Gay romantic time? You make the 1950's and 1960's sound bad.
America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
![](https://dve0j0ctiui3r.cloudfront.net/3109/AD_300_250.jpg)
Meet Loads of Foreign Women in Person! Join Our Happier Abroad ROMANCE TOURS to Many Overseas Countries!
Meet Foreign Women Now! Post your FREE profile on Happier Abroad Personals and start receiving messages from gorgeous Foreign Women today!
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
FYI, in the past "gay" meant happy good time, it was something positive, not controversial like it is today. As usual the controllers hijack a good word and turn it bad. Their job is to invert things in accord with the Satanic law that everything is supposed to get worse over time except the technology used to control us of course. Another word that used to mean something positive was "square". That word used to be a compliment. Nowadays it means that you are boring if you are square.
Check out my FUN video clips in Russia and SE Asia and Female Encounters of the Foreign Kind video series and Full Russia Trip Videos!
Join my Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne
Join my Dating Site to meet thousands of legit foreign girls at low cost!
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne
- WilliamSmith
- Veteran Poster
- Posts: 2158
- Joined: November 10th, 2021, 5:52 pm
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
@MrMan
Don't forget "Kiss of Death" (1995), he was fairly beefed up for that one too (not much, but compared to how he looked before):
https://www.bitchute.com/video/S6YaPQDukpVI/
LOL, if I guessed right about what you were referring to by "cut scenes," I completely agree: All the up-close camera work and fast-flashing cut scenes with chopped up bits of footage instead of choreographing actual action scenes just got more and more lame as movies went down the drain. Even watching obviously unconvincing action scenes with Steven Seagal having stuntmen patiently waiting for him to move in and pretend to dominate fights with Aikido were way more fun than that "in your face" flashy affected film-editing BS that started getting worse in the mid-late 1990s and kept getting worse 2000+ when I stopped wasting my time watching the crappy new generations of action movies. Not even worth the time!MrMan wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 8:03 pmAction movies continued to get worse with 'cut scenes.' Those are so irritating to watch. I first noticed them in a 'Taken' movie with Liam Neeson. Maybe it's cheaper to do it that way, or maybe they just couldn't get Neeson or a stunt double who looked like him to do a decent fight scene, or maybe they actually thought those lame scenes looked good.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
If you're serious about "taking the red pill," read thoroughly researched work by an unbiased "American intellectual soldier of our age" to learn what controlled media doesn't want you to see
: https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
He doesn't look that big in this one.WilliamSmith wrote: ↑August 27th, 2023, 1:56 am@MrMan
Don't forget "Kiss of Death" (1995), he was fairly beefed up for that one too (not much, but compared to how he looked before):
https://www.bitchute.com/video/S6YaPQDukpVI/
LOL, if I guessed right about what you were referring to by "cut scenes," I completely agree: All the up-close camera work and fast-flashing cut scenes with chopped up bits of footage instead of choreographing actual action scenes just got more and more lame as movies went down the drain. Even watching obviously unconvincing action scenes with Steven Seagal having stuntmen patiently waiting for him to move in and pretend to dominate fights with Aikido were way more fun than that "in your face" flashy affected film-editing BS that started getting worse in the mid-late 1990s and kept getting worse 2000+ when I stopped wasting my time watching the crappy new generations of action movies. Not even worth the time!MrMan wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 8:03 pmAction movies continued to get worse with 'cut scenes.' Those are so irritating to watch. I first noticed them in a 'Taken' movie with Liam Neeson. Maybe it's cheaper to do it that way, or maybe they just couldn't get Neeson or a stunt double who looked like him to do a decent fight scene, or maybe they actually thought those lame scenes looked good.![]()
![]()
- WilliamSmith
- Veteran Poster
- Posts: 2158
- Joined: November 10th, 2021, 5:52 pm
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
*shrugs*MrMan wrote: ↑August 28th, 2023, 5:59 pmHe doesn't look that big in this one.WilliamSmith wrote: ↑August 27th, 2023, 1:56 am@MrMan
Don't forget "Kiss of Death" (1995), he was fairly beefed up for that one too (not much, but compared to how he looked before):
https://www.bitchute.com/video/S6YaPQDukpVI/
LOL, if I guessed right about what you were referring to by "cut scenes," I completely agree: All the up-close camera work and fast-flashing cut scenes with chopped up bits of footage instead of choreographing actual action scenes just got more and more lame as movies went down the drain. Even watching obviously unconvincing action scenes with Steven Seagal having stuntmen patiently waiting for him to move in and pretend to dominate fights with Aikido were way more fun than that "in your face" flashy affected film-editing BS that started getting worse in the mid-late 1990s and kept getting worse 2000+ when I stopped wasting my time watching the crappy new generations of action movies. Not even worth the time!MrMan wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 8:03 pmAction movies continued to get worse with 'cut scenes.' Those are so irritating to watch. I first noticed them in a 'Taken' movie with Liam Neeson. Maybe it's cheaper to do it that way, or maybe they just couldn't get Neeson or a stunt double who looked like him to do a decent fight scene, or maybe they actually thought those lame scenes looked good.![]()
![]()
He wasn't that big in Con Air either, was he?
