Semjaza

Because that's the main way you can access any of your settings and other information that's required for the proper use of OB. You cannot remove it.

I know you're not arguing with me. Don't worry about that lol. Thinking about it... the final scene with that Satan creature was rather bizarre and I feel less needed than pretty much every other one in the movie. In any case, the Bible is basically the most successful book in history. I'd think most everyone who went would be familiar with the characters, especially because it concentrated on a select few and not every last person that could have been. As such, I personally didn't really feel a need for the reasons of "why?" and "what's the importance of this guy?" because it was already there on some level. I'm sure most people who go and see this wouldn't be completely unknowledgable about the story. Obviously this isn't a normal route to take on films though, so I don't know. I can understand not liking that approach. Anyway, getting off of that... I think there were a lot of things done really well. The cinematography was excellent. Everything was shot really well; the enviroments in particular. I also think the acting was quite good. Everyone in it seemed pretty believable, overall. I agree with your subtitle comment too. It was nice that it wasn't used for every last thing. I assume this was some sort of compromise since the film was set to have no subtitles at all, originally. You really don't need to know what anyone is saying when Jesus is being punished behind the gate. It would have been useless information for the most part. It was kind of weird hearing people speak fluid Latin too. I took it for almost four years and, while I could understand some of it, it's just flows a lot better than one would expect. That's mostly because we basically could just speak broken Latin in that class though heh.

[quote name='Queen Asuka][color=hotpink][size=1]So for all of you people that think that it doesn't get cold in Georgia, TAKE THAT! WHOO!!!!!!!!![/color'][/size][/quote] Damn. Suddenly my life just doesn't make sense anymore. It snows here constantly and the only thing I don't like about it is that I'm the one stuck shoveling it every time.

In any case, I personally don't see an issue with the personification of it. I am sure there were better ways to go about it, but it hardly added to the breakdown of the film for me. Jesus and Mary are given issues of tempation in the Bible and while I don't really think that some bald guy with a baby looking like it's 40 really add to the story in any way and actually do end being a little comical... I just don't feel that strongly against it. As for the brutality, this is the story of Jesus. Not Bob from down the corner. There's obviously a difference between them on many levels. Having him endure all these things, while exaggerated, is kind of the point. How can you bring pure logic into a story that involves things that are written in the Bible concerning him? Should I also dislike the movie because of the resurrection? Afterall, no real person could do that either [spoiler](I do think the wounds in his hands in that scene was lame though)[/spoiler]. It's by no means the best movie I've ever seen or even the saw recently... but I can't say I agree with you overall either. Obviously the wrath involved against Jesus is a key point of the whole thing. If was obviously killed for real justifiable reason as it was. If you want to walk away from that feeling nothing only the negative impact of it, then okay. I can't say I walked away thinking the same things. I can't really say I walked away in amazement though... there were people in there crying the whole film, but they all looked to have come from Ash Wednesday services, so I'm sure they'd feel more strongly about whatever it is they thought of the film heh.

