I watched:

SARA UNFILTERED;
This week's eps.

FAMILY GUY:
Several eps.

What did you watch?

--
Don't jump!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/25 1:30 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:

What did you watch?

I got no work done yesterday! (I generally don't on Saturdays.) So I
actually got through *three* movies yesterday! And some soaps too!:

soaps: Y&R - Tue's & Wed's ep. Much of this was taken up with Billy's
new "business venture" with Filis[sic!] mostly on board, but Michael
(and Summer) skeptical. Also, Billy has some "romance time" with Sally,
but it's interrupted by Filis; Sally also tried to talk Billy out of
going into business with Filis... Also, at some point, Filis is forced
to talk to Sharon, and I swear Sharon was deliberately baiting Filis,
even though Sharon was claiming to be all "contrite". Not much else of
note happened.
DOOL - Fri's ep. No follow up with Joy/Alex/Stephanie. Instead, we
get follow up on captive Ava! The "Lady in White" gives Ava a hard time, pointing out that no one is looking for her because they all think she's
in Hong Kong with Tripp. Kristin discovers Ava's phone in Rachel's bag
(no Rachel this epie - we should be getting NuRachel any day now, I
think) and realizes that Ava's text to Brady about Hong Kong was faked
by Rachel, and realizes that Ava is captive in her old parents' place.
Kristen heads there, intending to free Ava (believing Rachel is holding
her captive), but comes across the "Lady in White", realizing it's her
mother! Patch calls Tripp in front of Brady (no Tripp on-camera), and
they both realize that Ava is not in Hong Kong... Meanwhile, Patch
pitches Jada on the idea that EJ is framing her. And Paulina offers
FauxRafe the interim Commissioner's job, just like EJ wants. (Can't wait
until Belle discovers what EJ has been up to!)

Movies:

Mechanic: Resurrection (Max) - This 2016 sequel flick had been on the "ad-supported" streamers (e.g. Tubi) most recently before this, however
I resisted the urge to watch this flick there. But when I watched
"Beetlejuice" on Friday, I noticed that "Mechanic: Resurrection" finally
made it back to a real streamer! - Max. So I endeavored to watch it on Saturday!
At the end of 2011's "The Mechanic", our (anti-)hero, Arthur Bishop
is presumed dead. So he apparently took the opportunity to "retire" from
the "secret assassin" business, and moved to Rio.
This first sequence is annoying, as I don't think the primary crew
ever went to Rio to film at all, and so this sequence looks very clunky, consisting of greenscreen work, etc. In fact, compared to the first
film, this film overall feels more cheaply produced.
Anyway, in Rio, Bishop is tracked down by a mean Asian "courier"
(lovely Thai actress Rhatha Phongam) who tries to coerce him to
"unretire", and then sicks a dozen thugs on him when Bishop demures.
Bishop dispatches the thugs and flees Rio, but discovers the identity of
the courier before he does. (Oddly, we never see Phongam in the rest of
the film, so I'm not sure why it was necessary to show us that Bishop
figured out her ID....)
Anyway, Bishop flees to Thailand, where it seems like much of this
movie was really filmed.
Here he meets up with his "old friend" Mei (Michelle Yeoh). The
sequel is annoying for inventing a whole host of people who we didn't
see or hear about in the first film including Mei, the film's Big Bad,
and Bishop's love interest.
On that score, soon enough Mei wants Bishop to rescue an abused
wife(? girlfriend?) who just happens to be played by Jessica Alba, so
you know this isn't just a subplot! Bishop does, accidentally killing
the abuser in the process. It doesn't take Bishop long to get Jessica
Alba to admit that she's been coerced into being "honey trap" for
Bishop, by the same Big Bad who sent the courier to Rio - some dude
named Crain (Sam Hazeldine), who apparently worked with Bishop in the
past, though he was never mentioned at all in the first film!
Anyway, Crain quickly takes Alba hostage, after Bishop has already
gotten sweet on her (of course he does - it's Jessica Alba! if she
didn't treat underlings as badly as JLo does, she might be the perfect woman!!). Bishop now has to kill three rivals of Crain's, or Crain will
kill Jessica Alba.
That's a lot of set up to get this sequel to the same place as the
original film - with a bunch of elaborate set pieces to get Crain near
each of the targets, and then a bunch of gadgetry in order to execute
the "kill".
Tommy Lee Jones, in what must be one of this last roles (I haven't
noticed him in anything in years!) shows up towards the end of this as
the last target on the list.
This wasn't nearly as good as the first film, but it has beautiful locations, Jessica Alba, and is OK once it gets to the "assassination
hit pieces". The ending is kind of weak, but seems to imply that a third "Mechanic" film is very unlikely.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (Max) - The 2024 sequel to the 1988 film. Also
directed by Tim Burton, with the score from Danny Elfman.
While the original film is charming, as you might expect the sequel
is lacking in nearly all of that, and instead hews much closer to Tim
Burton's later excesses. This film is also much "busier" and
(unnecessary) more complicated that the original film.
As with the first film, this opens with a long fly-over shot of the
Vermont village (again standing in for "Connecticut", though I don't
recall anyone saying the word "Connecticut" in this film either!). But
this time, it's more clearly a real fly-over shot of the actual village
(this time likely using dreaded drones!) with the transition to a
fly-over of Adam Maitland's model of the town being much more obvious here.
This film makes a lot (and I mean *a lot*!) of questionable choices.
The first is not killing off Lydia's (Winona Ryder) father, Charles
Deetz, off-screen (and long-before the sequel). Instead Burton and the
writers have the horrifically bad idea of using what is known as the
"fake Shemp" trope (including use of an animated sequence in an
otherwise live-action film!) to have Charles, but not the disgraced
actor Jeffrey Jones, appear in the film. Oh, and they kill Charles off
*in this film*! To say this is a bad idea is an understatement.
Meanwhile, the Maitland ghosts (Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis from
the original film) get a mere two brief mentions, one of them being a
throwaway line from Lydia that "they found a loophole" which let the
Maitlands cross over. Some more detail about *this development* would
have been more than welcome.
Of the good elements in the film, Keaton is still great as
Beetlejuice (despite it being 35 years later!!), Winona Ryder is still
good (despite this film and its backstory pretty much ruining her
character), and Jenna Ortega Lydia's daughter Astrid is a welcome
addition (though maybe by not as much as you might have expected). Also, Catherine O'Hara's Delia is toned down from the first film, almost out
of necessity. I also did enjoy Willem Dafoe (and his crew) as ghost
cops, though Dafoe's "ghost" make-up is less than convincing.
But there are a bunch of ancillary elements added on to the sequel -
one being Monica Bellucci as a character inspired by the Bride of
Frankenstein, Morticia, or both!; another being Astrid's dead father; a
third was Astrid's whole subplot - that I was never sold on. And Justin
Theroux is added here, though I'm not sure he adds much to the film.
And this one retreats in the Tim Burton "preciousness" too often,
one example being Beetlejuice's underlings - The original film ends with Beetlejuice in the waiting room of Hades (or whatever!) next to a tribal
shaman and his shrunken-headed victim. In the original film, this is a
good bit. The sequel has the frankly dumb idea of taking this bit, and
running with it, giving Beetlejuice an entire crew of shrunken-headed
ghost workers. One shrunken-headed dude (Bob was the main one) would
have been fine - Why does Beetlejuice have a crew of nothing but a
*dozen* shrunken-headed ghosts?! It makes no sense!... Clearly an
example of a good bit being run into the ground.
Overall, I guess this is entertaining enough, though it is both overly-complicated and over-long (at an hour and 45 minutes, 15 minutes
longer than the original film, and seeming to be longer than that!). But
I definitely don't want them making a third film in this franchise,
after this one comes off as a relative disappointment.

