Coronavirus Discussion

1737476787998

Comments

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper By the powers INvested in me by this parish, I hereby do commandeer this message board
    Posts: 6,645

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,258
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.
  • edited November 2020 Posts: 7,423

    Has nothing to with the President, but thanks for going there....unreal.

    The President is ultimately responsible for the coronavirus outbreak in the United States...?

    By Your logic, every President is responsible for their countries outbreak as well? Or does it only count in USA?

    Indeed. However very few has fucked up as much as your tribe leader has...
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,258
    jobo wrote: »

    Has nothing to with the President, but thanks for going there....unreal.

    The President is ultimately responsible for the coronavirus outbreak in the United States...?

    By Your logic, every President is responsible for their countries outbreak as well? Or does it only count in USA?

    Indeed. However very few has fucked as much as your trives leader has...

    Yes. The failure of the American government with regards to the Coronavirus is very well documented.
  • WillardWhyteWillardWhyte Midnight Society #ProjectMoon
    Posts: 784
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,258
    Ah yeah. The Emmy thing does seem a bit weird honestly.
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    Posts: 1,990
    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/21/us/joe-biden-trump?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
    “President Trump makes brief appearance at Group of 20, but skips pandemic meeting.”

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,410
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

  • WillardWhyteWillardWhyte Midnight Society #ProjectMoon
    Posts: 784
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

    Because it wasn't? As for who's in control, when most States said they were gonna make their decisions...well wouldn't it be on them? (especially the nursing home disaster in NY).

    Anyway at least you got to bring up Trump again. Some of you people are Trump 24/7.

    Atleast Coumo wrote a book on leadership through Covid. I wonder if he discusses his decision on sending infected elderly to nursing homes.



  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,283
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

    Because it wasn't? As for who's in control, when most States said they were gonna make their decisions...well wouldn't it be on them? (especially the nursing home disaster in NY).

    Anyway at least you got to bring up Trump again. Some of you people are Trump 24/7.

    Atleast Coumo wrote a book on leadership through Covid. I wonder if he discusses his decision on sending infected elderly to nursing homes.



    Wow, you need to be needing your needy needs here.
  • Posts: 7,423
    And meanwhile the pandemic wreaks havoc in the US, this guy doesn't care:

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/21/donald-trump-g20-pandemic-golf-club

    Why should he worry? He has instant access to the best medical service you can get. So what with all the other suckers and losers?

    The level of cruelty has reached absurd levels at the moment. And the level of stupidity from his heard of sheep is even worse. They blindly worship him no matter what...
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,157
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

    Because it wasn't? As for who's in control, when most States said they were gonna make their decisions...well wouldn't it be on them? (especially the nursing home disaster in NY).

    Anyway at least you got to bring up Trump again. Some of you people are Trump 24/7.

    Atleast Coumo wrote a book on leadership through Covid. I wonder if he discusses his decision on sending infected elderly to nursing homes.



    Trump is the leader of the country. He's responsible for all those deaths because he failed to act. Sorry, dude.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,410
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

    Because it wasn't? As for who's in control, when most States said they were gonna make their decisions...well wouldn't it be on them? (especially the nursing home disaster in NY).

    Anyway at least you got to bring up Trump again. Some of you people are Trump 24/7.

    Atleast Coumo wrote a book on leadership through Covid. I wonder if he discusses his decision on sending infected elderly to nursing homes.



    I don't know if it was all honest or not. What I've seen is that Cuomo made some very poor decisions at the start, learned from them and adjusted to it, showing to be a leader. Don't get me wrong, I'm no particular fan of his, but caling him dishonest without any evidence is a bit.... dishonest. That he's getting an Emmy for the way he presented the updates is a bit incensitive of the part of the Emmy organisation, but you can't blame Cuomo for getting an award he never asked for in the first place.

    You perhaps missed the fact that Trump made the decision to leave this crisis in the hands of the governors? He stepped away from his responsibilities as a president, as he is doing right now as well. Talking about beeing dishonest. I've never been a fan of his, as I thought he was unfit for office from the start, and I've been proven right about that time and time again. Other than that I'm just following the same rethorical tricks republicans have been doing for the last ten years: if you want to blame the one guy for something, how about the other guy who's deeds were far worse! Is that unfair?

