Careercow Robert Chipman / Bob / Moviebob / "Movieblob" - Middle-Aged Consoomer, CWC with a Thesaurus, Ardent Male Feminist and Superior Futurist, the Twice-Fired, the Mario-Worshipper, publicly dismantled by Hot Dog Girl, now a diabetic

[Judge Dredd]

From what little I know about the film it's actually been misrepresented with a sloppy ad campaign since it's more of critique of that sort of thing than a endorsement.

That was said to defend the film early on when all anyone saw of it was a couple of posters and a trailer. When the film was released, the people who saw it claimed the marketing downplayed the sleazy elements if anything.

Edit: Clarity.

 

[King Dead]

From what little I know about the film it's actually been misrepresented with a sloppy ad campaign since it's more of critique of that sort of thing than a endorsement.
Then again Bob has this weird thing where the creator holds moral high ground over the audience, he defended the MA3 ending despite not playing the game and he defended Diablo immortal despite it being a wanky phone game. At this stage he'd probably defend a that ethnic cleansing game if gamers were upset.

That's not really the issue at hand, though. You can make a film about a reprehensible subject that doesn't support that subject, and there are loads of examples of just that. The issue that comes into play is when you subject your actors to literally doing the reprehensible things in question, then try to shrug off anyone saying "uh that's really not good" by claiming it's art. You can make a movie about a girl rebelling against her strict Islamic upbringing without including gratuitous shots of preteens twerking, down to closeups of their asses and crotches.

The other aspect that makes this indefensible is that it would be a whole other story if the characters in question were adults, or even just the actors playing them. Still pretty skeevy, but at least you're not exploiting children. When you've basically made a softcore child porn film, you've lost any right to pull the "b-but it's art!" excuse. Sure, the movie doesn't champion what the main character does, but it still showcases it front and center. Pedos will masturbate to things way more innocent than this. Cuties is a goldmine for them no matter how much the plot says it's wrong.

Bob's just doing his standard kneejerk opposition to the backlash because he thinks the only people who are against softcore child porn are Bible-thumping conservatards who are trying to keep a brave pee-oh-see woman down, when it's really pretty much everyone that's not an out-of-touch film critic that finds something wrong with the movie. This really isn't the hill you want to die on, Bobbo.

 

[cypocryphy]

Dance Moms and child beauty pageants have always had critics though. Just go watch your Marvel movies, Bob.

 

[Fuck Y'all]

View attachment 1592935

Dance Moms and child beauty pageants have always had critics though. Just go watch your Marvel movies, Bob.

my god, how the fuck someone could have completely twisted moral code

 

[Pokemonquistador2]

If Dr. Strange would only do pee pee surgery on "passable" people, then he would not have a dime on his pocket.

Robert loves to indulge this crazy person, wonder if he got the very obvious tone of regret and resentment Ellie here holds about cutting off his own dick.

Yeah, estrogen isn't magic, neither is surgery, and there is no such a thing as "passable" for 99% of trans people, everybody can see, it is just polite to not point it out.

oh, and for the 1% androgynous elf people, the disfigured genitalia is still there, and regardless of gender or sexual orientation, it still is a hurdle to be attracted to it when things come down to it.

If you wanna go trans, fucking go for it, just know that reality won't bend to anyones caprices and it is far, far more easy to be accepting of trans in a public and general way, than in a particular and personal fashion.

Case in point, a query for you Ellie, you think your good friend, movie Robert, would have sex with you?

The trans movement started out as a way for people who were physically intersex to set themselves to their mental sex. People born with male and female sex organs or Klinefelter men with a few extra X Chromosomes were people who could often pass if they wanted to. Men who insisted on dressing up as women were considered either gay or crossdressers (or both.) They were often portrayed as comic relief in sitcoms.

The present day's obsession with transness feels different. Part of the thrill of being a transwomyn these days is the forcing of people to treat you like a glamor queen, when you obviously don't look anything like a biological woman. Knowing that you can send the cops after people that refuse to go along with your delusion (or cancel them from their careers) is part of the fetish. The strange thing is that some of these men could pass as biological women, except for the fact that they dress and apply makeup like circus freaks. If they dialed it back a little, they might be able to convince people on the street that they're female. But their need to get attention overrides their mission to pass as female. That leads me to believe that there's more than just dysphoria going on with trans people these days. They don't want to fit in, they want all eyes on them.

