…You have to be lying. Or this game somehow caused you head trauma. These are the only two rational conclusions, as far as I have considered things, for how someone could forget the life-altering horror that is Colonial Marines.

But imagine how cool that would be at the end of a great storyline rather than a good one that's been a bit shaky.

No. But, because of that, yes.

It's nearly the same thing, in a sense, that absolutely sabotaged X-Men: Origins - Wolverine (ignoring the greenlight, multiple previous drafts and pre-production period - but in keeping with the, "Well…we don't have enough stuff ready to go and…the script's good enough, right? Just shoot it!"-mentality…) . …

I agree. I think they could have revised it into a TV movie, not spent so much on the co-stars and the like, cleaned it up a bit regarding scene count…and done fairly well. But I think the main issue regarding the time was the scheduling and the whole notion of, "Either make an X-Files movie now or you might not…

"I remember you doing that, too." Ah, creepy comments.

What was being thought: "There's a writer's strike? Crap. We need to get something into production. The script of a well-known property already has a draft done despite not having a greenlight and the guy who created it is willing to direct? Let's do it!"

Human beings? What's that? Can you give me a dollar figure representative of what its actual value might be?

I never thought I'd see the day where something Rob Zombie did was referred to as "tasteless."

Be fair. They have great personalities!

I don't know. I see Gentle Herpes around here a lot.

I believe I understand what you're getting at but to behave as though morality is something we should impose onto others regarding their interpretation of art rather than allowing them to have their own interpretation of that art is fairly absurd to my view (regarding the mentality it encourages) as well as being…

What something such as the potential interpretation of characters as homosexual or homophobic has to do with it is that, if one immediately precedes the work with something declaring that portrayal/inclusion/whatever as wrong, one unnaturally shapes the interpretation of the material by imposing an external social…

It distorts the immediate interpretation of the material. If I watched it and went, "Wait a second…this seems pretty racist…" then I'm having a personal experience/interpretation of the material. If I watch it and go, "Oh, this is fun…" then I'm having a personal experience/interpretation of the material. Those…

While I understand that, there are plenty of characters in modern cartoons that one could, if they were of a certain perception, perceive as homosexual (and that could then be construed as either bad because, "I hate gays!" or "Look how stereotypical he is!" or whatever else). I don't expect SpongeBob Squarepants to…

Yes, children could be influenced by such things - but that's the case with anything. "Protecting them from it" is a means of limiting them, which not only might prevent them from becoming racist (although it could encourage them - who knows what their "rebellious phase" might turn into…or how much their potential…

Well, that might come down to your personal view of how art or expression within media should be interpreted. For me, something which directly moralizes from outside of material distorts the material. Imagine if someone officially involved in the distribution of something you enjoyed said your favorite thing was…

So when I said I needed disclaimers for things dismissive of the poor or similar and you came back that disclaimers were only necessary for ethnic stereotypes, you didn't see how that was you completely misconstruing what I said so you could pretend to be on a high horse? Similar to what a straw man argument is all…

If they referred to black people with a slur, it would be a depiction which might trouble many, sure (hence, the disclaimer - a "Don't blame me for that!" one). Children might not automatically know that's not okay, no, but children aren't generally going to read the disclaimer anyway (nor fully grasp the video one).…

I didn't indicate that it was censorship. It's possibly more insidious in some regards due to its "acceptable" nature. To impose a view upon something (particularly a view which moralizes or similar) distorts the interpretation of the material. This is often the way bigots work regarding their assertions. And it's…