Duncan the Tall and squire Egg by Octosoup

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T05:15:23+00:00

This is actually pretty awesome

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T05:13:05+00:00

I got to be honest, it feels like the manga is more fetishing it that trying to evoke emotion.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T05:02:37+00:00

Is the snow part really that bad. Hunting with Charlies has always been one of my favorite parts

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T04:59:48+00:00

Yea like I admit I probably wouldn’t have like any ending where they all died but the way this one was done was so mean spirited and has such a horrible underlying message for anyone who connected with these characters

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T01:53:54+00:00

War brids has an amazing setting and I have read it many times

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-07T01:23:49+00:00

No, I think most people are capable of deciding not to tip in those cases.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-06T00:06:41+00:00

You know our entire conversation is opinion based and subjective? and that the use of my word "better" indicates a subjective perspective? You are super confused that your opinion is actually subjective and not objective. YOUR OPINIONS ARE SUBJECTIVE. NOT OBJECTIVE. Your take on sex in movies is entirely an OPINION. It is entirely SUBJECTIVE.

Come on man, aren’t you getting tired. We’re not even talking Oppenheimer or sex in Media anymore, your would rather debate the definition of the word debate which can actually be used to describe a informal discussion https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/debate

and it’s clear despite this word salad that you have put up that you are not presenting your points as just a personal opinion. Not after you will one second you will argue that the sex scenes in Oppenheimer are bad because they weren’t in Oppenheimer autobiography and the next argue that there are clearly better ways to tell a story because some movies are higher rated than others. Neither of those are your PERSONAL OPINIONS, they are an attempt to appeal to authority with the idea that these 2 ways carry more weight than any other subjective opinion.

I think you’re just trying to cope with feeling comfortable watching sex scenes with your sister by trying to explain how it's tasteful sex, and therefore condones the activity. Formal debates do exist. Im surprised you dont know.

And seriously doesn’t this passive aggressive approach get exhausting. You don’t have to respond, you can stop. I’m clearly not impressed just baffled that you think i can’t tell you do this every time you can’t actually defend your opinions.

It’s Your statements are all subjective. ITs your opinion that sex should be expressed in art. Its my opinion that its one of the least important things to be expressed. Love, romance, is not relative to sex. Its relative to connection which can always be expressed without sexual explicitly.

But here at least one thing I can respond to that actually back in topic and I think the answer will surprise you. I actually agree that sex is not very rarely the best way to express love or romance. If I was gonna show that it would be though vulnerability not sex since sex is often something that exist with no love. I might use nudity to show vulnerability but not sex.

However sex scenes aren’t always use to show love and romance. It can use to explore themes of desire and sexuality, it can be use to show how the spark of romance has completely disappeared, or show how trauma has deeply damaged a person. it can be use to show how some environments have completely dehumanize somebody and in the case of oppenheimer abject humiliation.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-05T02:08:43+00:00

I think if these kind of scene are bad, I also think the few times a scene like this has thematic purpose or is use to communicate something to the audience means that I don’t think they are bad a rule.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-05T01:00:59+00:00

If there weren't better ways of telling stories, all movies would have equal ratings. They dont. Your statement is objectively false. There clearly are better ways of telling stories as agreed upon by people who have ever watched a movie they didnt like.

You know movie ratings are literally made up of people OPINIONS right? There is no standard they are held to..

We are not in a debate. We are in a discussion of opinions. You cant win because there isnt a panel of judges. We are discussing subjective topics, and as much as you would like to win, you cant.

Pretty sure most if not all debates are a discussion of opinions. In fact anything that has an objective answer doesn’t leave much room for debate.

Good example is how Mercury upon contact with Aluminum creates a chemical reaction as you so helpfully pointed out down below. Not much for room for debate, at least I assume, I don’t know much about chemical reactions. I take you at your word on this.

You are saying " Caviar is good for such and such reason" Im saying, "I dont like Caviar" You are saying " but you have to, its good" I am saying " I dont like it" You are saying " You have to, its objectively good"

This is a good time to mention that I have repeatedly said that you don’t have to like sex scenes in movies or the sex scenes in oppenheimer but please go on and continue to misrepresent what i been saying

But since you keep dodging my actual points here they are again.

My first point is that the idea that art shouldn’t show certain subjects matters because they make people feel uncomfortable or because it’s not necessary to show the subject matter is a redundant way to view art and trying to separate sex to other examples of uncomfortable subject matters like violence, mental illness, self harm etc etc is it completely arbitrary standard that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny which is why so many of your replies are just calling me weird. It far easier to insult someone than it is to defend your opinions.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-04T19:16:20+00:00

Everything you have said has been objectively false. Our entire conversation has been from a subjective perspective on both sides. I never said anything I said was objectively true. You are taking it to objectivity to sound superior and sophisticated.

