|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 21, 2018 8:27:00 GMT
Isn't Apt Pupil about an older man hanging out with and molding a young boy? Apt pupil indeed. no quite the contrary, it's a quality drama version of Freddy vs Jason if that makes it clearer to you. It's about discovering an old fugitive Nazi criminal and about the banality and fascination of evil, sins of the past and manipulative psychopathy. Being a King novel there is some sadistic stuff in it too, but the film removes the novels misogynistic contents. Anyway, no pedo content as demonstrated by the fact alone that we do not deal with prepubescent children here. You know why people get sent to jail for messing with minors? That's still considered pedophilia. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 9:02:31 GMT
no quite the contrary, it's a quality drama version of Freddy vs Jason if that makes it clearer to you. It's about discovering an old fugitive Nazi criminal and about the banality and fascination of evil, sins of the past and manipulative psychopathy. Being a King novel there is some sadistic stuff in it too, but the film removes the novels misogynistic contents. Anyway, no pedo content as demonstrated by the fact alone that we do not deal with prepubescent children here. You know why people get sent to jail for messing with minors? That's still considered pedophilia. maybe by people who do not understand the meaning of words. www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/pedophiliaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophiliawww.britannica.com/topic/pedophiliaApart from that, I am not aware that pedophilia is a theme in Apt Pupil, or even sexual abuse of minors. |
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Oct 21, 2018 9:13:11 GMT
To summarize this thread:
James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile.
Bryan Singer is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 21, 2018 10:03:17 GMT
To summarize this thread: James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile. Bryan Synger is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok. problem with insane fans, they can hate something so much it gets personal just ask thatguy/bud47 who indirectly insulted TDK by lying the movie is only considered a masterpiece because people were shot in the TDKR cinema screening, which is bs for many reasons and formershamd who doxed DC fan, of a pain that will never go away. you mcu people are disgusting when you make it so personal and for what...fictional movies 
No, Singer is not officially definitely a paedophile, it has not been factually proven yet, chances are he might be. you want him to be a paedophile because you cant accept in his prime he made superior marvel movies to your Disney mcu comedy garbage.
in these cases 60% of the time the men are usually guilty but that we dont know for sure at a 100% for Singer or even Michael Douglas. the only time when the word definitely should be used.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Oct 21, 2018 10:04:31 GMT
To summarize this thread: James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile. Bryan Synger is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok. problem with insane fans, they can hate something so much it gets personal just ask thatguy/bud47 who indirectly insulted TDK by lying the movie is only considered a masterpiece because people were shot in the TDKR cinema screening, which is bs for many reasons and formershamd who doxed DC fan, of a pain that will never go away. you mcu people are disgusting when you make it so personal and for what...fictional movies
No, Singer is not officially definitely a paedophile, it has not been factually proven yet, chances are he might be. you want him to be a paedophile because you cant accept in his prime he made superior marvel movies to your Disney mcu comedy garbage.
in these cases 60% of the time the men are usually guilty but that we dont now for sure at a 100% for Singer or even Michael Douglas. the only time when the word definitely should be used.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Oct 21, 2018 10:08:54 GMT
To summarize this thread: James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile. Bryan Synger is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok. problem with insane fans, they can hate something so much it gets personal just ask thatguy/bud47 who indirectly insulted TDK by lying the movie is only considered a masterpiece because people were shot in the TDKR cinema screening, which is bs for many reasons and formershamd who doxed DC fan, of a pain that will never go away. you mcu people are disgusting when you make it so personal and for what...fictional movies
No, Singer is not officially definitely a paedophile, it has not been factually proven yet, chances are he might be. you want him to be a paedophile because you cant accept in his prime he made superior marvel movie to your Disney mcu comedy garbage.
in these cases 60% of the time the men are usually guilty but that we dont now for sure at a 100% for Singer or even Michael Douglas. the only time when the word definitely should be used.
