The shooting happened after the Department of Homeland Security sent more than 2,000 ICE agents to the Twin Cities in the "largest DHS operation ever."
Film critics can throw peanuts from the peanut gallery but nobody actually cares what they think if they don’t show they can make something better or even elucidate how to improve on the current script.
I’m not saying they can’t make such comments; but as a call to action? In terms of obvious suggestive stochastic rhetoric? That’s Chamberlain talk. Plain and simple.
In a way, it’s like they’re preaching to a choir of fellow critics who all agree the film sucks. But they don’t offer any substantive way to improve it. Instead they just cry and complain to other film critics to find a way to make it better, or just keep yelling at the director to do something. Nobody likes these people.
That is your requirements and not the rest of ours. I have watched critics not add anything, we are empathetic creatures, sometimes we want to know how others feel, not just what they think.
I am honestly fine with people crying about it being bad and preaching to the choir cause it makes for a more full sounding song.
I dont require everyone that says anything to always be productive and I would ask you to ask yourself why you think that is normal to require from everyone else.
Nope, not me. I am not fine with falsely equating film critics analyzing a film already completed to stochastic antagonists prodding what has yet to come.
Besides, like I said even if we entertain this false analogy, in a way, it’s like they’re preaching to a choir of fellow critics who all agree the film sucks. But they don’t offer any substantive way to improve it. Instead they just cry and complain to other film critics to find a way to make it better, or just keep yelling at the director to do something. Nobody likes these people.
Film critics can throw peanuts from the peanut gallery but nobody actually cares what they think if they don’t show they can make something better or even elucidate how to improve on the current script.
I’m not saying they can’t make such comments; but as a call to action? In terms of obvious suggestive stochastic rhetoric? That’s Chamberlain talk. Plain and simple.
In a way, it’s like they’re preaching to a choir of fellow critics who all agree the film sucks. But they don’t offer any substantive way to improve it. Instead they just cry and complain to other film critics to find a way to make it better, or just keep yelling at the director to do something. Nobody likes these people.
That is your requirements and not the rest of ours. I have watched critics not add anything, we are empathetic creatures, sometimes we want to know how others feel, not just what they think.
I am honestly fine with people crying about it being bad and preaching to the choir cause it makes for a more full sounding song.
I dont require everyone that says anything to always be productive and I would ask you to ask yourself why you think that is normal to require from everyone else.
Nope, not me. I am not fine with falsely equating film critics analyzing a film already completed to stochastic antagonists prodding what has yet to come.
Besides, like I said even if we entertain this false analogy, in a way, it’s like they’re preaching to a choir of fellow critics who all agree the film sucks. But they don’t offer any substantive way to improve it. Instead they just cry and complain to other film critics to find a way to make it better, or just keep yelling at the director to do something. Nobody likes these people.