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

How will Bob react to seeing the Mario film?


  • Total voters
    1,451
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't remember who said it, but I recall someone saying that if you changed the religion that The Handmaid's Tale criticizes, you effectively change its genre. When the story places Christianity as its target, The Handmaid's Tale is fiction; when when you change its focus to Islam, The Handmaid's Tale transforms into a documentary.
If I remember rightly Atwood was inspired to write it after seeing what was going on in Iran and how feminists in the West were doing nothing to fight it while complaining about people like Mary Whitehouse and Pat Robertson and viewing them as the biggest threats to liberalism.

The point of the book is not ”this is what Christians will do if they ever gain any power, so you have to make sure any Nativity plays in school are accompanied by a guy in a black robe ominously chanting ’Hail Satan, hail Baphomet’ for three hours because muh separation of Church and state”, the point of the book is ”if you find the thought of a state religion being enforced by forced conversions and women being forced to wear a veil abhorrent, then do something about that happening in Iran and Saudi Arabia instead of whining about how banning degeneracy will lead to women becoming baby-making machines”.

It's also important to note that in both the book and the film, Catholics were persecuted by the Sons of Jacob and their regime (for instance, nuns were given a choice between apostasising and becoming sex slaves or being sent to death camps, Catholic priests were hanged on the wall in Boston, and Cardinal Newman's books were burnt) making Bob's insistence that the Catholic Church wants to bring about a world like The Handmaid's Tale doubly stupid.
 
If I remember rightly Atwood was inspired to write it after seeing what was going on in Iran and how feminists in the West were doing nothing to fight it while complaining about people like Mary Whitehouse and Pat Robertson and viewing them as the biggest threats to liberalism.
And yet when the TV show was made she did a 180 for the attention.
The point of the book is not ”this is what Christians will do if they ever gain any power, so you have to make sure any Nativity plays in school are accompanied by a guy in a black robe ominously chanting ’Hail Satan, hail Baphomet’ for three hours because muh separation of Church and state”, the point of the book is ”if you find the thought of a state religion being enforced by forced conversions and women being forced to wear a veil abhorrent, then do something about that happening in Iran and Saudi Arabia instead of whining about how banning degeneracy will lead to women becoming baby-making machines”.
The problem is, since she used Christianity no one got it because second and third wave feminists are only nominally smarter than Film Robert. So, how are things going in the Middle East for women, Margie? Still crappy? Okay.
It's also important to note that in both the book and the film, Catholics were persecuted by the Sons of Jacob and their regime (for instance, nuns were given a choice between apostasising and becoming sex slaves or being sent to death camps, Catholic priests were hanged on the wall in Boston, and Cardinal Newman's books were burnt) making Bob's insistence that the Catholic Church wants to bring about a world like The Handmaid's Tale doubly stupid.
As would happen in any oppressive Protestant regime, honestly. How did Catholics go from being the most decadent sect for most of history in their eyes to the most traditionalist and repressive in the last 15 years? Boggles my mind.
 
And yet when the TV show was made she did a 180 for the attention.
I didn't know that. Does she seriously believe that the majority of Trump supporters, Catholics, Baptists, or whatever the liberal boogeyman du jour is, want to make women sex slaves?
The problem is, since she used Christianity no one got it because second and third wave feminists are only nominally smarter than Film Robert. So, how are things going in the Middle East for women, Margie? Still crappy? Okay.
The white women who ignored the message of that book showed that they can't understand symbolism.
Which is, ironically enough, a trait of autism.

(As an aside, how obvious a comparison to the Islamic Revolution did it need to be? The Sons of Jacob took over after food shortages and riots under a liberal government, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob forced women to wear headscarves and skirts, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob publically hanged dissenters and gays, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob carried out violence against Catholics and Jews, in the same way the Ayatollah attacked Sunnis and Jews in Iran. Do these people need a guy with a beard to pop out and say ”Derk derk, Allah, Mohammed jihad! My name is Mohammed Islam and I enjoy massacring homosexuals and atheists after I get back from a hard day's work at the Koran factory, unless I decide to beat my wives Fatima, Rashida, Muslima and Stereotypical-name-ending-in-a,” to realise something's a reference to Islam?
As would happen in any oppressive Protestant regime, honestly.
As did happen under any oppressive Protestant regime. I know people think of the Spanish Inquisition as the supreme evil (for which we can thank the Black Legend) but Henry VIII and Edward VI persecuted Catholics and non-conformist Protestants in ways that were far harsher than anything the Inquisitions ever did.
 