Yeah, no. I don’t want him to be a pedo, I love most of his movies. But even if I hated his movies I wouldn’t want him to be a pedo because I’m not a creepy weirdo who wants people who made movies I didn’t like to be bad people and to be hated like a couple users on this site. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 15:52:32 GMT
Isn't Apt Pupil about an older man hanging out with and molding a young boy? Apt pupil indeed. no quite the contrary, it's a quality drama version of Freddy vs Jason if that makes it clearer to you. It's about discovering an old fugitive Nazi criminal and about the banality and fascination of evil, sins of the past and manipulative psychopathy. Being a King novel there is some sadistic stuff in it too, but the film removes the novels misogynistic contents. Anyway, no pedo content as demonstrated by the fact alone that we do not deal with prepubescent children here. Except there are very strong sexual (between a younger and older) undertones to it with the two main characters. Obviously the kid isn't underage, but because of the age difference, pedophilia can be implied because colloquially, most just assume it's between a older man and a kid/teenager regardless if he's over 16. Not to mention, there was a lawsuit though where Singer had underage boys in the shower scene and forced them to strip for that scene. I just find it hilarious that you go out of your way to attack Gunn for a tweet when he has no accusations, whereas Singer has not only accusations against him but there are blantant shades of pedophilia, on-set and in-film, but somehow, Gunn is the real guilty one here?! You're just a hypocritical piece of shit, that's all you are. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 16:27:18 GMT
no quite the contrary, it's a quality drama version of Freddy vs Jason if that makes it clearer to you. It's about discovering an old fugitive Nazi criminal and about the banality and fascination of evil, sins of the past and manipulative psychopathy. Being a King novel there is some sadistic stuff in it too, but the film removes the novels misogynistic contents. Anyway, no pedo content as demonstrated by the fact alone that we do not deal with prepubescent children here. Except there are very strong sexual (between a younger and older) undertones to it with the two main characters. Obviously the kid isn't underage, but because of the age difference, pedophilia can be implied because colloquially, most just assume it's between a older man and a kid/teenager regardless if he's over 16. gosh you are so obtuse it's nauseating, seahick. I now downgraded you to intelligence age 8. I don't give a raccoon's ass what an uneducated rube like you understands under clinically defined terms like "pedophilia" or how you idiotically twist them to shift goalposts and deflect. And check "underage" too. LOL at how mad you got, seahick. Your stupidity and personal incredulity cannot change facts. Your beloved pedo guru James "c um stained boys make me EXTREMELY HAPPY" Gunn is a hack and a pedophilic POS. And to shift your straw man back where it belongs: I never defended Singer's disposition despite him being acquitted of all charges and all accusers not being prepubescent children (per definition not making him a pedo except for uneducated rubes like you). Quite the contrary: he is remarkably creepy and detestable IMO. The big difference to Gunn is that James " I have famously huge turds" Gunn is a depraved hack making idiotic movies for lowbrow rubes like you, whereas Singer is someone who created renowned classics and masterpieces in and outside of genre movies. Now be silent halfwit, next time you get daddy's belt. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 21, 2018 16:38:11 GMT
Wasn't there an unneeded shower scene? |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 16:43:11 GMT
Wasn't there an unneeded shower scene? I brought that up and he deflected there. Not only that, there's allegations that the extras used in that scene were underage as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 16:51:48 GMT
Wasn't there an unneeded shower scene? ok, genius, can't remember. Provide a vid so we can check what is in there. Then define "unneeded" and why it is relevant for anything? Do you mean to say that there is a scene where prepubescent children are sexually exploited, so that it gives the movie a pedo promotion vibe a la James " I would break in my daughter anally before she gets married" Gunn…? or a la  Btw, Super despite the depraved scene (of a teen girl heated for a middle aged Gunn-loser) is the only Gunn film I give a pass (7/10) besides Slither (5/10). |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 16:54:00 GMT
