Controversial Opinions (For Everything Other Than DC Comics)

[williamtheday]

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) was too over the top for me.

[DrNewGod]

I don't think sequels need necessarily be appropriate.

I'm not sure that I follow you on this one. Expand?

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) was too over the top for me.

Total agreement.

[TheRay]

I'm not sure that I follow you on this one. Expand?

....sequels don't have to be necessary to get made.

[DrNewGod]

....sequels don't have to be necessary to get made.

Ah. I suppose that depends upon whether you're talking to a creator, or finance guy.

[godisawesome]

Ah. I suppose that depends upon whether you're talking to a creator, or finance guy.

Eh, with a creator, the storytelling and character based impetus for a sequel is a flexible, many faceted thing. You *can* go episodic instead of serialized if you know how to do it right.

[TheRay]

Ah. I suppose that depends upon whether you're talking to a creator, or finance guy.

I mean yeah I guess, obviously you're not going to spend money on something that won't make money.

[Madam-Shogun-Assassin]

The thing about people in the west (particularly America) not addressing Israel treatment of Palestinians is because of their own history. Notice blinker saying it should be on a referral basis.

So the the ones committing war crimes have to refer themselves to be investigated

The us sits permanently on the security council and has crazy veto power, so if israel somehow gets referred US will veto an investigation

The US gets referred they can veto investigations into their own actions

The main reason no one in the west will speak out or take any legislative action is because of the precedent that will be set and the fact that every claim you can put on Israel you can also prosecute the US for in Iraq and Afghanistan

These skeletons in their closets are still getting people killed today. An investigation may lead to the US having to pay reperations to black and indeginious peoples and having their actions recognised as crimes against humanity in extrajudicial killings within the US, aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, genocide against indigenous populations and a plethora of war crimes. All four international crimes

I know the US isn’t signed to the time statute however it should not give them the freedom to do **** like this. Ilhan Omar is basically right about Israel.

[TheRay]

Doing your own research needs to be encouraged even more.

[Gray Lensman]

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) was too over the top for me.

It was, but I often enjoy over the top performances. It remains one of, if not the single most accurate rendition of the novel I have heard of, and the closest I have ever seen personally.

There is a BBC production that hits many of the same beats from the novel, but doesn't try to shoehorn in the love story angle. But I only know of it from a YouTube video about adaptations, ranking a couple dozen of them for novel accuracy. It's amazing how many of the retellings fall into the 'Inspired By' rather than the 'Based On' category.

Every now and then you just want to enjoy the finest hazelnut fed Iberian ham.

[CSTowle]

The problem with people doing their own research is them shopping for the "research"/answers they want. Or avoiding the ones they don't. Take, for example, the ongoing Covid pandemic. You only have to make a quick visit to right-wing blogs or Conspiracy subreddits to find people confidently proclaiming one or more of the following: Covid's a hoax/the regular flu, it's a Chinese bio-weapon meant to weaken the West to allow them to overtake us, it can be cured with Vitamin D or hydroxychloriquine, the death toll is nowhere near 600k in the US, the vaccine is either more dangerous than the virus/a secret plot by Bill Gates to "chip" all Americans with the mark of the Beast as Satan planned/giving us magnetic powers/a plot to change our DNA/etc. Then you have masks and behavior around them.

All of this nonsense has been extensively "researched" by the people spreading it, and all it takes is a few medical professionals/politicians trying to gain attention or make a buck lending the appearance of credibility to the conspiracy theories and you muddy the waters. It's anti-science, sometimes proudly so. Critical thinking and questioning official narratives can be of value, but there has to be something legitimate there. Your crazy uncle who thinks the moon is hollow and can link you to a Youtube video from a guy who used to work at NASA isn't a legitimate source of information or a substitute for real experts/scientific study.

Not to say that you are in any way advocating for that, just that it's an attitude that can be used as an excuse for literally doing the opposite and just glomming onto whatever bulls##t fits a person's worldview.

[Kirby101]

The rampant belief in the Qanon absurdities show that we should not take anything written in the first and second centuries about Jesus literally or with any veracity.

[numberthirty]

Tommy Bolin was the best guitarist in The James Gang.

[Jack Dracula]

The problem with people doing their own research is them shopping for the "research"/answers they want. Or avoiding the ones they don't. Take, for example, the ongoing Covid pandemic. You only have to make a quick visit to right-wing blogs or Conspiracy subreddits to find people confidently proclaiming one or more of the following: Covid's a hoax/the regular flu, it's a Chinese bio-weapon meant to weaken the West to allow them to overtake us, it can be cured with Vitamin D or hydroxychloriquine, the death toll is nowhere near 600k in the US, the vaccine is either more dangerous than the virus/a secret plot by Bill Gates to "chip" all Americans with the mark of the Beast as Satan planned/giving us magnetic powers/a plot to change our DNA/etc. Then you have masks and behavior around them.

All of this nonsense has been extensively "researched" by the people spreading it, and all it takes is a few medical professionals/politicians trying to gain attention or make a buck lending the appearance of credibility to the conspiracy theories and you muddy the waters. It's anti-science, sometimes proudly so. Critical thinking and questioning official narratives can be of value, but there has to be something legitimate there. Your crazy uncle who thinks the moon is hollow and can link you to a Youtube video from a guy who used to work at NASA isn't a legitimate source of information or a substitute for real experts/scientific study.

Not to say that you are in any way advocating for that, just that it's an attitude that can be used as an excuse for literally doing the opposite and just glomming onto whatever bulls##t fits a person's worldview.

Related to this: Just 12 People are responsible for 65% of false and misleading anti-vaccine posts on social media.

These figures are well-known to both researchers and the social networks. They include anti-vaccine activists, alternative health entrepreneurs and physicians. Some of them run multiple accounts across the different platforms. They often promote "natural health." Some even sell supplements and books.

The claims from the "Disinformation Dozen" range from "denying that COVID exists, claiming that false cures are in fact the way to solve COVID and not vaccination, decrying vaccines and decrying doctors as being in some way venal or motivated by other factors when they recommend vaccines," Ahmed said.

[TheRay]

The problem with people doing their own research is them shopping for the "research"/answers they want.

That wouldn't be doing research then. Research is extensive, very often never ending. It requires multiple sources, usually with the condition that those sources have been verified already. Uncle Jim Joey Bob's blog wouldn't count as research. You could use that blog to jump off into a point of research, but that's it.

[DrNewGod]

That wouldn't be doing research then. Research is extensive, very often never ending. It requires multiple sources, usually with the condition that those sources have been verified already. Uncle Jim Joey Bob's blog wouldn't count as research. You could use that blog to jump off into a point of research, but that's it.

Yeah, well, they're not much interested in the actual definition of research. They burned hours reading links the found on p.a.r.l.e.r., so in their minds, they've researched the topic. You pointing out they're wrong is just you being "a woke elitist," trying to confuse them with fake news, which they take as further proof that they're right.