Sneaky, huh? While this isn't a true blue name change (and the article is thus a little dishonest), the tagline which arguably DOES make for a superior title has been emphasized to the point where it effectively becomes the "title" most, or at least newcomers, will associate with the fllm. One of the last genuine…

In fairness I may have misspoken with "NO nonsensical plot turns/character behavior", as it's been a good while since my one and only viewing, but I didn't recall anything flagrantly dumb in that regard, aside from the seemingly unavoidable "obsessed/stubborn main protagonist"/ "Why don't they just LEAVE?" convention.…

Really? The guy attempting to paint me as a generic MPAA drone/corporate schill merely for pointing out that attempts to rationalize around the illegality of downloading copyrighted material one hasn't payed for are entirely stupid is accusing someone else of "missing the point"? Literally anyone of sound mind would…

Ignoring for a moment it's glaringly obvious you and "Dingdoo HuffinDong" are one and the same, you're miiighty silly! hehe~

"Translation" for anyone who may be confused:
Adorable little Jonas here is arguing that piracy of copyrighted material is totally ok on account the WRONG PEOPLE are getting all the money, see!? Not the starving genius artists doomed to forced obscurity via the cruel realities of modern commerce, but the cigar chomping…

I had a feeling this was the (bullshit) direction you would take, and the concept of "reasonable allowances", for lack of a better term, clearly comes into play here. The studios/MPAA would love nothing more than to charge every single individual person that views a given film on a per-viewing basis, make no mistake.…

Also, considering your baseless, predicatable presumptions about my "agenda", you might be in for a bit of shock to learn I do/have stolen a LOT of shit via p2p. STOLEN being the operative word. That's right—totally do it now and again—I just can't stand when fuckwads like you attempt to maneuver around the glaring…

My God, all this silly obfuscation over semantics (steal/copy/file/entertainment experience)!
…Ok, playing along for one last moment and pretending I even need to articulate this …the SUPER FUN/FULFULLING/POIGNANT EXPERIENCE (TRANSLATION: ENTERTAINMENT!!) which is comprised of all those little 1's and 0's is what has…

What was that about ad hominem? Right, so, SHOCKINGLY, instead of mounting an articulate, relevant defense as to precisely how the acquisition of copyrighted material through a channel in which you don't pay for it either directly (digital/physical copy) or indirectly as per a bundle (subscription) somehow ISN'T…

In this case the name-calling is pretty understandable, since the flagrant intellectual dishonesty of your responses practically begs for it. Also, so called "ad hominem" that constitutes reasonable speculation about a person's values/morals based on the things they've said on a particular topic isn't really that at…

"Statist"? Adorable! I love these attempts to skirt and jive around the basic irrefutable concept that something which can only be acquired LEGALLY via a direct transaction or a payed subscription to a service which has in turn acquired it legally from the distributor somehow ISN'T stolen based on dumb irrelevant…

Considering the context of the article, what with how it deals exclusively with the illegal acquisition of copyrighted material as opposed to, say, freeware software, the term "stealing" seems completely accurate and appropriate, but ya know, details details. You doofuss.

Considering that the sum total of seeders is a tiny speck relative to leechers in the grand scheme of torrent users, and that seeding while downloading can be pretty much disabled manually (I think, on some clients at least), and that the number of seeders of most anything (but especially of something popular) at any…

If you mean your "The more you know" closing snippet about Iowa fair enough, but what I said sort of refutes your preceding statement. The data doesn't necessarily indicate "Iowa is downloading surprisingly sophisticated things!"

As addressed in the article the data is based on seeders (the folks sharing a copy of something) rather than leechers (the hordes actually downloading any given thing, many/most of which don't stick around to seed afterward), so this is pretty inconclusive as far as what the masses are downloading the most or who's …

Well it stands to reason fans of that shitty-ass show would be prone to such irrational behavior

Pssh whatever. Always some nerd with their unassailable, easily verifiable facts…

Yeeaaaaah Flooooridaaah on da maaaa-aaaaap! Representin in da hooooo-ooooouse *buuuuuuurp*

This is a sequel I'm really looking forward to. While saddled with an inherently absurd premise like 99% of the genre, the first Sinister at least had the courtesy to not use that as an excuse to indulge in lazy/sloppy writing, nonsensical character behavior, etc, and served up some genuinely chiling scenes. In fact,…

Maybe the answer is in your last sentence? Maybe it's a deliberate bid to reinforce the inherent absurdity? And to that end drawing attention to said absurdity isn't necessarily a mistake, just one viable strategy.