No banners, make a banners thread

/tv/ - Television & Movies

I wonder what's on TV?


New Thread
X
Max 20 files0 B total
[New Thread]

Page: Prev [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Next | View | Catalog | Banners | Logs


thumbnail of 21211111111111111.png
thumbnail of 21211111111111111.png
21211111111111111 png
(18.34 KB, 671x419)


Yes, but I am in a little town and I have 0 online friends.
I managed to get only into one single serious private tracker, the rest aren't serious.
I am trying to see if someone pity this priviledged white trash.
Usenet is also in general, I never got access to that too.





thumbnail of 1546042296797.jpg
thumbnail of 1546042296797.jpg
1546042296797 jpg
(22.15 KB, 300x300)







thumbnail of 740full-xenia-seeberg.jpg
thumbnail of 740full-xenia-seeberg.jpg
740full-xenia-... jpg
(54.22 KB, 662x854)
thumbnail of lexx-eva-habermann-zev-bellringer-07-dvdbash.jpg
thumbnail of lexx-eva-habermann-zev-bellringer-07-dvdbash.jpg
lexx-eva-habermann-ze... jpg
(731.19 KB, 2200x1580)

Eva, of course.
Her naked scene was removed from the dvd release in some countries for some reason. Everyone else's nude scenes remained.

I was disappointed when she was replaced by Xenia. Eva gave off strong Carrie Fisher vibes for me and I find her a lot more attractive.



thumbnail of 9a2602110512ee5e76161a62664001b34a219b4a5fc255f6b526d88dcaaba942.jpg
thumbnail of 9a2602110512ee5e76161a62664001b34a219b4a5fc255f6b526d88dcaaba942.jpg
9a2602110512ee5e76161... jpg
(15.34 KB, 316x315)



 >>/714/
Well, the dude's a youtuber so it's to be expected. Still annoying though. Frankly I think the show is decent but not my taste. It's merely above average to do taking it's animation and story more seriously but it still has a lot of the same tropes of the rest of thing on right now that prevent it from truly being stand out.



thumbnail of 1423848942551.jpg
thumbnail of 1423848942551.jpg
1423848942551 jpg
(115.93 KB, 760x506)




thumbnail of The Frugal Gourmet.jpg
thumbnail of The Frugal Gourmet.jpg
The Frugal Gourmet jpg
(152.09 KB, 1920x1080)
thumbnail of The Frugal Gourmet.jpg
thumbnail of The Frugal Gourmet.jpg
The Frugal Gourmet jpg
(152.09 KB, 1920x1080)
The Frugal Gourmet  (#F!awt3wTjS!nQsYgdo_u-Yh0vLA-ohcIA)

The Frugal Gourmet was a classic cooking show that first aired in the late 70s on WTTW in Chicago. Later, re-airing nationally on PBS from 1983 to 1997.

There are no DVDs of this show in existence. Old VHS recordings were uploaded to Youtube a while back ago, but Google Inc. shut it all down. Fortunately for us, I have it all backed up.

All the episodes will be mirrored below in timely fashion, many of them come in two parts. A few special holiday episodes come in three or four parts.

Expect around 4 to 5 episodes mirrored per day until uploading is finished. (This show is also currently being shared via the P2P client Soulseek!)
155 replies omitted. Click to expand viewer


Whoever posted this thank you very much! I created my own DVD collection with all the episodes posted here. I remember watching this show when I was younger and for a cooking show Jeff Smith made it both informative and fun to watch. We need more shows like this today.


 >>/550/
Do not worry. It will be uploaded elsewhere in due time. I will make sure of it.

Currently you can access most of these episodes @ the mega.nz hash link (#F!awt3wTjS!nQsYgdo_u-Yh0vLA-ohcIA) & can find them being shared via Soulseek.



thumbnail of 1463641274707.png
thumbnail of 1463641274707.png
1463641274... png
(301.45 KB, 326x499)
One of the big red flags when listening to criticism is when they could just as well apply to a book. Things like plot holes, they are very superficial observations about narrative and mostly concern people who don't really even care whether what they're looking at is a movie or book, they only care about pandering to their own little narratives. Commercialism. If a good movie has a(n actual) plot hole it's a shame, but only for reasons external to the movie itself. And mostly it's dependent on the viewer's bias, they just claim the plot holes start where their own prior knowledge of how the world is ends. If a person was so uncultured he didn't know anybody who has a father, and a movie featured an intact family, that person would call it a plot hole that's there just some guy hanging out at some mother's house. It's a shame that this movie can't reach somebody that dense, and a better movie would reach anybody by some cinematic magic, but it's not a flaw in the movie and what it set out to portray. It would be like complaining the finest pearl doesn't also make coffee.

