Taneleer Tivan

Good luck!

I thought that 'Johnson's trilogy' was cancelled (or put "on hold indefinitely")? Isn't allegedly Feige already being stretched thin regarding the Spider-Man divorce? Idk how to feel about this.

Me too.

then*

It's not giving me the ability to vote. Did I vote, not comment, and forget? 1984's Secret Wars would be an interesting concept to adapt. Considering how much and how often they change things I could see it working out with the right writers and director(s). I think the Russo brothers have left the door open to direct another big event for the MCU.

IIRC they were asking for $1,000,000 for the longest time.

Regarding who/what?

You guys are golden.

Whoa, what?

I don't know if I'm "excited" as much as purely "interested". I'm interested in seeing if they can rebound from TLJ. I'm interested to see if they can somehow honor a finale of a franchise this large, in the same way that Endgame (great), or Game of Thrones (bad)..... I really hope that it entertains me the same way 3-7 did. TLJ is just a very bad movie. An even worse Star Wars movie.

This isn't true.....

It does matter, though.

What a turn-off.

Johnson isn't directing this one.

Yes. I don't have any optimism about it.

Love the show.

Is that subtitle for real?

If you are wrong, then that would make the other person..... Right, right? If the other person is right, why do you have a personal vendetta against someone who "takes sides" as you put it, with that person? I'm not taking a side, but that other person WAS right. I tend to side with logic and reason, if you wanna put it that way.

So much for admitting when you're wrong.....

Since you didn't heed my advice about thinking about my post..... The vast majority of us agree that what you did or were doing is unethical. That user seems to dislike your topic based on, from what I can tell, constantly calling them "SPAM" and "bloviating". I don't really disagree with them there. This thread is a good example. I don't think it matters WHO starts WHAT thread. If you only started informational threads I don't see how they could barge in obtrusively. Are you gonna base my posts on my join date, or the fact that I've been in the business for almost 30 years? Since being an internet "newb" seems to be your threshold of accepting advice.....

You're not being obsequious then. You're antagonizing someone when you're asking an open forum advice (or claiming that you accept advice) and selectively ignoring based on your emotions rather than logic. Are you not? You want to fit in, but you want to call out a single person as to separate them from the pack? Do you not see the hypocrisy? You made that topic because you thought you were right. You even claimed that he/she is wrong. It looks like you were wrong, correct? You ACT like you're playing nice until it gets to the nitty gritty. Then you reveal your true nature and it's disturbing IMO. I'll go back to my shell and let you think about this.

You wouldn't post certain topics if user didn't expose your ulterior motives tho. Isn't that correct? You always say he/she is wrong but then you post a topic that proves you're wrong. Doesn't make sense to me. Didn't you also say "thanks for the advice even if I didn't ask for it"? And you admitted that you get angry at people. You're never consistent or transparent. Always backtracking and trying to fit in instead of being genuine.

Constantly arguing with someone and making topics to antagonize them doesn't seem obsequious to me.