Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Mr. Toons Condemns MONSTER HOUSE!!

Merrick fears...


...Zemeckis and CGI.

I can’t shake memories of POLAR EXPRESS; those dead-eyed mannequin-zombies bouncing around a train – exalting hot chocolate like tragically hopped-up crack addicts…the fascistic North Pole where Santa snaps his poor reindeer with a laser whip (like the one Skeletor used to subjugate He-Man in the MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE movie)…the overall feeling that the film was self-generated by computers rather than created by people.

I know Harry’s looking forward to this one…but my hunch is it’ll be a little bit goosey…maybe a lot goosey.

Here’s what Mr. Toons had to say…


Me, my two daughters, 12 & 14, and my son, age 8, attended the very first showing of Monster House.

After seeing the trailers for the last few months we were very excited about seeing the movie. We were very disappointed. Here's a few reasons why. There aren't any characters you really care about. You know that none of the kids are going to get hurt. It wasn't very funny. The middle third of the movie really drags. The characters in the movie are just the basic caricatures. Continuity problems (a dog which changes from female to male for no apparent reason.). My 14 year old was bored and my 8 year old was scared, not a good combination. My 12 year old commented on the language in the movie and how it wasn't appropriate for children (such as Dickhead).

Here's a quick synopsis of the movie.

The day before Halloween the parents who live across the street leave town and their son DJ, (Mitchell Musso) at home. A babysitter shows up, Zee, (Maggie Gyllenhaal), semi goth teenage girl, and her boyfriend comes over, Skull,(Jason Lee).

DJ goes outside to play with his friend Chowder, (Sam Lerner). Chowder's basketball goes onto the lawn of the Monster House, out comes the owner Nebbercracker (Steve Buscemi). He takes the ball in after yelling at them. The house makes sounds and moves around a bit. This may sound rather thin and that's probably because so far the movie hadn't made much of an impression on me.

Let me simplify this even more. After thinking he killed Nebbercracker DJ along with Chowder and a girl named Jenny (Spencer Locke) go into the Monster House to put out it's heart so it doesn't take all the kids who are coming that Halloween. Police show up twice, donut jokes and Nick Cannon plays an almost racist version of a cop. He rolls his eyes and runs around scared. One thing many of the scenes from the trailer aren't in the movie, the scene where the police car is taken by the house never happens.

Nebbercracker comes home because he isn't dead and explains why the house is haunted. House gets really upset, chases kids and Nebbercracker but they prevail and destroy the house in one of the least interesting endings to a movie like this I've seen.

Other weird parts of the movie, Jenny calls her Mom and then says she has an hour before she has to go, which turns into numerous hours without her mom showing up. Even though the 2 policemen disappear, houses are destroyed, numerous explosions and general mayhem no one shows up. In fact this movie is very short of any characters other than the ones actively involved with the house.

Finally I would compare the movie to something like Chicken Little, a very thin story that only really works on one level. It just wasn't very funny and some parents will be offended by some of the language.

As my 14 year old put it, "It was just OK".


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 14, 2006, 12:55 p.m. CST

    I say

    by banditmania

    First!!

  • April 14, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Looks like

    by banditmania

    a movie to avoid. And second.

  • April 14, 2006, 1:02 p.m. CST

    HAHA

    by banditmania

    so there.

  • April 14, 2006, 1:07 p.m. CST

    Yet another movie...

    by GaiustheBrave

    I'll have to convince my niece not to force me to see. Off topic, but can anyone believe or care that they're making a Scary Movie 5? Why? ,I ask, Why? How is it so easy to produce a 5th Scary Movie, when Jurassic Park 4 seems less and less likely with each passing day? I wanna see dinos with missile-launchers on their backs!

  • April 14, 2006, 1:09 p.m. CST

    By the way...

    by GaiustheBrave

    doesn't it look like Spock's giving whoever it is (Kirk?) the howdy-stranger?

  • April 14, 2006, 1:20 p.m. CST

    This Movie

    by PantherMatt

    If this "monster House" flick is anywhere near as bad as this review was poorly written, it will take home "worst Movie of the Year" honors at the '06 Razzies. Good God, dude, please get it together and proof read your shit before you submit!