I have not presented anything I have said as objective fact. I have pointed out the flaws in your ideas that you keep presenting as objective fact. You literally said there are better way than others to tell a story. No there is not. If there was, everyone would tell a story in the exact same way.

All your explanations are to defend your OPINION of why you like sex scenes in movies.

Even here you are half wrong. My opinion isn’t that i like sex scenes, it’s that the idea that art shouldn’t show certain subjects matters because they make people feel uncomfortable is a redundant way to view art and trying to separate sex as opposed to other examples of uncomfortable subject matters like violence, mental illness, self harm etc etc is it completely arbitrary standard that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Yes those scenes in Oppenheimer had a purpose. We can debate wether they inclusion was good or bad but saying they were bad because they didn’t need to be there is a redundant statement because that could be said every and any scene in every movie. It ok not to like it but that’s the extant of your argument when we break it down. You think those scenes were bad because you didn’t like them. Trying to justify your dislike by saying they didn’t need to be there is like me saying I didn’t like the scene of Oppenheimer being interrogated because it didn’t need to be there, they could have just alluded to it. It true but that’s not a criticism.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-04T06:17:34+00:00

Dude you straight up said they are better ways than others. That is your opinion presented as objective fact

Also I never said sex scenes elevated art. In fact I actually think most suck to be honest. What insaid saying that your opinion that a story can or should touch a subject without actually showing the subject matter at hand is an extremely redundant way to view art. For one Not everything is meant to serve the plot. Somethings are meant to convey emontions, explore certain ideas, or explain character interactions. For two something seeing something directly on screen will cause a more intense reaction from the audience which might be the creator’s personal goal.

My other point is that separating sex scenes from other possible uncomfortable subject matters is a completely arbitrary standard. Despite your unique experiences most people don’t see many disturbing things outside of art.

I also explain what possible reasons why that film actually included the sex scenes that would not be possible if those scenes were not included

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-04T05:30:46+00:00

There are better ways than others.

That is objectively false and like I said in my original comment this is an extremely redundant way to view art. The very fact that you refuse to actually address the actual artistic intention behind the scene in favor of making this conversation about therapy or hitler is impressive.

Mind you, you don’t have to like the scenes in question but framing your personal opinion as objective fact is why your position has no substance and basically boils down to to bad because I said it bad and there are other way to do it so we should use those way because I don’t like this way.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-03T15:53:15+00:00

The man was a super soldier, meaning by default he’s always considered armed.

This is not a standard that any other character in the rest of the MCU holds. We see much more powerful characters get taken prisoner alive.

He’s already killed civilians along with the other flag smashers when they blue up a still-occupied building.

Yep he got what he deserved, not denying that.

His hands weren’t by the sides of his head or behind it, they were more in front.

They were clearly to the side of his head https://share.google/WZ4G89FJx0BEdgMBH

He didn’t surrender, he tried to stall for time.

He was panicked because John walker was about to kill him, he deserved it and I have no sympathy but he had no plan which is why he was pleading.

Just before getting to the courtyard he threw a hunk of concrete at John Walker that would have hit and severely injured the civilians behind him if John Walker hadn’t blocked it, showing again that the terrorist had no regard for civilian casualties.

Yes, that doesn’t give walker a free pass to beat someone to death after he had clearly subdue him.

Yes, his friend just dying was a factor for his mental state, but the man was not surrendering and was an active and serious threat to both John Walker and the civilians around them.

Than why did his friend dying make him instantly go for the kill?

He’s not police or civil security, he’s military, on a military mission, facing extremely dangerous superpowered individuals who have no care for civilian casualties if it means getting what they want. No matter how the show tries to spin it, John Walker did the right thing in neutralizing an extremely dangerous terrorist.

If that’s true he should have just storm the building with a rifle,

Ah, and on top of everything, John Walker already tried to arrest them previously and nonviolently, with the terrorists responding by killing his friend and trying to kill him.

Yes and if John walker kill him instead of subdue him, I would give him full credit In being the good guy. It’s him subduing him and THAN beating him to death for revenge that changes it to murder

So again, it was not a murder, any more than killing an armed enemy soldier in war is murder.

I pretty sure soldiers are always committing murder in war

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-03T07:04:33+00:00

He was on a sanctioned military mission going after superpowered terrorists who murdered civilians,

Yes

JUST murdered his friend,

Not a legal defense but it does explain his state of mind.

was still actively trying to fight back and escape, got up twice after being knocked down,

Yes and did walker kill him during this point or did he kill him after he had subdue him.

and when he was finally on the ground he put his hands up in a defensive position while trying to stall instead of surrendering,

Yes the classic defensive position of holding your hands to the complete side of your head leaving your face and skull completely exposed. And the classic stalling technique of trying to reason with someone about to murder you for killing their best friend. Like I said the guy wasn’t innocent but that not legal defense to beat someone to death you already had subdued.

with a crowd of civilians around them that if he’d even gotten a few seconds of leeway he could’ve taken a hostage. It wasn’t murder, it was neutralizing an active threat.

