Movies you've recently watched

[The Brain]

Anyone seen Kick Ass? The trailer looked awesome and the reviews are good. Probably won't air here though.

Why do you hate Wags?

[The Brain]

I wonder if I can insure people at the retirement home or a cancer ward.

Never heard of it. Was it any good?

[jimmy olsen]

Anyone seen Kick Ass? The trailer looked awesome and the reviews are good. Probably won't air here though.

Why do you hate Wags?

I just missed it.

[The Larch]

Watched Napoleon Dynamite and cringed all the way through. How come was this movie so successful? Is it my lack of cultural references? Moreover, it is supposed to be a comedy and I just couldn't find any of the situations funny at all. I was like this all the time. Is it me or almost all the characters seem to be retarded?

I always wanted to punch a person wearing a VOTE FOR PEDRO t-shirt after watching that abortion of a movie.

The girfriend of a friend of mine was wearing one the other day. Now I'll have to question her taste forever, I'm afraid she may have a severe case of hipsteritis.

I'm pretty square and I loved that movie.

Can you explain its appeal? What on that movie made you love it? I swear I can't find a single redeemeable feature.

[Lettow77]

 An Autumn Afternoon. I liked it alot.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Anyone seen Kick Ass? The trailer looked awesome and the reviews are good. Probably won't air here though.

Why do you hate Wags?

He hates most of us. You can see through his air of superiority when he posts news articles.

[Grey Fox]

Animation movie name 9.

It was Ok. The ending sucked ass. Very well done pseudo-steampunk tho.

[Malthus]

Screwed in a way similar to the way Walmart employee dude got screwed I hope.

he seemed oh so happy about that, so I guess.... I think I'm from some alternate universe to everyone here, one where people give a shit about others.

I have questions about whether Walmart really has an "insurable interest" on the life of an employee who no longer works for them. Paging DGuller!

Although the "vulture" aspect is distasteful, the person really getting screwed here is - the insurance company.

Normally, companies have an "insurable interest" on key employees because their death would screw up the company's operations. Here, at least according to the facts in this thread, that's not at issue.

[ulmont]

I have questions about whether Walmart really has an "insurable interest" on the life of an employee who no longer works for them. Paging DGuller!

I don't see why it matters.  Either the insurance company has done their math correctly in calculating the premium costs - in which case this should be a losing proposition for Walmart - or they haven't.

[Barrister]

I have questions about whether Walmart really has an "insurable interest" on the life of an employee who no longer works for them. Paging DGuller!

I don't see why it matters.  Either the insurance company has done their math correctly in calculating the premium costs - in which case this should be a losing proposition for Walmart - or they haven't.

It matters because you are supposed to have an "insurable interest" before being allowed to take out life insurance on someone.  Prevents the 'taking out life insurance on residents in the cancer ward' idea.

[ulmont]

It matters because you are supposed to have an "insurable interest" before being allowed to take out life insurance on someone.  Prevents the 'taking out life insurance on residents in the cancer ward' idea.

Same deal.  Why not take out life insurance on residents in the cancer ward - I suspect it's going to be very expensive?

[Barrister]

It matters because you are supposed to have an "insurable interest" before being allowed to take out life insurance on someone.  Prevents the 'taking out life insurance on residents in the cancer ward' idea.

Same deal.  Why not take out life insurance on residents in the cancer ward - I suspect it's going to be very expensive?

I'm not arguign policy.  The law says you have to have an 'insurable interest'.

[Malthus]

I have questions about whether Walmart really has an "insurable interest" on the life of an employee who no longer works for them. Paging DGuller!

I don't see why it matters.  Either the insurance company has done their math correctly in calculating the premium costs - in which case this should be a losing proposition for Walmart - or they haven't.

The policy is designed to avoid various sorts of scams.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

he seemed oh so happy about that, so I guess.... I think I'm from some alternate universe to everyone here, one where people give a shit about others.

Absolutely.  You're a great guy because you wish we could go back in time, undo the insurance purchase, so that the poor guy's life could have turned out EXACTLY THE WAY IT DID.

You need to learn how to read, moron. I'm well aware his life wouldn't have turned out any differently necessarily... All I was doing was pointing out that I THINK it's wrong and should be illegal for companies to make 10's of thousands of dollars from some part time employee who died after she stopped being their employee. If it happened to your wife, I daresay you'd feel that Wal-Mart and the insurance co. were profiting off your misery.

The difference that would have happened is just that. No wal-mart getting insurance money is one thing that the dude wouldn't have had to feel shitty about. He already felt pretty shitty with his wife dying. He felt shittier because of this happening.

I'm done hijacking this thread about this now, as usual on Languish I forget that all the ignorance is willful and immovable. No one is ever wrong here. :assholes:

BTW not one word I ever write on Languish is ever promoting me as being a "great guy" ... I don't think in those terms. ie: my opinion is right, thus I'm awesome. I know I'm awesome, my opinions are neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things. And unlike the majority of posters here, they actually change once in awhile.

[lustindarkness]

Men who stare at goats, what a wonderful and weird movie.