  • April 14, 2006, 1:23 p.m. CST

    So, what...

    by Spaz_Monkey

    ... They made a movie from that show on the Discovery Channel? I know Hollywood is out of ideas, but a motion picture about re-designing someone's house? That's just dumb....... Huh? It's not based on that show? It's just a crappy movie? Oh, never mind then.

  • April 14, 2006, 1:44 p.m. CST

    E.T.

    by CaptDanielRoe

    Set a low bar for profanity in family fare. Albeit one not oft revisited since. But then what family film has net what E.T. did?

  • April 14, 2006, 2:16 p.m. CST

    hrmmmm....

    by HolyCalamity

    You know, I really liked Polar Express (sorry, I love just about any christmas moive..I'm a sucker) and I am looking forward to this one. I am the first to admit that this movie might completely miss the mark, but is it just me, or was this reviewer a fucking whiner!

  • April 14, 2006, 2:25 p.m. CST

    Rob Schrab and Dan Harmon

    by X-Ray Cat

    Nobody has mentioned yet that the main reason Monster House will probably own is that it's the first feature script by Rob Schrab and Dan Harmon, creators of Heat Vision and Jack, Channel101.com, Scud the Disposable Assassin, Robot Bastard, and the Zoolander brainwash sequence. Everything they've done has been completely new and different, plus balls-out hilarious, so I'm sure this will be no different even if it's for kids. The trailer for this was so much fun that when I saw it in front of Zathura, I couldn't make myself enjoy the feature. Because it wasn't Monster House. Monsterhousefuckyeah!

  • April 14, 2006, 2:32 p.m. CST

    PENIS BREATH! PENIS BREATH! PENIS BREATH!

    by BeeDub

    Not appropriate for a kids' movie? How about the MOST POPULAR KIDS' MOVIE EVER??? (And right on, CaptDanielRoe.)

  • April 14, 2006, 2:38 p.m. CST

    THE COPS AREN'T EATEN?!?!!

    by Drath

    Wait, if the cops get scared and/or disappear, then did that scene get cut? It was the only thing that actually was kind of cute in the trailer.

  • April 14, 2006, 2:39 p.m. CST

    Hmmmm

    by Brendon

    I'm a fan of Zemeckis, but that won't extend to great expectations for project he is only producing. The year's CG film is bound to be Cars. Pixar buffs - there's a new SplineCast at iTunes. And I blogged a bit about it here: http://filmick.blogspot.com/2006/04/giant-interview-with-pixars-ralph.html Good to see that Stanton and Docter news, and the audio interview is good stuff.

  • April 14, 2006, 4:01 p.m. CST

    What's Wrong With Kids These Days

    by rbatty024

    This guy's 8-year old was scared, and his 12-year old said the language is inappropriate? Wow, his kids must be a couple of pussies. I don't know if the movie's good or not, but I long for the days of E.T. Goonies when family films weren't whitewashed for the parents.

  • April 14, 2006, 4:16 p.m. CST

    "Wow, his kids must be a couple of pussies."

    by ShawnT

    Freakin dead where I sit! LOL! LOL!

  • April 14, 2006, 4:29 p.m. CST

    Sir, your kids...

    by WolfmanNards

    don't exist. They probably died years ago, but you pretend they exist so you don't feel so lonely when you go to the movie theater to see childrens movies by yourself.

  • April 14, 2006, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Making fun of kids...

    by Mon-El

    Anyone making fun of Mr. Toon's kids are obviously not parents themselves (or they are not good parents). I'm glad to know his kid didn't like the language - it sounds like he's trying to raise his children with some morals. You guys mocking an 8 yr old & a 12 yr old are truly pathetic. Would you dare call an 8 year old a p***y to his face if the father was standing right there? Try it sometime and prepare to get your teeth smashed in.

  • April 14, 2006, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Yes Mon-El, but...

    by X-Ray Cat

    What if the kid was pretending to be a cat at the time?

