers and special forces.