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
If you're serious about "taking the red pill," read thoroughly researched work by an unbiased "American intellectual soldier of our age" to learn what controlled media doesn't want you to see
: https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
I remembered him being more buff, but I wasn't paying that much attention. He looks pretty buff in this scene where his muscles are pumped up. https://youtu.be/De_YpBxvchI?t=307WilliamSmith wrote: ↑August 28th, 2023, 6:05 pm*shrugs*MrMan wrote: ↑August 28th, 2023, 5:59 pmHe doesn't look that big in this one.WilliamSmith wrote: ↑August 27th, 2023, 1:56 am@MrMan
Don't forget "Kiss of Death" (1995), he was fairly beefed up for that one too (not much, but compared to how he looked before):
https://www.bitchute.com/video/S6YaPQDukpVI/
LOL, if I guessed right about what you were referring to by "cut scenes," I completely agree: All the up-close camera work and fast-flashing cut scenes with chopped up bits of footage instead of choreographing actual action scenes just got more and more lame as movies went down the drain. Even watching obviously unconvincing action scenes with Steven Seagal having stuntmen patiently waiting for him to move in and pretend to dominate fights with Aikido were way more fun than that "in your face" flashy affected film-editing BS that started getting worse in the mid-late 1990s and kept getting worse 2000+ when I stopped wasting my time watching the crappy new generations of action movies. Not even worth the time!MrMan wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2023, 8:03 pmAction movies continued to get worse with 'cut scenes.' Those are so irritating to watch. I first noticed them in a 'Taken' movie with Liam Neeson. Maybe it's cheaper to do it that way, or maybe they just couldn't get Neeson or a stunt double who looked like him to do a decent fight scene, or maybe they actually thought those lame scenes looked good.![]()
![]()
He wasn't that big in Con Air either, was he?![]()
- WilliamSmith
- Veteran Poster
- Posts: 2158
- Joined: November 10th, 2021, 5:52 pm
Re: America in the 1950's - What a time! Look!
@MrManMrMan wrote: ↑August 28th, 2023, 6:12 pmI remembered him being more buff, but I wasn't paying that much attention. He looks pretty buff in this scene where his muscles are pumped up. https://youtu.be/De_YpBxvchI?t=307
Hey good post!
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
Come to think of it, I remember Trejo's role in that movie: He was playing a gross rapist who boasted about his victims and got tattooed for each victim, so I guess the character he was playing was enough of a loser to get beat by Cage... If I remember rightly though that actor Trejo was a real life former convict who ended up reforming and helping other inmates get off drugs later... but I have a hunch Trejo's probably actually the toughest IRL.
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
I think his first role I saw him in was in "Runaway Train" by Kurosawa where they filmed it in an actual prison and got him to play the role of a guy boxing Eric Roberts...
FYI to @Lucas88 just in case your most experienced martial artist around here finds this amusing.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
If you're serious about "taking the red pill," read thoroughly researched work by an unbiased "American intellectual soldier of our age" to learn what controlled media doesn't want you to see
: https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/
![Cool 8)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 0 Replies
- 3304 Views
-
Last post by wuxi
-
- 0 Replies
- 2905 Views
-
Last post by odbo
-
- 12 Replies
- 6105 Views
-
Last post by Pixel--Dude
-
- 13 Replies
- 10512 Views
-
Last post by gsjackson
-
- 17 Replies
- 6483 Views
-
Last post by Winston