  • April 14, 2006, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Mon-El is right

    by theBigE

    I've got four, count 'em, 4 kids 13 and under. They react the same way when kids swear in movies. "That wasn't necessary" or "That wasn't appropriate." Give kids some credit - even Spielberg said that he made Goonies and ET before he had kids, and now he wishes he'd toned down the language. The talkbackers complaining here must be the parents that let their 6 year olds run around while I was watching "Blade 2" (that ticked me off). Or maybe they were some of those kids themselves growing up.

  • April 14, 2006, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Me and my friends swore like that when I was a kid...

    by Novaman5000

    And I turned out... well... not THAT bad.

  • April 14, 2006, 5:42 p.m. CST

    And I don't think morality and curse words

    by Novaman5000

    Have really anything to do with one another. You could have polite language and be an evil person, and be a great person with a potty mouth. I don't know what the big deal about swears are... People are just too sensitive about that shit. Whoops!

  • April 14, 2006, 6:31 p.m. CST

    Wrong, Novaman5000

    by Mon-El

    Great people aren't given to profanities/vulgarities. To quote George Washington (a great man by all accounts) "The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it."

  • April 14, 2006, 6:55 p.m. CST

    theBigE is right

    by Mon-El

    The filmmakers who put profanities and vulgarities in their movies tend not to have any kids of their own. As for having seen six year olds running around during a showing of Blade 2... wow! [sarcasm]Talk about quality family time.[/sarcasm] I feel sorry for those kids.

  • April 14, 2006, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Sounds like shit from the review BUT...

    by Laserbrain

    If my man Dan Harmon had anything to do with it I'm fucking there! Laser Fart forever! Everyone go check this dude's stuff on Channel 101.com- he's a goddam comedy genius.

  • April 14, 2006, 7:57 p.m. CST

    Mon-El

    by one9deuce

    You're a fricking a-hole. Shut your effing dipstick mouth. Goshdarn mothertrucker. I dislike people that don't swear, and hate the ones that say people who swear are ignorant or wicked. Do you know what a word is Mon-El? It's a way to express an idea or an emotion. If you smash your thumb with a hammer and yell "Son of a biscuit!", your still feeling and thinking the same emotion that someone who yells "Son of a Bitch!". All your really doing is pretending that you're being virtuous. I swear like a sailor/trucker and believe me, I am not only far from ignorant, but I am a hell of a lot smarter than you. Believe it. Not only am I smarter than you, but I'm more eloquent also. And while the "F" word escapes my mouth on a regular basis in all of it's wonderful iterations, I am no more wicked than you, or your children for that matter. Yeah, that George Washington was full of shit man. I love the hypocrisy of someone denouncing people who swear as "foolish and wicked" when George Washington was a douchbag slave owner. To stay on topic: Monster House sounds like it will be in the public consciousness for it's opening weekend. If that.

  • April 14, 2006, 8:28 p.m. CST

    Funny how having kids suddenly "opens your eyes"

    by BeeDub

    to how "immoral" everyone else is. Of all the irrational, self-righteous idiots I've met in my life, most have been parents, scared to death that "the children will be corrupted."

  • April 14, 2006, 9:18 p.m. CST

    It is funny, BeeDub

    by theBigE

    Suddenly you are responsible for a life other than your own. Suddenly the main focus of your life is no longer on you, but rather on the person you have living and growing under your care. Whoever you were before is gone - now your number one job description is "Parent." Wait until it happens to you! I was amazed how quickly the transformation took place in my own life. ////////// Oh, and one9duece, I doubt you're a hell of a lot smarter than Mon-El. Take a word of advice

  • April 14, 2006, 10:04 p.m. CST

    by ShawnT

    Once we OD on crappy CG movies, maybe we can go back to getting a few more 2-D filcks on the silver screen. BTW////////// Like punctuation has everything to do with intelligence. Moron. Some one forgot to write the word Puss Between BIG and E in their screen name...I'm just sayin'//////////

  • April 15, 2006, 12:51 a.m. CST

    theBigE, you're taking it upon yourself to grade posts?

    by one9deuce

    Yeah I usually proofread my posts, but sometimes a mistake will get through. I'm intelligent, not perfect. You on the other hand are pompous, and I arrived at that conclusion by the entirety of your post and not whether you used "your" or "you're" correctly. And you spelled one9deuce as one9duece in the same section of your post that was criticizing my writing ability. I'm going to make another writing error, I spell theBigE: P-O-M-P-O-U-S. And get over yourself on the whole parent thing. I can guarantee that you will be making plenty of mistakes, and most of them will be because you forgot what being a kid is like. Or more importantly: what kids ARE like. Wake up.