Wasn't there an unneeded shower scene? ok, genius, can't remember. Provide a vid so we can check what is in there. Then define "unneeded" and why it is relevant for anything? Do you mean to say that there is a scene where prepubescent children are sexually exploited, so that it gives the movie a pedo promotion vibe a la James " I would break in my daughter anally before she gets married" Gunn…? or a la Btw, Super despite the depraved scene (of a teen girl heated for a middle aged Gunn-loser) is the only Gunn film I give a pass (7/10) besides Slither (5/10). And you know that the extras in that shower scene were underage. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 17:06:44 GMT
ok, genius, can't remember. Provide a vid so we can check what is in there. Then define "unneeded" and why it is relevant for anything? Do you mean to say that there is a scene where prepubescent children are sexually exploited, so that it gives the movie a pedo promotion vibe a la James " I would break in my daughter anally before she gets married" Gunn…? or a la Btw, Super despite the depraved scene (of a teen girl heated for a middle aged Gunn-loser) is the only Gunn film I give a pass (7/10) besides Slither (5/10). And you know that the extras in that shower scene were underage. and you know daddy uses the belt buckle first, right? What are you people prattling about? This shower scene? Where he goes into the shower and imagines a NAZI concentration camp with starved prisoners to be lead into the gas chambers and death cries? That is the best you got to claim the film has pedophilic content? |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Oct 21, 2018 17:23:52 GMT
And you know that the extras in that shower scene were underage. and you know daddy uses the belt buckle first, right? What are you people prattling about? This shower scene? Where he goes into the shower and imagines a NAZI concentration camp with starved prisoners to be lead into the gas chambers and death cries? That is the best you got to claim the film has pedophilic content? Well, Singer does want his young boys in the nude. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 17:25:07 GMT
To summarize this thread: James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile. Bryan Singer is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok. to summarize, you are as clumsy as you are stupid, zombie brains. You do not even understand the meaning of words. Whatever kind of creep Singer is, how can he be a pedo if he was never accused of having assaulted prepubescent kids? James "I like it when little boys touch me in my silly place" Gunn made countless pedophilic comments, vids, pics and blogs regarding babies, kids and teens and endorsed Nambla and convicted pedos. This is why nobody takes you seriously btw. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 17:26:43 GMT
And you know that the extras in that shower scene were underage. and you know daddy uses the belt buckle first, right? What are you people prattling about? This shower scene? Where he goes into the shower and imagines a NAZI concentration camp with starved prisoners to be lead into the gas chambers and death cries? That is the best you got to claim the film has pedophilic content? Amazing, so ardently defending the guy even though the pedophilic undertones are blantant there. As someone else said on here, you give him a pass because you think his movies are good so that automatically excuses him, but since you hate Gunn's movies, he's automatically guilty. Good is subjective, always have been but it's also irrelevant in this case, and if you really object to pedophilia, then you should be treating both Singer and Gunn equally with contempt. You can deny it all you want, but it only makes you look more like a hypocritical piece of shit you are when you give one a pass because you like his movies. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 17:35:28 GMT
To summarize this thread: James Gunn has never been accused of abusing a kid, but he made pedo jokes on Twitter and made movies I really disliked, so he’s a disgusting despicable pedophile. Bryan Singer is definitely a pedophile and might have raped a few kids, but he made movies I really liked, so it’s ok. to summarize, you are as clumsy as you are stupid, zombie brains. You do not even understand the meaning of words. Whatever kind of creep Singer is, how can he be a pedo if he was never accused of having assaulted prepubescent kids? James "I like it when little boys touch me in my silly place" Gunn made countless pedophilic comments, vids, pics and blogs regarding babies, kids and teens and endorsed Nambla and convicted pedos. This is why nobody takes you seriously btw. Are you really that obtuse? You do really every allegation against Singer was from a "minor" claiming assault. It's pretty much pedophilia. But are you really that fucking dumb trying to downplay his allegations. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 17:53:16 GMT