 

[iRON-mAn]

That's not really the issue at hand, though. You can make a film about a reprehensible subject that doesn't support that subject, and there are loads of examples of just that. The issue that comes into play is when you subject your actors to literally doing the reprehensible things in question, then try to shrug off anyone saying "uh that's really not good" by claiming it's art. You can make a movie about a girl rebelling against her strict Islamic upbringing without including gratuitous shots of preteens twerking, down to closeups of their asses and crotches.

If the film wanted to be about the damage of sexualizing young girls, I'd probably be fine with some depictions of said acts to create context, but Cuties never gets around to showing the actual damage of their acts. This is like a film about the horrors of war showing climatic gun fights with swelling music and acts of bravery, then forgetting to show the PTSD, potential physical injury and rehabilitation, and piles of dead bodies. In Cuties, the MC just kind of moves on, and there's no suggestion of probable therapy for years to come, issues of physical intimacy or emotional detachment that comes from usual cases of child sexualization. Rather it's portrayed as a rather turbulent phase in her life before she grows up.

As a movie critic, that's absolutely something that Bob should be able to see and note, regardless of whether he thinks the glorification is intentional by Doucouré. Bob is gullible enough to take the filmmaker at her word, but if he truly understood even the basics of storytelling, he would still have a problem with Cuties, even if he wants to ignore the moral implications.

 

[dzonatan]

That leads me to believe that there's more than just dysphoria going on with trans people these days. They don't want to fit in, they want all eyes on them.

Right on the money. Anyone who had a narcissistic sibling in life can tell straight away what kind of people they are.
They make unreasonable demands, get refused and instantly run off to nearest relevant authority in your life and drop it on your head all while pretending to be a victim.
To add more insult to injury they make sure you're the only who sees their shit-eating grin.

 

[TopTierHealer]

Powerlevelling a bit, I went out hiking yesterday. I spend the whole day outside enjoying the very, very last days of summer without any access to technology. I didn't feel this good in a long time and was meant to start the day by having a sensible chuckle at our resident fat smoothbrain.
I don't remember getting as pissed off in the past 6 pages as I did in the earlier 200 hundred (save for Chris' ebegging).

I honestly want Lindsay or HBomber to mention CinemaRoberto by name again and tell him to shut the fuck up, it's the only thing that would give me some peace and quiet and the only instance that Blob could not backpedal from.

Speaking of child actors and Bob's flawed logic I remember reading about Danny Lloyd, the kid from The Shining.
Kubrick had always been infamous in the way he treated his actors but he didn't traumatize Danny. The kid wouldn't even know what kind of movie he had starred until his teens because Kubrick paid special attention to shelter him from all the disturbing scenes of the film. Danny never even knew what kind of move he was starring in.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/oct/27/danny-lloyd-the-kid-in-the-shining-i-was-promised-that-tricycle-after-filming-but-it-never-came

To put this in context with Bob's logic: the girls in cuties were not only told what they would be doing, they would be given very detailed information on the sexual nature of the choreography and somehow this is ok because they consented.

Chris, you mongrel, keep your daughter away from uncle Bob....(who am I kidding, you would pimp her to the Hollywood Elites for a 15 second appearance on a late night show)

 

[Positron]

Bob is now outright defending the concept of putting a child into a sexual exploitive situation.
View attachment 1590961

You can hit me with all the a-log ratings you want, but if I was to ever meet Bob in real life I would without hesitation punch him right in his face. And I'm not joking about that. He crosses my path and he's going to get knocked out.

What a retard. A martial artist doesn't actually beat up the "bad guys" in the movies, but the children who do emulated sex moves in movie were really doing those emulated sex moves.

There is no moral line with Bob, just who he hates and who he likes.

Tactics, targets. The target this time is a BIPOC woman, so even though she deserves death threats (and then some) Bobby has to cry foul.

So when does "pedo sympathizer" gets added to the thread title?

"Defender of sexual predators and pedophiles".

+ + + + +
The left is so oppressed. Poor intellectuals, they get called out for their retarded hot takes!


What's more, they regularly get shot by Rust-belt Trumpsters!


QAnon:


Hollywood said ACAB:


+ + + +
Kissing up to abortion:


Political stuff; I can't be bothered to investigate:


Bizarre fedoraism:



Red-haired troon (who incidentally has a KF thread) is, surprise, another pedophilia apologist:

Red-haired troon has seen the kiddie porn. Congrats I guess?