Fatal Exposure (Tubi) - A 2025 Tubi Original film!
Good news/bad news - The good news is that I think this might the
first Tubi Original film without a dumb twist ending (and I was
definitely expecting one here!). The bad news is that, as a result, this
played like pretty much a standard Lifetime flick, just with more "frank sexualized content" then they would ever put in a Lifetime flick.
And, on that score - while this film maybe does have more "frank"
sexuality than a Lifetime flick, it is still devoid of naked nudity, so
the audience actually gets nothing from the frank sex (talk).
Gist: Sofia Masson (who is now becoming a Tubi Original staple - I
think this is the third flick she's done for Tubi) stars as Ariel, a promiscuous and somewhat aimless Millennial photographer. (Sidenote:
Here Masson's Ariel is clearly bisexual, and Masson seems to only play
lesbians or bisexuals - Is this typecasting? Or is this the actress
purposely picking roles?...) Anyway, in the film's open, she is attacked
in her place by a masked intruder who steals some of her cameras, and
attacks her before being driven off. Ariel calls her new older boyfriend
Derek (Stephen Huszar), whom she's getting unusually close to, after the attack.
Derek offers Ariel the opportunity to come stay with him at his
country mansion over the summer. She agrees. But once there, Ariel is
isolated, on a country estate with creepy servants. And she then is
shocked to discover that Derek has a daughter Ariel's age, Chloe
(Jasmine Vega).
Soon enough, stuff starts happening to Ariel - e.g. she starts
getting weird notes, and is sabotaged. Is it a jealous Chloe (who simultaneously seems to start trying to seduce Ariel!)? Or is one of the
creepy staff after Ariel?
This goes exactly where you'd expect it to with the identity of the
perp (hint/spoiler: it's not Chloe).
But at least the ending doesn't try to spring a "twist" on us, as
nearly every other Tubi Original flick I've seen before this has!
However, as a result, I found this flick pretty standard fare - I
wasn't really surprised by anything here (except maybe the frank sexuality).
P.S. Why is Ariel, et al. walking around free at the end,
considering how they deal with the perp?!!

So that was the three movies I watched.


What did you watch?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/2025 9:14 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:

On 2/9/25 1:30 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:

What did you watch?

I got no work done yesterday! (I generally don't on Saturdays.) So I
actually got through *three* movies yesterday! And some soaps too!:

soaps: Y&R - Tue's & Wed's ep. Much of this was taken up with Billy's
new "business venture" with Filis[sic!] mostly on board, but Michael
(and Summer) skeptical. Also, Billy has some "romance time" with Sally,
but it's interrupted by Filis; Sally also tried to talk Billy out of
going into business with Filis... Also, at some point, Filis is forced
to talk to Sharon, and I swear Sharon was deliberately baiting Filis,
even though Sharon was claiming to be all "contrite". Not much else of
note happened.
   DOOL - Fri's ep. No follow up with Joy/Alex/Stephanie. Instead, we
get follow up on captive Ava! The "Lady in White" gives Ava a hard time, pointing out that no one is looking for her because they all think she's
in Hong Kong with Tripp. Kristin discovers Ava's phone in Rachel's bag
(no Rachel this epie - we should be getting NuRachel any day now, I

NuRachel won't be on until spring, so at least another month or so.
That's why she wasn't on-camera when Brady took her to therapy.

think) and realizes that Ava's text to Brady about Hong Kong was faked
by Rachel, and realizes that Ava is captive in her old parents' place. Kristen heads there, intending to free Ava (believing Rachel is holding
her captive), but comes across the "Lady in White", realizing it's her mother! Patch calls Tripp in front of Brady (no Tripp on-camera), and
they both realize that Ava is not in Hong Kong... Meanwhile, Patch
pitches Jada on the idea that EJ is framing her. And Paulina offers
FauxRafe the interim Commissioner's job, just like EJ wants. (Can't wait until Belle discovers what EJ has been up to!)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/2025 9:14 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:

On 2/9/25 1:30 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:

What did you watch?

I got no work done yesterday! (I generally don't on Saturdays.) So I
actually got through *three* movies yesterday! And some soaps too!:

soaps: Y&R - Tue's & Wed's ep. Much of this was taken up with Billy's
new "business venture" with Filis[sic!] mostly on board, but Michael
(and Summer) skeptical. Also, Billy has some "romance time" with Sally,
but it's interrupted by Filis; Sally also tried to talk Billy out of
going into business with Filis... Also, at some point, Filis is forced
to talk to Sharon, and I swear Sharon was deliberately baiting Filis,
even though Sharon was claiming to be all "contrite". Not much else of
note happened.
   DOOL - Fri's ep. No follow up with Joy/Alex/Stephanie. Instead, we
get follow up on captive Ava! The "Lady in White" gives Ava a hard time, pointing out that no one is looking for her because they all think she's
in Hong Kong with Tripp. Kristin discovers Ava's phone in Rachel's bag
(no Rachel this epie - we should be getting NuRachel any day now, I
think) and realizes that Ava's text to Brady about Hong Kong was faked
by Rachel, and realizes that Ava is captive in her old parents' place. Kristen heads there, intending to free Ava (believing Rachel is holding
her captive), but comes across the "Lady in White", realizing it's her mother! Patch calls Tripp in front of Brady (no Tripp on-camera), and
they both realize that Ava is not in Hong Kong... Meanwhile, Patch
pitches Jada on the idea that EJ is framing her. And Paulina offers
FauxRafe the interim Commissioner's job, just like EJ wants. (Can't wait until Belle discovers what EJ has been up to!)