  • April 15, 2006, 1:14 a.m. CST

    one9deuce...

    by Mon-El

    Excellent post... you prove my point. I agree that sometimes in certain situations a swear word is appropriate... just not in a kid's movie. And certainly not to the extreme as you favor. If that's what you really think of George Washington, your teachers did a poor job of teaching you.

  • April 15, 2006, 2:05 a.m. CST

    hold up.....

    by HolyCalamity

    girls...girls....girls... can't we all just get along??!!

  • April 15, 2006, 8:06 a.m. CST

    Good Morning!

    by theBigE

    Well now, this topic has stirred some emotions! I think the main point that Mon-El was trying to make, and seconded by me, was that if you're going to make a film marketed to families and kids, try to keep the language clean. No one believes that kids don't use swear words, but why should it be depicted on screen? To make the movie realistic? Or to fit some screenwriter's vision of what kids will find "cool?" Just because the kids used some bad language in "E.T." doesn't make it ok. As I said before, Spielberg himself acknowledges this. BTW, kids also go to the bathroom a lot, pick their noses and sometimes eat it, and stick their hands down their pants. Do we need to see all of this depicted in every kid movie? To keep it realistic, because "that's how kids are?" I think that's why I disliked "Zathura." The story was ok, but the kids bickered and fought so much the movie became unpleasant. Yes, that's how brothers quite often act, but do we want to watch it during a family sci-fi fantasy? ////// For the record, one9douche or deuce or whatever your screen name is, I only grade posts of those people that brag about their intelligence. Surely someone as enlightened and intelligent as you would recognize the irony of your mistakes. ShawnT, yes there is a link between punctuation and intelligence. Generally, the more intelligent and learned you are, the better punctuation you use in your correspondence. Not that the use of bad punctuation makes you unintelligent, but there is a link.

  • April 15, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Oh

    by brycemonkey

  • April 15, 2006, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Vocabulary by George Washington?

    by brycemonkey

    OK. I'm pretty sure that someone who died over 200 years ago isn't the best person to quote on language use. But I can see your point, some people don't like the coarse language. I fall into the middle camp "Kids movie, no. Titty Bar, yes."

  • April 15, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Words

    by No-Op

    The words we use and how we say them says more about who we are than what we are saying. Vulgarity labels the speaker's class, education, and ethics. Just true. If the evening network newsanchor peppered his report of the war events of the day with fucks, damns, shits, and assholes, few viewers would see is as a good thing. My guess is that those who DID like it are also looking out for a deal on matching hubcaps for their home.

  • April 15, 2006, 4:19 p.m. CST

    your 12 year old daughter is a fucking pussy.

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    ohhh! dickhead! shut up.

  • April 15, 2006, 4:25 p.m. CST

    "bad words" do not exist.

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    look, if i curse at you in german, it wont mean shit to you. it wont offend you because you wont understand it. therefore, the offense of the word is coming from an internal place. therefore, when i say fuck, if you are offended, it is YOU who are making an obscenity.

  • April 15, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Mon-El your argument is one big fallacy

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    see, you are confusing the speaker with the argument. there is a latin name for it, but i forget what it is. point being, just because someone smart said it, doesnt make it viable on its own.

  • April 15, 2006, 4:41 p.m. CST

    not to spam but...

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    i just remembered, that i too was a little pussy when i was a kid...i saw a test screening of the iron giant about a year before it came out; and i complained in the focus group that they cursed too much. i coulda sworn they said god damnnit a few times in that movie in the version i initially saw.

