CobraKevin

LOL! Wow, I didn't realize a number of people on here tried this. It was called Quixtar when I started, but apparantly they didn't like the "t". I tried it. The good thing about it - it actually does work. The bad thing about it - it's INCREDIBLY difficult to get people to believe you, due to the fact that it is in fact a pyramid scheme. ATTENTION!!! If you don't give two flying shits how this works, don't read the insanely long post. If you're interested or even the least bit curious, read on. The idea behind getting started is to convert your monthly spenditures (groceries, clothes, car parts, etc.) from the stores and outlets to this online website. Then, you get your family and friends to do the same thing and BAM - mucho dinero. This is a relatively in-depth breakdown of how it works. For every $2.50 you spend on this website, you receive 1 point. Your target is to get 100 points per month (or spend $250 a month) to reach your initial bonus level of 3%. While $250 sounds like a lot to some, especially me being 18 (at the time) and not spending that kind of money per month on "stuff", your average household spends well over $500 per month on "stuff", though they tell you something like $770. So you start buying all your stuff online, or at least $250 worth and you'll reach the 3% return bracket, which means they cut you a check for $7.50 a month. I can vouch for that, as I had received a few of those, but that's a ripoff to spend $250 to only get $7.50. This is where getting other people underneath you comes into play. You're goal, per the basic outline, is to get 6 friends/relatives/strangers underneath you to do the same thing - convert their monthly spenditure from stores to the internet. If you succeed and they're all spending $250 per month and earning their 100 points, your total business volume between you and your 6 "associates" is now $1750. This will put you in the 9% bracket, meaning you're getting a 9% return on your total business volume ($1750). So they would be cutting you a check for $157.50, but out of that check they would take out the earnings of the 6 people you got involved. 6 x $7.50 = $45 $157.50 - $45 = $112.50 per month you receive. So now your goal is to "mentor" the 6 people you got involved into getting people beneath them to increase their income (which also increases yours). The plan they outline involves you getting 6, those 6 each getting 4, and those 4 each getting 2. You = 1 123456 = 6 people 444444 = 24 people 888888 = 48 people 1 + 6 + 24 + 48 = 79 total people So, with a total group of 79 people (sounds like a lot, but in theory it shouldn't be) all doing their $250 and therefore 100 points per month, the total business volume for YOUR business is generating $19,750. 7500 points puts you in the highest return bracket of 25% (you're generating 7900), which would equal $4937.50. After the 78 "associates" are paid their cut, you're looking somewhere between $2500 and $3000 per month (I forgot the exact number). $30k a year now for doing absolutely nothing, and it'll just continue to grow from then on out. So now all those things you're spending money on are technically free AND you're making an additonal $2000 per month. There are supposedly guys making six figures every month, but of course I've never seen a paystub. I tried to get some friends involved, got a few to come to the meetings, but nothing really came from it since all the bad rap these schemes get. I personally believe it would work like a charm, but it's a pain in the ass to get others to believe the same, so I left it alone. Sorry for the long post. I'm sure I pretty much wasted my time typing all that out, but oh well. -Kevin

It was unnecessary, but still funny. The guy is supposed to be some leader of a top secret government organization, yet he's wearing an S7 wife beater designed like the Superman logo and retarded-looking boxers. It would have actually made you happier to have a 10-minute scene of Bernie Mac's half-retarded car salesman character going through all the paperwork with the boy and his dad? Can't you just "assume" that after all the windows blew out in all the other cars that MAYBE he just wanted to get rid of the damn thing? Cmon now. No different than any other action movie in history. The good guys always pull off completely unrealistic (though in some instances still possible) stunt moves. If John McLaine were anyone other than John McLaine, he'd have been dead a long time ago, as would James Bond, etc. If I remember correctly, she didn't really do a damn thing. The car still didn't start, which is why she decided she was going to walk home. Bumblebee just decided to start when he felt like it. Any other gripes? -Kevin

1. Umm....sure...? 2. Maybe it's just because I got out of a statistics class, but the "guess" fits. I can guarantee you will find more exciting, entertaining, and just plan awesome films in the $100+ million range than you will in the <$100 million range. If two movies open on the same weekend on the same number of screens, and movie A makes $150 million over the course of three weeks while movie B only brings in $27 million over those three weeks, its pretty safe to say that audiences enjoyed movie A more. 3. Nope. Still not relevant. 4. You'll always get a "sensory experience" at any movie. Some you may not be conscious, others you might be pissed you just wasted $7.50. I prefer to leave with a smile on my face. What do you look for in movies? I'm not sure if you were foreshadowing with your "I can and will do better" statement like you just won On The Lot or something, but if that's the case, I wish you the best making "good", but low grossing films. -Kevin P.S. If I had to pick three movies off the top of my head to claim as the three "best" movies, I would choose: A Few Good Men - $243,240,178 Worldwide Good Will Hunting - $225,900,000 Worldwide Live Free or Die Hard - $119,374,537 Worldwide (so far) Just curious to see an off-the-top list of your favorites.