Movies:

Mechanic: Resurrection (Max) - This 2016 sequel flick had been on the "ad-supported" streamers (e.g. Tubi) most recently before this, however
I resisted the urge to watch this flick there. But when I watched "Beetlejuice" on Friday, I noticed that "Mechanic: Resurrection" finally
made it back to a real streamer! - Max. So I endeavored to watch it on Saturday!
   At the end of 2011's "The Mechanic", our (anti-)hero, Arthur Bishop
is presumed dead. So he apparently took the opportunity to "retire" from
the "secret assassin" business, and moved to Rio.
   This first sequence is annoying, as I don't think the primary crew
ever went to Rio to film at all, and so this sequence looks very clunky, consisting of greenscreen work, etc. In fact, compared to the first
film, this film overall feels more cheaply produced.
   Anyway, in Rio, Bishop is tracked down by a mean Asian
"courier" (lovely Thai actress Rhatha Phongam) who tries to coerce him
to "unretire", and then sicks a dozen thugs on him when Bishop demures. Bishop dispatches the thugs and flees Rio, but discovers the identity of
the courier before he does. (Oddly, we never see Phongam in the rest of
the film, so I'm not sure why it was necessary to show us that Bishop
figured out her ID....)
   Anyway, Bishop flees to Thailand, where it seems like much of this movie was really filmed.
   Here he meets up with his "old friend" Mei (Michelle Yeoh). The
sequel is annoying for inventing a whole host of people who we didn't
see or hear about in the first film including Mei, the film's Big Bad,
and Bishop's love interest.
   On that score, soon enough Mei wants Bishop to rescue an abused
wife(? girlfriend?) who just happens to be played by Jessica Alba, so
you know this isn't just a subplot! Bishop does, accidentally killing
the abuser in the process. It doesn't take Bishop long to get Jessica
Alba to admit that she's been coerced into being "honey trap" for
Bishop, by the same Big Bad who sent the courier to Rio - some dude
named Crain (Sam Hazeldine), who apparently worked with Bishop in the
past, though he was never mentioned at all in the first film!
   Anyway, Crain quickly takes Alba hostage, after Bishop has already gotten sweet on her (of course he does - it's Jessica Alba! if she
didn't treat underlings as badly as JLo does, she might be the perfect woman!!). Bishop now has to kill three rivals of Crain's, or Crain will
kill Jessica Alba.
   That's a lot of set up to get this sequel to the same place as the original film - with a bunch of elaborate set pieces to get Crain near
each of the targets, and then a bunch of gadgetry in order to execute
the "kill".
   Tommy Lee Jones, in what must be one of this last roles (I haven't noticed him in anything in years!)

You made me look. The last movie I saw him in was 2019's Ad Astra.
He's 78 now, but he has been steadily working. He's not doing multiple
movies every year, but he had two come out in 2023 and he's filming a
new one now.

shows up towards the end of this as

the last target on the list.
   This wasn't nearly as good as the first film, but it has beautiful locations, Jessica Alba, and is OK once it gets to the "assassination
hit pieces". The ending is kind of weak, but seems to imply that a third "Mechanic" film is very unlikely.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (Max) - The 2024 sequel to the 1988 film. Also directed by Tim Burton, with the score from Danny Elfman.
   While the original film is charming, as you might expect the sequel
is lacking in nearly all of that, and instead hews much closer to Tim Burton's later excesses. This film is also much "busier" and
(unnecessary) more complicated that the original film.
   As with the first film, this opens with a long fly-over shot of the Vermont village (again standing in for "Connecticut", though I don't
recall anyone saying the word "Connecticut" in this film either!). But
this time, it's more clearly a real fly-over shot of the actual village
(this time likely using dreaded drones!) with the transition to a fly-
over of Adam Maitland's model of the town being much more obvious here.
   This film makes a lot (and I mean *a lot*!) of questionable choices.
   The first is not killing off Lydia's (Winona Ryder) father, Charles Deetz, off-screen (and long-before the sequel). Instead Burton and the writers have the horrifically bad idea of using what is known as the
"fake Shemp" trope (including use of an animated sequence in an
otherwise live-action film!) to have Charles, but not the disgraced
actor Jeffrey Jones, appear in the film. Oh, and they kill Charles off
*in this film*! To say this is a bad idea is an understatement.
   Meanwhile, the Maitland ghosts (Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis from
the original film) get a mere two brief mentions, one of them being a throwaway line from Lydia that "they found a loophole" which let the Maitlands cross over. Some more detail about *this development* would
have been more than welcome.
   Of the good elements in the film, Keaton is still great as
Beetlejuice (despite it being 35 years later!!), Winona Ryder is still
good (despite this film and its backstory pretty much ruining her
character), and Jenna Ortega Lydia's daughter Astrid is a welcome
addition (though maybe by not as much as you might have expected). Also, Catherine O'Hara's Delia is toned down from the first film, almost out
of necessity. I also did enjoy Willem Dafoe (and his crew) as ghost
cops, though Dafoe's "ghost" make-up is less than convincing.
   But there are a bunch of ancillary elements added on to the sequel - one being Monica Bellucci as a character inspired by the Bride of Frankenstein, Morticia, or both!; another being Astrid's dead father; a
third was Astrid's whole subplot - that I was never sold on. And Justin Theroux is added here, though I'm not sure he adds much to the film.
   And this one retreats in the Tim Burton "preciousness" too often,
one example being Beetlejuice's underlings - The original film ends with Beetlejuice in the waiting room of Hades (or whatever!) next to a tribal shaman and his shrunken-headed victim. In the original film, this is a
good bit. The sequel has the frankly dumb idea of taking this bit, and running with it, giving Beetlejuice an entire crew of shrunken-headed
ghost workers. One shrunken-headed dude (Bob was the main one) would
have been fine - Why does Beetlejuice have a crew of nothing but a
*dozen* shrunken-headed ghosts?! It makes no sense!... Clearly an
example of a good bit being run into the ground.
   Overall, I guess this is entertaining enough, though it is both overly-complicated and over-long (at an hour and 45 minutes, 15 minutes longer than the original film, and seeming to be longer than that!). But
I definitely don't want them making a third film in this franchise,
after this one comes off as a relative disappointment.

I read someone else a complaint about Monica Bellucci's character being unnecessary and bogging down the movie, and asked why is she even in the
movie. Then someone else responded, because she's married to the
director. Although I say if they were going to cut something out to
save some time, getting rid of Jones would have been an *easy* fix and
resolved multiple issues with the movie. Cut him out and suddenly it's
15 minutes shorter and less controversial. LOL

Enjoy the Pitch meeting. "You can't just hand wave that away." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-dYMcb-XfI&t=89s

snip

What did you watch?

I watched:

Captain America: The First Avenger (4K disc) 2011 movie set in the MCU.
Chris Evans stars as Steve Rogers/Captain America who after taking a
super serum fights Nazis and Battles Red Skull and his evil Hydra cult.


Captain America: The Winter Soldier (4K disc) 2014 movie set in the MCU.
Captain America is back and he's still fighting Hydra. Great movie.
There's also a scene where Captain America learns a secret about the
murder of Iron Man's parents. I wonder if that will come into play in a
later movie or not?


Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while
another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.
Except one thing leads to another and the two sides are soon fighting
each other. This movie also introduces the Spider-ling. Or um,
Spider-boy. Another great movie. It took *all* of my willpower not to
watch "Avengers Infinity War" and "Avengers Endgame" next. But I'm
saving those for next year when the next Avengers movie comes out.


Eternals (blu-ray) 2021 movie set in the MCU. The plot is way to
complicated to try to summarize, especially without spoilers. Lots of
super heroes fight evil and save the Earth. This was mostly background
noise with a horrible commentary. That commentary was a complete waste
of time! Anyway, this one ends with a giant unresolved plot issue
sticking out. Much like Tim Blake Nelson's Samuel Sterns character and whatever happened to him, the MCU keeps making movies with dangling plot threads. And whatever happened to Ross after he became secretary of
State? Maybe there will be a movie that answers all of these questions...


