Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

vgfitzger

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    39

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by vgfitzger

  4. Posted

    Sorry I disagree with a lot of what you say but I don't care to debate it, It wasn't a topic on the show. And not a topic I feel particularly knowledgeable about. I guess I listen to too much Howard Stern to agree with you 100%. You really squeezed this topic out of that ad as far as I'm concerned. What I'm more interested in is where on the site are you finding these porn movies for sale. I've been to the site twice and I still can't find it. How did you find it?

    It's right in the main navigation bar. Third from the right, it says "Adult Movies." Pretty obvious. Maybe if you navigated the web with less then 50 tabs each buffering a different asian anal anime clip for once you'd have seen it. Embrace the fact that you're a cog in the porn industry. It's good money, millions of hopelessly addicted users can't be wrong!

  5. Posted

    Why would you want to argue with someone who has the conviction that there is no such thing as right and wrong? How annoying. If he truly thinks there is no such thing as morality why does he draw the line of acceptability at causing harm to other living things? Seems arbitrary. Asking a normal person to argue against Gemberling about bestiality is like asking Gemberling to defend his belief that it's wrong to cause suffering for a animal to a sadistic psychopath. It would be pointless.

  6. Posted

    On yesterday's podcast Matt Besser said something to the effect of, "I'm not successful enough to take this kind of criticism without being really insulted." I don't know if that was recorded before or after my comment, but it still made me feel bad for exacerbating Besser's body of work image issues. So, I'll actually backpedal on my original statement a bit here to clear my conscience.

     

    I deliberately attacked Freak Dance as a dance movie, because as a musical dance movie, it was a failure. The music, lyrics and choreography were not up to any standards. A good satire needs to at least approach the quality of the genre it satirizes. As a surreal comedy movie it was great, clocking in at about a laugh a minute. However, the plodding, boring dance sequences make it impossible to recommend. So, my hate of Freak Dance leaves my respect for Matt as a comedian unscathed.

     

     

    You didn't insult Freak Dance. You insulted Matt's ability to make a dance movie. You weren't ripping on the movie, you were disrespecting a person.

     

     

    That statement is idiotic. How could one insult a person's only dance movie without insulting their demonstrated ability to make dance movies? Also, if you're going to split hairs like an idiot, I never insulted his abilities I only insulted his knowledge on how to make a watchable dance movie, which doesn't infringe on his character at all. Did you notice how I never called you an idiot? Is it really any better to beat around the bush like that? You still idiotically feel as if I called you an idiot.

     

    Matt I think it's a combination of you being really accessible and willing to engage with people, plus seeming to have an acerbic personality that makes them feel you're open season. Your honest and take a hard stance on the things that you think are wrong, I think people who attack you have a "if you can dish it out" mentality. If you weren't so frequently speaking your mind I'd think there'd be less hate. That's not a suggestion, because I don't think you should ever stop standing up for things and doing it on your podcast, that's just my assessment of the doo-doo-heads who go after you with unnecessary snark.

     

    If I were Matt, I would be most hurt that with all the people standing up for Matt and against "unnecessary snark" nobody is standing up for Freak Dance. Implicitly agreeing with me about Freak Dance while also agreeing with Matt's assessment of his career esteem not being able to withstand snark.

  7. Posted

    I get the complaining. The last two weeks deserved lots of comments for and against Case Closed. But someone insulting my movie because I didn't get a video game character's game right. It seems like more than bitterness and envy.

    I just realized that vgfitzger is the star of the catchment Case Closed. What's your deal dude? I had you on the show. We had a good time. What makes you feel it's cool to insult Freak Dance? I am truly curious what your thinking is?

     

    Just because someone disliked Freak Dance doesn't mean they're not a Besser fan.  Your body of work isn't like the old testament of the bible, I can pick and choose what I accept in my heart and still expect to be let into improv heaven.  So, to someone interested in preventing a torturous eternity, I wouldn't recommend either lying with a man as with a woman or watching Freak Dance.  

     

    I figured you, as a sumptuously accomplished comedian, should be able to take a little ribbing about your old projects in stride.  Shall I cite my sources?  I only have one and it's wikipedia, but I think it helps my case:  http://en.wikipedia..../Roast_(comedy)  

     

    What's your thinking on why it's not cool to flippantly insult Freak Dance?  Is it because I know you read the forum and should spare your feelings?  Or is it because you've had me on the show and I should consider you a friendly acquaintance?  You know what?  You're right.  Yeah, I really regret it and would delete it now if I knew that doing so wouldn't make you call me out as a fool and a coward.  I'm completely backpedaling, okay?  You win sir.  Please don't intellectually bully me any farther, I've had enough.  Let's talk sports sometime.

  10. Posted

    Interesting you think it was "nigger". It was not. Was not an African-American slur at all. However, let's not turn this into a guessing game.

    Of course we thought you probably said the n-word. Generally, that's THE slur that you can't say unless you're making some sort of shocking point about using the n-word. Don't put it off on that guy, like he's got the n-word on his mind. It's also funny that you give a hint, then ask us not to have a guessing game. That's like saying "Ready... Set... Go! But please, let's not have this turn into a race!" Anyway, my guess is "Gubba" the derogatory term for White people used by Aboriginal Australians. Am I close?