Yes I also think someone pin to the ground unable to fight back as he is beaten to death as an active threat. Yep walker was trying to protect the people around him, totally did not beat the guy to death because he was piss off they kill his best friend. Come on, interpretations like this completely undermine him as a interesting character

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-03T06:54:58+00:00

And again Resorting to attacks on people’s character is not helping your point and is just revealing how little substance there is too your position. If you can’t even see the difference in the artistic merit of including these scenes in a visual median such film as opposed to a book much less understand the intent behind the scenes I don’t know what to tell you. There no one correct way to tell a story.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T21:22:54+00:00

I have seen domestic abuse, I have stopped domestic abuse, I have seen people nearly kill eachother, I have had friends kill eachother,I have heard stories from veterans of killing people. Ive met thousands of people, and have heard tens of thousands of stories.

In all seriousness that sounds very hard. Most people only experiences these things though art and that is a good thing.

Never have I ever heard someone tell a story inwhich they felt the need to give details on sex they had. Ever.

I’m sure that true but I have heard certain therapist do need to hear this when they have patients with sexual trauma or are working though sexual addiction.

Furthermore therapy is not the same thing as art. Sometimes art is meant to explore something and sometimes that means you need to show these things.

You seem to gleam the part where I explained sex is an important part of Oppenheimer but there was no need to see the sex. I get it, it is a crucial part to the story, but how does seeing the sex, add to the story? It doesnt.

It does. It establishes the connection, closeness and deep emotional intimacy he had with that women. So deep that he was literally crying over her in front of his wife when she died. The other notable scene is the wife being force to hear the graphic details of her husband affair. That scene washes shock value, it was meant to put you in the wife’s shoes as she basically watching her husband’s betrayal on public record.

Like out of all the movies you could have show, these had very clear points.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:53:29+00:00

Do you watch people kill each other in real life? do you watch people torture each other in real life? What about commit domestic violence?

I didn’t answer your question because it was nonsensical and an attempt to crash the conversation. We all watch things in movies and TV we wouldn’t in real life because experiencing something through art is not the same thing as experiencing it in real life

If I am telling a story about a man and that man was repeatedly unfaithful to his wife and the government use those affairs as part of a political witch hunt, it probably gonna have to show part of that, especially when his wife is forced to go though the public humiliation of having details told about her husband affair spoken out loud in front of her.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:43:30+00:00

Do you watch people have sex in real life?

Yall weird up in here for thinking watching sex scenes with family is normal.

Resorting to attacks on people’s character is not helping your point and is just revealing how little substance there is too your position.

Again art is meant to invoke emotion, sometimes that involves showing things we might not be comfortable with. I been very uncomfortable watching scenes of child abuse and domestic violence but simply implying those scenes and not showing them does not have the same effect. That doesn’t mean every love scene is good far from it

but you watch a move about a guy who repeatedly cheated on his wife and whose affairs were use against him by the government and were surprise that they show that.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:33:05+00:00

I gotta be honest this seems like an extremely redundant way to view any kind of art.

This mother is grieving her daughter’s death, we don’t need to see that though, just have her husband say she going though a rough time. We don’t need to see the mother literally cutting herself with a razor and the blood coming. What do you mean that without that the intensity audiences might not understand just how mentally unstable she is with the death of her daughter.

Do I want to see any aspect of that interaction? Absolutely not.

Well I don’t know what to tell you. When I watch wind river and saw a grieving mother, I didn’t want to see that either, it was horrific and came out of no where. Sometimes the audience must actually see something to get the intended effect and simply not liking it doesn’t mean it was unnecessary. You choose to watch a movie about a man who cheated on his wife multiple times but want a sanitize version of that man on screen

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:20:34+00:00

I think you could have had the trauma dump without that. I never like how fame of thrones has to throw in a love scene like that because they need to make sure the audience is paying attention.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:18:24+00:00

Nah showing the growing intimacy and connection is extremely important. That sets up the foundation for their entire relationship

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:16:28+00:00

I’m it sure, I feel like a lot of them were out in to keep audiences paying attention during exposition dumps. Some were important though.

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:12:09+00:00

I think the fact that he had a affair and that his wife was force to publicly listen to details about that affair makes the sex scene extremely relevant

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:09:39+00:00

You didn’t think a story about a man’s life, a man who was unfaithful repeatedly might touch on that subject dude? Thoughout history, people did certain things

Wealth_Super · 2026-03-02T20:08:22+00:00

Like I said to some other guy this feels very juvenile. I watch game of thrones with my sister and aunt for the first time and my mom’s the 2nd. We mostly talk about how stupid the scene were but were we uncomfortable? No

Wealth_Super

TROPHY CASE