  • April 15, 2006, 5:09 p.m. CST

    s0nicdeathmonkey: take a logic class, please.

    by Mon-El

    You're embarrassing yourself. The reasoning that "if you are offended, it is YOU who are making an obscenity" is inane! Words have meanings regardless of the listener's understanding. A speaker makes the obscenity (in any language, with a certain intent). The listener can then *interpret* that in a multitude of ways (be offended, not care, not understand, etc.) And as far as confusing the speaker with the argument... I'm not confusing anything, perhaps you are. George Washington just happened to state what I tend to agree with in an eloquent manner. The POINT is, curse words, obscenities, profanities, vulgarities do not belong in movies marketed to children.

  • April 15, 2006, 5:28 p.m. CST

    I think you were thinking about...

    by GaiustheBrave

    ad hominem...which isn't so much mixing up argument and arguer, so much as switching gears from a critique of a person's argument to a critique of a person him/her/it-self. Many ppl will tell you this only happens when the person loses the argument. This can also happen when you're in a chat room and the person you're arguing with really is a dumbass. I've argued with and been that person. BTW, Mon-El, do words have meaning in and of themselves, regardless of the listener's understanding? I'm not being argumentative. It's just that I read that, and it seemed that it could be argued that it isn't necessarily the case. Though, I'm probably wrong. I'm so full of crawfish and beer right now, I can't think straight. Happy Easter!

  • April 15, 2006, 6:39 p.m. CST

    no...not ad homenim

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    there are 2 terms, they sound much alike. one is positive and the other is negitive. actually, they are both 'bad', but one is supporting an argument because you like the speaker and the other is assualting the speaker instead of the argument. and, for the record, i am actually taking a logic class this semester in college thank you very much. but words do not have any meaning. if you think we have a concept intrinsically and words just fit this concept then you are agreeing with a foolish philosophy. Voltaire handidly destroyed this manner of thinking in his novel Candide. see, this thinking is surmised in "all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds" and leads one to beleive things like noses were made by god to fit glasses because of the silliness of the idea.

  • April 16, 2006, 2:50 a.m. CST

    a 12 year old commenting on bad language?

    by rebel299

    what a little fucking pussy. i wouldn't be surprised if she's also a tattle-tale and a nerd. i guess kids are just getting softer these days.

  • April 16, 2006, 6:35 a.m. CST

    Fellow Geeks!

    by one9deuce

    What an interesting debate this has become, and it's most definitely relevant to movies, or more accurately "kids" movies. I would like to address one thing quickly about George Washington, Mon-El wrote: "If that's what you really think of George Washington, your teachers did a poor job of teaching you". How or what my teachers taught me about him is irrelevant. He had over 300 slaves on his property when he died. This is a fact and has nothing to do with my education. I don't care to be preached to about my wickedness by a slave owner. I say "fuck", he practiced one of the most despicable elements in human history. Try to get some perspective in your little insular world. Mon-El, you also wrote "... you prove my point. I agree that sometimes in certain situations a swear word is appropriate... just not in a kid's movie". Except I didn't prove your point because your entire argument is based on the flawed idea that there are "kids" movies, and "adult" movies, and that there is some line that bisects all films into either one or the other. Which is of course complete nonsense. Pulp Fiction = Adult Movie. I think we can all agree on that. The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie = Kids Movie. I think everyone can agree on that assessment. Raiders of the Lost Ark? Well doesn't that film just grey everything up? I was 8 when I saw it, and I loved it. I would use a dog leash like a whip to swing across the non-existant chasm underneath my swingset. It is a great kids movie, AND a great adult film. It was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar and deservedly so. Along with 7 other Oscar nominations. It is a masterpiece and an all-time classic with some very serious adult themes. Does Indiana Jones say "Ha, ha, ha, ha....son of a bitch"? Yes he does and it fits the tone of the scene perfectly. Would you keep your child from seeing a film like Raiders of the Lost Ark because the word bitch is used? If so, I feel sorry for them. I don't think anyone here is saying that Nemo should have yelled "Oh, fuck!" when he got scooped up into the dentist's net, but try not to turn into the Mormons, who edit out every single "objectional" thing in a film.

