Not only do I have a substantial interest in Transformers (the feature films, anyway), but also in VeggieTales. So I guess I'm deficient in a lot of ways, then. 
Irrational prejudices you hold
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
- Status
^ Like I said, I only like the TF movies (never got into the cartoons or the actual toys themselves).
Just reminded me of another prejudice that may or may not be rational: Any TV show with a laugh track sucks. If it needs fake laughter to remind us when to laugh, it's not worth watching. (Shows with a studio audience get a free pass, though; at least then, the laughter is real.)
And yet another prejudice that has nothing to do with the previous one: I hate, hate, hate, HATE the concept of a multipurpose sports stadium (at least ones that try to mix baseball and football). I hate them with the fire of a thousand suns. I'm old enough to remember the cookie-cutters, and I never got over that - even though most of them are gone. So I view all multipurpose stadia as evil and a blight on the face of sports.
Just reminded me of another prejudice that may or may not be rational: Any TV show with a laugh track sucks. If it needs fake laughter to remind us when to laugh, it's not worth watching. (Shows with a studio audience get a free pass, though; at least then, the laughter is real.)
And yet another prejudice that has nothing to do with the previous one: I hate, hate, hate, HATE the concept of a multipurpose sports stadium (at least ones that try to mix baseball and football). I hate them with the fire of a thousand suns. I'm old enough to remember the cookie-cutters, and I never got over that - even though most of them are gone. So I view all multipurpose stadia as evil and a blight on the face of sports.
I don't think anybody's intellectual capacity is a constant. If it were, ordinarily semi-intelligent human beings wouldn't do things like smoke tobacco, drink alcohol, eat butter/eggs/bacon/red meat, have multiple sex partners or watch reality TV but obviously we indulge in those things because there are holes in our intellectualization of life choices. Some things we just do because we're animals and they poke pleasure centers. Like looking at Channing Tatum carry a big gun does for my GF 
I love it when stoners try and convince you that they are actually more creative, insightful and on the ball when they are stoned. I know a lot of people who have been smoking for 10-20 years and you can really see deterioration in mental acuity and goal setting/achieving. Seen a few marriages on the rocks because of it too.. Jeff Lebowski is a nice dude and all but no one wants to be married to him.
Let me quickly add that these observations apply to regular smokers of weed. I would not expect someone who still had a joint a few times a year or whatever to experience any downward slumping. I wouldn't discourage a person from trying it either, unless they had already demonstrated an addictive personality, mental health issues or were obviously pretty unhappy and seemed likely to become dependent.
Let me quickly add that these observations apply to regular smokers of weed. I would not expect someone who still had a joint a few times a year or whatever to experience any downward slumping. I wouldn't discourage a person from trying it either, unless they had already demonstrated an addictive personality, mental health issues or were obviously pretty unhappy and seemed likely to become dependent.
Are you saying you don't think drugs EVER enhance creativity, insight, etc; or just that the trade off in circumstances of excessive abuse are unacceptable and ultimately self-defeating?
I don't really believe in it myself... with the exception of alcohol on occasion. You've been over to my site - a few of my stories over there I wrote completely pissed, but I don't really experiment with anything else - for creative or any other reason. Supposedly the results were positive according to reviews. One I can remember for certain was "Novocaine", but it's possible "Wrecked" was one as well.
I have to admit that my limited experience w/ the idea does seem to reinforce George Carlin's claim that it "Does seem to open the doors, broaden the horizons a bit." (talking about his occasional marijuana use in his later years)
Define substantial. I have all of the Gen 1 cartoon boxsets of Transformers, and have many Transformers shirts (including a badass shirt of Optimus Prime playing a pointy guitar in front of giant amps and it says YOU'VE GOT THE TOUCH!), and I can tell you I am certainly not intellectually deficient. If anything, it would be a sign of immaturity, or maybe just the fact I think giant transforming robots are cool in a cheesy fun '80s kind of way.
Do I take it seriously? Hell no. It's silly, and that's why I like it. Does it make me intellectually deficient? Hell no, it just makes me silly too.
But then again, we're talking generalizations here, so I don't really need to defend myself.
The trade off. I have no doubt that they are a creativity burst simply because they give you a new way of looking at the world. However I can think of a few musicians who might have really achieved something in the public eye who were too stoned to get off the bottom level pub circuit, despite their spouses and friends trying to help them take it to the next level. The same with any artistic pursuit where showing up and networking and stuff is actually part of it.
I also kind of think it's limited--once you've been stoned a couple times you aren't going to keep having amazing new perspectives. It's like being drunk really, it's always pretty much the same, you enjoy it and that's nice but it's not new every time.
I know a lot of people would say otherwise for acid but the potential for the negatives outweighing the positives for that especially with repeated usage is waaaaay too high to be worth it.
I would agree about the repeated use but I think the scale would be more on the order of a couple of dozen times rather than 2 or 3.
Hear, hear! A stadium designed for both baseball and football is like a spork. It sucks at both jobs.
