Worst disaster that never happened! Topic

1 Why would Denise Richards be wrong for an action Movie? Doesnt every action movie hace a tough babe? Look at the work in "The World is not enough".

2 Van Dien seems like a prototype action star.

Only NPH stands out for me.

I think you are trying to make the picture look more campy than it was intended as a reason for the weakness of the movie.

I agree the message was interesting, but the film is weak!
11/17/2010 3:37 AM
Posted by antonsirius on 11/16/2010 8:10:00 PM (view original):
The 'inappropriate' casting is entirely fueled by that satire. van Dien, NPH and Denise Richards are terrible choices for an action film, but awesome ones for a movie that's equal parts Leni Riefenstahl and Aaron Spelling.
I understand the satirical approach to the movie, and that is what I didn't like.  Just not to my taste.  I think there are more than enough concepts to explore in that book without making it an overt jab at american imperialism. 

Just not what I was hoping to see when this movie came out. 

Still think the producer should be shot. 

11/17/2010 8:52 AM
Posted by jastrial on 11/17/2010 8:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by antonsirius on 11/16/2010 8:10:00 PM (view original):
The 'inappropriate' casting is entirely fueled by that satire. van Dien, NPH and Denise Richards are terrible choices for an action film, but awesome ones for a movie that's equal parts Leni Riefenstahl and Aaron Spelling.
I understand the satirical approach to the movie, and that is what I didn't like.  Just not to my taste.  I think there are more than enough concepts to explore in that book without making it an overt jab at american imperialism. 

Just not what I was hoping to see when this movie came out. 

Still think the producer should be shot. 

Yeah, I totally understand hating it because of what it does to the book. I just view them as separate entities.
11/17/2010 12:10 PM
I still think the movie falls short. It is poorly acted, all the mock commercial gimmicks are cute but not clever, it is overly violent to try to attract teens.

The only way the movie works at all is if it is camp, but then it is bad camp.
11/19/2010 10:20 PM

WASHINGTON – Oil from the BP spill remains stuck on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, according to a top scientist's video and slides that she says demonstrate the oil isn't degrading as hoped and has decimated life on parts of the sea floor.

That report is at odds with a recent report by the BP spill compensation czar that said nearly all will be well by 2012.

At a science conference in Washington Saturday, marine scientist Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia aired early results of her December submarine dives around the BP spill site. She went to places she had visited in the summer and expected the oil and residue from oil-munching microbes would be gone by then. It wasn't.

"There's some sort of a bottleneck we have yet to identify for why this stuff doesn't seem to be degrading," Joye told the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual conference in Washington. Her research and those of her colleagues contrasts with other studies that show a more optimistic outlook about the health of the gulf, saying microbes did great work munching the oil.

"Magic microbes consumed maybe 10 percent of the total discharge, the rest of it we don't know," Joye said, later adding: "there's a lot of it out there."

The head of the agency in charge of the health of the Gulf said Saturday that she thought that "most of the oil is gone." And a Department of Energy scientist, doing research with a grant from BP from before the spill, said his examination of oil plumes in the water column show that microbes have done a "fairly fast" job of eating the oil. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab scientist Terry Hazen said his research differs from Joye's because they looked at different places at different times.

Joye's research was more widespread, but has been slower in being published in scientific literature.

In five different expeditions, the last one in December, Joye and colleagues took 250 cores of the sea floor and travelled across 2,600 square miles. Some of the locations she had been studying before the oil spill on April 20 and said there was a noticeable change. Much of the oil she found on the sea floor — and in the water column — was chemically fingerprinted, proving it comes from the BP spill. Joye is still waiting for results to show other oil samples she tested are from BP's Macondo well.

She also showed pictures of oil-choked bottom-dwelling creatures. They included dead crabs and brittle stars — starfish like critters that are normally bright orange and tightly wrapped around coral. These brittle stars were pale, loose and dead. She also saw tube worms so full of oil they suffocated.

"This is Macondo oil on the bottom," Joye said as she showed slides. "This is dead organisms because of oil being deposited on their heads."

Joye said her research shows that the burning of oil left soot on the sea floor, which still had petroleum products. And even more troublesome was the tremendous amount of methane from the BP well that mixed into the Gulf and was mostly ignored by other researchers.

Joye and three colleagues last week published a study in Nature Geoscience that said the amount of gas injected into the Gulf was the equivalent of between 1.5 and 3 million barrels of oil.

"The gas is an important part of understanding what happened," said Ian MacDonald of Florida State University.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco told reporters Saturday that "it's not a contradiction to say that although most of the oil is gone, there still remains oil out there."

Earlier this month, Kenneth Feinberg, the government's oil compensation fund czar, said based on research he commissioned he figured the Gulf of Mexico would almost fully recover by 2012 — something Joye and Lubchenco said isn't right.