I agree with the above. And for the most part, despite our differences in the other thread baseciv, I do agree with a lot of your post. But in the grand scheme, those miniscule issues do not affect the overall quality of the film. And as for Megan Fox.... http://images.google.com/images?q=Megan+Fox&hl=en&um=1&sa=X&oi=images&ct=title Enjoy! -Kevin

1. Congratulations on knowing how to look up things on the internet. 2. You INFERED that my point was that higher grossing films = better movies. My point was actually "Just because you don't like Bay's movies doesn't mean they suck". Congratulations again on poor language arts skills. 3. I actually did prefer Armageddon to The Matrix, but I liked both quite a bit. Again, not my point. 4. YOU feel Clerks is better than Armageddon. I'm actually a big fan of all Kevin Smith's films, and I'm sure a number of people would agree with your sentiment. However, you'd be in the minority. 5. I see what you did there. Wait, no I didn't. My mom makes some pretty dumb arguments, but that just topped them. That was a completely retarded analogy. There is absolutely no correlation between the price of gas and the decision to purchase it versus a film's monetary gross and the opinion of its quality. Who's the idiot again? Case in point, "good movies" are a matter of opinion. I'm sure there are people that think Syriana or A New World or The Pledge were "good movies" but I personally found them all rather boring (especially The Pledge - easily the worst film in history). I watch movies for their entertainment value. No matter the genre of the film, did the movie accomplish its task? If so, then it was worth the price of a ticket. Try again. But make sure you try harder, douchebag. -Kevin P.S. It's rather unwise for your first posts to be argumentative. There are better ways to be "accepted". Take this as me being cordial.

My apologies. I'm over a week late on actually getting to check this film out, but lets see what we got. Disclaimer: Transformers was slightly before my time, and consequently I did not watch a whole lot as a kid. Therefore, this review is again not focused on historical accuracy. Summary: Some random highschool kid Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is on a mission to get his first car and the girl he's set his eyes on. The U.S. government is on a mission to find out who destroyed an army base and who stole vital military information from their system. Turns out, the two missions collide when the car Sam picked (or the car that picked Sam) is actually a friendly robot (Bumblebee), and the mastermind(s) behind the army base attack and the stolen files were evil robots. Earth is caught in the middle of an ancient battle between two types of robots - the noble Autobots and the dreaded Decepticons. Further investigation and provided information from both the Autobots and a secret government agency known as Sector 7 reveals that Sam's ancestor, Captain Archibald Witwicky, made one of the most prized discoveries in human history in the Arctic Circle. Sam is now in the possession of his ancestors glasses, which hold the key to obtaining a relic of unlimited power. Pros: Unmatched special effects, plenty of comic relief, Megan Fox is ridiculously gorgeous, good storyline (given the nature of the film), and an overall amazing job of resurrecting an 80's childhood favorite into a live-action masterpiece. Cons: [baseciv] Michael Bay sucks. [/baseciv] Note: I actually like Michael Bays films, but that's about the only gripe I think anyone could have about the movie - not liking someone who was involved in making it. Conclusion: 5.0/5.0. No question. A film like this had a lot of room for error, but pulled it off flawlessly. Between this and Disturbia, I think Shia LaBeouf is an extremely potential up-and-coming actor, and Tyrese actually didn't suck this time around. For me, I'd say easily one of the Top 25 best movies ever. For Transformer fans, should be an easy Top 10 or maybe even 5. I do have to say, however, I did prefer Live Free or Die Hard. Both are must sees this summer, though. Get up off the computer and go. Now. -Kevin

Summary: Basically a "sequel" to the rather comical Bruce Almighty, God (Morgan Freeman) instills the role of Noah in an up-and-coming congressman (Steve Carell), along with the task of building an Ark for the impending flood. Pros: It was...a little funny. Cons: It wasn't as funny as it looked. Conclusion: 2.0/5.0. It's a decent movie that kids might get a kick out of because of all the animals and rather lame humor, and I doubt it's a film any heavily religious folk will go see to grade historical accuracy. Jim Carrey definitely fits this style of film much better than Steve, who I personally don't think is all that funny. 40-year-old Virgin was definitely a hilarious film, but I think a few of the B-list actors actually carried that film. The funniest part in the entire film was the extremely feminine terrifying scream from a male news reporter as he runs onto the Ark avoiding the flood. Bleh. -Kevin