  13. Posted

    People arguing that altering a small part of the 2nd Amendment will negate the entire Bill of Rights and further amendments is total bullshit. There are plenty of loopholes and extenuating circumstances that lets the government sideswipe the amendments... Like I don't know, THE PATRIOT ACT. The Patriot Act can technically violate at least amendments 1,3,4,5,6,7 and 8. So if you're going to get pissy about losing freedom because someone wants to take away your AK, but not because of all of these other freedoms that could potentially be taken from you, you're a hypocritical piece of shit.

    So, since they've already taken a knee jerk shit on the bill or rights we shouldn't mind if they hop a squat and do it again? This is the line of thinking that makes the slippery slope fallacy less than fallacious.

     

     

     

    Yikes,

    http://www.cbc.ca/ne...un-control.html

     

    Armed guards it is...

    What exactly is the problem with that? We frequently have armed guards to protect our money. Why not extend that same precaution to our kids?

  14. Posted

    I'm just afraid that instead of gun control, the issue is going to be made into "we need more security at our schools" and "we have to combat evil".

     

    Do you think that in your double barreled shotgun only America, when someone eventually decides to achieve CNN celebrity by walking into an elementary school and shooting two kids, people's reaction would be, "Thank god it was only two!" No! Two is still two too many. I'm not saying it's a slippery slope, but when knees are jerking, gun rights are gonna be the first thing to get kicked.

  15. Posted

    the "yer destroying the constitution!" argument doesn't work very well.

    Straw-man arguments rarely do.

     

    this isn't the 1800s, "the government" has nuclear weapons, satellite guided missiles, drones, etc. the idea that the we're just around the corner from beating back the government with hand guns is so funny to me.

    I'm not interested in the logistics of a treasonous uprising. I'm interested in just how far we are willing to tolerate constant restrictions of our rights, trading freedom for safety at every turn. If you think that the desire to have any small guarantee to soften the ever looming threat of intolerable oppression isn't valid just because of the existence of nukes and drones, well there's nothing that can be said to you.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    As long as we're talking about subverting clauses of the bill of rights for the sake of safety, let's put the rest of it on the table.

     

    If the press weren't free to sensationalize these shootings into historical watersheds, turn the gunmen into dark anti-heroes and rattle off death counts like high scores, maybe disturbed individuals wouldn't be inspired to try and become famous by commiting suicide by massacre.

     

    What about freedom of speech? If film makers, game developers and authors weren't free to depict and describe violence and cruelty, maybe the gunmen wouldn't have been pre-desensitized to the violence they were planning and never be able to take a life.

     

    Taking away protections of search and seizure would free the government up to do routine checks on every gun owner's home to make sure their weapons are locked up safely out of the reach of their pyschotic sons.

     

    If the government could force a state religion down our throats maybe the fear of eternal damnation would enough to prevent a shooting.

     

    If there was no due process and no restriction on cruel punishments maybe the promise of swift and sure retribution would make all violent crime a thing of the past.

     

    If you trust the government enough to restrict your ability to physically resist and rise up against tyranny, why don't you trust the government to remove all of the safe guards put in place by the bill of rights to prevent tyranny?

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    This is the first time I've ever heard someone try to use a Netflix viewing marathon as some sort of substitute accomplishment. "Sorry son, I know that I promised I wouldn't miss your softball game, but I did watch 10 episodes of Breaking Bad. Now I'm all caught up! So, how about letting me off the hook?"

     

    If he cant keep his word on this why should the fans expect him to keep his word on anything ever? Should I just take his word for it that the Have A Summah album isn't just a collection of differently titled .mp3's each containing 18 minutes of static? I don't think I can take that leap of faith anymore. Is the whole summah being great thing just another fib, just like this 12 movie summah debacle!? Also, I find it abhorrent that Howard is trying to use the Aurora tragedy as an excuse to go back on his word. If he goes through with this movie cop out, everything I thought I knew and respected about Howard Kremer will be called into serious question.

  21. Posted

    Finally, Matt takes his place among Denzel Washington, Martin Scorsese and Zooey Deschanel as a celebrity featured in an Apple commercial. Flick Dance will be rocketing up to #1 on iTunes. Soon, no one will ever confuse it with Wayons brother's parody classic, Dance Freak ever again! Onwards and upwards!

  25. Posted

    Seriously, shouting "Ah!Ah!Ah!" at people? LOL, so random! It's not interesting that yelling that noise makes people stop what they are doing, since it means, "Hey! Stop what you're doing right now! In fact it's so urgent I don't have time to say this!!" What an idiot.

     

    Also, Hawaii is essentially a sovereign nation currently in year 114 of an American occupation, brought about by greedy American businessmen. The implication that the illegitimate overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom and its subsequent illegal annexation, is something only a pedantic special needs child would bring up is an offensively ignorant point of view. I would be very offended by this if I weren't so chonged out on this sweet pakalolo.

    • Like 2
×