Babylon 5 (blu-ray) - "Secrets of the Soul" - Season 5, episode 6.
Bester brings his Psi Cops to B5 to hunt down the group of rogue
telepaths that Sheridan gave sanctuary.

"Day of the Dead" - Season 5, episode 8. The Brakiri purchase part of B5
so they can perform a ritual that allows people to talk to the dead.
There are way too many plot holes with this episode to list! Neil
Gaiman wrote this episode and according to the Lurker's Guide the reason
the dead who come back to talk are an odd (to say the least) choice, is
because Gaiman was free to use whichever characters he wanted. That is
nowhere near a good enough reason for a subpar episode. Anyway, the
main reason I watched it is because it featured Rebo and Zooty. Has
anyone ever noticed that Rebo and Zooty look a *lot* like Penn and Teller? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp_WAWsc1fk

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb" <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

I re-watched this recently, too, and I have to say, the scene where Ross sits them all down and lectures them always angers me, particularly when he focuses on what happened in New York, implying that the Avengers are responsible for all the damage and (presumed) deaths that occurred.

Excuse me? How is *any* of that damage the fault of the Avengers? If they hadn't been there, the city literally would have been completely destroyed by the Chitauri (as well as the rest of the earth, eventually) and when Cap
weakly tries to make that important point, Hurt responds with "But at what cost?"

Cap should have responded, "Excuse me, motherfucker? I know you didn't just
say that. Wasn't it you assholes in the government that launched a fucking *nuke* at Manhattan in response to the invasion? The only reason New York is still standing at all and isn't a radioactive slag heap is that we took the time-- in the middle of a pitched battle-- to *also* stop you assholes from killing millions of innocent people. Now you want us to let the same people
who wanted to nuke New York to start calling the shots with us, too? GTFO."

That whole scene just pisses me off, both for Ross's hypocritical arrogance
and for the way the team just sat there and took it rather than pointing out the gaping holes in his bullshit.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and Barton to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One is good with a bow/arrow, the other exceptionally skilled in hand-to-hand combat. If that's the criteria in these "Sokovia Accords", then everyone who qualifies as Marksman on the pistol range or achieves a black belt in martial arts would have to register and be monitored and controlled by the United Nations.

Seems like there'd be just a few constitutional issues involved there, at least for the Americans who met the standards of the Accords.

And since, per AGENTS OF SHIELD, the Accords weren't limited to just the Avengers but rather any "enhanced person", why was someone like the Son of Coul, who was technologically enhanced with that nifty bionic hand that could do all sorts of tricks, not required to register, but Tony Stark was? And how much tech assistance triggers the reporting requirement? After all, a gun is tech, so does merely carrying a gun require registration? If not, then where's the line between a holstered gun and an Iron Man suit that imposes a submission-to-the-United Nations requirement on a person?

And what qualifies as "enhanced"? Would someone with those kangaroo-like leg prosthetics be considered "enhanced"? I mean, they *can* run and jump faster and longer than people with normal human legs, after all. And then there's Thor, who isn't enhanced at all. He's just not human. He's normal for his species.

Those "accords" presented so many legal and due process challenges, which
both the show and the movies gloss over (for good reason--- most people don't care about that stuff), but which the law geek in me would love for them to have addressed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:54:35 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: The First Avenger (4K disc) 2011 movie set in the MCU.
Chris Evans stars as Steve Rogers/Captain America who after taking a
super serum fights Nazis and Battles Red Skull and his evil Hydra cult.

Starring the impossibly cute Jenna Louise Coleman.

I don't like this movie. It started when Director Joe Johnston came out complaining that he hated the Captain America costume being based on the
flag and wanted to ditch it.

They should have brought him back for the new Cap movie, since Mackie apparently doesn't believe Captain America should have anything to do with America. They're a match made in heaven.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb" <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a
mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the
Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S.
Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while
another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

I have a problem with this and a more basic level. Tony Stark should’ve
told these people to go fuck themselves. And Steve Rogers should’ve bent
over to take it up the poop shoot. I don’t know who decided they should be
on the wrong side of things.

I re-watched this recently, too, and I have to say, the scene where Ross sits them all down and lectures them always angers me, particularly when he focuses
on what happened in New York, implying that the Avengers are responsible for all the damage and (presumed) deaths that occurred.

Yeah, he watched a different movie than I did

Excuse me? How is *any* of that damage the fault of the Avengers? If they hadn't been there, the city literally would have been completely destroyed by the Chitauri (as well as the rest of the earth, eventually) and when Cap weakly tries to make that important point, Hurt responds with "But at what cost?"

Cap should have responded, "Excuse me, motherfucker? I know you didn't just say that. Wasn't it you assholes in the government that launched a fucking *nuke* at Manhattan in response to the invasion? The only reason New York is still standing at all and isn't a radioactive slag heap is that we took the time-- in the middle of a pitched battle-- to *also* stop you assholes from killing millions of innocent people. Now you want us to let the same people who wanted to nuke New York to start calling the shots with us, too? GTFO."

That whole scene just pisses me off, both for Ross's hypocritical arrogance

Well, I’ve always hated Ross all the way back to the mid 1960s. He was designed to be the guy you hate.

and for the way the team just sat there and took it rather than pointing out the gaping holes in his bullshit.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One is good with a bow/arrow,

I note your “at least“ above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they’ve decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I forget what they settled on if he’s got magic eyes somehow or is actually seeing three seconds in the future. I think the latter is what they had to
have in order for him to help brie Larson murder Bruce Banner.

the other exceptionally skilled in hand-to-hand combat.

If that's the criteria in these "Sokovia Accords", then everyone who qualifies
as Marksman on the pistol range or achieves a black belt in martial arts would
have to register and be monitored and controlled by the United Nations.

There’s also an implementation problem. How do they know how all of these people are doing all of these things? Who told them about Mike Murdock’s Mystery radar sense?

Seems like there'd be just a few constitutional issues involved there, at least for the Americans who met the standards of the Accords.

And since, per AGENTS OF SHIELD, the Accords weren't limited to just the Avengers but rather any "enhanced person", why was someone like the Son of Coul, who was technologically enhanced with that nifty bionic hand that could do all sorts of tricks, not required to register,

Because per Josh Wheden, the son of Cole died in the first avengers movie.
In the movies he’s dead. In the TV show he’s only secretly alive. Either way I can see where they can’t put him on the list.

but Tony Stark was? And how

much tech assistance triggers the reporting requirement? After all, a gun is tech, so does merely carrying a gun require registration? If not, then where's
the line between a holstered gun and an Iron Man suit that imposes a submission-to-the-United Nations requirement on a person?

Maybe they registered Tony Starks heart and not the suit. Did they register
war machine?

And what qualifies as "enhanced"? Would someone with those kangaroo-like leg prosthetics be considered "enhanced"? I mean, they *can* run and jump faster and longer than people with normal human legs, after all.

Yeah, there has to be some sort of limiting scale. If your bionic legs let
you walk half as fast as I do you’re still enhanced, but does it count? If you can walk twice as fast as I do, do you trip something?

And then there's

Thor, who isn't enhanced at all. He's just not human. He's normal for his species.

Actually, Thor is not only top end of his species, but he also has a magic
belt given him by Odin that doubles his strength. And he’s got Mjolnir. He’s definitely enhanced.