"I've been to the bottom. I've seen what it looks like with my own eyes. It's not going to be fine by 2012," Joye told The Associated Press. "You see what the bottom looks like, you have a different opinion."

NOAA chief Lubchenco said "even though the oil degraded relatively rapidly and is now mostly but not all gone, damage done to a variety of species may not become obvious for years to come."

Lubchenco Saturday also announced the start of a Gulf restoration planning process to get the Gulf back to the condition it was on Apr. 19, the day before the spill. That program would eventually be paid for BP and other parties deemed responsible for the spill. This would be separate from an already begun restoration program that would improve all aspects of the Gulf, not just the oil spill, but has not been funded by the government yet, she said.

The new program, which is part of the Natural Resources Damage Assessment program, is part of the oil spill litigation — or out-of-court settlement — in which the polluters pay for overall damage to the ecosystem and efforts to return it to normal. This is different than paying compensation to people and businesses directly damaged by the spill.

The process will begin with public meetings all over the region.

2/21/2011 3:31 AM
Was going to let this slide but since you brought it up.

This story seems to star a single scientist from the U of Georgia. All the other research shows that most of the problem is gone. The one scientist seems to think otherwise. I wonder why this story is written this way? Why not talk about all the research that shows good news and just mention one lone scientists? Could it be a letist media still trying to create a massive disaster to prevent drilling and promote an enviromental agenda?

I know we are used to watching Sci-Fi movies where one lone scientist sees the monster coming and everyone else is blind to the threat, but this is reality!
2/21/2011 5:25 AM
Yeah, it's weird that the BP funded scientist would find nothing wrong.  It's also weird that the BP funded science didn't publish his findings showing that everything was AOK.  As she has published her findings and is actually doing public presentatioins on her research, one has to wonder if she dosen't have something there. 

The people of Hinkley, CA would tell you that sometimes that single person can make a huge difference.
2/21/2011 10:46 AM
Posted by swamphawk22 on 2/21/2011 5:25:00 AM (view original):
Was going to let this slide but since you brought it up.

This story seems to star a single scientist from the U of Georgia. All the other research shows that most of the problem is gone. The one scientist seems to think otherwise. I wonder why this story is written this way? Why not talk about all the research that shows good news and just mention one lone scientists? Could it be a letist media still trying to create a massive disaster to prevent drilling and promote an enviromental agenda?

I know we are used to watching Sci-Fi movies where one lone scientist sees the monster coming and everyone else is blind to the threat, but this is reality!
If BP was so sure of its findings why didn't they take samples from the same area that the Uof Ga scientist did to prove her wrong?
2/21/2011 11:47 AM
This isnt BP. This is the government and all the other scientists. Some were funded by BP, some were not.
2/21/2011 3:44 PM
It is IMPOSSIBLE for there not to be oil still in the gulf. Do you realize how much oil was spilled?

BP sprayed a toxic dispersent (outlawed in Europe) to DISPERSE the oil. It doesn't magically make the oil go away, it simply breaks it up and then it sinks.
There has GOT to be longterm effects of that much oil introduced into the gulf. I, myself, will not touch gulf seafood for a long time, probably not ever again.

I could not believe when I heard Rush talking about this like "it's all gone now, so much for the big disaster". Totally irresponsible and ridiculous.

I am not in favor of stopping drilling, in fact, we need to use more of our own resources. This will become especially true in years to come. However, we also need to be much more responsible about it. BP has proven three times now, that they are NOT responsible. IMO they should be banned from selling or drilling anywhere near the U.S.

2/21/2011 4:46 PM
Amen.
2/21/2011 11:05 PM
No one is saying there is no oil left.

What everyone in the know seems to be saying is that most things are going to be ok by next year. It isnt a disaster anymore.

You are shocked at what Rush said?? Were you at all bothered by all the radical enviromentalists that claimed this was going to be an epic disaster, who scared people and caused financial harm?

Eat what you want....more Shrimp for me!
2/22/2011 1:32 AM
2/22/2011  1:32 AM
swamphawk22

No one is saying there is no oil left. 


 
8/7/2010  3:21 AM
swamphawk22

Remember a few weeks ago they were telling us the Gulf was destroyed and that Florida and maybe the whole Atlantic coast would be covered in oil? Remember Obama shutting down all the drilling and putting thousands of people out of work because we cannot allow another disaster like this one?

So it is all gone now. 

The enviromentalist movement is wrong about another disaster that never came. 
2/22/2011 9:23 AM
That of course was a reference to the slick, not all remaining oil anywhere.

Why dont you just admit you lost this one. There was all the enviromental fanfare and nothing really happened.
2/22/2011 5:18 PM
Posted by swamphawk22 on 2/22/2011 5:18:00 PM:
That of course was a reference to the slick, not all remaining oil anywhere.

And this of course is just another lie from the biggest liar on these boards.
2/22/2011 6:55 PM
◂ Prev 1...11|12|13|14 Next ▸
Worst disaster that never happened! Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.