[quote name='xbloodfightx']Your band, Apocalyspe Hoboken or whatever the crap it's called is probably local. Stop using them as an example because I'll put out tons of loca stuff. Punk has evolved yeah, the sound has, it's gotten faster, more to a point, what it actually stands for. And by the way...Bad Religion sucks.[/quote] They're from Chicago, but got enough national exposure. Did you even read the post? The first thing I said was that they were a "local Chicago band". You wouldn't even have to get one sentence into the paragraph about them to see that. This isn't the first time you've shown a fundamental misunderstanding of something someone posted on OB, either. Try reading a bit more before you pounce on people, please. The naming of them still doesn't change my point and completely ignores the fact that I only used them as an example to combat your point a grand total of [I]one time[/I]. An example I wouldn't have even used if you didn't make such a broad, and ultimately incorrect, generalization despite your undeniable knowledge on the one and only meaning of punk. Seriously, if punk at this point only included things such as the subject matter you listed, nearly any genre there was could have bands that could have been considered "punk". Not to mention all the bands that did likewise before the genre even existed. Sure, I agree with you that current "punk" for the most part perhaps couldn't be considered "true punk" when compared to the ideal it was founded on... but that wasn't what I was getting at as it was. Your naming a bunch of local bands in your vicinity wouldn't do any good in going against what I was trying to say. I could name dozens of bands from a bunch of genres just within the city limits here, but what the hell that does that matter? It doesn't at all. Apparently it was a key point of mine though. Could have fooled me. Perhaps I should be impressed if you do it though, because I don't know why else you'd say it in that manner. To me, it sounded like some sort of challenge. I'm not taking the bait, whatever it is you meant to accomplish by saying that. You say everything everyone has mentioned doesn't count, yet you don't even know all that was mentioned in the first place? That's not [I]my [/I]problem, it's [I]yours[/I]. Don't make stupid generalizations that encompass [I]everything [/I]if you can't back them up. Why not say you don't even know the band instead of posting something to that effect? Excuse me for thinking you [B]KNEW WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT[/B]... maybe it was based on the caps and bold type you had to use to emphasize it and the fact that I was personally singled out since I'm the only mod that posted in here. I do appreciate your well thought out rebuttal though. Was totally worth the time spent in here. It would be nice to hear some reasons as to why you don't like something than a simple "it sucks" for once. You did that in the metal thread too. Sorry that isn't enough for me to agree lol. A band you enjoy sucks and I'm not going to give you a single reason as to why, hahaahhaah. Okay. If you don't want to back up your narrow-minded comments, why even bother saying them at all? If all I'm going to get is stuff like "that sucks and blah blah I know the true, pure music and that's all there is to it blah blah", I might as well talk to my little brother or the local radio music fan who is just as blind to everything that isn't contained in their little bubble. I'd come out with the same end effect. Your abrasiveness in general sure doesn't help matters either. I wasn't even remotely trying to be negative or hostile towards you despite my disagreeing with what you said. I voiced my thoughts on the subject and tried to give reasons to back it up. And I get this garbage in return? Give me a break. Listen to what you want and share your thoughts on bands and music... that's cool -- but stop being condescending about it all. Your attitude in both of these threads has been pretty blah overall (although there obviously were exceptions in there, as I feel you've been very helpful in the past with band information). I apologize if this is some "personal attack" in your mind (or anyone elses'), but when it affects how an opinion is expressed on the subject at hand, I feel that it's worth saying.

I used to enjoy DDR, but the novelty wore off. I really love music games, but stuff like Gitaroo Man and Amplitude are more along the lines of what I like to play. DDR just gets dull really fast for me and I can't stand 95% of the US music selections. I have a pair of PVC hardpads for DDR somewhere in the house. What a waste of money that turned out to be heh.

Well, for those that don't know... Scarling is a band. The key member is Jessicka, who some may know from the now defunct, yet excellent, Jack Off Jill. The break up of JOJ was sad for me, mostly because their final release was easily their best and left so much room for potential. Scarling has been around for a couple years now, it seems. They put out a vinyl single long ago, which I own... but never actually played. They finally released their main LP known as Sweet Heart Dealer this past week. I also picked up the CD version of their single which now also includes a cover of Radiohead's Creep. [CENTER] [img]http://www.wrappedinplastic.net/images/stuff/sweetheartdealer.jpg[/img][/CENTER] I kind of expected this band to sound more like JOJ than it actually does. Jessicka still has the same sweet, almost child-like voice she always had... the screaming still is intact, although it's not really as common, I suppose. I suppose the best comparisons would be a band like Black Rebel Motorcycle Club or My Bloody Valentine. Particularly the latter. You're left what is basically a wall of sound that somehow manages to still carry some sense of melody. It's very well layered, though, and I feel a massive amount of talent is shown considering this is their first release. [CENTER] [img]http://www.scarling.com/images/photos/press/06_a.jpg[/img][/CENTER] I've played the LP a few times and it has definitely grown on me. While I don't know that this is as good as JOJ's Clear Hearts, Grey Flowers (the previously mentioned final release), Scarling itself definitely has more future potential than JOJ had. So it's worth checking out if you get the chance. Sweet Heart Dealer can be grabbed for around $10 if you look around. I wound up spending like $13 since it's apparently considered a full release despite only being 7 tracks long (but it does clock in at like 30 something minutes... which seems long enough when you play it heh). I do wish it was longer though, especially considering the wait.

I think more people would probably reply if they knew what Coachella was. The word doesn't really make you want to click on the thread link lol. It was really the basis for my post of the Pixies tour in the first place. I'd love to go, but it'll never happen. Pixies, Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, The Cure, Muse, Kraftwerk, Death Cab, MSI, Mogwai, Pretty Girls Make Graves, etc... how could you not want to go? heh.