Those "accords" presented so many legal and due process challenges, which both the show and the movies gloss over (for good reason--- most people don't care about that stuff), but which the law geek in me would love for them to have addressed.

Yep.



--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

On 2/9/2025 9:14 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:

On 2/9/25 1:30 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:

What did you watch?

I got no work done yesterday! (I generally don't on Saturdays.) So I
actually got through *three* movies yesterday! And some soaps too!:

soaps: Y&R - Tue's & Wed's ep. Much of this was taken up with Billy's
new "business venture" with Filis[sic!] mostly on board, but Michael
(and Summer) skeptical. Also, Billy has some "romance time" with Sally,
but it's interrupted by Filis; Sally also tried to talk Billy out of
going into business with Filis... Also, at some point, Filis is forced
to talk to Sharon, and I swear Sharon was deliberately baiting Filis,
even though Sharon was claiming to be all "contrite". Not much else of
note happened.
   DOOL - Fri's ep. No follow up with Joy/Alex/Stephanie. Instead, we
get follow up on captive Ava! The "Lady in White" gives Ava a hard time,
pointing out that no one is looking for her because they all think she's
in Hong Kong with Tripp. Kristin discovers Ava's phone in Rachel's bag
(no Rachel this epie - we should be getting NuRachel any day now, I
think) and realizes that Ava's text to Brady about Hong Kong was faked
by Rachel, and realizes that Ava is captive in her old parents' place.
Kristen heads there, intending to free Ava (believing Rachel is holding
her captive), but comes across the "Lady in White", realizing it's her
mother! Patch calls Tripp in front of Brady (no Tripp on-camera), and
they both realize that Ava is not in Hong Kong... Meanwhile, Patch
pitches Jada on the idea that EJ is framing her. And Paulina offers
FauxRafe the interim Commissioner's job, just like EJ wants. (Can't wait
until Belle discovers what EJ has been up to!)

Movies:

Mechanic: Resurrection (Max) - This 2016 sequel flick had been on the
"ad-supported" streamers (e.g. Tubi) most recently before this, however
I resisted the urge to watch this flick there. But when I watched
"Beetlejuice" on Friday, I noticed that "Mechanic: Resurrection" finally
made it back to a real streamer! - Max. So I endeavored to watch it on
Saturday!
   At the end of 2011's "The Mechanic", our (anti-)hero, Arthur Bishop
is presumed dead. So he apparently took the opportunity to "retire" from
the "secret assassin" business, and moved to Rio.
   This first sequence is annoying, as I don't think the primary crew
ever went to Rio to film at all, and so this sequence looks very clunky,
consisting of greenscreen work, etc. In fact, compared to the first
film, this film overall feels more cheaply produced.
   Anyway, in Rio, Bishop is tracked down by a mean Asian
"courier" (lovely Thai actress Rhatha Phongam) who tries to coerce him
to "unretire", and then sicks a dozen thugs on him when Bishop demures.
Bishop dispatches the thugs and flees Rio, but discovers the identity of
the courier before he does. (Oddly, we never see Phongam in the rest of
the film, so I'm not sure why it was necessary to show us that Bishop
figured out her ID....)
   Anyway, Bishop flees to Thailand, where it seems like much of this
movie was really filmed.
   Here he meets up with his "old friend" Mei (Michelle Yeoh). The
sequel is annoying for inventing a whole host of people who we didn't
see or hear about in the first film including Mei, the film's Big Bad,
and Bishop's love interest.
   On that score, soon enough Mei wants Bishop to rescue an abused
wife(? girlfriend?) who just happens to be played by Jessica Alba, so
you know this isn't just a subplot! Bishop does, accidentally killing
the abuser in the process. It doesn't take Bishop long to get Jessica
Alba to admit that she's been coerced into being "honey trap" for
Bishop, by the same Big Bad who sent the courier to Rio - some dude
named Crain (Sam Hazeldine), who apparently worked with Bishop in the
past, though he was never mentioned at all in the first film!
   Anyway, Crain quickly takes Alba hostage, after Bishop has already
gotten sweet on her (of course he does - it's Jessica Alba! if she
didn't treat underlings as badly as JLo does, she might be the perfect
woman!!). Bishop now has to kill three rivals of Crain's, or Crain will
kill Jessica Alba.
   That's a lot of set up to get this sequel to the same place as the
original film - with a bunch of elaborate set pieces to get Crain near
each of the targets, and then a bunch of gadgetry in order to execute
the "kill".
   Tommy Lee Jones, in what must be one of this last roles (I haven't
noticed him in anything in years!)

You made me look. The last movie I saw him in was 2019's Ad Astra.
He's 78 now, but he has been steadily working. He's not doing multiple movies every year, but he had two come out in 2023 and he's filming a
new one now.

shows up towards the end of this as

the last target on the list.
   This wasn't nearly as good as the first film, but it has beautiful
locations, Jessica Alba, and is OK once it gets to the "assassination
hit pieces". The ending is kind of weak, but seems to imply that a third
"Mechanic" film is very unlikely.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (Max) - The 2024 sequel to the 1988 film. Also
directed by Tim Burton, with the score from Danny Elfman.
   While the original film is charming, as you might expect the sequel
is lacking in nearly all of that, and instead hews much closer to Tim
Burton's later excesses. This film is also much "busier" and
(unnecessary) more complicated that the original film.
   As with the first film, this opens with a long fly-over shot of the
Vermont village (again standing in for "Connecticut", though I don't
recall anyone saying the word "Connecticut" in this film either!). But
this time, it's more clearly a real fly-over shot of the actual village
(this time likely using dreaded drones!) with the transition to a fly-
over of Adam Maitland's model of the town being much more obvious here.
   This film makes a lot (and I mean *a lot*!) of questionable choices.
   The first is not killing off Lydia's (Winona Ryder) father, Charles
Deetz, off-screen (and long-before the sequel). Instead Burton and the
writers have the horrifically bad idea of using what is known as the
"fake Shemp" trope (including use of an animated sequence in an
otherwise live-action film!) to have Charles, but not the disgraced
actor Jeffrey Jones, appear in the film. Oh, and they kill Charles off
*in this film*! To say this is a bad idea is an understatement.
   Meanwhile, the Maitland ghosts (Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis from
the original film) get a mere two brief mentions, one of them being a
throwaway line from Lydia that "they found a loophole" which let the
Maitlands cross over. Some more detail about *this development* would
have been more than welcome.
   Of the good elements in the film, Keaton is still great as
Beetlejuice (despite it being 35 years later!!), Winona Ryder is still
good (despite this film and its backstory pretty much ruining her
character), and Jenna Ortega Lydia's daughter Astrid is a welcome
addition (though maybe by not as much as you might have expected). Also,
Catherine O'Hara's Delia is toned down from the first film, almost out
of necessity. I also did enjoy Willem Dafoe (and his crew) as ghost
cops, though Dafoe's "ghost" make-up is less than convincing.
   But there are a bunch of ancillary elements added on to the sequel -
one being Monica Bellucci as a character inspired by the Bride of
Frankenstein, Morticia, or both!; another being Astrid's dead father; a
third was Astrid's whole subplot - that I was never sold on. And Justin
Theroux is added here, though I'm not sure he adds much to the film.
   And this one retreats in the Tim Burton "preciousness" too often,
one example being Beetlejuice's underlings - The original film ends with
Beetlejuice in the waiting room of Hades (or whatever!) next to a tribal
shaman and his shrunken-headed victim. In the original film, this is a
good bit. The sequel has the frankly dumb idea of taking this bit, and
running with it, giving Beetlejuice an entire crew of shrunken-headed
ghost workers. One shrunken-headed dude (Bob was the main one) would
have been fine - Why does Beetlejuice have a crew of nothing but a
*dozen* shrunken-headed ghosts?! It makes no sense!... Clearly an
example of a good bit being run into the ground.
   Overall, I guess this is entertaining enough, though it is both
overly-complicated and over-long (at an hour and 45 minutes, 15 minutes
longer than the original film, and seeming to be longer than that!). But
I definitely don't want them making a third film in this franchise,
after this one comes off as a relative disappointment.