You can't and you won't. And just because you don't like Bay's movies doesn't mean they suck. The $100+ million they all make disagree with you. You probably dream of being one of those retarded Entertainment Weekly movie critics who gives all the hit movies shitty ratings and the foreign indy film that opened in 7 theaters worldwide an A. Fuck you and your coherent sentence, douchebag. -Kevin

I definitely see your reasoning in not wanting to pay to play a game. But about never completing it? Isn't that why games lose their replay value? Ever remember buying a game when you were younger and you and a friend beat in the first night playing it. Then you NEVER play it again? THAT sucks. Besides, there's no "real" end in D2. Just 3 different difficulty levels that you go through the same Acts and kill the same bad guys....over and over and over again until you get the sets that you want. And you can solo EVERYTHING in that game. Not necessarily very challenging . -Kevin

Thanks Rick. See what I get for using Dogma as a basis for my religious knowledge? Once again, sorry about your loss, Alex. -Kevin

I thought that's what they said at first. But I believe they actually said "game". -Kevin P.S. But yeah, that was one of the dumber things I've seen in my life.

WoW > D2. Though I did used to be a big D2 fan. By all means a great game. But WoW is king. -Kevin

I was a Grego show fan, more or less because 99.7 caters to my music taste more than any other radio station. So naturally, I'd listen to that in the mornings sometimes at work or on my way to school. I think it sucks, but I don't listen to enough radio to care all that much. Secondly, and I know this happened a long time ago, but what in the hell happened with 107.1 and Rover's Morning Glory? That shit was good, and Dare Deiter was pretty badass. -Kevin

First, I wanna say I'm sorry to hear that. I haven't lost any close friends of mine, but I have seen more than a couple people I went to high school with lose their lives one way or another and even that's hard to take in. I can't imagine losing a really close friend. Secondly, and this isn't intended to bring anyone down or anger anyone but rather more for clarification purposes, I was under the impression that suicide was considered a mortal sin and therefore did not allow entry into Heaven. Anyone "know" anything about that? -Kevin

Incredible. No other way to describe it. -Kevin

Wow. I didn't feel like wasting the last 4 minutes of my life, but definitely very cool to watch. And yes, that choreography must have been ridiculous. -Kevin

Same thing happened to me. Just nothing else seems to do anywhere near enough damage with that kind of hp. Died on 49 as well, scored 3770000 and change...not even close to the leaderboard. -Kevin

LMAO! Fuckin hilarious! -Kevin

Anyone got any server space? I'll upload some good stuff for ya'll. -Kevin

Well, my first 3 tries were abysmal...best of an 88...then, I got on some kind of roll for my 4th try and... http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9004/39000hi2.png

Lol. That's pretty awesome. I got a phone call within 2 mins. -Kevin

In a similar fashion as "Bug", I'm not going to waste my time doing a typical review. However, in this case it's for the exact opposite reason. I was literally blown away, no pun intended. Easily one of the best movies I've seen in years, and most definitely jumped immediately to my Top 10 of all-time. I haven't really taken the time to determine what the other 9 are yet, but I know this would be one of them. I just watched the original Die Hard yesterday for a little nostalgia and I'm a very big fan of Die Hard With A Vengeance (Samuel L. Jackson is the shit), but this movie was absolutely incredible. Probably one of the best Action/Comedy films since Full Metal Jacket (I was seriously laughing out loud numerous times, as was the rest of the theater) and the plot was actually amazing as well (and terrifying at the same time). Justin Long (Jeepers Creepers) is hilarious, Bruce Willis obviously still has it, Mary Elisabeth Winstead (Final Destination 3) is quite attractive, and Timothy Olyphant (Girl Next Door) is all-around awesome. Oh, and Kevin Smith is in it (Silent Bob ftw). The only slight gripe I had with the film was the fact that there were more than a handful of incidents that were obviously unrealistic. But hey, all for entertainment purposes, right? 5 out of 5, no questions asked. See this movie...or...just...I don't know. Just go see it. -Kevin

Wow. That was Ray Charles, wasn't it? -Kevin

I could hook ya up easy enough. I've personally done up to 22" wheels, did my Cobra's tires as well as a buddies Cobra tires. Wouldn't charge you a dime. -Kevin

Holes 1-6 can be holes-in-one. From then on out, the fewest number of shots per hole is as follows: 7. 3 8. 2 9. 1 (usually 2, gotta be VERY LUCKY for 1) 10. 1 (usually 2, gotta be VERY LUCKY for 1) 11. 2 12. 2 (usually 3, tough to get it in 2) 13. 1 14. 2 (potentially possible for 1, but I've never done it) 15. 4 (usually 5, very tough to get it in 4) 16. 2 17. 1 18. 4 That's 31 shots for a perfect score, which at a par 91 (I think I counted correctly) makes a -60 the best possible score. -56 or maybe -57 are the best "likely" scores. -Kevin