I think my first time through, I didn't really know what to think about it either. It's kind of incoherant on some levels and requires a couple listens at the least. At some point it kind of just all fell into place and just worked for me. At first it just seems like straight out noise and chaos, but you begin to sort it out and understand just how layered it all really is. I'm pretty damn impressed by what this has accomplished, which takes a lot lately heh.

Welcome to basic cable television. What can you expect? Either watch a real cable station or buy the movie yourself. Why would you ever want to watch a commercial interrupted film anyway? heh

I think that's a really extreme opinion over one stupid aspect of the film. Whether or not you liked the humanization of Satan is one thing, but it hardly makes this film comparable to anything from the so-called "Bennifer". Just using that term deserves a punch in and of itself lol. Do you work for Extra or Celebrity Justice? Ugh heh. I agree the use of a humanized Satan really didn't always have the desired effect. However, I don't really see how the thoughts of Jesus or Mary's temptations could have been shown much better. The only other device that comes to mind would be giving them flashes of hypothetical situations that really just wouldn't have fit in with the film. If you're familiar with the Bible there are actually parts where Jesus pretty much does converse or see the devil "in the flesh" so to speak. Therefore I don't find what they did to be pandering to some idiotic audience. However, I do agree in some senses because I don't really see the point in making them look ridiculous to the point of being almost humorous. I think the use of the goofy looking children was a bit over-used... It had the desirable effect that it was going for on me, but that's mostly because I knew what it was trying to get at. In and of itself, the children were rather comical. Comparing that to Darkness Falls is rather ridiculous. As for the brutality, really what was exaggerated about it? Any weapons they used on Jesus would have had those same effects in reality. Jesus's cross would have been about that size in reality. Obviously his overcoming things most anyone else couldn't is slightly exaggerated, but it's not much different in the Bible -- I always thought that was part of the point. Afterall, he isn't exactly a normal person lol. The only thing I think might be thought to be extreme would be the level to which the Roman's enjoyed attacking Jesus... however, in reading other things and studying their culture in Latin class, I find no reason to believe why there wouldn't be people who loved doing that sort of thing to that degree. This is a culture that had people kill eachother on a regular basis for the sheer fun of it all. The brutality is all part of the point, I think. People of the Christian religion have the idea of "Jesus died for your sins" beaten into their brains so often that it loses all meaning. What you're supposed to get from this film is really how much Jesus went through for what amounts to totally selfless reasons. That's the "uplifting" message. That the son of God would care for the people of this earth so much that he'd be willing to go to these lengths. It's the core of the whole Christian belief system. I'm not religious whatsoever. I don't even believe in Jesus as a religious figure, really... but if you can't put the ideas of the religion along with the reasoning as to why i happened, I think you're just going to miss the point of the film and look at it as just another simple movie. Anyway, I thought this was very well done in terms of costume design, acting and cinematography at the least.

Girls are people, not some simple-minded animal that can be grouped very specifically based on things they always do. You have to deal with things on a case by case basis and that's what I do. What would be fun in knowing every last thing about girls in the first place? I like the spontaneity of going with the flow.

I don't know the reason. I assume the overall lack of quality posting and the waste of attachment space... that and the people who did nothing but post their pictures and never post elsewhere lol. I guess for ego boosts, I don't know. I can tell you one thing for sure: it's not coming back. So either you can embrace the new pictures site Queen Asuka is running or... well that's about it lol. The site allows comments and all sorts of other little things. I think it works pretty well.

[QUOTE=Manic][i]Angel[/i] has been [b]cancelled[/b]. Yes, cancelled. Canned. Put to sleep. Thrown into the realm of syndication and reruns. This will be the show's final season. On the bright side, WB will air the rest of the episodes. Whether or not they'll keep them in the same timeslot is beyond me... Link: [url=http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~hsiao/media/tv/buffy/bronze/20040214.html]The Article[/url][/QUOTE] I guess my friend was right. He told me this a few days ago and I said I didn't really believe it considering the new season just started. It's kind of sad since it seemed like one of the station's bigger shows. Perhaps another network would be interested in it...? In any case, I'm annoyed because I just started getting into this show like a week ago... My timing is terrible lol.