I read someone else a complaint about Monica Bellucci's character being unnecessary and bogging down the movie, and asked why is she even in the movie. Then someone else responded, because she's married to the
director. Although I say if they were going to cut something out to
save some time, getting rid of Jones would have been an *easy* fix and resolved multiple issues with the movie. Cut him out and suddenly it's
15 minutes shorter and less controversial. LOL

Enjoy the Pitch meeting. "You can't just hand wave that away." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-dYMcb-XfI&t=89s

snip


What did you watch?

I watched:

Captain America: The First Avenger (4K disc) 2011 movie set in the MCU.
Chris Evans stars as Steve Rogers/Captain America who after taking a
super serum fights Nazis and Battles Red Skull and his evil Hydra cult.

Starring the impossibly cute Jenna Louise Coleman.

I don’t like this movie. It started when Director Joe Johnston came out complaining that he hated the Captain America costume being based on the
flag and wanted toditch it. I wanna know what happened to the guy, who went
to Eisner fighting to keep the Rocketeer costume intact.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (4K disc) 2014 movie set in the MCU.
Captain America is back and he's still fighting Hydra. Great movie.
There's also a scene where Captain America learns a secret about the
murder of Iron Man's parents. I wonder if that will come into play in a later movie or not?

I hate this movie, but then I’ve always hated the Winter soldier. Bucky,
like uncle Ben, should stay dead.




--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:54:37 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a >>> mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the >>> Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. >>> Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while >>> another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

I have a problem with this and a more basic level. Tony Stark should've
told these people to go fuck themselves. And Steve Rogers should've bent
over to take it up the poop shoot. I don't know who decided they should be
on the wrong side of things.

Yes, it does seem like they'd both have the opposite view than what was presented in the movie.

I re-watched this recently, too, and I have to say, the scene where Ross
sits
them all down and lectures them always angers me, particularly when he
focuses
on what happened in New York, implying that the Avengers are responsible for
all the damage and (presumed) deaths that occurred.

Yeah, he watched a different movie than I did

Excuse me? How is *any* of that damage the fault of the Avengers? If they >> hadn't been there, the city literally would have been completely destroyed >> by
the Chitauri (as well as the rest of the earth, eventually) and when Cap
weakly tries to make that important point, Hurt responds with "But at what >> cost?"

Cap should have responded, "Excuse me, motherfucker? I know you didn't just >> say that. Wasn't it you assholes in the government that launched a fucking >> *nuke* at Manhattan in response to the invasion? The only reason New York is
still standing at all and isn't a radioactive slag heap is that we took the >> time-- in the middle of a pitched battle-- to *also* stop you assholes from >> killing millions of innocent people. Now you want us to let the same people >> who wanted to nuke New York to start calling the shots with us, too? GTFO." >>
That whole scene just pisses me off, both for Ross's hypocritical arrogance

Well, I've always hated Ross all the way back to the mid 1960s. He was designed to be the guy you hate.

and for the way the team just sat there and took it rather than pointing out
the gaping holes in his bullshit.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and
Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not
enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One >> is
good with a bow/arrow,

I note your "at least" above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they've decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I forget what they settled on if he's got magic eyes somehow or is actually seeing three seconds in the future. I think the latter is what they had to have in order for him to help brie Larson murder Bruce Banner.

Yeah, all these characters have undergone so many revisions and re-imaginings over the years in the comics, that I only go with what they've shown in the movies themselves.

Seems like there'd be just a few constitutional issues involved there, at >> least for the Americans who met the standards of the Accords.

And since, per AGENTS OF SHIELD, the Accords weren't limited to just the
Avengers but rather any "enhanced person", why was someone like the Son of >> Coul, who was technologically enhanced with that nifty bionic hand that
could
do all sorts of tricks, not required to register,

Because per Josh Wheden, the son of Cole died in the first avengers movie.
In the movies he’s dead. In the TV show he’s only secretly alive. Either way I can see where they can’t put him on the list.

but Tony Stark was? And how

much tech assistance triggers the reporting requirement? After all, a gun is
tech, so does merely carrying a gun require registration? If not, then
where's
the line between a holstered gun and an Iron Man suit that imposes a
submission-to-the-United Nations requirement on a person?

Maybe they registered Tony Starks heart and not the suit.

So people with hi-tech medical implants have to register, too?!?

Did they register war machine?

I assume so.

And what qualifies as "enhanced"? Would someone with those kangaroo-like leg
prosthetics be considered "enhanced"? I mean, they *can* run and jump faster
and longer than people with normal human legs, after all.

Yeah, there has to be some sort of limiting scale. If your bionic legs let you walk half as fast as I do you’re still enhanced, but does it count? If you can walk twice as fast as I do, do you trip something?

And then there's

Thor, who isn't enhanced at all. He's just not human. He's normal for his >> species.

Actually, Thor is not only top end of his species, but he also has a magic belt given him by Odin that doubles his strength. And he’s got Mjolnir. He’s definitely enhanced.

Those "accords" presented so many legal and due process challenges, which >> both the show and the movies gloss over (for good reason--- most people
don't
care about that stuff), but which the law geek in me would love for them to >> have addressed.

Yep.

I have these same questions whenever movies and shows (like the X-MEN) that deal with government mandates for mutants to register themselves. How do they define 'mutant'? Would Patrick Mahomes or Mozart be a mutant
because they can do things at a spectacular level that no one else can do? Is possession of any ability above the human baseline norm a registerable
offense? What if someone's power is to be able to fart in color? Or play golf better than Tiger Woods in his prime? Those are things that can never be used to hurt anyone, so would they have to register and submit to constant government surveillance? What would be the justification for tagging them like an animal putting them under house arrest?

And how is any of this stuff legal? Have they done a wholesale shit-canning of the Constitution?

Q: How many of the Bill of Rights does the government violate by locking
people up just for being able to do things they can't?

A: All of 'em, I think.

Short of a complete abdication of the Constitution and the foundations of the government's relationship to the citizenry that has existed for 200+ years in this country, how is the U.S. government even getting away with passing and enforcing such laws on people?