I didn't know that. Does she seriously believe that the majority of Trump supporters, Catholics, Baptists, or whatever the liberal boogeyman du jour is, want to make women sex slaves?
Couldn't tell you if she seriously believes it. Plus I'm spouting off. I heard it somewhere, can't remember where, so I could be wrong, admittedly and it might've been some other wokie feminist writer I'm thinking of.
The white women who ignored the message of that book showed that they can't understand symbolism.
Which is, ironically enough, a trait of autism.
They didn't ignore it, they didn't understand it.
(As an aside, how obvious a comparison to the Islamic Revolution did it need to be? The Sons of Jacob took over after food shortages and riots under a liberal government, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob forced women to wear headscarves and skirts, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob publically hanged dissenters and gays, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob carried out violence against Catholics and Jews, in the same way the Ayatollah attacked Sunnis and Jews in Iran. Do these people need a guy with a beard to pop out and say ”Derk derk, Allah, Mohammed jihad! My name is Mohammed Islam and I enjoy massacring homosexuals and atheists after I get back from a hard day's work at the Koran factory, unless I decide to beat my wives Fatima, Rashida, Muslima and Stereotypical-name-ending-in-a,” to realise something's a reference to Islam?
Yes.
As did happen under any oppressive Protestant regime. I know people think of the Spanish Inquisition as the supreme evil (for which we can thank the Black Legend) but Henry VIII and Edward VI persecuted Catholics and non-conformist Protestants in ways that were far harsher than anything the Inquisitions ever did.
Well, that wasn't my original point, but yes, Catholics had their turn being oppressed same as every other group. The Church of England was a mistake.
 
Seriously, he goes on these tangents about how Disney pretty much owns the world and I'm just sitting here being like...

whydoesitpleaseyou.gif
Lately, people have been giving Disney heat for choosing to reduce the third season of one of their shows, The Owl House, down to three two-parters, something that the creator didn't expect at all, while another show airing at the same time, Amphibia, received no real cutbacks. People say its because of the prominent LGBT stuff they can't censor for overseas viewers because two of the main female characters have been developing feelings for each other.

What exactly would Bob have to say about this? Would he condemn Disney for silencing the gays (including the bisexual creator of the show), or would he find some backwards way to defend this possible act of censorship?
 
Another reason why I hate people like Bob. The constant debates and arguments about meaningless nerd shit.

Why do these geeks care so much about what’s canon?
You're asking a pretty deep question.
You see canon should basically just be "what actually happened in the story" but in the era of sequels and reboots it becomes important in terms of the pre-existing audience. It's also respectful to the original author if you're someone making a sequel or a continuation to know canon. Its why Star Trek has run for so long, even though they come up with random stuff all the time.
 
That feeling when not only can you no longer tell if a Star Wars hot take is a joke, you don't even care if it isn't.

Bloom County: Here's a joke that only works because Calvin & Hobbes is such a cornerstone of the industry that I can assume my entire audience knows the "rules" about when Hobbes is a stuffed animal and when he isn't.
Bob: Begun, the Comic Wars have.

Apparently Bob never discovered the difference between a playful nod and an unforgiveable slight.


Can confirm. Once in a town I was working in there was an anti-abortion protest which, it was reported, was organized by a women's group. I changed my commute route to avoid the protest - and ended up blocked by the anti-anti-abortion counterprotest on the next block where a bunch of fat white red-Puritan-dress cosplayers were holding signs reading "The Handmaids Tale isnt an instruction manual!" (sic) or mocking the penis sizes of the women's group anti-abortion protestors.
It doesn't surprise me that Bob's smooth-ass-brain didn't understand the joke in the Bloom County strip there. Berk Breathed does a lot of "crossover" comic strips like that. I don't know exactly what Bob was thinking the strip meant (only his turbo-sped autistic brain knows), but maybe he thinks it'll raise the ire of the hermit Watterson, and that Watterson will go to war over it? I'm not enough of a sped to completely understand all Bob's nuclear hot takes.


I didn't know that. Does she seriously believe that the majority of Trump supporters, Catholics, Baptists, or whatever the liberal boogeyman du jour is, want to make women sex slaves?

The white women who ignored the message of that book showed that they can't understand symbolism.
Which is, ironically enough, a trait of autism.

(As an aside, how obvious a comparison to the Islamic Revolution did it need to be? The Sons of Jacob took over after food shortages and riots under a liberal government, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob forced women to wear headscarves and skirts, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob publically hanged dissenters and gays, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob carried out violence against Catholics and Jews, in the same way the Ayatollah attacked Sunnis and Jews in Iran. Do these people need a guy with a beard to pop out and say ”Derk derk, Allah, Mohammed jihad! My name is Mohammed Islam and I enjoy massacring homosexuals and atheists after I get back from a hard day's work at the Koran factory, unless I decide to beat my wives Fatima, Rashida, Muslima and Stereotypical-name-ending-in-a,” to realise something's a reference to Islam?