to summarize, you are as clumsy as you are stupid, zombie brains. You do not even understand the meaning of words. Whatever kind of creep Singer is, how can he be a pedo if he was never accused of having assaulted prepubescent kids? James "I like it when little boys touch me in my silly place" Gunn made countless pedophilic comments, vids, pics and blogs regarding babies, kids and teens and endorsed Nambla and convicted pedos. This is why nobody takes you seriously btw. Are you really that obtuse? You do really every allegation against Singer was from a "minor" claiming assault. It's pretty much pedophilia. But are you really that fucking dumb trying to downplay his allegations. seahick, what rubes like zombie brains and you do not understand is that pedophilia is defined since centuries as sexual attraction with prepubescent children. I linked it above several times, but you nimrods do not read (lol, surprise). - So it's not pedophilia and Singer was never charged with it not even "pretty much". Raping a baby or a 16 year old are different low. Even halfwits like you should get that much? - Second, I do not talk about or downplay any allegation or any of your desperate straw men. As far as I know Singer has been acquitted of all, or is there something pending, seahick? Anyway, I do not weigh who is the bigger creep, Singer or Gunn. I don't know what depravity any of them commits in the future. Both can be locked in prison for all I care. Only thing that is certain is that James " Did you create a penis" Gunn is a hack, and Singer is the one who brought cinematic masterpieces like The Usual Suspects et al. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 21, 2018 18:09:28 GMT
Are you really that obtuse? You do really every allegation against Singer was from a "minor" claiming assault. It's pretty much pedophilia. But are you really that fucking dumb trying to downplay his allegations. seahick, what rubes like zombie brains and you do not understand is that pedophilia is defined since centuries as sexual attraction with prepubescent children. I linked it above several times, but you nimrods do not read (lol, surprise). - So it's not pedophilia and Singer was never charged with it not even "pretty much". Raping a baby or a 16 year old are different low. Even halfwits like you should get that much? - Second, I do not talk about or downplay any allegation or any of your desperate straw men. As far as I know Singer has been acquitted of all, or is there something pending, seahick? Anyway, I do not weigh who is the bigger creep, Singer or Gunn. I don't know what depravity any of them commits in the future. Both can be locked in prison for all I care. Only thing that is certain is that James " Did you create a penis" Gunn is a hack, and Singer is the one who brought cinematic masterpieces like The Usual Suspects et al. Sure, if you want to get politically correct, pedophilia is attraction to preteens pretty much, and Singer is really Hebephile, but colloquial, it's still pedophilia because any attraction to an someone under 16 by a 30+year old is wrong and all the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 21, 2018 18:21:44 GMT
seahick, what rubes like zombie brains and you do not understand is that pedophilia is defined since centuries as sexual attraction with prepubescent children. I linked it above several times, but you nimrods do not read (lol, surprise). - So it's not pedophilia and Singer was never charged with it not even "pretty much". Raping a baby or a 16 year old are different low. Even halfwits like you should get that much? - Second, I do not talk about or downplay any allegation or any of your desperate straw men. As far as I know Singer has been acquitted of all, or is there something pending, seahick? Anyway, I do not weigh who is the bigger creep, Singer or Gunn. I don't know what depravity any of them commits in the future. Both can be locked in prison for all I care. Only thing that is certain is that James " Did you create a penis" Gunn is a hack, and Singer is the one who brought cinematic masterpieces like The Usual Suspects et al. Sure, if you want to get politically correct, pedophilia is attraction to preteens pretty much, and Singer is really Hebephile, well, at least you got half of it, that is more than Zombie Brains could ever aspire to. That is correct: Singer seems hebephile (12-15) at worst or rather ephebophilia (later 15-19) , which is much more common a sexual deviation than pedophilia. no, incorrect. It's a huge difference to sodomize a prepubescent or a teen in terms of damage and abuse. In many western countries, especially Europe, sexual freedom begins as from turning 14. It has nothing to do with being PC: The difference is defined under the law and psychiatry (abusing an infant you get a quasi life sentence, while dating a teen will only get you a few years or conditional sentence). ´ |
|
