>/tv/ hates Sigourney Weaver now
I want summer to end
damn mootposter
>>85823825
>>/tv/ hates Sigourney Weaver now
No, tv hates waifufags like yourself op. Kys
>>85824098
Rude
>>85823825
What? Nobody hates Sigourney Weaver. Stop trying to make yourself out to be some kind of victim you absolute faggot
>>85824823
>not knowing how to make actress threads that don't get 404'd
>>85824277
He's got a point. Still like the weave but I'll say she sure sucks just to rustle your jims son.
>>85825088
2 pics in a waifu post. Sure kid keep.telling me how it's working.
>>85825183
Honestly I don't even do it for the (you)s anymore, I just can't stop thinking about her and it's a daily routine to post a Siggy thread
tldr: autism
Queen of sci-fi disliked by neckbeard virgins who resent all women?
>>85825507
>literally in 1 good sci fi movie
>queen of sci fi
>>85825650
In addition to the worthy sequel, Weaver has also starred in Ghostbusters and Galaxy Quest, which has been correctly recognized by /tv/'s userbase as being a very underrated movie.
And you can dislike it all you want, but Avatar was a massive moneymaker and a /cultural event/. Name me one other new, major motion picture since which has stayed in wide/quasi-wide original theatrical release for over six months.
>>85825772
>shitty spoof movie
>shitty 80's comedy
Not an argument
>>85825860
Yes it most certainly is so an argument, as both films, despite their comedic leanings, are nevertheless fundamentally based in science fiction premises. Science fiction premises are based in a practical "what if?", with some speculative science involved. Both movies have both.
Even Avatar has such a high-concept element, which is really the hallmark of what science fiction /is/ as a genre. The speculative "what if?"
>>85823825
does somebody have the pepe-sigourney edit?