  • April 16, 2006, 6:59 a.m. CST

    theBigE

    by one9deuce

    You wrote: "Just because the kids used some bad language in "E.T." doesn't make it ok. As I said before, Spielberg himself acknowledges this". Steven Spielberg circa late 1990's to present said this, but he is an inferior filmmaker to Steven Spielberg circa 1975 to 1985. He was at the very top of his directorial powers when he made E.T. and the film is perfection. When he tried to modify it for the 20th anniversary all he did is diminish it's brilliance. Government agents wielding walkie talkies instead of guns? Horrible. The Mom saying "hippie" instead of "terrorist"? Also horrible. His instincts were beyond compare in 1982, so when Michael says "Son of a bitch" when he is driving a vehicle on the streets for the first time while trying to get an alien back to his spaceship with government agents hanging on to the plastic tube attached to the van, I feel his words fit that character in that situation perfectly.

  • April 16, 2006, 7:03 a.m. CST

    theBigE again

    by one9deuce

    Even though I have read "one9douche" plenty of times in talkbacks, it always makes me laugh. It isn't very original though.

  • April 16, 2006, 8:01 a.m. CST

    This is one of the most fucked-up TBs ever

    by Drunken Rage

    Anyone who thinks phonemes placed together have meaning outside of themselves is a poopy-face. Words aren't bad, intentions are. Oh, and I was pretty amazed by the parents with the pre-teens at the showing of "Hostel" I attended. That's just stupid.

  • April 16, 2006, 9:54 a.m. CST

    No Kidding, Drunken Rage

    by Anton_Sirius

    I can't believe that a) a debate on obscenity started up over the word 'dickhead', b) that anyone in this day and age still thinks that shielding their children from things is a smart move, and c) that we've been talking about George Washington this long without someone mentioning that he was also a pot smoker. Oh, and Mon-El, you're wrong about the nature of an obscenity too. It is *purely* in the ear of the listener, not the mouth of the speaker. Someone has to get offended for something to be offensive...

  • April 16, 2006, 2:58 p.m. CST

    one9deuce, not to nitpick but...

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    spongebob squarepants is worth WAY MORE than just being a kids flick. that movie is hilarious, remember that the guys behind the mr. show did it. i saw it 3 times in theaters, 1 at a test screening, again when it was finished and once more while...um...inebriated. also, it would have been really funny if nemo yelled 'oh fuck!' but, then thats just me.

  • April 16, 2006, 3:03 p.m. CST

    I don't mind some swearing at all, nor do my stepkids..

    by Doctor_Sin

    But... Too much swearing = cheap laughs = easy laughs = bad writing. The use of "dickhead" is just to be shocking enough to make kids laugh, and startling enough to make adults who want to be cool laugh at how 'outrageous' and 'wacky' it is to have kids swearing. I say 'bah.' The trailer made me interested, but this review makes me want to stay home and watch 'Toy Story' again.

  • April 16, 2006, 3:35 p.m. CST

    s0nicdeathmonkey, you are right about SpongeBob.

    by one9deuce

    I also saw it in the theater, and I thought it was hilarious. But I had to choose something for an example of a kids movie.

  • April 16, 2006, 5:41 p.m. CST

    You know that none of the kids are going to get hurt

    by SIR-SLEDGE450

    Yeah,that always pisses me off when i see a film as well

  • April 16, 2006, 6:42 p.m. CST

    George Washington and slaves

    by Mon-El

    Yeesh, how this devolved into a lesson on Washington, I'm not sure of. But, yes, we all know Washington owned slaves. Somehow you are trying to overlay your modern enlightened sensibilities on someone from the 1700's. You can't do that. I daresay if any of you had been wealthy landowners back then, you would have owned slaves, as well. But I guess you folks never finished reading your history books... while he was serving as the General of the Continental Army, as our first President securing freedom for the entire nation, his thoughts about slavery changed. In his will, he made provisions to free all his slaves, to educate/train their children, and to care for the aged and ill. All his slaves were freed in 1800 and many of them were cared for by his estate for over 30 years.