As did happen under any oppressive Protestant regime. I know people think of the Spanish Inquisition as the supreme evil (for which we can thank the Black Legend) but Henry VIII and Edward VI persecuted Catholics and non-conformist Protestants in ways that were far harsher than anything the Inquisitions ever did.
Ironically the white women (and others - like Bob) who ignored/didn't understand the message of Handmaid's Tale are such crayon-eating blue curtain analyzing exceptional individuals, that they find meanings the author never intended in a ton of media. Since they have a preconceived bias against Christianity, they think that when one of their own (Atwood) makes a tome that seems to portray Christianity in a light that they already thought of it (MuH THeOcrACy! Women barefoot pregnant in the kitchun 4ever OHNOES!), they take it at absolute face value.

It's been uncool to criticize Islam for a while now, hence why the book relied on a form of Christianity for its boogeyman, but in recent years it's become absolutely verboten, forcing Atwood to pretend she never meant it to be based on horrific Iranian customs imposed by the Ayatollahs if she wanted to not get cancelled by her fellow feminists.
 
Last edited:
Reminded me of Dumb and Dumber.

Bob is so retarded that he can only be compared to other dumbasses, real or fictional.

Bob is such a mark for this cheap shit.

John K. may be a creep, but I really liked his reasoning for making the Ren and Stimpy episode, "Son of Stimpy." It's to show that it's really not that hard to make an audience cry when you put sad music over shit. He made an episode to show that he could manipulate audiences into getting emotional over something as stupid as Stimpy missing his fart, and it worked.


The episode's story is credited to John Kricfalusi, Vincent Waller, and Richard Pursel, storyboarded by Peter Avanzino, and directed by the show's creator John Kricfalusi. John Kricfalusi originally conceived "Son of Stimpy" as a parody and critique of popular Hollywood melodramas (Bambi, E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial), and "fake pathos". He describes the latter as an act of manipulation performed by film directors that involves using audio-visual cues and tricks, mainly music and cinematography, to trigger melancholy emotions in audience members. Kricfalusi, infuriated by this practice, referred to it as "cheap", "contrived", and "a dirty trick", while asserting his belief that real drama should come from engaging characters and believable acting, not from editing techniques. He also vented his frustration that dramatic features of this type ultimately gain more acclaim and recognition than simpler comedic films, which are generally seen as inferior. When writing this episode, he deliberately gave it the most ridiculous premise he could think of (Stimpy not being able to flatulate a second time) and used as many of the aforementioned filmic tricks as he could think of, to prove how easy it is to force viewers into crying over something that has little to no real substance.
 
(As an aside, how obvious a comparison to the Islamic Revolution did it need to be? The Sons of Jacob took over after food shortages and riots under a liberal government, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob forced women to wear headscarves and skirts, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob publically hanged dissenters and gays, in the same way the Ayatollah did. The Sons of Jacob carried out violence against Catholics and Jews, in the same way the Ayatollah attacked Sunnis and Jews in Iran. Do these people need a guy with a beard to pop out and say ”Derk derk, Allah, Mohammed jihad! My name is Mohammed Islam and I enjoy massacring homosexuals and atheists after I get back from a hard day's work at the Koran factory, unless I decide to beat my wives Fatima, Rashida, Muslima and Stereotypical-name-ending-in-a,” to realise something's a reference to Islam?
Hardly surprising tho' - look at how many people conveniently ignore how Animal Farm is basically the Russian Revolution and its descent into Stalinism and 1984 is heavily inspired by how Stalin's regime worked (it's a long time since I read it but IIRC Orwell actually included a line about how the Nazis and Russian Communists came very close to Ingsoc)
 
Hardly surprising tho' - look at how many people conveniently ignore how Animal Farm is basically the Russian Revolution and its descent into Stalinism and 1984 is heavily inspired by how Stalin's regime worked (it's a long time since I read it but IIRC Orwell actually included a line about how the Nazis and Russian Communists came very close to Ingsoc)
and then people -- like Bob -- will angrily tell you that "Orwell was a SOCIALIST!" as if that's some kind of slam dunk against anyone criticizing the left for doing something Orwellian. As if because Orwell wore the same color hat they do, that must mean he'd never dare criticize the sacred tribe they were both in.
 