Fresh from his valiant battle on behalf of pedophiles, Bobby is tasked with babysitting very little children:


Onto lighter stuff. Bobby is pining for a new Mummy movie...


... as well as the revival of X-Files (with QAnon):

 

[Flexo]

That's not really the issue at hand, though. You can make a film about a reprehensible subject that doesn't support that subject, and there are loads of examples of just that. The issue that comes into play is when you subject your actors to literally doing the reprehensible things in question, then try to shrug off anyone saying "uh that's really not good" by claiming it's art. You can make a movie about a girl rebelling against her strict Islamic upbringing without including gratuitous shots of preteens twerking, down to closeups of their asses and crotches.

The other aspect that makes this indefensible is that it would be a whole other story if the characters in question were adults, or even just the actors playing them. Still pretty skeevy, but at least you're not exploiting children. When you've basically made a softcore child porn film, you've lost any right to pull the "b-but it's art!" excuse. Sure, the movie doesn't champion what the main character does, but it still showcases it front and center. Pedos will masturbate to things way more innocent than this. Cuties is a goldmine for them no matter how much the plot says it's wrong.

Can't believe I'm doing this but... TV Tropes still has up the article for it.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoNotDoThisCoolThing

You want to have An Aesop about something that we should avoid at all costs. Trouble is, just by showing or describing it in lavish detail, you end up undermining your message by showing just how damn appealing it is and cause the audience to get the wrong idea.​

. . .​

If a work attempts to play down the attractive aspects and stick to the unappealing ones, the work itself may become unappealing as a result, which again undermines the goal of spreading its message. It's a tricky artistic balance: If you Show, Don't Tell, you risk showing something bad as cool, but if you just tell, you're left with a boring Author Tract saying "And That's Terrible." This trope was formerly called "Truffaut was right", named for French director François Truffaut who noted that you simply cannot make a truly anti-war movie.​

Though when you think a lot about this with the movie, it then gets worse. Like you can't show child exploitation is bad without making children seem really tempting??

At a point, the excuse stops working.

 

[Mola Ram]

Though when you think a lot about this with the movie, it then gets worse. Like you can't show child exploitation is bad without making children seem really tempting??

I'll make it easy for you, and to be perfectly frank, this is something Bob, movie historian that he claims to be, should be eminently aware of.

Cuties operates on precisely the same moral and intellectual level as a movie from 1938 called Child Bride, where the vile practice of Appalachian rednecks forcibly marrying underage girls was condemned in such a fashion that it required a 13 year old actress to go topless and have an extended nude swimming scene. The pretense that it was a moral lecture and not exploitative, no sirree, allowed it to sneak past the Hays Office. This movie is so disturbing that the MST3K guys declined to screen it.

 

[Ralph Barnhardt]

Has Dan Olson defended Cuties? It's right up his alley. Maybe he can defend the director by saying she only made it to pwn Gamergate. Which is the same reason he jacked off to it.

Unlike Bob I do unironically strongly suspect Dan of being a pedo, or if not that, something roughly on the same level of fucked up. Something is very off about that guy.

I did a quick search and didn't see him even mention Cuties. I did find something about Dan that I feel needs poster here.


You see that Bob? Dan Olson, who's claim to fame is trying to get 8chan pulled down by posting child porn on the site and reporting his said posting of child porn like the retard he is, can get asspats from those much ballyhooed YOUTUBERS that you smugly swiped at yesterday. Lindsay Ellis prefers the digital company of a retard like Dan Olson over you Robbie.

I'll make it easy for you, and to be perfectly frank, this is something Bob, movie historian that he claims to be, should be eminently aware of.

Cuties operates on precisely the same moral and intellectual level as a movie from 1938 called Child Bride, where the vile practice of Appalachian rednecks forcibly marrying underage girls was condemned in such a fashion that it required a 13 year old actress to go topless and have an extended nude swimming scene. The pretense that it was a moral lecture and not exploitative, no sirree, allowed it to sneak past the Hays Office. This movie is so disturbing that the MST3K guys declined to screen it.

View attachment 1593100

Fugg I thought I was the only one who knew about that...

 

[Godzilla@1989]

I found a video of a guy bashing Bob for his tales on Cuties.