My favorite guitarist was Navarro, who coincidentally didn't even want to be in the band in the first place heh. Blood Sex Sugar Magik is pretty much undeniably their best album, in my opinion. I've not even bothered with the last two releases though. I just don't really have the interest anymore.

It's gone. The somewhat official picture posting place is at [url]http://www.slownerveaction.org/obpics[/url] now. Not quite the same, obviously... but it works. It's been pretty successful so far.

[QUOTE=xbloodfightx]I really don't understand. Even the moderators don't know what they are talking about. Emo died before the 80's or 90's [I don't remember]. So I doubt anyone knows any emo bands. No one mentioned any punk bands either[besides the Misfits, but they are really weird to classify, I just call them horor punk]. You've all listed this new school crap bands. Punk bands do not talk about girls, crying, or any of that crap. They talk about politics, partying[mostly just the casualties], drinking, and anti-religion. If most people listened to actual punk, they wouldn't like it. For old school stuff listen to Defiance, they are street punk. Listen to bands on punkcore records, they are punk basically. Listen to Toxic Narcotic too, they are good.[/QUOTE] The Misfits call [I]themselves [/I]horror punk and I said that in the first place. You're not breaking any news here lol. It comes off like you invented the term or something. I think I'm the only mod who posted in here, but I'm certainly not infallible heh. Anyway... You're confusing the punk [I]ideal [/I]with punk as a [I]sound[/I]. There's a BIG difference. In fact, I think we got into this with your old username, honestly lol. Genres evolve and the world isn't what it was 20 or 30 years ago. You're claiming the subject matter is all that defines the genre and that really just isn't the case anymore (unlike its roots, perhaps). The stuff you've listed goes more along the ideal of punk as a thought process rather than the sound itself, and while there are obviously still groups that go with this... many just no longer do. Rock has changed. R&B has changed. Electronica has changed. Punk has changed. It all evolves according to the current climate around it. It can't be stuck according to the ideal thought it was originally founded on decades prior to now (especially when random people always name Sex Pistols in these threads -- they're just as manufactured as anything nowadays). Again, the ideal and the sound have become seperate entities over time, although they obviously intertwine with eachother depending on the situation and there are bands that still apply themselves completely to that ideal. If you want to stick with the simply ideal, punk is about rebellion at its core. That doesn't necessarily have to include [i]any[/i] of the types of writing subjects you've mentioned. It's a pretty broad subject... and while obviously not all bands that can be placed into the "punk" genre go for that subject matter, it doesn't mean much for the actual sound itself. You could just call a lot of the newer stuff "punk revival", "ska revival" or "emo revival"... but they all still contain those keywords: punk, ska and emo. I think this all just reiterates my point. You also have the issue of mixed genres that comes up as well. I fail to see how bands like Apocalypse Hoboken or Bad Religion really sing about the stuff you claim all bands mentioned here do anyway. Most of AH's songs are about drugs, social issues, drinking and having sex when they shouldn't be. That's pretty comparable to whining about girls and emotional feelings? lol Obviously you have little experience with them, if any. If you want to think of your genres in that way, be my guest. It's certainly not the only approach to it and I don't feel I'm any less right than you may be on the subject. If things were that cut and dry, no one would ever have discussions over what bands were what genre in the first place. Obviously that's not the case. Unfortunately, ignoring any evolutions (beneficial or otherwise) to a genre doesn't make them just go away. We can add all the little sub-genre descriptors on them that we want to and it's still the same result in the end. Things change. I'm not a genre whore and the idea that what defines a genre completely has to be that rigid to be included in any form seems ridiculous to me. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing that forms of punk that follow that idea somehow are incorrect in doing so. If you want to consider that stuff "real punk" (and I suppose you could legitimately say that) and listen to that exclusively, that's fine with me. I wouldn't argue that most people wouldn't like it either, because most definitely wouldn't. My point is simply that the genre itself just is no longer defined by that alone. This reminds me of your comments in the metal thread where you said what amounted to the idea that older metal sucks and newer metal is great. Obviously not everyone would agree with you on that. Maybe some people feel the same way about what some versions of punk as a [i]sound[/i] have become? Surely metal has changed and evolved into something different in the past few decades as well (plus all the little sub-genres involved in that too). Isn't this comparable? I think it is, personally. Maybe some people consider the metal you listen to "new school crap"? Does that make it any less fitting for the genre in terms of sound? No, not really. To some closed minded people stuck in the 70s and 80s perhaps, but that's about it. In any case, I'm not going to go any farther and debase this into some lame "true punk" debate. I wash my hands of this crap lol.