Wrestlers: all the brain and body damage of pro football, none of the money or mainstream acceptance unless you break out like Hulkster or The Rock.

And if you DO become a famous wrestler, you STILL have the pain and lasting injuries, except now your history will be dug through by trash tabloids to find something in it to cancel you for so they can advance their political agendas on that road of successfully taken celebrity scalps.

and then people -- like Bob -- will angrily tell you that "Orwell was a SOCIALIST!" as if that's some kind of slam dunk against anyone criticizing the left for doing something Orwellian. As if because Orwell wore the same color hat they do, that must mean he'd never dare criticize the sacred tribe they were both in.
A socialist who got mega-disillusioned by the way the so-called champions of socialist values behaved (See the USSR under Stalin and the Spanish Civil War) to the point he wrote the ultimate dystopic novel as a brutal dunking on those who think political parties have a snowball's chance in Hell of ever installing real socialist values without becoming self-perpetuating machines of human misery... the natural bankruptcy of socialist thinking aside.

Essentially, it was his painful realization that communism doesn't work and the so-called "Leaders" are always to blame.

Lately, people have been giving Disney heat for choosing to reduce the third season of one of their shows, The Owl House, down to three two-parters, something that the creator didn't expect at all, while another show airing at the same time, Amphibia, received no real cutbacks. People say its because of the prominent LGBT stuff they can't censor for overseas viewers because two of the main female characters have been developing feelings for each other.

What exactly would Bob have to say about this? Would he condemn Disney for silencing the gays (including the bisexual creator of the show), or would he find some backwards way to defend this possible act of censorship?
It's the sweaty man at two buttons conundrum

TALK BAD ABOUT DISNEY CENSORING LESBIANS, ACCUSING HIS PATRON GOD OF HERESY

TALK BAD ABOUT NON-US AUDIENCES BEING, IN FACT, NOT IN TO LESBIANS IN KIDS SHOWS, MAKING THE MAYOGHOULS LOOK EITHER RIGHT OR AT LEAST NOT AS UNWORLDLY AS HE CONSIDERS THEM.
 
Last edited:
Who was Chris trying to be, Curly or Shemp? Either way, he didn't look like either of them, nor he did try to. That's a fail to me.

I have no idea about the other two characters, so I won't comment on them. And even then, why is he sharing those pictures? Does anybody care about what he went as on Halloween in the early '90s?
 
So Chris is admitting he was always an ambulatory marshmallow.
Leave it to Bob to get emotional over a fucking yogurt commercial.

Why wouldn't he? Watch it. It contains everything he likes: stronk wahmyn of color (to fap to), the Superior Future (including what he probably imagines hydroponic farming is), a product the buy, and nary an obsolete ghoul in sight. This commercial is everything he could have wanted; the only way it would've been better for him is if it featured Trump getting fed into a wood chipper.
 
So Chris is admitting he was always an ambulatory marshmallow.

Why wouldn't he? Watch it. It contains everything he likes: stronk wahmyn of color (to fap to), the Superior Future (including what he probably imagines hydroponic farming is), a product the buy, and nary an obsolete ghoul in sight. This commercial is everything he could have wanted; the only way it would've been better for him is if it featured Trump getting fed into a wood chipper.
Remember when The Simpsons had Lionel Hutz imagine "a world without lawyers" and he imagined an idyllic saccharine world where everyone got along? Same here, Bob is imagining a world without conservatives: It's practically the Elf Kingdom, except the elves are all POC / lesbians.
 
It doesn't surprise me that Bob's smooth-ass-brain didn't understand the joke in the Bloom County strip there. Berk Breathed does a lot of "crossover" comic strips like that. I don't know exactly what Bob was thinking the strip meant (only his turbo-sped autistic brain knows), but maybe he thinks it'll raise the ire of the hermit Watterson, and that Watterson will go to war over it? I'm not enough of a sped to completely understand all Bob's nuclear hot takes.
Never mind that when Pearls Before Swine did a c&h joke, it inspired Bill to come out of retirement long enough for a crossover strip.

But then, this is Bob who in a podcast once went on FOREVER about how massive the balls must be on the Creed director to go up to Stallone and ask to do a sequel.

I suspect Bob assumes everybody has the hair trigger temper he does.
 
Remember when The Simpsons had Lionel Hutz imagine "a world without lawyers" and he imagined an idyllic saccharine world where everyone got along? Same here, Bob is imagining a world without conservatives: It's practically the Elf Kingdom, except the elves are all POC / lesbians.

The fact that he acknowledged that this was a corporation trying to emotionally manipulate him, and still let them do it, is infuriating.

It's worse than if he was just too dumb to see it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back