I get why movies don't get into those weeds much because they only have a couple of hours to tell the whole story, but a TV series has the time to address some of these things so that people like me aren't constantly yelling, "They can't do that!" at the TV.

I think the whole legality of it all would be fascinating. Of course none of this makes for an exciting action movie, so it's
always all glossed over and hand-waived away to make room for the explosions and CGI.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 14:54:37 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a >>> mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the
Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S.
Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while
another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

I have a problem with this and a more basic level. Tony Stark should’ve >told these people to go fuck themselves. And Steve Rogers should’ve bent >over to take it up the poop shoot. I don’t know who decided they should be >on the wrong side of things.

True as Steve is the Boy Scout who always follows the rules, not Tony.

I re-watched this recently, too, and I have to say, the scene where Ross sits
them all down and lectures them always angers me, particularly when he focuses
on what happened in New York, implying that the Avengers are responsible for >> all the damage and (presumed) deaths that occurred.

Yeah, he watched a different movie than I did

Excuse me? How is *any* of that damage the fault of the Avengers? If they
hadn't been there, the city literally would have been completely destroyed by
the Chitauri (as well as the rest of the earth, eventually) and when Cap
weakly tries to make that important point, Hurt responds with "But at what >> cost?"

Cap should have responded, "Excuse me, motherfucker? I know you didn't just >> say that. Wasn't it you assholes in the government that launched a fucking >> *nuke* at Manhattan in response to the invasion? The only reason New York is >> still standing at all and isn't a radioactive slag heap is that we took the >> time-- in the middle of a pitched battle-- to *also* stop you assholes from >> killing millions of innocent people. Now you want us to let the same people >> who wanted to nuke New York to start calling the shots with us, too? GTFO." >>
That whole scene just pisses me off, both for Ross's hypocritical arrogance

Well, I’ve always hated Ross all the way back to the mid 1960s. He was >designed to be the guy you hate.

and for the way the team just sat there and took it rather than pointing out >> the gaping holes in his bullshit.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not
enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One is
good with a bow/arrow,

I note your “at least“ above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they’ve decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he >obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I >forget what they settled on if he’s got magic eyes somehow or is actually >seeing three seconds in the future. I think the latter is what they had to >have in order for him to help brie Larson murder Bruce Banner.

the other exceptionally skilled in hand-to-hand combat.

If that's the criteria in these "Sokovia Accords", then everyone who qualifies
as Marksman on the pistol range or achieves a black belt in martial arts would
have to register and be monitored and controlled by the United Nations.

There’s also an implementation problem. How do they know how all of these >people are doing all of these things? Who told them about Mike Murdock’s >Mystery radar sense?

Seems like there'd be just a few constitutional issues involved there, at >> least for the Americans who met the standards of the Accords.

And since, per AGENTS OF SHIELD, the Accords weren't limited to just the
Avengers but rather any "enhanced person", why was someone like the Son of >> Coul, who was technologically enhanced with that nifty bionic hand that could
do all sorts of tricks, not required to register,

Because per Josh Wheden, the son of Cole died in the first avengers movie.
In the movies he’s dead. In the TV show he’s only secretly alive. Either >way I can see where they can’t put him on the list.

but Tony Stark was? And how

much tech assistance triggers the reporting requirement? After all, a gun is >> tech, so does merely carrying a gun require registration? If not, then where's
the line between a holstered gun and an Iron Man suit that imposes a
submission-to-the-United Nations requirement on a person?

Maybe they registered Tony Starks heart and not the suit. Did they register >war machine?

If that's the case should anyone with an artificial heart or even a
pacemaker be added to the registry? What about people with one of
those insulin pumps. Now neither an insulin pump or pacemaker make you
perform better than a normal human but then neither does Stark's
heart. It's powerful but does nothing until you add on the bits of the
suit.

And what qualifies as "enhanced"? Would someone with those kangaroo-like leg >> prosthetics be considered "enhanced"? I mean, they *can* run and jump faster >> and longer than people with normal human legs, after all.

Yeah, there has to be some sort of limiting scale. If your bionic legs let >you walk half as fast as I do you’re still enhanced, but does it count? If >you can walk twice as fast as I do, do you trip something?

And then there's

Thor, who isn't enhanced at all. He's just not human. He's normal for his
species.

Actually, Thor is not only top end of his species, but he also has a magic >belt given him by Odin that doubles his strength. And he’s got Mjolnir. >He’s definitely enhanced.

Those "accords" presented so many legal and due process challenges, which
both the show and the movies gloss over (for good reason--- most people don't
care about that stuff), but which the law geek in me would love for them to >> have addressed.

Yep.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:54:35 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: The First Avenger (4K disc) 2011 movie set in the MCU.
Chris Evans stars as Steve Rogers/Captain America who after taking a
super serum fights Nazis and Battles Red Skull and his evil Hydra cult.

Starring the impossibly cute Jenna Louise Coleman.

I don't like this movie. It started when Director Joe Johnston came out
complaining that he hated the Captain America costume being based on the
flag and wanted to ditch it.

They should have brought him back for the new Cap movie, since Mackie apparently doesn't believe Captain America should have anything to do with America. They're a match made in heaven.

Good point



--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 14:54:37 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a >>>> mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the >>>> Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. >>>> Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while >>>> another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

I have a problem with this and a more basic level. Tony Stark should’ve
told these people to go fuck themselves. And Steve Rogers should’ve bent >> over to take it up the poop shoot. I don’t know who decided they should be >> on the wrong side of things.

True as Steve is the Boy Scout who always follows the rules, not Tony.

Exactly. How would Steve Rogers ever turn down any order from someone whose first name was General?

I re-watched this recently, too, and I have to say, the scene where Ross sits
them all down and lectures them always angers me, particularly when he focuses
on what happened in New York, implying that the Avengers are responsible for
all the damage and (presumed) deaths that occurred.

Yeah, he watched a different movie than I did

Excuse me? How is *any* of that damage the fault of the Avengers? If they >>> hadn't been there, the city literally would have been completely destroyed by
the Chitauri (as well as the rest of the earth, eventually) and when Cap >>> weakly tries to make that important point, Hurt responds with "But at what >>> cost?"

Cap should have responded, "Excuse me, motherfucker? I know you didn't just >>> say that. Wasn't it you assholes in the government that launched a fucking >>> *nuke* at Manhattan in response to the invasion? The only reason New York is
still standing at all and isn't a radioactive slag heap is that we took the >>> time-- in the middle of a pitched battle-- to *also* stop you assholes from >>> killing millions of innocent people. Now you want us to let the same people >>> who wanted to nuke New York to start calling the shots with us, too? GTFO." >>>
That whole scene just pisses me off, both for Ross's hypocritical arrogance >>

Well, I’ve always hated Ross all the way back to the mid 1960s. He was
designed to be the guy you hate.

and for the way the team just sat there and took it rather than pointing out
the gaping holes in his bullshit.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not
enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One is
good with a bow/arrow,

I note your “at least“ above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they’ve decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he
obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I >> forget what they settled on if he’s got magic eyes somehow or is actually >> seeing three seconds in the future. I think the latter is what they had to >> have in order for him to help brie Larson murder Bruce Banner.

the other exceptionally skilled in hand-to-hand combat.