Hard to say, I can name a few must haves:

Pi
The Shining  1980
Night of the Living Dead (the original 60s version)
Carnival of Souls (the original 60s version)
Deliverance  1972
Bad Boys  1983
The Boys Next Door
Two-lane Blacktop
Easy Rider  1969
Beetlejuice  1988
Requiem For The Dream
Pink Flamingos (warning: not family friendly)


 >>/469/
Bro, the entire movie is about the significance of the main character's last words and flashbacks throughout the film of his life. His last word, Rosebud at the end turned out to be a sled he had as a child. Showing that, although he was rich, had all the material possessions in the world, influence, trophy wife, he wanted that happiness a child had in a simple toy. I did like the movie but when it's a plot hole that is important to the entire plot, and theme of the movie it's a bigger deal than normal imo. The entire movie is in fact bookended by his last words in the beginning and the revelation of their significance at the end. But no one was there to hear them unless you're just assuming his butler is there. Not a huge deal but it is rarely brought up even in a trivial light when critics discuss it. 
I would think you'd see it brought up more as trivial footnote at least. 
> Tour de force acting of Orson Welles, revolutionary lighting and cinematic pacing etc. Key plot point is nonsensical, but you probably won't notice your first time through.

 >>/470/
 >>/471/
Yes! Some other oldies but goodies:

Rivers Edge (1987) [not family friendly]
Blue Velvet (1986) [not family friendly]
Maximum Overdrive (1986)
The Crazies (the original 1973 film)
Slingblade (1996)
Bad Boy Bubby (1994) [not family friendly]
Night of the Comet (1984)
Trading Places (1983)
The Hills Have Eyes (1977)
Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry (1974)
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)

And one newer film I recall...

Nebraska (one of the very few new films I like, 2013)

Other then that I'd say 9 out of 10 new films suck ass. I'm sure there are a few exceptions. Some of the best films (in my humble opinion) came out during the mid 1960s all through the early 90s). Films started to suck after they relied heavily on special effects. I like films with good narratives, provocative scripts and unique characters that make you lean back and say "WTF? This is crazy!"



thumbnail of Daisy Ridley STILL doesn't understand Mary Sues.webm
thumbnail of Daisy Ridley STILL doesn't understand Mary Sues.webm
Daisy... webm
(17.91 MB, 640x360)
Do hollywood actors generally just not have drama degrees? This video is made by a complete moron as well, but it stikes me on many occasions the people actually performing in films don't have the kind of formal knowledge in social study that would make articulating their craft so much easier and more interesting.

Why is anyone even answering these mary sue "accusations" seriously? I put in quotes because really, it doesn't even matter, but the thing is, what Rey is is a shit character, but not a mary sue. She's in no way an indulgent character, she's an underdeveloped character which is in some ways the opposite of a mary sue, although none the more elevated. But we get these fucking mouth breathers weighing in about "mary sue" because it's the most accusatory sounding term they can find in a dictionary despite not having a clue what they're talking about. I'm personally offended that this kind of shitshow will even exist when on the other hand I have to hear that social science is worthless. If it's that trivial then shut up or at least don't fucking suck at it, jesus christ, this is why we create tools.

It's like watching lab coat wearing jocks piss on a petridish while claiming that chemistry is not a 'real' science. On the basis that real scientists do nothing but piss on petridishes.




thumbnail of 6a00d8341c60bf53ef0162fff1303f970d.jpg
thumbnail of 6a00d8341c60bf53ef0162fff1303f970d.jpg
6a00d8341c60bf53ef016... jpg
(8.63 KB, 300x250)





thumbnail of image.png
thumbnail of image.png
image png
(1.41 MB, 1092x615)





Post(s) action:


Moderation Help
Scope:
Duration: Days

Ban Type:


0 replies | 0 file
Refresh
New Thread
Max 20 files0 B total