  • April 16, 2006, 6:45 p.m. CST

    Anton_Sirius

    by Mon-El

    You have got to be kidding, right? You said "that anyone in this day and age still thinks that shielding their children from things is a smart move" You obviously don't have children. But when you do, when they are five or so, let them watch porn, let them play with matches and knives and guns. Try not to shield them from anything. That's a plan for disaster.

  • April 16, 2006, 6:54 p.m. CST

    s0nicdeathmonkey

    by Mon-El

    You are the one putting forth an ad homimen attack. You are trying to discredit the argument by saying what Washington said was invalid because he owned slaves. Holy non-sequitur, Batman!

  • April 16, 2006, 7:32 p.m. CST

    Mon-El, you don't seem to have a grasp on reality.

    by one9deuce

    You are really amusing, and your arguments are easy to destroy, so I will make this fairly brief. Slavery was and is a horrible thing. Plenty of people were against slavery back in the 1700's. Because "all the wealthy land owners" were doing it doesn't make it acceptable. George Washington's many great qualities don't make the fact that he was a slave owner acceptable. The fact that he made provisions in his will to have them freed, AFTER he had died and was finished subjugating them doesn't make the fact that he was a big-time slave owner acceptable. Are you seeing the theme here? And when you say that bringing up George Washington in this discussion is a non-sequitur, please scroll up the talkback and tell me who brought him up first if you will. Or if you're too lazy I'll just mention that it was you. And my favorite thing you have said so far: "You obviously don't have children. But when you do, when they are five or so, let them watch porn, let them play with matches and knives and guns. Try not to shield them from anything". No reply needed there!

  • April 16, 2006, 8:46 p.m. CST

    I said nothing about washington.

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    however, his moral standings are pertinent when dealing with his views on morality.

  • April 16, 2006, 9:49 p.m. CST

    About Polar Express......

    by Doom II

    I remember all the negative reviews about that film upon release, but it is becoming a classic. My son LOVES that film. A couple kids in his class LOVE that film as well. So it seems the "critics" don't like it, but most regular people do (including myself and my wife. Monster House looks like an episode of Jimmy Neutron streched into 75 minutes.

  • April 16, 2006, 10:45 p.m. CST

    Mon-el: Hoisted by your own petard.

    by Some Dude

    If we can't judge Washington for owning slaves due to the centuries that separate us, then the wooden-toothed founding father can't judge us for our copious cursing. How's that petard smell?

  • April 17, 2006, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Smashed Fingers

    by Meremoth

    I've heard it said that profanity is the show weak mind trying to express itself. Anyone who swears all the time, just stop for a week and think of something better to say. The first week is hard, but if you get through it, the pay off of a greater vocabulary is well worth it. However, if your like me you'll propably say "fuck it, a lot of cool people cuss anyway" and then slip back into an obscene amount of cursing that is given to erupt when your around your buddies or get stuck behind some slow person on the roadway. Anyway, I got a kick out of the brothers always fighting in Zathura, reminded me of my brothers when we were little.

  • April 17, 2006, 1 a.m. CST

    Reality / Relativism

    by Mon-El

    One9Deuce... I've got a grip on reality, thank you very much. I'm probably twice your age and done it all -- graduated from college, married w/kids, corporate job, business owner, etc. I'm not a pseudo-intellectual high school or college student like most talkbackers. The problem is that yourself and others like s0nicdeathmonkey are obviously relativists, not absolutists. So we will never see eye to eye on this subject. Anyway, I think you guys have forgotten why I even posted in this forum. If you would venture back to my original posts, you would see I was remarking that the talkbackers mocking an 8 yr old & a 12 yr old are pathetic losers. I'd like to see these smart alecks call an 8 year old a f*****g p***y to his/her face when the kid's father is standing right there. Prepare to find out that words do indeed have meaning.

