Dubstepforum.com

most blockbuster movies are hopeless as works of art ... "art" movies can be pretentious rubbish, but not all of them ...

but film is a very new medium, < 120 years, when writing, painting, music, etc have been around for 1000s of years (and still photography, not much older, is also on somewhat shaky ground as a art form) ... it'll be great when ppl have really learnt how to use the medium ...

wub wrote:

Terpit wrote:

dubfordessert wrote:i don't get a lot of art that is produced that is just about making something that looks totally real omg! out of like coffee stains or cigarette butts or pennies or whatever. i just think it's super gimmicky, despite not being able to produce realistic images out of any medium whatsoever (not even my camera)

i kind of agree but i do find certain pieces to be really powerful. cant name any tho

I honestly cannot remember saying "naked children" and am surprised/slightly confused to see it in your signature

http://www.dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 2&start=60

LOL. burn

Terpit wrote:

wub wrote:

Terpit wrote:

dubfordessert wrote:i don't get a lot of art that is produced that is just about making something that looks totally real omg! out of like coffee stains or cigarette butts or pennies or whatever. i just think it's super gimmicky, despite not being able to produce realistic images out of any medium whatsoever (not even my camera)

i kind of agree but i do find certain pieces to be really powerful. cant name any tho

I honestly cannot remember saying "naked children" and am surprised/slightly confused to see it in your signature

http://www.dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 2&start=60

Fair play

tbf i was skeptical myself.... looked like it was taken WELL out of context.

Does make me wonder why a comment made 18months ago suddenly appeared in a signature...especially considering it says "naked children"and there is a seperate discussion on Lolitas taking place...

Nevalo wrote:looked like it was taken WELL out of context.

wub wrote:Does make me wonder why a comment made 18months ago suddenly appeared in a signature...especially considering it says "naked children"and there is a seperate discussion on Lolitas taking place...

That thread popped up and i tried reading it from the beginning, didnt happen tho, i was distracted by your sexy naked child post

Terpit wrote:i was distracted by your sexy naked child

Revenge sig wub?

double post.

dididub wrote:

Terpit wrote:i was distracted by your sexy naked child

Revenge sig wub?

Revenge for what? I stand by my previous posts, even if I can't remember writing them

That quote by terpit is almost too good to go un-sigged, though

Reese Liar wrote:That quote by terpit is almost too good to go un-sigged, though

Dont try and start a sig-off

I seriously, seriously can't be the only one who thinks Dr Who is terrible, and not even enjoyable in a "so bad it's good way", just terrible? Surely? Surely i'm normal?

idontreallygiveashit wrote:I seriously, seriously can't be the only one who thinks Dr Who is terrible, and not even enjoyable in a "so bad it's good way", just terrible? Surely? Surely i'm normal?

No iam the same its pretty awful but i think its mainly for middle age men who watched it as kids

idontreallygiveashit wrote:I seriously, seriously can't be the only one who thinks Dr Who is terrible, and not even enjoyable in a "so bad it's good way", just terrible? Surely? Surely i'm normal?

I also cant stand it. Its has this cheesey mid 90's afterschool tv show vibe to it.

idontreallygiveashit wrote:I seriously, seriously can't be the only one who thinks Dr Who is terrible, and not even enjoyable in a "so bad it's good way", just terrible? Surely? Surely i'm normal?

Yep, I caught a bit of an episode before, just seems like a parody of itself, not sure how people can take it seriously.

If bicycles are going to be considered vehicles then there needs to be a hell of a lot more laws about where and how they ride them in the street

Thank god, thought i was the only one, everyone i know watches it, from ages 7 - 70.

ehbrums1 wrote:If bicycles are going to be considered vehicles then there needs to be a hell of a lot more laws about where and how they ride them in the street

there are laws here, peole break em a lot tho.

pisses me off when cyclists go on about cars (which are admittedly way more dangerous as vehicles) not following the highway code and then just run red lights at passenger crossings whenever they feel like it and randomly ride onto the pavement if it suits them.

not all cyclists do this but ffs don't be a dick. bet half those guys get super mad if people stand on the left while they're tryna run their foldable twatmobile down to the tube platform