NOTHING makes the left look as bad as the right. 

It’s funny, because it was basically a studio race to see which gang movie could get out first: this or The Warriors, and the two movies couldn’t be more different aside from featuring gangs.

“Are they? Because the prequels don’t support this at all”

I think its because the rest of the GOP, conservative pundits and would be supporters no sell (to use a pro wrestling term) any kind of Trump scandal. The way the media works now is something will happen and they have to have people on to talk about it. They bring someone on and go “What about this? Isn’t this bad?”,…

Between JD Vance and Aileen Cannon, there’s batshit insanity happening roughly every two hours.

This. Katy Perry used to be on the Christian pop circuit and did national ads for a skin-care line. I don’t want to be like, one of those nineties kids who swore they stopped listening to Jawbreaker after they signed with someone who wasn’t Dischord Records. And I know that people can change. And I know that arguments…

The armorer isn't solely responsible, the assistant director also has a role to play in the procedure. He also failed, but in this case he testified against the armorer. Because they had legal responsibility, not the actor. That's a fact. Baldwin should never have been charged, it was a joke from the start. 

I’ve been very vocal about the safety concerns on set. I think the first AD got off lightly, and the UPM’s decision to merge the armorer and prop assistant jobs IMO was negligent. Baldwin may be civilly liable as a producer, but as I’ve already made clear, I do not believe that his actions were criminally negligent.

Seriously. “We know you did it, man” would far more likely result in a dismissal without prejudice so that he could be retried.

But he wasn’t a gun handler. He was playing a gun handler, and the incident set off a debate about the use of real, operating guns on film sets.

Yup- a condom breaking is generally considered an accident. It’s not rape by deception because you were trusting in the product to do what it’s supposed to

“Should a guy who gets drunk and hits and kills a child be let go free because other drunks didn’t run over and kill children?”

“You make an interesting point. Should a guy who gets drunk and hits and kills a child be let go free because other drunks didn’t run over and kill children?”

Definitely didn’t feel this one at all. It exists somewhere in the space between Silence of the Lambs, Cure, and Hereditary, but isn’t anywhere near as good as any of those and felt like it kept undermining its own atmosphere (which is the only thing it really had going for it).

I have to believe it only got pushed through was because for some reason the internet wants Baldwin’s head for what was a tragic accident.  If they didn’t have any hard evidence that Baldwin, himself, was intentionally negligent then this whole trial was a waste of tax payers money 

It is a movie set, there are a different set of rules. That has been well established. 

On the set of a movie, it is the armorer’s responsibility to ensure the weapons are safe to use for filming, and that no live ammo is loaded. The actors explicitly trust the armorer with their safety. He “could have” but isn’t expected to. The responsibility to ensure that no live ammo is used falls to the armorer.…

He had no reason to believe the gun wouldn’t fire. It wasn’t supposed to be loaded with live ammunition, period. The responsibility for ensuring there was no live ammo on set and in the device designed as a lethal weapon that was in perfect mechanical condition fell to the AD and the armorer, not Baldwin. SAG-AFTRA…

Yeah I don’t know who the fuck those people were. Nor should I or any other viewer have to do homework for it. I understand bringing them in for quick little Easter eggs or something but to dedicate that much time to people who aren't characters on this show is absurd

Looking forward to his Stephen King adaptation now!