  • April 17, 2006, 8:27 a.m. CST

    Mon-El: My post absolutely (not relatively) beat yours.

    by Some Dude

    Why else would you ignore it completely? Anyhow, your post defending the honor of Massa Washington was itself an exercise in moral relativism, the practice of which you later claim to despise. Again you have been hoisted by your own petard. I bet this time the fart smells like hypocrisy. With all due respect, you have been served. -------------- Oh, and I have confronted children (or more specifically, their rude behavior) in front of their parents. I still have all my teeth. However, I much prefer to confront parents in front of their children. Kids learn a lot when they see their belligerent parents frozen by fear. Public humiliation is a great lesson in social behavior. Being a parent doesn't make you a bad-ass, usually it only makes you an asshole.

  • April 17, 2006, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Some Dude

    by Mon-El

    You're wrong. My post about Washington wasn't moral relativism... it was putting something into historical context. Slavery was wrong then, it's wrong now, it will always be wrong. Your complete and utter dismissal of all the good and noble things Washington did simply because he was a slave owner is, however, an excercise in the absurd. You should admire the fact that he did change his mind and made amends for it. Have you never been wrong? (I'll answer that for you: Yes, you have). As far as confronting children for misbehavior, that's fine with me. I do it, too. That's completely different than calling a kid names for something that has nothing to do rude behavior.

  • April 17, 2006, 11:16 a.m. CST

    re: BeeDub

    by beamish13

    Very astute observation. Saying that something is being done out of consideration "for the kids" is a very shallow cop-out that intends to mask one's own narrow-mindedness.

  • April 17, 2006, 5:15 p.m. CST

    Mon-El: The straw man argument made flesh.

    by Some Dude

    I didn't say any of that about Washington. All I addressed was his ownership of slaves. Thus you are employing the straw man argument to distract others (and perhaps yourself) from seeing that you are not defending your position very well. Distorting the opponent's argument does not win a debate. Oh, and historical context is one of the many reasons why moral relativism isn't as scary as some people think it is. Adjusting the parameters of what is considered moral behavior to fit into a particular historical context is a wonderful example of moral relativism. Now that the lesson is over, I dare you to post something that does not contradict itself. I think (for as long as I have been keeping tabs in this thread) you are now zero for three. That may be a record. Keep at it.

  • April 17, 2006, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Some Dude

    by Mon-El

    The only thing you have proven is that you are an annoying nutter. You sound like a high school (maybe community college) student that is reading Hamlet and taking a logic class. When you finish that class, maybe you'll see that you are guilty of the very things you are accusing me of. Good luck on your SATs. Try to lighten up... See you in another talkback!

  • April 18, 2006, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Mon-El: When the straw man fails, try the ad hominem.

    by Some Dude

    Wow. This is a text book case of how to not win a debate. You can get back to the issue at hand or you can try to obfuscate. I'm sure you'll choose the latter. "Lighten up" is the refuge of those who have been beaten. 0h, and SAT 1490, ACT 34, ASVAB 99. Good day.

  • April 18, 2006, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Guys, guys, guys, let's get back to the real issue...

    by GaiustheBrave

    the liberal media's war on my birthday. It's only one month away, and still no signs up. I'll be contacting the O'Reilly Factor, and soon. I tried spray-painting the date of my birth in JCPenney's and they had me arrested! Just another example of the liberal media's attacks on our traditions. BTW, Drunken Rage, I agree with you, or I think I do, about the parents' bringing their kids to see Hostel. This one woman brought kids that couldn't have been older than nine. Complain if they see a tit at the SuperBowl, but let them see all the violence they want.

  • April 19, 2006, 12:08 a.m. CST

    for the record, washington owning slaves is pertinent.

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    it does matter. see, we are using him as a moral compass here, correct? if that is so, then his moral views ARE important. he owned slaves, he also pseudo-appologized for it after he died. I have heard the same story, but never seen it in a history book, so i dont know that the whole freeing his slaves bit was true. until i see definite proof of it, i will concider it an urban legend.______________________also, i am in no way a relativist. i actually spent about 45 minutes earlier tonight explaining to a classmate (yes, I am one of those 'pseudo-intellectual college students' someone earlier refered to...which too is an ad hominem argument) why moral relativism is not moral at all.

  • April 19, 2006, 11:51 p.m. CST

    if you read the post...

    by s0nicdeathmonkey

    you would see that he ALLEDGEDLY freed his slaves and cared for them in his will.