[quote name='Shinmaru']This is really nowhere near the post quality that we strive for here at OtakuBoards - it's really frowned upon to just jump in and say that you hate the ending of FFX-2 without any rhyme or reason (so to speak). A little elaboration would go a long way, I think. Why do you dislike the ending of FFX-2? What about the other parts of the game? Was it generally a good experience for you? And so on.[/quote] Um. I'm 99% sure that this person did not play all of the game nor did they see the ending for themselves. Seems rather obvious that the user known as BoA posted something about the ending and ruined it for this person. As such, I don't really know how they can answer those questions.

[quote name='Zidargh']Well take Dragon Warrior VII for example, I'm only about 2 hours into the game but I've just experienced my first battle in it, and I found it terrible. The battle system is in a first person view and not only this, the enemies hardly budge, just the odd inch when they attack you, with no animation of the playable characters whatsoever. However, this game appears to have a strong storyline with plenty of twists in it so I look forward to getting further into the game.[/quote] That's how battles in every Dragon Warrior game ever are. They're always first person and it's simply just another way to do things. I personally find nothing wrong with it and in many cases, I prefer it. The first battle is with a small pack of slime, so obviously it won't be exciting. You don't have access to any powers, magic, good weapons or anything else. Also, the animation in that game for the battles is pretty damn amazing. Yes, they only move when they're attacking (the alternative is what? jumping up and down constantly or doing some breathing animation? eh -- we're also talking about hundreds of 2D animated monsters, with animation up there with a Street Fighter game when they do attack, it's a bit much to ask heh))... but it's incredibly fluid and each monster has a couple different animations for each attack. Perhaps it's not the best at first, but it definitely improves. Some of the monster designs are amazingly good. As for the system, it depends on what you like. In the end, it's not really much different than most other RPGs because you're just stuck picking from a menu. You have to keep in mind that DW7 is EXTREMELY traditional. It's trying to appeal to long time fans of the series and not really trying to gain any new ones... especially with its pretty "eh" graphics in basically everything but the monsters lol. Dragon Quest/Warrior 8 looks to improve all of these issues though. The battles are even in 3rd person, which should make people happy. I think the first person battles are what people complain about most.

Definitely post your thoughts because it seems this won't get any other replies lol.

I wound up changing a lot of this. I had new ideas for it because I wasn't happy with the page layouts. My teacher pretty much echoed my thoughts on the subject when I showed it all to her. So this is what I have currently. The colored boxes pop up when you click on the "Navigation" button.

The jukebox doesn't work with Mozilla. Period. You'll have to wait until someone fixes that, like Justin said. The quick reply activator "thing" is this: [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/images/liquid/buttons/quickreply.gif[/img]. Click it on any post you'd like to reply to.

I'm really not a fan of Cooper. He has some good songs and releases (Billion Dollar Babies comes to mind)... but nothing I consider remotely amazing. The guy hasn't even attempted to evolve his image in any way. He's still trapped in the era he came out in. My main issue with him is that he seems to have this opinion that he created the look for basically every other dark performance-minded band in existance. While he was one of the major players of that at the time, he certainly wasn't the first or only one. Plus the bands he tries to say are like him just really aren't all that comparable, in my opinion. He seems pretty egotistical for someone who's almost 60 and is still mostly known for singing about summer break in school and turning 18. But that's just my opinion. Obviously lots of other people love him if he's still able to sell his records.

I think it was actually Genkai that started the Flaming Lips thread... although I think I actually made one too, now that I'm trying to remember it all lol. Yoshimi is an awesome release. I'm not always in the mood to listen to it, but every so often it makes its way into my playlist again. It's important to note that new Flaming Lips is actually quite different from the older stuff... so I'm not sure how big you'd be on their other releases. In any case, I'd check out The Soft Bulletin. I would consider that their best.

I don't know if it's called anything else. I don't know why it would be, considering the full name is just one more short word lol. It''s not really a book I'd think would be used in an AP class. I obviously love it, but it doesn't seem to be at the same level of books I had to read in AP English... Even if you don't read it for class, pick it up. I've not even really read a book since Eenior year of high school and this still managed to get me interested.