You claimed to know insiders who disliked the film and yet refused to back it up so as far as I'm concerned we are both full of shit and that is fine with me.
If it is inconceivable to you that someone other than yourself might have connections in a particular industry, as I said, that's up to you.
I still remember reading the article but whatever.
Okay. Who was being interviewed? Surely you can remember that much. You remember reading the interview, which was in a magazine, so just punch the name of who was being interviewed into google and the title of the film and presto: you can provide a link. I know you're not going to do this. Because you've forgotten who was being interviewed, right? (I'm psychic.)
At least that is the consensus of the scientific community.
Clearly you didn't read those links. The second article you posted was written by a graduating student. The first one (really shabby journalism, by the way) rated the risk of a viral pandemic a 3/10. There was two paragraphs in the entire article pertaining to the subject at hand, and nothing whatsoever to "conditions in which a virus might thrive".
Two internet articles cannot reflect "the consensus of the scientific community." It's easy to find articles to support whatever you want on the internet. I can google you up fifty articles supporting racism or genital torture, if you like. Doesn't really seem like you made much effort. If you want to provide a credible source of information, why not cite an article that actually makes a comparison between the potential for pandemics across a period of time, because that is what we are discussing.
For example the word Theory is used differently between biologists and creationists. It really only has one meaning but due to common usage it also has a less precise meaning. Creationist use that to distort issues claiming that oh Evolution is just a theory therefore lessens the impact of the word theory.
That is the most ridiculous thing you've said so far. Your example doesn't have two contexts. They are both using the term in the same context and both using it correctly. The meaning is no less precise. The word is abstract. It cannot be changed, except in your mind if you allow it to be. Creationists are idiots. Don't let them alter your vocabulary. They are arguing a technicality. Really everything is theoretical. Given a sufficient amount of evidence, we conclude that the theory is most likely correct. But we never really know anything for sure. It's corny, but if you don't know you're dreaming, then you don't know if you're not. Some people require more evidence than others. For example despite how obviously bad Contagion is, you believe that it is an accomplished piece of film-making.
There is a difference between how the news depicts a potential threat and how a movie (meant for entertainment) treats a subject involving a potential threat.
What is the difference? Clearly there's (at the very least) some overlap. How do you separate the two?
you are the one saying to give the guy a chance. I did. Wasn't worth it.
You chose to watch a bad film for the purposes of mocking it. I'm not judging you, I've done that (mocked bad films) many a time. But let's not bullshit each other. You weren't giving him a chance. You wanted to make fun of a shitty film.
I do hope to face him the boxing ring one day. If only to cause him permanent brain damage so he can't make any more films.
Why don't you just not watch them?
That's what I don't get about the enormous hatred aimed towards this guy. I've only got Rampage to go on, but it really wasn't that bad. The reason I mentioned Green Lantern was because it was far worse than Rampage. Yet nobody wants to hurt the director. There isn't this weird cloud of hate floating around his celebrity. What about the guy who writes The Bold & the Beautiful or Justin Beaber? Do you want to kill them to? Because they're worse. There's hundreds of thousands of worse people, or equally bad people, in the film and television industry. Do you want to kill them all?
It seems to me that Uwe Boll is just the popular skapegoat. I have seen at least thirty films this year worse than Rampage. Most television shows are worse. And, you enjoyed his films didn't you? It sounded like it. You got pissed and had a laugh. Chill.
It appears some people cannot take a joke. Unless you were referencing our discussion. In that case well played sir well played
I most certainly was not referencing our discussion. I am four thirty-fourths Japanese and proud of it. I don't appreciate racists comments about sushi, sashimi, OR origami. If you're prejudiced against albinos on the other hand (or midgets) that's cool. Those pale little mother fuckers creep me out.