Those are my favorite kind of trailers actually.
The ones that are just a single 2min scene.

I’m not sure that would do this movie justice either though. It’s kind of unusual in it’s presentation. It wouldn’t give more context than the clip show trailer we got. It would make you feel like you had an idea what it was, but that idea would probably be wrong.

The genre would be part drama, part farcical dark comedy.

So many people complain that trailers give too much away about a movie. Here’s a trailer trying real hard not to do that, and people complain it’s just a bunch of disjointed clips with no info on the plot.

I’m telling you that’s for a reason. It’s avoiding spoilers. The trailer is not half as good as the movie. The movie is unique and compelling. The trailer is only confusing. And I don’t know how to make the trailer better without messing up the first viewing experience.

The trailer does the movie no justice. For good reason, it’s trying very hard not to reveal too much. It all makes sense in a way you wouldn’t expect; Even the werid cat. You should see it sometime

Lemmy and Reddit usage are relatively low compared to their respective social media siblings. I’ve always believed the reason is in the difference in how they’re structured. Most other social media is wired around people as the primary structural unit. “Who’s saying what?” Reddit and Lemmy are instead wired around topics. “What are people saying about this?” And I assume the difference in popularity is evidence for how most people themselves are wired.

Tiny homes are soooo stupid
“Let’s take all the worst parts of appartments and suberbs, and put them together! It’ll be adorable!”

This is the thinking that got us pugs people. Pugs!
It’s not a good impulse.

Fixing this, is the whole point of Medicare for All

Christopher Nolan could do it.
He might be the only director with enough broad appeal to really build a new ubiquitous franchise.

That’s certainly a fact that it’s illegal; Almost no matter the context. It could be considered part of the broader environmental context. Like it’s not raining.

But I’m more looking for the actions of the three people involved, during the several minutes leading up to the head slamming. Longer possibly. Maybe one or more of them has a criminal history.

How would it make them feel?
It would make me feel bad.

Yah I thought SCOTUS ok’d that within 100 miles of a boarder.

…

Seems not! Just lots of circut courts have affirmed the general idea. This is the first at an appellate court.

Is happy an option?

So it is okay to hurt people if they make you feel bad.
That’s scary.

You aren’t? That’s odd. Who else would you side with?

What makes the criminal a coward? The driving away? Would it be brave for him to stay, waiting to be arrested? Or is that just some dismissive rhetoric?

So then, what’s the reason?
Is “bad impulse” all there is?

It’s just true. The vindictive mindset is a primordial cognitive disease.

Revenge is horseshit.
It’s literally just “I hurt them because they made me feel bad”. That’s never a justification.

No, what?

Not to the people doing the attacking, they don’t

Of course not. Nothing would justify it. But explain it? Sure. Maybe there was an understandable reason for it, beyond bad impulse.