I AM PEX

MI7 · #1 July 18, 2008, 5:31 PM

Paradise Towers is shit.

Danny Stewart · #2 July 18, 2008, 5:38 PM

Danny Stewart · #3 July 18, 2008, 5:40 PM

http://tinyurl.com/6bl9u5

MI7 · #4 July 18, 2008, 7:01 PM

BritCanuck · #5 July 18, 2008, 7:07 PM

Originally Posted by MI7

"Worst Cliffhanger Ever" contender because of the face.

But also bear in mind that this was a Season 24 episode.
About disgruntled caretakers.
And canibalistic residents.
And kiler robots.
And girl gangs with dyed hair. (Cute, though.)
And Pex, of course. (Though his turnaround at the end is one of the few highlights.)

Never take a Season 24 episode seriously. It takes all the fun out of MST3K-ing it later.

Danny Stewart · #6 July 18, 2008, 7:12 PM

Originally Posted by BritCanuck

Never take a Season 24 episode seriously. It takes all the fun out of MST3K-ing it later.

What do you think Tom and I were just doing that prompted the making of this thread?

James P. · #7 July 19, 2008, 8:15 PM

I defend Paradise Towers. I liked it. The thing was done well, I thought. The Rezzies were my favorite part. Especially the part where Tilda and Tabby were taken down the garbage disposal chute by the cleaner robot's claw.

It may not be a fan favorite but it's one of my favorites.

Mister_Wilbur · #8 July 19, 2008, 9:43 PM

I couldn't watch all the way through... It's just way too 80s... Don't get me started on the eighties.

AAAAAAAAGGGGG!!! NEON PANTSUIT FROM HELL.

James P. · #9 July 19, 2008, 10:10 PM

What do you mean, "Too 80's"?

Josef Kenny · #10 July 20, 2008, 3:54 AM

Originally Posted by Keff McCulloch

What do you mean, "Too 80's"?

The problem with the 80s is that there were 2 80s, the early-to-mid 80s which tended to be quite interesting and inventive and then the part from 1987 onwards that tended to be rather shit really.

Danny Stewart · #11 July 20, 2008, 1:17 PM

Originally Posted by Rat Souffle

and then the part from 1987 onwards that tended to be rather shit really.

1987 is when Keff McCulloch started working on Doctor Who. Coincidence? I think not.

Mister_Wilbur · #12 July 22, 2008, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by James P.

What do you mean, "Too 80's"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

I hate to use a Rickroll... But it gets my point across. It's the metric with which to measure something as "too 80s."

Oddly enough, "Never Gonna Give You Up" came out in 1987.

Josef Kenny · #13 July 22, 2008, 1:03 PM

Originally Posted by Mister_Wilbur

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

I hate to use a Rickroll... But it gets my point across. It's the metric with which to measure something as "too 80s."

Oddly enough, "Never Gonna Give You Up" came out in 1987.

Aye. I knew that.

James P. · #14 July 22, 2008, 6:55 PM

Originally Posted by Mister_Wilbur

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

I hate to use a Rickroll... But it gets my point across. It's the metric with which to measure something as "too 80s."

Oddly enough, "Never Gonna Give You Up" came out in 1987.

Excuse me while I clean the blood out of my eyes and ears. Horrible music and bad coreography.

Josef Kenny · #15 July 23, 2008, 3:37 AM

James is probably swaying to public opinion. How could anyone say that was bad choreography? It looked really well planned to me, and even if you didn't like the style of it, some of the stuff was particularly impressive to me at least. As for the song, it does its job perfectly - it's a pop song, designed to be catchy and marketable. That is where it excels.

James P. · #16 July 23, 2008, 10:32 AM

No, I honestly felt that it was that bad.

Josef Kenny · #17 July 23, 2008, 12:04 PM

Then you're boring.

IZ THAT INSULT!?

Superkid11 · #18 July 23, 2008, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by Rat Souffle

IZ THAT INSULT!?

Maybe. Might not be quite severe enough.

We've yet to work out the limits of the insult definition yet. Doesn't seem you're too keen on it.

Josef Kenny · #19 July 23, 2008, 12:29 PM

I don't want my freedoms and liberties restricted simply because James P. is an utter--

Superkid11 · #20 July 23, 2008, 1:17 PM

Oh come on now. We need to make some compromises in order to keep this place from dying. James' inherent annoyingness isn't a nice feeling but what exactly are you hoping to accomplish? Showing him his behavior is annoying? It's obviously not working. If you want to rant about him there's a perfectly good place to do it. (I feel the new rules should be void in the private forum.)

Frankly, I think he's annoying too. But it doesn't bother me to the point where I have to spat at him. And he hasn't been doing anything wrong.

We need to get some kind of order established around here. Because you know what? The aggressive air around here lately is why this place has become so inactive. People become too disgusted or what have you to post. It's not a good look. What good are total freedoms and liberties on a forum that only gets one or two posts a day?

Besides, we're going for a universal definition of "insult". James may still be insulted, but if it does not match the definition then you can say it.