Mainly I mean those that bitch and moan about the Bayformers movies because this or that aspect isn't true to the cartoons. If you enjoyed the cartoons as a kid, I view that as poor upbringing on your parents' part, but whatever, and if you continue to enjoy those old eps nostalgically, fine. But enough with the crying about how Bay isn't really interested in the robots themselves, and spends too much time on Shia. (For the record, I mostly enjoyed the first movie, skipped the second, might rent the third if the reviews are good.) Given how asinine the whole franchise's existence is, I don't think anyone's entitled to good movies being made from its mold.
Define substantial. I have all of the Gen 1 cartoon boxsets of Transformers, and have many Transformers shirts (including a badass shirt of Optimus Prime playing a pointy guitar in front of giant amps and it says YOU'VE GOT THE TOUCH!), and I can tell you I am certainly not intellectually deficient. If anything, it would be a sign of immaturity, or maybe just the fact I think giant transforming robots are cool in a cheesy fun '80s kind of way.
Do I take it seriously? Hell no. It's silly, and that's why I like it. Does it make me intellectually deficient? Hell no, it just makes me silly too.
But then again, we're talking generalizations here, so I don't really need to defend myself.
Mainly I mean those that bitch and moan about the Bayformers movies because this or that aspect isn't true to the cartoons.
Define substantial. I have all of the Gen 1 cartoon boxsets of Transformers, and have many Transformers shirts (including a badass shirt of Optimus Prime playing a pointy guitar in front of giant amps and it says YOU'VE GOT THE TOUCH!), and I can tell you I am certainly not intellectually deficient. If anything, it would be a sign of immaturity, or maybe just the fact I think giant transforming robots are cool in a cheesy fun '80s kind of way.
Do I take it seriously? Hell no. It's silly, and that's why I like it. Does it make me intellectually deficient? Hell no, it just makes me silly too.
But then again, we're talking generalizations here, so I don't really need to defend myself.
How is it any different than people bitching and moaning about ST:XI not being true to canon?
I'm not too nuts about that either, but there is still a huge difference, in that Trek is Trek - a tender steak, raised on a free-range farm and cooked to perfection (well, cooked pretty darn well at least), while Transformers is the comparative equivalent of a light layer of Cheez Whizz sprayed on beef broth-soaked cardboard.
Mainly I mean those that bitch and moan about the Bayformers movies because this or that aspect isn't true to the cartoons. If you enjoyed the cartoons as a kid, I view that as poor upbringing on your parents' part, but whatever, and if you continue to enjoy those old eps nostalgically, fine. But enough with the crying about how Bay isn't really interested in the robots themselves, and spends too much time on Shia. (For the record, I mostly enjoyed the first movie, skipped the second, might rent the third if the reviews are good.) Given how asinine the whole franchise's existence is, I don't think anyone's entitled to good movies being made from its mold.
Define substantial. I have all of the Gen 1 cartoon boxsets of Transformers, and have many Transformers shirts (including a badass shirt of Optimus Prime playing a pointy guitar in front of giant amps and it says YOU'VE GOT THE TOUCH!), and I can tell you I am certainly not intellectually deficient. If anything, it would be a sign of immaturity, or maybe just the fact I think giant transforming robots are cool in a cheesy fun '80s kind of way.
Do I take it seriously? Hell no. It's silly, and that's why I like it. Does it make me intellectually deficient? Hell no, it just makes me silly too.
But then again, we're talking generalizations here, so I don't really need to defend myself.
Bad upbringing for watching a cartoon? I sincerely hope that was a joke, so I'm just going to ignore that one.
I don't even remember watching it as a kid, so it doesn't have to be nostalgia for people to enjoy something just because you cannot comprehend the appeal. I've never been one for nostalgia. I just happen to love the corny charm of the 80s. I can understand if you don't share that view, but don't judge someone for enjoying a harmless formulaic kids cartoon. On a side note, it doesn't take a fan of the original cartoon to find fault in the new movies. They did focus too much on the human factor. Much like you, I quite enjoyed the first movie despite its problems, but the second one wasn't very good, but I'm still interested in the 3rd.
I'm not too nuts about that either, but there is still a huge difference, in that Trek is Trek - a tender steak, raised on a free-range farm and cooked to perfection (well, cooked pretty darn well at least), while Transformers is the comparative equivalent of a light layer of Cheez Whizz sprayed on beef broth-soaked cardboard.
Ah so because it's crap people who take it seriously enough to collect and have opinions about it lack intellect?
Sounds like snobbery. Not the part about you thinking it's crap, the part about the people who don't.
Edit to add: oh yeah irrational prejudices. Kind of lost track of that. Carry on.
The best and brightest people I know watched few if any cartoons growing up. I believe in restricting kids' TV consumption to the best/most humane/most educational programming, with a heavy bias against violence/war-centric shows. High standards of excellence, what can I say.
I love the goofy '80s charm, but formulaic cartoons run an unacceptably high risk of helping produce formulaic kids. It does seem to take a fan of the cartoon to scream and moan about the quality of the Bayformers flicks rather then just shrugging them off. And I enjoyed the first one largely because it put the robots in background/supporting roles. I can get invested in the tale of a geeky teen trying to score a gal; I don't give two shits about big-ass robots who seem to have no inner lives or personalities whatsoever.
- Status
Similar threads