 

[Quixotic Man]

Hollywood said ACAB:
View attachment 1593014

Bob is a fucking idiot, especially about subjects he is supposedly an expert in. The reason that cops often weren't the focus of early Hollywood was due to excessive censorship. The Hays code required excessive respect for the law and law enforcement. You couldn't show a good cop being inside a corrupt system, you couldn't show a cop failing. There were even periods where you couldn't show cops being killed by criminals. It basically created a situation where if you had a cop protagonist, you couldn't create any drama around them at all. So instead the detective role got shifted over to Private Investigators, with cops mainly providing a supporting role to save the protagonist, help him out occasionally, or show up just a second too late to prevent tragedy. Either that or they showed up in comedy films in order to chase around the Abbot and Costello for a misunderstanding involving the Wolfman.

Surprisingly Bob did recognize about the correct time period for when push back against the Hays code and loosening of its enforcement allowed filmmakers to make more interesting and nuanced depictions of cops, but the fact that he can't put the two together does not surprise me at all.

 

[Mola Ram]

Bob is a fucking idiot, especially about subjects he is supposedly an expert in. The reason that cops often weren't the focus of early Hollywood was due to excessive censorship. The Hays code required excessive respect for the law and law enforcement. You couldn't show a good cop being inside a corrupt system, you couldn't show a cop failing. There were even periods where you couldn't show cops being killed by criminals. It basically created a situation where if you had a cop protagonist, you couldn't create any drama around them at all. So instead the detective role got shifted over to Private Investigators, with cops mainly providing a supporting role to save the protagonist, help him out occasionally, or show up just a second too late to prevent tragedy. Either that or they showed up in comedy films in order to chase around the Abbot and Costello for a misunderstanding involving the Wolfman.

Surprisingly Bob did recognize about the correct time period for when push back against the Hays code and loosening of its enforcement allowed filmmakers to make more interesting and nuanced depictions of cops, but the fact that he can't put the two together does not surprise me at all.

My favorite part of Bob's dribble is that the Irish cop stereotype was because the Irish were acceptable targets for buffoonery ... as opposed to there being armies of Irish cops in the real world. Where does he think the Ancient Order of Hibernians came from?

But I shouldn't be too critical. It's not like he lives near an old East Coast city known for its Irish population.

 

[DZoomer]

I tried searching for some recent tweets from this faget, but he tweets so much that I got tired after scrolling so much and only getting to tweets from 2 hours ago. Does this guy not have anything to do other than shit out bad takes?

 

[None More Black]

even though other cows have done worse things, bob's complete unawareness of how worthless he is on every conceivable level makes me hate him the most. like this for instance:

his combination of uselessness and flagrant obnoxiousness is just astounding to me

 

[XtrmGamr719]

even though other cows have done worse things, bob's complete unawareness of how worthless he is on every conceivable level makes me hate him the most. like this for instance:
View attachment 1593225
his combination of uselessness and flagrant obnoxiousness is just astounding to me

He really lacks any sort of semblance of empathy or sympathy.

 

[Mola Ram]

He really lacks any sort of semblance of empathy or sympathy.

Sometimes his tweets sound like excerpts from John Doe's endless journals in Seven. Only not as educated.

 

[Flexo]

Wow, @Positron , I think you found one of the most high density idiot dumps of Bob yet.



So if men have a right to abortion now, does that mean we can finally have an opinion and vote on it too?



Bob, the medieval Catholics were the ones to invent universities. Maybe try to think more than believe once in awhile?



Oh we all agree - you should have been eaten by a cave bear long ago.

Red-haired troon (who incidentally has a KF thread) is, surprise, another pedophilia apologist:

Red-haired troon has seen the kiddie porn. Congrats I guess?

So by this logic - I can't be opposed to rape unless i've personally witnessed one?

(On a slightly more serious note, aren't these also the same people that say they can critique and mock religion without actually attending services or reading the holy texts?)

Onto lighter stuff. Bobby is pining for a new Mummy movie...

OMG. I've got to document this right now. Pay close attention.

Maybe you didn't notice it. Watch again.

Let me translate see if you spot the stupidity.
>Hey everyone! Remember how this first movie established reincarnation as a thing?
>What if they brought back Rachel Weiss again for a sequel.
But '99 mummy took place in the '30s. Nu Mummy is supposed to be modern day.
>How can we get Rachel's character to the modern day?
>Dunno - maybe immortal?

Me, an intellectual: Why don't you.... USE REINCARNATION WHICH THE SERIES ALREADY ESTABLISHED AS AN OPTION???