If that's the criteria in these "Sokovia Accords", then everyone who qualifies
as Marksman on the pistol range or achieves a black belt in martial arts would
have to register and be monitored and controlled by the United Nations.

There’s also an implementation problem. How do they know how all of these >> people are doing all of these things? Who told them about Mike Murdock’s >> Mystery radar sense?

Seems like there'd be just a few constitutional issues involved there, at >>> least for the Americans who met the standards of the Accords.

And since, per AGENTS OF SHIELD, the Accords weren't limited to just the >>> Avengers but rather any "enhanced person", why was someone like the Son of >>> Coul, who was technologically enhanced with that nifty bionic hand that could
do all sorts of tricks, not required to register,

Because per Josh Wheden, the son of Cole died in the first avengers movie. >> In the movies he’s dead. In the TV show he’s only secretly alive. Either >> way I can see where they can’t put him on the list.

but Tony Stark was? And how

much tech assistance triggers the reporting requirement? After all, a gun is
tech, so does merely carrying a gun require registration? If not, then where's
the line between a holstered gun and an Iron Man suit that imposes a
submission-to-the-United Nations requirement on a person?

Maybe they registered Tony Starks heart and not the suit. Did they register >> war machine?

If that's the case should anyone with an artificial heart or even a
pacemaker be added to the registry? What about people with one of
those insulin pumps. Now neither an insulin pump or pacemaker make you perform better than a normal human but then neither does Stark's
heart. It's powerful but does nothing until you add on the bits of the
suit.

A lot of people want me to get the pacemaker or pump or both, especially my next-door neighbor who happens to be an endocrinologist.

But I lost 40 pounds during my two months in the hospital, which may take
care of a lot of that for me.

And what qualifies as "enhanced"? Would someone with those kangaroo-like leg
prosthetics be considered "enhanced"? I mean, they *can* run and jump faster
and longer than people with normal human legs, after all.

Yeah, there has to be some sort of limiting scale. If your bionic legs let >> you walk half as fast as I do you’re still enhanced, but does it count? If >> you can walk twice as fast as I do, do you trip something?

And then there's

Thor, who isn't enhanced at all. He's just not human. He's normal for his >>> species.

Actually, Thor is not only top end of his species, but he also has a magic >> belt given him by Odin that doubles his strength. And he’s got Mjolnir.
He’s definitely enhanced.

Those "accords" presented so many legal and due process challenges, which >>> both the show and the movies gloss over (for good reason--- most people don't
care about that stuff), but which the law geek in me would love for them to >>> have addressed.

Yep.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/2025 9:14 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:

What did you watch?

'The Living Daylights'. The interviews with Dalton have him basically
saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist franchise.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

'The Living Daylights'. The interviews with Dalton have him basically
saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist >franchise.

This is pretty much the only movie with Bond in evening clothes start to finish. It's decent entertainment.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/2025 6:39 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

On 2/9/2025 9:14 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:

What did you watch?

'The Living Daylights'.  The interviews with Dalton have him basically saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist franchise.

Good. There are any number of movies that suffer because the lead actor
didn't take the job seriously and decided to phone it in or do a campy performance. Actors should always bring their "A" game.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

On 2/9/2025 6:39 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

'The Living Daylights'. The interviews with Dalton have him basically >>saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist >>franchise.

Good. There are any number of movies that suffer because the lead actor >didn't take the job seriously and decided to phone it in or do a campy >performance. Actors should always bring their "A" game.

It began as a script written for Roger Moore. It's the performance that
makes all the difference.

Dalton is a great actor.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/9/2025 9:06 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

'The Living Daylights'. The interviews with Dalton have him basically
saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist
franchise.

This is pretty much the only movie with Bond in evening clothes start to finish. It's decent entertainment.

He wasn't wearing evening clothes while in the desert.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/10/2025 5:37 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

On 2/9/2025 6:39 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

'The Living Daylights'. The interviews with Dalton have him basically
saying he wants to give an Oscar worthy performance for this populist
franchise.

Good. There are any number of movies that suffer because the lead actor
didn't take the job seriously and decided to phone it in or do a campy
performance. Actors should always bring their "A" game.

It began as a script written for Roger Moore. It's the performance that
makes all the difference.

Dalton is a great actor.

A great actor doesn't look down on the material and say so publicly.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:54:37 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a >>> mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the >>> Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. >>> Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while >>> another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and
Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not
enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One >> is
good with a bow/arrow,

I note your “at least“ above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they’ve decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I forget what they settled on if he’s got magic eyes somehow or is actually seeing three seconds in the future.

I came across these excerpts today from the comics where at least one version of Hawkeye claims to be a normal-powered human who is just a really good
shot.


https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjEwMTYyMzEzNzQyMzE3Mzk1Nzl8NnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3NzYyOTI2MjgifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=8mxsbrbmDt6&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=6&et=2&id=868cf4bb1ed4452389d68308a01355a1&q_aid=XN9Fk0NLSMd&uid=X2RmatfochZ

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 1:54:37 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Feb 9, 2025 at 10:26:35 AM PST, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

Captain America: Civil War (4K disc) 2016 movie set in the MCU. After a >>>> mission goes bad Thaddeus Ross shows up with a proposal to reign in the >>>> Avengers. The last time we saw Ross we was a general, now he's the U.S. >>>> Secretary of State. At this rate, maybe one day he'll even be
President. Anyway, after the ultimatum is delivered one group of
Avengers lead by Iron Man decide to sign on to the new restraints while >>>> another group lead by Captain America decide to go their own way.

As for the Accords, I want to know what justifies requiring Romanov and
Barton
to register with the government. At least in these movies, they're not
enhanced, either biologically or technologically. They're just people. One >>> is
good with a bow/arrow,

I note your “at least“ above, so I’m sure we’ve probably discussed this but
at some point, they’ve decided that Barton is in fact enhanced, as he
obviously has to be because the shots he makes are impossible otherwise. I >> forget what they settled on if he’s got magic eyes somehow or is actually >> seeing three seconds in the future.

I came across these excerpts today from the comics where at least one version of Hawkeye claims to be a normal-powered human who is just a really good shot.

https://www.quora.com/qemail/tc?al_imp=eyJ0eXBlIjogMzMsICJoYXNoIjogIjEwMTYyMzEzNzQyMzE3Mzk1Nzl8NnwxfDE0Nzc3NDM3NzYyOTI2MjgifQ%3D%3D&al_pri=1&aoid=8mxsbrbmDt6&aoty=2&aty=4&cp=6&et=2&id=868cf4bb1ed4452389d68308a01355a1&q_aid=XN9Fk0NLSMd&uid=X2RmatfochZ

Fair enough. I have never seen the actual comics depiction of them saying
he had the superpower, just read about it.

Of course there’s no way in hell he doesn’t have something extra going for him even if he doesn’t know about it. He murdered the Hulk by shooting him
in the eye in the microsecond before Banner could change, from a distance greater then the arrow could travel in the time it would take. I mean,
Banner put a gun in his mouth once and pulled the trigger and the Hulk woke
up. To pull that off, Hawkeye needs telescopic vision and super archery
skills and precognition.


--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)