They weren't blacklisted. Stop with your damn conspiracy. IT was a movie in an industry that knows full well beginning actors aren't in the union.

You get your card AFTER you have done some work.

SHe is actually pretty good. The professional, Heat she is really good.

I suspect she has just picked poor scripts in most her roles.

Hey now! Teak has character. That's why it make beautiful furniture.

" Empire Strikes back is jumbled; no real beginning or end."

It's not supposed to. I understand that some people need simple stories wrapped up in a neat package, but don't blame the oive.

Just stick you your sitcom and laugh tracks, let the adults enjoy a story.

Maybe you should learn to enjoy build up and tension and not just pretty lights and explosions?

You're right about his acting ability, but the killer for the movie was direction. Portman is a much better actor, but lame script and mediocre director was what really did it in. I suspect if she was more mature at the time she could have pushed back on some of the script and direction choices.

All the hot grits in the world can't save her from that script.

And that skill is 23 throat punches a minute.

The first set dealt with unknowns in lead roles. The fact that one of them became a megastar is pretty good.

The last three where horrible directed.

Yeah, a 'eager' 125,000 for an entry level position.

Actors are paid too damn much.

OEM, sure. But it's not my understanding that if you buy a PC and buy the full, expensive version of windows and the PC dies and you buy a new pc then you need to buy another copy of windows. Otherwise....why would anyone pay for the full version; you'd get the oem, right?

We're not talking about rumours here, though.

You know nothing about computers. Why are you even on this site?

Microsoft's javascript support is just like the other's; slower before but not so much now.

Self fulfilling prophecies? Well, maybe, or maybe it's just an obvious requirement for modern sites. Your list of uses is hardly exhaustive; stack exchange sites use it to great effect; you can't be serious when you prefer hitting f5 to provoke an update rather than...doing nothing and having the site update by itself? Look at google maps today (on the desktop). The limits to the practicality of javascript is...well, there are no limits. It's a programming language; you can do whatever you want with it. Emulate operating systems, games....

http://js1k.com/

There's nothing sloppy about the use of javascript. I think you're a bit of an edge case; perhaps you're better off not using the internet; it really is as fundamental as that.

The problem was never javascript. Sure, IE was the posterboy in slow, buggy javascript. But it's hard to imagine anything other that static pages (and there's nothing wrong with that) being handled with anything better than javascript. Perhaps you're not very technical, but forget ads and gifs for a moment and explain how you'd provide the same functionality javascript (and ajax and all that goes along with it) would be handled without javascript? Uploading files to a site with a progress bar? Dragging and dropping files onto the browser. Sensible, rich clientside validation of user input (in addition to the back end validation, obviously)? The only alternative I can imagine you giving is some other client side language. The only reason you're not blocking those too is because they're not as popular as javascript; they can certainly produce and handle popups.

So can an app.

Not really, i'm talking about chickens. Must have used a trigger word or something.