    And yes, I'll keep on clubbing the current lame-president until he either starts doing something about the crisis, or a new president comes in (and does something about the crisis).
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,283
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    My understanding is yes, every nation's leader is responsible for what happens in that nation.

    Maybe I'll make my original statement more clear: The President is ultimately responsible for handling the coronavirus outbreak in the United States. I didn't mean to imply he caused it.

    You didn't really imply that he actually handled it either, did you?

    No, my whole point is the responsibility of handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the United States ultimately falls on the President, and he's bungled it completely. Willard seems to have said the situation "has nothing to do with the President", which I disagree with.

    Nothing to do with the article relating to Governor Andy Coumo receiving an Emmy for his televised Covid briefings. Alot of governors in the USA held similar briefings.


    In which you said 'you always knew he was just acting'. Implying that whatever he did in this crisis wasn't honest. As you've complained about Cuomo and his handling of the crisis before.

    I just put it in perspective of the guy who (should) run(s) the show in (the US o)America. And yes, Bolsonario is just as responsible for what happens in Brazil as Trump is for the whole of the US as Cuomo is for NY.

    Because it wasn't? As for who's in control, when most States said they were gonna make their decisions...well wouldn't it be on them? (especially the nursing home disaster in NY).

    Anyway at least you got to bring up Trump again. Some of you people are Trump 24/7.

    Atleast Coumo wrote a book on leadership through Covid. I wonder if he discusses his decision on sending infected elderly to nursing homes.



    I don't know if it was all honest or not. What I've seen is that Cuomo made some very poor decisions at the start, learned from them and adjusted to it, showing to be a leader. Don't get me wrong, I'm no particular fan of his, but caling him dishonest without any evidence is a bit.... dishonest. That he's getting an Emmy for the way he presented the updates is a bit incensitive of the part of the Emmy organisation, but you can't blame Cuomo for getting an award he never asked for in the first place.

    You perhaps missed the fact that Trump made the decision to leave this crisis in the hands of the governors? He stepped away from his responsibilities as a president, as he is doing right now as well. Talking about beeing dishonest. I've never been a fan of his, as I thought he was unfit for office from the start, and I've been proven right about that time and time again. Other than that I'm just following the same rethorical tricks republicans have been doing for the last ten years: if you want to blame the one guy for something, how about the other guy who's deeds were far worse! Is that unfair?

    And yes, I'll keep on clubbing the current lame-president until he either starts doing something about the crisis, or a new president comes in (and does something about the crisis).

    I concur.
    (my most used Q quote)
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    Posts: 1,990
    I'll add my two cents.

    To say that President Trump mishandled the US’s COVID-19 response is an understatement!! (And no, I don’t mindlessly blame him for all of the COVID-19 deaths, or even hold him solely responsible for some of the conflicting information surrounding the virus during the early stages of the outbreak. As with any unique situation, there are always unknowns and missteps.)

    There were various aspects to our initial response to COVID-19 that could only be done at the national level (at-least in the short term). For example, the invoking of national defense procurement measures necessary to ramp-up the production of protective gear. In addition, the president, and only the president, could authorize the distribution of equipment from our national stock pile that exists for such emergencies. Both of which, President Trump did only reluctantly - and after a significant delay. For example, short of leadership at the national level, given a limited number of ventilators, the individual states wound up competing among themselves (and drove up the price in the process). That led to inefficient allocation of resources.

    This created a leadership gap, a gap that hat New York State governor Andrew Cuomo was only too happy to fill. And while I personally found Governor Cuomo’s briefings to a little too “show-business” like as they went on, they were picked up by broadcasters in other states – since NY state was among the first regions of the US affected and people were looking to see how their own areas should deal with the situation.

    You may recall that during the early stages of the crisis, President Trump was - also - only too happy to brag about the TV rating for *his* daily briefings (usually held at around 6:00 PM EDT). However, when commentators started to complain about the him contradicting his own medical advisors or using the briefings for openly political purposes (“the US is doing great….if you remove all of those nasty blue state people from the totals”), he ran into trouble. In fact, several local TV stations here in New York City started to cut away. Finally, once it became clear that the daily briefings were having a negative effect on President Trump’s political prospects, he stopped having them.

    Finally, as I recall prior administrations (of both political parties), left in place a blue print for how the national government should respond to such a crisis. Trump chose to ignore that blueprint.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,283
    Dwayne wrote: »
    I'll add my two cents.

    To say that President Trump mishandled the US’s COVID-19 response is an understatement!! (And no, I don’t mindlessly blame him for all of the COVID-19 deaths, or even hold him solely responsible for some of the conflicting information surrounding the virus during the early stages of the outbreak. As with any unique situation, there are always unknowns and missteps.)

    There were various aspects to our initial response to COVID-19 that could only be done at the national level (at-least in the short term). For example, the invoking of national defense procurement measures necessary to ramp-up the production of protective gear. In addition, the president, and only the president, could authorize the distribution of equipment from our national stock pile that exists for such emergencies. Both of which, President Trump did only reluctantly - and after a significant delay. For example, short of leadership at the national level, given a limited number of ventilators, the individual states wound up competing among themselves (and drove up the price in the process). That led to inefficient allocation of resources.

    This created a leadership gap, a gap that hat New York State governor Andrew Cuomo was only too happy to fill. And while I personally found Governor Cuomo’s briefings to a little too “show-business” like as they went on, they were picked up by broadcasters in other states – since NY state was among the first regions of the US affected and people were looking to see how their own areas should deal with the situation.

    You may recall that during the early stages of the crisis, President Trump was - also - only too happy to brag about the TV rating for *his* daily briefings (usually held at around 6:00 PM EDT). However, when commentators started to complain about the him contradicting his own medical advisors or using the briefings for openly political purposes (“the US is doing great….if you remove all of those nasty blue state people from the totals”), he ran into trouble. In fact, several local TV stations here in New York City started to cut away. Finally, once it became clear that the daily briefings were having a negative effect on President Trump’s political prospects, he stopped having them.

    Finally, as I recall prior administrations (of both political parties), left in place a blue print for how the national government should respond to such a crisis. Trump chose to ignore that blueprint.

    Wow, dude, are you FROM New York? Or are you just on your best behaviour here? Trump F***ED us. He flushed the pandemic plan, he fired the CDC group working on it, he silenced (or attempted to) Fauci, and tried to turn this whole thing into another climate change-denial coup. You are a diplomat sir. I'm a 70's NY kid with nunchucks, boppin' my way back to Coney. ;)
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    edited November 2020 Posts: 1,990
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Dwayne wrote: »
    I'll add my two cents.

    To say that President Trump mishandled the US’s COVID-19 response is an understatement!! (And no, I don’t mindlessly blame him for all of the COVID-19 deaths, or even hold him solely responsible for some of the conflicting information surrounding the virus during the early stages of the outbreak. As with any unique situation, there are always unknowns and missteps.)

    There were various aspects to our initial response to COVID-19 that could only be done at the national level (at-least in the short term). For example, the invoking of national defense procurement measures necessary to ramp-up the production of protective gear. In addition, the president, and only the president, could authorize the distribution of equipment from our national stock pile that exists for such emergencies. Both of which, President Trump did only reluctantly - and after a significant delay. For example, short of leadership at the national level, given a limited number of ventilators, the individual states wound up competing among themselves (and drove up the price in the process). That led to inefficient allocation of resources.

    This created a leadership gap, a gap that hat New York State governor Andrew Cuomo was only too happy to fill. And while I personally found Governor Cuomo’s briefings to a little too “show-business” like as they went on, they were picked up by broadcasters in other states – since NY state was among the first regions of the US affected and people were looking to see how their own areas should deal with the situation.

    You may recall that during the early stages of the crisis, President Trump was - also - only too happy to brag about the TV rating for *his* daily briefings (usually held at around 6:00 PM EDT). However, when commentators started to complain about the him contradicting his own medical advisors or using the briefings for openly political purposes (“the US is doing great….if you remove all of those nasty blue state people from the totals”), he ran into trouble. In fact, several local TV stations here in New York City started to cut away. Finally, once it became clear that the daily briefings were having a negative effect on President Trump’s political prospects, he stopped having them.

    Finally, as I recall prior administrations (of both political parties), left in place a blue print for how the national government should respond to such a crisis. Trump chose to ignore that blueprint.

    Wow, dude, are you FROM New York? Or are you just on your best behaviour here? Trump F***ED us. He flushed the pandemic plan, he fired the CDC group working on it, he silenced (or attempted to) Fauci, and tried to turn this whole thing into another climate change-denial coup. You are a diplomat sir. I'm a 70's NY kid with nunchucks, boppin' my way back to Coney. ;)

    You are correct!

    Given the the general tone that the moderators attempt to maintain, I think long and hard before I post anything with political overtones. We are here, after-all, for our love of all things Bond, and I do have other avenues to vent politically. In fact, after I drafted the above response, I debated for several days whether I should post it. And yes, I'm being diplomatic as my real feeling are a tad stronger.......
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    Posts: 1,865
    Third major COVID-19 vaccine shown to be effective and cheaper

    London | Pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca said Monday (Tuesday AEDT) that late-stage trials showed its coronavirus vaccine was up to 90 per cent effective, giving public health officials hope they may soon have access to a vaccine that is cheaper and easier to distribute than some of its rivals.
    https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/third-major-covid-19-vaccine-shown-to-be-effective-and-cheaper-20201124-p56hak
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited November 2020 Posts: 5,157
    Dwayne wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Dwayne wrote: »
    I'll add my two cents.

    To say that President Trump mishandled the US’s COVID-19 response is an understatement!! (And no, I don’t mindlessly blame him for all of the COVID-19 deaths, or even hold him solely responsible for some of the conflicting information surrounding the virus during the early stages of the outbreak. As with any unique situation, there are always unknowns and missteps.)

    There were various aspects to our initial response to COVID-19 that could only be done at the national level (at-least in the short term). For example, the invoking of national defense procurement measures necessary to ramp-up the production of protective gear. In addition, the president, and only the president, could authorize the distribution of equipment from our national stock pile that exists for such emergencies. Both of which, President Trump did only reluctantly - and after a significant delay. For example, short of leadership at the national level, given a limited number of ventilators, the individual states wound up competing among themselves (and drove up the price in the process). That led to inefficient allocation of resources.

    This created a leadership gap, a gap that hat New York State governor Andrew Cuomo was only too happy to fill. And while I personally found Governor Cuomo’s briefings to a little too “show-business” like as they went on, they were picked up by broadcasters in other states – since NY state was among the first regions of the US affected and people were looking to see how their own areas should deal with the situation.

    You may recall that during the early stages of the crisis, President Trump was - also - only too happy to brag about the TV rating for *his* daily briefings (usually held at around 6:00 PM EDT). However, when commentators started to complain about the him contradicting his own medical advisors or using the briefings for openly political purposes (“the US is doing great….if you remove all of those nasty blue state people from the totals”), he ran into trouble. In fact, several local TV stations here in New York City started to cut away. Finally, once it became clear that the daily briefings were having a negative effect on President Trump’s political prospects, he stopped having them.

    Finally, as I recall prior administrations (of both political parties), left in place a blue print for how the national government should respond to such a crisis. Trump chose to ignore that blueprint.

    Wow, dude, are you FROM New York? Or are you just on your best behaviour here? Trump F***ED us. He flushed the pandemic plan, he fired the CDC group working on it, he silenced (or attempted to) Fauci, and tried to turn this whole thing into another climate change-denial coup. You are a diplomat sir. I'm a 70's NY kid with nunchucks, boppin' my way back to Coney. ;)

    You are correct!

    Given the the general tone that the moderators attempt to maintain, I think long and hard before I post anything with political overtones. We are here, after-all, for our love of all things Bond, and I do have other avenues to vent politically. In fact, after I drafted the above response, I debated for several days whether I should post it. And yes, I'm being diplomatic as my real feeling are a tad stronger.......

    The sad irony is that Jared Kushner advised Trump not to take a stronger leadership role and shut down the country in early 2020 because it would hurt the economy and Trump's reelection chances.

    Well, the economy tanked anyway. And Trump lost. So hundreds of thousands of people died for...nothing.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    edited November 2020 Posts: 1,865
    AstraZeneca is likely to run an additional global trial to assess the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine using a lower dosage, its chief executive was quoted as saying on Thursday amid questions over the results of its late-stage study.

    Instead of adding the trial to an ongoing U.S. process, AstraZeneca might launch a fresh study to evaluate a lower dosage of its vaccine that performed better than a full dosage, Pascal Soriot told Bloomberg News.

    "Now that we've found what looks like a better efficacy we have to validate this, so we need to do an additional study," he said, adding that the new, likely global, study could be faster because it would need fewer subjects as the efficacy was already known to be high.

    The news comes as AstraZeneca faces questions about its success rate that some experts say could hinder its chances of getting speedy U.S. and EU regulatory approval.

    Several scientists have raised doubts about the robustness of results released on Monday showing the experimental vaccine was 90% effective in a sub-group of trial participants who, by error initially, received a half dose followed by a full dose.
  • Posts: 14,591
    I don't believe I've partaken in this topic but I do have a question COVID-19 related..............

    Damn. The original DIE HARD is playing at my local cinema for only $7 a ticket this weekend. I haven't been to a movie theater since.........well since Eastwood's last film a couple years ago.

    Anyone here been to the cinema since COVID ? How safe does it feel and is it worth the risk? Is it still fun in spite of all the hoops one must jump through?

    I'm quite tempted to go, though timing and my schedule will ultimately dictate whether I end up going.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2020 Posts: 7,258
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I don't believe I've partaken in this topic but I do have a question COVID-19 related..............

    Damn. The original DIE HARD is playing at my local cinema for only $7 a ticket this weekend. I haven't been to a movie theater since.........well since Eastwood's last film a couple years ago.

    Anyone here been to the cinema since COVID ? How safe does it feel and is it worth the risk? Is it still fun in spite of all the hoops one must jump through?

    I'm quite tempted to go, though timing and my schedule will ultimately dictate whether I end up going.

    If everyone is wearing a mask and is sufficiently spaced out, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be safe. I’d feel better too if the theatre wasn’t serving food or drink of any kind.
  • Posts: 14,591
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I don't believe I've partaken in this topic but I do have a question COVID-19 related..............

    Damn. The original DIE HARD is playing at my local cinema for only $7 a ticket this weekend. I haven't been to a movie theater since.........well since Eastwood's last film a couple years ago.

    Anyone here been to the cinema since COVID ? How safe does it feel and is it worth the risk? Is it still fun in spite of all the hoops one must jump through?

    I'm quite tempted to go, though timing and my schedule will ultimately dictate whether I end up going.

    If everyone is wearing a mask and is sufficiently spaced out, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be safe. I’d feel better too if the theatre wasn’t serving food or drink of any kind.

    I suppose I could end up being the only patron in the theater. My better half has opted NOT to go with me. :( If it were a Bond film, however it might be a different case.
    I work graveyards so I may end up too tired to go. Still, it would be great to see the original in the cinema again. Probably a digital copy.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2020 Posts: 7,258
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I don't believe I've partaken in this topic but I do have a question COVID-19 related..............

    Damn. The original DIE HARD is playing at my local cinema for only $7 a ticket this weekend. I haven't been to a movie theater since.........well since Eastwood's last film a couple years ago.

    Anyone here been to the cinema since COVID ? How safe does it feel and is it worth the risk? Is it still fun in spite of all the hoops one must jump through?

    I'm quite tempted to go, though timing and my schedule will ultimately dictate whether I end up going.

    If everyone is wearing a mask and is sufficiently spaced out, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be safe. I’d feel better too if the theatre wasn’t serving food or drink of any kind.

    I suppose I could end up being the only patron in the theater. My better half has opted NOT to go with me. :( If it were a Bond film, however it might be a different case.
    I work graveyards so I may end up too tired to go. Still, it would be great to see the original in the cinema again. Probably a digital copy.

    Watching the classics in a cinema is a fantastic experience, especially if it’s not a big box theatre!

    I was the only patron (me and my friend actually) when I went to see Batman Begins in theatres years ago (very late into its run) and it was an awesome time.
  • Posts: 14,591
    I love seeing classics in the cinema, particularly Golden Age Hollywood.
    I wouldn't be surprised if IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE turns up this month at my local cinema. I'd love to see that. I half expect to be the only person watching DIE HARD if I go.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,422
    Cinema has never been safer.
Sign In or Register to comment.