Kthulhu |
Kthulhu has never had roommates, I see. Sometimes you don't have a choice in what you watch. :P
I've had several. Most lengthy times were when I was at the Defense Language Institute. I was lucky, the guy I roomed with for the majority of the time there had pretty similar tastes to mine. And when they did clash, I learned that I'm amazingly adept at tuning crap out.
Freehold DM |
Freehold DM wrote:proudly displays flagship FHDM-brand Haterade(tm) flavor- Joss Whedon Apple.
On a(slightly) more serious note, I can poke holes in the vast majority of his work.
If you hate him so much, why do you KNOW the vast majority of his work? I'm not a big fan of the show Big Bang Theory, and the only one I've ever watched beyond the pilot and a few episodes in (long enough for me to decide that yup, this show sucks) was the one with Summer Glau in it. And by "watch" what I meant is "have it on in the background and look up whenever I hear Summer Glau".
Which brings me to the true point of this rambling post. If Big Bang Theory was worth watching, it would have included Firefly references in said episode. Nope...it was all Terminator. BOO HISS BOOO !!!
Perhaps it's just bad luck, but I can't seem to escape his fans. Several of my good friends are hard-core Whedon fans, specifically of the "We can convert him!!!" variety. One of my older friends(who I have not seen in AGES) is one of the original Slayerettes. I'm exposed to his stuff in droves as his fans go on and on and on ad infinitum about how incredibly/refreshingly original his work is. And then when he started writing for X-men(a dark day to be sure), I couldn't escape Whedondom even in my local comic book shop.
Eric The Pipe |
I know he's an easy target, but I can't stand Salvatore.
I read all his stuff I've liked back when i didn't know anything, I don't pick up any of this books any more because i don't enjoy them. I won't re-read anything from "back in the day" because i like my fond memories and don't want the spoiled by reality.
I feel this must be the same for all dragon lance love, i couldn't make it through one, even "back in the day." At least Drizzt killed stuff cool.
Sanakht Inaros |
I like Joss Whedon because of Firefly and Dr. Horrible. I HATE angsty vampires so Buffy and Angel didn't do anything for me.
Salvatore is okay. A better writer than Tolkien, but that's not really saying much. At least Salvatore moves the story along and introduce characters that actually are relevant to the plot.
Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.
John Kretzer |
Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.
Are you sure that is not geeky? I mean...I know alot of geeks taking MA classes...
Just saying...I have read this thread and I still don't know what a Geek is suppose to be.
Pac-man |
Still new on the boards, but I'll give it a go...
The first Matrix movie bored me nearly to death. Took me at least 6 different times to get all the way through it (it had just been released to cable at the time) and wasn't impressed when I finally sat all the way through. Haven't seen either sequel, as they're supposedly worse than the first film.
Couldn't stand the "Iron Age" of comics, either. Way too many wack-jobs with guns, pointy sharp things, healing factors, belt pouches, leather jackets, and mysterious pasts with cavalier attitudes towards killing.
Sanakht Inaros |
Sanakht Inaros wrote:Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.Are you sure that is not geeky? I mean...I know alot of geeks taking MA classes...
But how many of them know the actual history behind them?
John Kretzer |
John Kretzer wrote:But how many of them know the actual history behind them?Sanakht Inaros wrote:Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.Are you sure that is not geeky? I mean...I know alot of geeks taking MA classes...
Actualy alot of them do...atleast to a degree.
Though I do have a friend who thinks he knows MA from watching MA movies...well he used to till somebody disabused of that notion.
Dragonsong |
John Kretzer wrote:But how many of them know the actual history behind them?Sanakht Inaros wrote:Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.Are you sure that is not geeky? I mean...I know alot of geeks taking MA classes...
As a lot of the instructors want to lay out lineages/ pedigrees to the techniques they instruct i would hazard a guess that many of them do. now is it bad history (there is IMHO no "actual" history only historicism/interpretation in the Foccualdian sense) possibly.
Edit: Ninja'ed
Sanakht Inaros |
I'm getting my degree in Asian Studies. My wife won't appreciate it, but I also plan on studying in Thailand for a couple months as part of the study abroad portion of my degree. I only know one instructor in the area who has been to Thailand. Two of my escrima instructors were born and raised in the Phillipines and never heard the term kali until they moved here to the States. A lot of americans believe the terms interchangeable.
A lot of muay thai students don't realize that muay thai has only been around since the turn of the 20th century. It wasn't until Ong Bak came out that muay boran became popular. Now there are more schools advertising muay boran than there were prior to that. And very few even knew about krabi krabong.
Twilightrose |
Sanakht Inaros wrote:John Kretzer wrote:But how many of them know the actual history behind them?Sanakht Inaros wrote:Non geeky things I do: I study martial arts. And the history behind them. My favorite styles are muay thai and escrima.Are you sure that is not geeky? I mean...I know alot of geeks taking MA classes...
Actualy alot of them do...atleast to a degree.
Though I do have a friend who thinks he knows MA from watching MA movies...well he used to till somebody disabused of that notion.
I think actually knowing the history behind them probably makes you more geeky... :P
Cuchulainn |
This past Saturday night, one of my buddies decided to have a Poker Night, and invited me.
I rarely ever play poker, and when I do, it's almost always 5-card draw. The game for the evening was Texas hold'em with some rules about switching off decks and Big Blind and Small Blind bidding.
Anyway, the guys there were having to coach me on the procedures, and getting a little frustrated.
Finally, I said, "sorry guys, I'm not very good at card games that don't involve a mana pool."
Two of the guys at the table got the reference, and laughed. The rest, not so much.
Aaron Bitman |
It's odd that I didn't notice this post before. I just revisited this thread, and read it. It's a pity I didn't respond years ago, but better late than never.
Aaron Bitman wrote:You haven't seen Octopus in action in the comics have you? His bone structure HAS to be tough enough to take the stress of what his arms can do or he'd just split in half. So yes, it's not only believable that he can shrug off as straight punch from Parker. HE HAS TO.DoveArrow wrote:Oh, and I hated Spider Man 2...What *I* hated about Spider Man 2 was that Spidey is supposed to have spider strength, and there he was fighting Doc Ock, who was essentially a normal man with some machine limbs thrown on. Spidey is seen punching Ock full in the face... and yet Ock shrugs it off. How? If the moviemakers wanted to choreograph the fights so that Spidey loses, that's fine. Just have Ock use his arms to keep Spidey AWAY from his face.
(Of course, this isn't the sort of thing you lose your geek card for. On the contrary, this is typical nerd rage.)
Yes, I most certainly HAVE seen Octopus in action in the comics. I'm now looking at Amazing Spider-Man #3, in which Spidey lands exactly ONE punch, and that's enough to KO Doc Ock. Here's a quote: "Strange that an old-fashioned punch to the jaw defeated the most dangerous villain I've ever faced."
Obviously, Spider-Man comics have changed considerably since then. But they CAN be written this way.