It's not about PDA; that's why I said you go to the back of the theater where it's dark and nobody can see you. Plus, everyone else does it, so it's not like people will be gawking at you. Just don't make too much noise.jinpei05 wrote:I can do this in the comfort and privacy of my/her place without having to pay for movie tickets, so unless you've got an exhibitionist fetish or just don't care who gawks at you, I'd rather go to a movie theater to see a movie.kenzo wrote:You don't watch the movie when you go on dates, silly. You cuddle, make out, and feel up your lady-friend the entire time in the back of the theater. I feel like this goes without saying.jinpei05 wrote:Obviously, so why don't you give me the scoop???kenzo wrote:You're obviously doing it wrong.
LiQuid wrote:Jin: We have Marcus Theaters here. The pricing isn't the reason I don't go to the flicks more often, I don't mind paying $10 to see a film. I just only find it worthwhile when I'm with a large group of friends and some smuggled alcohol, or a movie that I really want to see (or, yes, Kenzo was right, for a date I really don't want to see). Otherwise I do 95% of my movie watching on a whim, or as a planned date night with my digital bff.
kenzo wrote:It's not about PDA; that's why I said you go to the back of the theater where it's dark and nobody can see you. Plus, everyone else does it, so it's not like people will be gawking at you. Just don't make too much noise.
Also, you can't always stay at home (unless you want to get dumped). You have to leave the house once and a while, which will invariably always cost money. So if you're gonna be spending money on a lady, you might as well get your moneys worth and make it something that maximizes the amount of 'face time' you get with her. Again, I feel like this should normally all go without being said.
jinpei05 wrote:Of course going out is integral to a relationship. However, it's not always a necessity to spend money when doing so. I can always take her to the lakefront in Evanston, which is free, beautiful, and has many secluded spots off the bike trails for making out.
You would do wise to learn how to take advantage of your surroundings, young one.
kenzo wrote:jinpei05 wrote:Of course going out is integral to a relationship. However, it's not always a necessity to spend money when doing so. I can always take her to the lakefront in Evanston, which is free, beautiful, and has many secluded spots off the bike trails for making out.
You would do wise to learn how to take advantage of your surroundings, young one.
Everything costs money. Or are you gonna try to convince me that your drive to the lake-front was fueled with free gasoline? And that you guys ate honey and manna that rained down from heaven? Obviously some options are cheaper than others, but you've gotta have paper to do almost anything.
You're clearly not following my line of thinking, if the endpoint is 'fuck everything'. My line of reasoning is: if you HAVE to go outside at some point (and not everyone is lucky enough like you apparently, to have a grrrfriend that is content to sit on the couch all day long) and you have to spend money (not everyone is lucky enough like you apparently, to have a grrrfriend that is content to do free shit all the time), then you might as well spend money on something that's fun for you as well like making out at the movies, as opposed to say, being bored out of your skull at a play or opera.jinpei05 wrote:If we were to follow your line of thinking, I could argue what's the point of even existing? Everything costs money!
kenzo wrote:You're clearly not following my line of thinking, if the endpoint is 'fuck everything'. My line of reasoning is: if you HAVE to go outside at some point (and not everyone is lucky enough like you apparently, to have a grrrfriend that is content to sit on the couch all day long) and you have to spend money (not everyone is lucky enough like you apparently, to have a grrrfriend that is content to do free shit all the time), then you might as well spend money on something that's fun for you as well like making out at the movies, as opposed to say, being bored out of your skull at a play or opera.
Creep wrote:I saw Piranha 3D last night with a group of friends. I would give it an A. Excellent, dumb, fun. If you're gonna watch it in theaters, go with people. Boobs, blood, violence, directed by a guy who knows what he's dealing with and makes it work. I'm probably going to see it again over the weekend with some other people who I know would like it. If you're on the fence, want to watch something fun, need a laugh, like gore, go out and see it in theaters in 3D. It's seriously a good time.
jinpei05 wrote:Cool, that's what I figured. I am slightly more inclined to see it now. Thanks for your thoughts.
flufflogic wrote:Well, I watched Clash of the Titans last night.
It's a solid 2/5, but certainly not the worst film ever. I'm still saying House of the Dead for that.
Creep wrote:jinpei05 wrote:Cool, that's what I figured. I am slightly more inclined to see it now. Thanks for your thoughts.
My pleasure.
jinpei05 wrote:Be honest: the sight of severed breasts and a severed penis floating in the water raised it from an A- to an A, right?![]()
![]()
Bobloblaw wrote:The intent to be funny is clear from the beginning of Teeth.
jinpei05 wrote:flufflogic wrote:Well, I watched Clash of the Titans last night.
It's a solid 2/5, but certainly not the worst film ever. I'm still saying House of the Dead for that.
What exactly about that movie made it suck so much? I'm talking about Clash of the Titans.
RubedoHawk wrote:Cabin Fever (2002)
Not ever good from a campy horror perspective, just bad.
jinpei05 wrote:RubedoHawk wrote:Cabin Fever (2002)
Not ever good from a campy horror perspective, just bad.
ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!?![]()
I agree with you, it's horrible from a strictly horror movie viewpoint, but you found nothing redeeming about it at all??? Not even Dennis? I lost my shit when he started wigging out!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
That film wasn't as horrible as people made it out to be. It had an interesting setting (when is steampunk ever NOT interesting?) and had good action. No worse than say, Transformers, which people are willing to bend over backwards in order to apologize for it.jinpei05 wrote:So League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was on yesterday. That's a special kind of fail. No wonder Alan Moore won't put his name on shit anymore...
jinpei05 wrote:The CGI alone was enough to make my yell at my TV.
kenzo wrote:jinpei05 wrote:The CGI alone was enough to make my yell at my TV.
Maybe the problem was that you were watching it on the small-screen where you could carefully analyze all the flaws and details. The film looked perfectly good to me in theaters.
MacBooey87 wrote:Indiana Jones and The Crystal Skull was fucking horrible.
Bobloblaw wrote:MacBooey87 wrote:Indiana Jones and The Crystal Skull was fucking horrible.
Horrible? It certainly wasn't on the same level as Raiders and the Last Crusade. Calling it horrible is a bit of a stretch.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests