I guess if your axiomatic frame of reference is that humour is to be checked in at the door and anything not expressly permitted is implicitly prohibited, then yes. I guess I’ve been way too long, is this the New World now?
A two week ban for calling someone a clown seems… slightly excessive.
It seems predictable based on precedent, regardless of what I think ought to be permitted.
I which case, upon the expiration of my time in purgatory, I shall return and set myself ablaze.
Like Kurt said, better to burn out than fade away, right?
It’s up to you on whether that is worth your effort. If I wanted to troll that forum, I’d be able to do it without name calling. And maybe I have been.
You do realise that there’s a thing such as linguistic typing, right? There are very few people you can possibly be there. Your grammar is too perfect to be most people. Unless you’re gone full undercover and you’re washoe.
You are free to guess, but I probably will neither confirm nor deny.
washoe
Cuepee
Lagtight
Joking aside, I think you’re trolling. One of the people you could possibly be has told me personally that he’s not you here, and I don’t think he’d lie about that. Especially since I asked like 2 years ago. The other has a much more STEM oriented bent than you do. So unless you’re in deep, deep, cover, I don’t think you post there.
Oh, shit, unless you’re Sklansky. Or Malmuth.
Nah, we know who he is (was) over there.
Who?
Best reveal would be if he was actually BruceZ.
I can neither confirm nor deny that he was AN.
What now? As in an indefinite article, so his name starts with a vowel? I mean, the only candidate there is OriginalPosition. And not a very good candidate, I’d eat my shoe if NBZ=OP.
There are literally only a handful of posters as articulate and grammatically pinpoint as he is though, and OP is one.
Unrelated to this latest string, do folks see a difference in, say, changing the character from book to movie adaptations? Bond is a good example, the racism is largely cleaned up, particularly in recent movies … but if they remade a Fleming book (again), would people object?
I was thinking about this because of Fletch, which was a late-70s novel ofc famously turned into an 80s Chevy Chase classic … except the novel has Fletch apparently sleeping with an underage person living on the streets and then disposing of their body secretly when they OD, and it always occurred to me that scene would probably have been a dealbreaker getting the movie done today.
Maybe I misunderstand the question, but Casino Royale was more or less a pretty straight adaptation of the original book. Could other Bond books be adapted? Maybe. Not the ones that take place in the Caribbean, that’s for sure, woof.
In this case, I think it’s different from changing Dahl’s books in that everyone already understands the Bond movies are going to take huge liberties with the source material.
LOL no. Actually, sometimes I wondered if Cuepee was jalfrezi. I feel fine denying that I am QP.
I find your guesses amusing, so I will tell you I post infrequently over there but have posted in the last month and I am not in deep cover.
Also, if you are looking for someone to troll, Malmuth says troll-able stuff on Twitter.
If the trend is to portray some sort of sterilised version of society, then yes, probably be hard to get most movies of yesteryear produced today.
Literature and cinematography are forms of art, and good art should make its consumer think and (re-)evaluate their values. We, as humans, grow and mature through consuming books, films, and other forms of art that other humans who are older and have more life experience have produced. Art is neither supposed to, nor should it make us feel comfortable, warm, or fuzzy.
I was a huge fan of the Fletch series (og 9, anyway). Stumbled on this piece today and enjoyed it…
Chase’s performance isn’t even Hollywood’s biggest betrayal of McDonald’s book—the whole character is reconceived. Chevy Chase’s Fletch may be a deadbeat divorcee who owes alimony to his two ex-wives and casually ogles women, but for the most part, he doesn’t cross any major ethical or legal lines. The same cannot be said for McDonald’s Fletch, who frequently behaves like a scumbag.
As a lifelong Bond fan, I think the character just needs to retire, honestly. You’re never going to separate the toxic elements of the character from the core identity of who the character is. It’s like the Simpsons trying to reform the Apu character.